U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-06-2014, 01:19 AM
 
9,742 posts, read 9,333,201 times
Reputation: 2049

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by freightshaker View Post
Hunger was a pretty good incentive for me to move....
So we starve them? It might work, but it might cause severe unrest as well. I don't think it's that simple. Wish it was, but I'm not sure that's a viable option.

 
Old 04-06-2014, 01:28 AM
 
Location: Lost in Texas
9,832 posts, read 5,850,551 times
Reputation: 3404
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvxplorer View Post
So we starve them? It might work, but it might cause severe unrest as well. I don't think it's that simple. Wish it was, but I'm not sure that's a viable option.
There are lots of solutions but our politicians are too busy pointing fingers and blaming others to make any real progress. (Republican and Democrat alike) People who are dependent only by a lack of incentive, need to be slowly weaned off the system. They need pointed in the direction of bettering their lives, but they need to know that there won't always be something to fall back on. We can relocate people into locations where there is a need for labor, but if they feel they can merely fall back on the system, they are likely to do so. If there is no system to fall back into, they are less likely to fall back at all.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 03:53 AM
 
4,878 posts, read 2,353,923 times
Reputation: 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvxplorer View Post
blah...blah...blah...

...and the right's agenda is the rich getting richer, with shantytowns for everyone else...as seen around the world where money and power reside with the few.

"To the poor house you go, peasant!"

Have Democrats and Liberals even stopped to think that some of the richest of the rich are people who are also Democrats - Oprah, Hollywood, your own representatives. And most of those are benefitting from the corporate welfare that you all so hate. They may talk the talk of a Democrat but don't walk the walk. The only real stars that have helped those in need are Pitt and Jolie, when helping Katrina and they no longer even live in the states. These people have incorporated themselves so they pay little or no tax and some even receive gov't subsidies from the investments, but are hypocritical enough to tell the less fortunate that we need to lend a helping hand - as long as it isn't coming out of their pocket.

How about dear Maxine Waters of California, who contributes $100,000 a year to her own campaign budget while charging them 18% interest? This has become a real business to her as she now collects billions of interest on all the money she loaned her own campaign as the balance is never paid back.

The only ones looking for reform in any area for the betterment of the country are those not affiliated with the Democrats or Republicans.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 03:59 AM
bUU
 
Location: Georgia
11,883 posts, read 8,666,921 times
Reputation: 8406
Quote:
Originally Posted by surfman View Post
The left displaying their (lack of) knowledge when it comes to morality.
Says the poster posting a message trying to rationalize the egoistic and avaricious immoral perspective he prefers.

It's amazing to see what kind of pretzels right-wingers and libertarians twist themselves into to try to hide the patently corrupt perspectives they're trying to peddle here. "I me mine" they say, as if it was a religious incantation to ward away civic responsibility.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 04:02 AM
 
4,878 posts, read 2,353,923 times
Reputation: 5714
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvxplorer View Post
Do you have children, lilyflower? Feeding a growing child is not cheap. I don't know anyone who would think $500 is a lot for a family of three. What should we do? Force people to live on potatoes and cheese? That's not a healthy environment for raising children.


What do you eat? Maybe you should invest time in helping poor people shop more efficiently. That would beat getting annoyed.

Who's complaining? Anyone who is, can and should be ignored. Again, that beats getting yourself worked up over someone else's issues.


See above. You are a bright, educated young woman. I'd be proud to have you as a neighbor. As you mature, you will discover that these little annoyances melt away.



No - you have one smart lady here and as she matures she will only see reality more clearly - unlike myself who believed the Democratic BS for all those years. But then again - in my younger years there were very few abuses in the system. The food panties I worked actually fed people with little else than the cloths on their back. The little brothers and sisters I had in the Big Brother / Big Sister programs all came from lower income homes with working parents whose parents wanted something better for them - it's only been the last 25 years that we have made them dependent on the handouts instead of grateful they were there so that they could offer themselves a chance to gain more self respect and make a better life for themselves and their children.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 05:08 AM
 
Location: Houston
22,544 posts, read 11,607,337 times
Reputation: 9097
Quote:
Originally Posted by bUU View Post
Says the poster posting a message trying to rationalize the egoistic and avaricious immoral perspective he prefers.

It's amazing to see what kind of pretzels right-wingers and libertarians twist themselves into to try to hide the patently corrupt perspectives they're trying to peddle here. "I me mine" they say, as if it was a religious incantation to ward away civic responsibility.

What is actually amazing is liberals inability to understand rewarding sloth and the birthing of bastards is not beneficial to society.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 05:22 AM
 
Location: Steeler Nation
6,868 posts, read 3,947,393 times
Reputation: 1596
Quote:
Originally Posted by rosie_hair View Post
To both sides of the issue, I understand from both standpoints.

