4/5 Americans will face near poverty in their lifetimes (wage, ethic, dollars)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The real problem is the grunt jobs, high paying jobs that even the stupid can do, are going away.
It all started with the tractor. It eliminated a massive number of jobs. People then drifted into entry level manufacturing jobs. Globalization and technology eliminated many of these jobs. What's next? Got milk?
there is no medical transcribing anymore - the stupid big government with it's intrusion with making computerized charting ( it's a nightmare) killed those jobs.
And the patient safety
The purpose of technology is to eliminate jobs. It frees people up to learn to do something else. SOme do and some do not.
Read the article and the headlines is hyped. Just as what middle class has changed over the years .I do agree that 80% of government aid for poverty goes to cities that have 20% of poverty in US. 80% is in two rural areas and they get 20%. That is politics of poverty aid. Just as with all aid its been shown many can get more than working at their skill level. This IMO is the result of wealth sharing because the bottom is the bottom; no matter the income. We are reaching the point like europe where too many are dependent on too few with the most advanced education offered I the world if one applies themselves. Asians have clearly shown that.
seems your own argument is simply that "it isnt Bush's fault" and nothing more. You cant even explain your own argument. Half your post are copy and pasted from other posters or other sites, the other half are one liners like this.
In my view, its easy to blame the current guy. Yes, they're all guilty of inaction.
But I think its also silly to blame just one guy for the bottom feeder mentality that's spreading in the US.
It all starts at home, bottom line. Set a good example for your kids, teach them the rewards of a hard day's work, even if they're starting out at $8 an hour. Make them understand if they acquire good work ethics now, it'll really pay off later.
What throws off today's youth is the fact they they see their peers on govt programs, take your pick, and living the easy life.
Not an Obama fan but I cannot honestly just blame him. This mindset has been evolving for many years and I think its just now that we're hitting a tipping point.
More people just giving up and gladly accepting welfare instead of applying themselves. As a kid, families didn't want to be identified with that. You were an outcast.
Now its considered almost normal to get some type of help.
What do you think it'll be like in another 20 years?
Damn scary is all I can come up with.
I just was this a few minutes ago and my mouth dropped open. I'd have to do some research to find how how the research was done on this. If the population sampling was small, large, random, etc. If they just drew on cities known for no jobs and down the tubes. A sampling across the U.S. could not produce this statistic.
It's likely broad numbers from the Census, over time, were used. " At some point in their lives" is the key.
Yes, huge huge difference. First world poverty means you have refrigerated air conditioning in the summer, and plenty of heat in the winter, you have a nice cell phone, a big television, your kids play video games, you can even eat your meals out in restaurants with your food stamp card, you are likely obese because you have more than plenty to eat and can even buy your clothes at the mall. Most likely your kids have new clothes and aren't any more likely to wear hand-me-downs than middle class kids.
It's not possible to compare poverty on a global basis.
The U.S. people continue to have the greatest amount of disposable income, per household. And we certainly are good at the disposable part.
Business has to compete to survive and to do so business chases the most productive sources.
Global competition began in earnest, in the 60's, when it was cheaper to import steel due to higher U.S. labor costs.
The impetus for NAFTA actually began with Reagan.
NAFTA was signed by Bush 1 and sent to Congress for ratification.
Clinton signed the bill.
Unless I missed something, we do not have a Free Trade Agreement, with China.
The U.S. auto makers were designing and building cars inferior to the global competition. Congress reluctantly gave Chrysler a government guarantee to avoid bankruptcy/save jobs in 1979.
I'd say what an idiot the Clintons are, except that I think we all know that they knew full well what was going to happen to many millions of Americans when they gave away the jobs.
"Trade with China will not only extend our nation's unprecedented economic growth, it offers us a chance to help shape the future of the world's most prosperous nation and to reaffirm our own global leadership for peace and prosperity."
Yes that Obama who has been saying that for 4.5 years now.
He's consistent.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.