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.
Only the individual can close that gap...no one can do it for them...not laws or policies or handouts...it takes blood, sweat, tears, grit, discipline and drive
Plenty of people work hard and there lives get worse and worse. Sometimes sensible polices are needed. Do you think its fair for someone who revived a inheritance and was handed everything to walk into the best jobs? Sometimes polices and handouts are needed to uplift those who society would otherwise discard.
Plenty of people work hard and there[their] lives get worse and worse. Sometimes sensible polices are needed. Do you think its fair for someone who revived[recieved?] a inheritance and was handed everything to walk into the best jobs? Sometimes polices and handouts are needed to uplift those who society would otherwise discard.
I don't get your point about the inheritance....do you have one?
MY point is that no policy will ever fix this...Only the individual can fix this! Working hard is not the only quality I mentioned nor is it the only answer...far from it! It takes a lot of different factors that all lie within the individual. It's not easy....and that's why so many people look for a magic pill.
Lottery winners are a good example...the ones who couldn't handle money before wind up even deeper in a few short years, those that could handle money tend to stay at a decent level and the few who were really good with money could probably use it to become next level.
Thats not true at all. The most progressive states are the richest and wealthiest.
The most progressive states have the greatest income and wealth gaps, and the least socioeconomic mobility. That's exactly what we DON'T want, so why should the entire country emulate that?
Plenty of people work hard and there lives get worse and worse.
Give an example, by all means. I see this canard all the time from people who espouse the Noble Poor Theory, but rarely am given an example of someone who over a period of time where they consistently work hard in a job that has any level of demand actually has their situation worsen completely as a result of exterior forces beyond their control.
Also, working hard is not a measure of Supply & Demand. If you dig a 3 meter square/deep hole in your yard for no other purpose but moving the dirt, then fill it back in and repeat this process until you fall over from exhaustion, you are clearly working your arse off...but doing so at an activity with exactly no demand from anyone seeking to have that job done. That makes that form of seriously hard work totally unprofitable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BornintheSprings
Do you think its fair for someone who revived a inheritance and was handed everything to walk into the best jobs? Sometimes polices and handouts are needed to uplift those who society would otherwise discard.
And along with the Noble Poor fallacy we must always include the Evil Lazy Rich fallacy as it's symbiote. Not only is it not true that not all successful people started off life with inherited advantage, the reality is that people who inherit are a small minority of the top 1, 5, 10 and 50% of earners in this country.
It's a rent seeking myth that when Person A succeeds and Person B does not, that necessarily means Person A had some "unfair" advantage that Person B did not. And it is indeed rent seeking because your"sensible policy" prescription almost always requires taking something from successful Person A and giving it to unsuccessful Person B and calling that justice.
that's just crazy talk. theft is not compassion. period. punishing success is not the act of a compassionate people.
helping those less fortunate is compassion. building policy that does not do harm to those that have while building bridges of opportunity for those in need is compassion.
the left speaks in terms of compassion but they advocate dozens of heartless hurtful polices.
from energy policy that limits job opportunity (Pipline construction and drilling in ANWR) and drives up the cost of electricity (demand for greater use of expensive less efficient "renewables")
to tax policy that targets companies which in turn becomes a regressive hidden tax that unduely burdens the poor.
over and over the left talks about compassion but then acts viciously and remorselessly.
Is it "crazy talk" or simply a different perspective? A different opinion?
Part of what separates crazy talk from intelligent discussion is specifics rather than nebulous extreme rhetoric. Don't you think?
What are examples of these policies that "do harm." Which are these "heartless hurtful" policies?
Some argue with all their might that pro-choice policies are "heartless and hurtful." Others argue that pro-lifers are the "heartless and hurtful" ones? Who gets to decide which is which? Your opinion make it so? Just depends on who you ask is all...
Only a fool can't see both ends of these arguments and opinions, about jobs vs the environment also for example. Most of us want job creation of course and most of us want a clean protected environment, also of course. What fool doesn't understand the inherent tradeoff we've all got to consider and balance when it comes to competing agendas like these?
I made something of a career in the energy business, the oil industry, and even I know these issues and trade-offs are significant and need to be considered carefully and seriously, with no easy or inexpensive answers.
Cheap energy? Less expense? Of course. Exxon Valdez no matter? Again, I really don't think so...
"Crazy talk" is perspective and opinion that demonstrates no objectivity, like you seem to demonstrate.
I am quite certain that you cannot help me in any way.
Governments are not compassionate. People are compassionate. People taking money from other people and giving it to the poor is not compassion. People giving their own time and money to the poor is compassion.
It really is that simple.
I am in no way kidding myself about the ability to help anyone in this forum, but I do like trying to correct opinion that needs correcting with reason and logic I feel deserves consideration. With facts*, reason and logic that is fair, objective and informed.
I'm not the one who introduced all this about compassion, so I really don't feel I need argue about these issues in terms of compassion. I prefer to think about public policy that serves our interests, all our interests, in the most effective and productive manner possible. For this we need to agree on the goal(s), and for that I think you need to read my opening comment again.
At a minimum, there is no compelling reason to believe that people can be compassionate as you describe but that public policy can't be compassionate. I also struggle to think of government as other than an organization made up of people. *Supreme court ruled corporations are persons for example. Why corporations and not other organizations like churches, or governments?
It is the process of little more thinking about some of these issues that proves it's often not really as simple as you want to insist for sake of promoting your own simple biased opinion.
That's because the left knows nothing about compassion. They confuse theft with compassion.
No confusion about which side loves the simple straw man arguments above all else! That's for sure!
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.
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.