My boyfriend's sister is pregnant (again). She is only 18 and she's going to have her 2nd kid soon. The fathers are no where to be found. It completely boggles our minds, but there it is. And it is doubtful that we will see this as her last pregnancy. Both my boyfriend and I are sure that his sister will be pregnant again before 20. Those of us who actually work for a living end up paying for such behavior.

On the other hand, I wouldn't want medicaid to go away. It helps people who are legitimately in need of help who are working hard to bring themselves out of poverty. I know a successful accountant who used to be on medicaid and other social programs for the poor while he worked to put himself through school. He's told me many times that without those programs he wouldn't have made it at all, since he had no family to speak of.

Personally, I'm quite lost as to what we must do to better the situation. But about half children born into poverty is just too much. There needs to be something done. I just don't know what.

But I do know that neither progressives nor conservatives (in their current state) have the right answer. Conservatives seem to want to scrape the programs completely or significantly cut them. Progressives seem to want more and more of those programs. I have yet to seen any real effort to tackle the problem directly.
Your accountant friend used the system the way it was meant to be used and I have no problem with that. The problem is the ones who just milk the system for all they can and make no effort to improve their life.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 05:35 AM
 
66,535 posts, read 30,350,225 times
Reputation: 8677
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilyflower3191981 View Post
Right, we don't get it. If I love somebody, I can sacrifice myself for that person, including give that person a decent life. Otherwise, I wouldn't want to bring another life to this world just to suffer from poverty.

Love is selfless, not selfish
Exactly.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 06:22 AM
 
66,535 posts, read 30,350,225 times
Reputation: 8677
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvxplorer View Post
The dregs of society will always exist, even in a booming economy. I don't think they are numerous enough to pose a problem.
Because you don't understand the math:

Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
The problem is that nearly half of all children born in the U.S. are born into poverty and are dependent on means-tested welfare programs from day 1.

Medicaid Pays For Nearly Half of All Births in the United States | publichealth.gwu.edu

Those who receive public assistance have a birth rate 3 times that of those who don't.
U.S. Census citations and links in my post, here:
http://www.city-data.com/forum/32045595-post217.html

Let's take a deeper look at the problem that 3 times higher birth rate presents...

Example using numbers: 1 million receiving public assistance, 1 million not receiving such, the latest published birth rate numbers for each group (halved because the rates were reported for women only), and the formula for predicting future population, future value = present value x (e)^kt, where e equals the constant 2.71828, k equals the rate of increase (expressed as a decimal, rate taken from the U.S. Census data), and t is the number of years.

After 20 years, the population of those not receiving public assistance will have grown from 1 million to 1.75 million.

After 20 years, the population of those very likely needing public assistance will have grown from 1 million to 4.953 million.

1.75 million paying taxes to support social programs for 4.953 million.

Providing for an exponentially growing welfare-dependent class is unsustainable. Do you understand that?

This is what nearly half of all children born in the U.S. will be facing:
Youth From Low-Income Families Fact Sheet
Youth from Low-Income Families: Fact Sheet
Provides grim statistics.
 
Old 04-06-2014, 06:58 AM
 
66,535 posts, read 30,350,225 times
Reputation: 8677
Quote:
Originally Posted by nvxplorer View Post
I don't have the answers, but letting the wealth gap increase is certainly not the solution.
Therein lies the dilemma. Increasing the wealth gap is in fact necessary to pay for supporting those who receive public assistance benefits and services. Why? Because higher income earners pay an inordinate amount of the taxes used to pay for them. The top 1% earns 18.7% of the income, but pays 35.1% of the federal income tax revenue, roughly twice their fair share which is 4 times what the middle class pays (the middle class pays only about half of their fair share). The problem with our country's progressive tax system is that it creates a perverse incentive for the federal government to enact policies that promote as wide of an income gap as possible in order to maximize tax revenue.

Others have noticed, too...
Quote:
"[Economist Anatole] Kaletsky argues that over-reliance on progressive taxes creates "a perverse incentive for governments to promote income inequality. If the solvency of the state and the ability to fund basic services for the poorest people in society depends on the rich getting even richer, it is tempting for even the most progressive politicians to support widening inequalities."
The liberal case for regressive taxation - Salon.com

As long as we have a progressive tax system, the incentive remains to keep the income gap as wide as possible. When the top 1% loses income share, the federal government loses twice that much in tax revenue. But when the top 1% gains income share, the federal government consequently gains twice that much in tax revenue.

Think about that...
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.


Closed Thread

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top