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.
And sooner or later the fleeing affluent want the amenities they had in their former location, and sooner or later their new place gets discovered, and hence all the growth and the costs with that.
Yes amenities for themselves not welfare for others.
It is a practical thing to utilize people out of work and tie in training programs for our own infrastructure work. You are bringing in a personal perception that has nothing to do with this.
But, since you bring it up....People of South are not the only local heroes. People of North, South, East, and West are always ready to pitch in and help their neighbors; mine helped me, I checked on some elders, and many individuals with trucks were out there. However, local everyday citizens do not have access to the kinds of heavy equipment and materials that are used in dealing with massive emergencies, nor are they trained in emergency management and control.
Each and every city and town should have a comprehensive disaster plan that includes highly supervised crews spontaneously brought in from all sectors, notably from the sector of the unemployed. Contrary to popular opinion, most able-bodied people want to work, they want to pitch in and contribute to their communities. Many on the rolls want jobs. The problem is, it doesn't "pay" anymore to get a modest job when unemployed; federal and state support is much more lucrative, sometimes over generations.
Unemployment isn't multi-generational. There are issues of ideology and issues of sustainability and the pool of available resources to sustain programs is a challenge and thus our current political debate. Speaking of the unemployed. Consider the Boomer in their 50's who loses their job and draws down their savings to survive. Eventually they recover find a new job and begin to try to reconstruct the path they were on. Once again being productive albeit without their nest egg they are backed to being a target of wealth transfer to support those who are long term, multi generational failures to produce or who made decisions that have them behind the eight ball long term. Sorry I am on the side of the Boomer trying to secure THEIR retirement. With a 30 percent dropout rate in many states and a 50% drop out rate in many areas those are bad decisions being made that those who studied are going to be asked to cover for. We have many boomers who are struggling to recover from the recession and that recovery will be hindered by efforts to renew the transfer of wealth from them.
Yeah I have been and I know my neighbors responded and were prepared. I learned a lot from Irene. In North Carolina there are not many pieces of snow removal in the state and we are told to be prepared to be without power for a week in ice storms, hurricanes and tornadoes. My neighbors who are from here have generators and some of the transplants do. Roads are not cleared other than major roads and most cross roads are untouched. Power lines go down her like elsewhere and things shut down but folks are prepared. We got hit pretty hard by Irene. In my four years as a transplant I have learned about the difference in government expectations in another region. As evidenced by the current political dialog in our country not everyone wants government to solve their problems or expect them to solve others problems. It is not just where we are now in government intrusion but where some elected officials want to take us. Increased contributions and decreased benefits for many. While others see no increase in expected contributions( not that they were) and benefits remaining the same.
That's funny. I responded to Irene, spending time in Kinston and Belhaven, NC doing damage assessment and chainsaw work. This was a couple of weeks after the storm and I think I actually saw LESS community involvement than I did after Katrina, Dennis, Gustav or Ike, not to mention the 3 or 4 ice storms, two midwest floods, California brush fires and multiple tornado events I've been to. People were just sitting around waiting for somebody to do something. AND, they were lined up at the FEMA sites, just like everyone else.
In my experience, you just can't make blanket condemnations of people based upon their region, race, ethnicity or economic status. People everywhere respond about the same to disasters. Some pitch in, some don't, but ALL need government help when it's really bad. (And, Irene wasn't really bad in NC. I've seen far, far worse. Y'all actually got out pretty light.)
By the same token, you can't make blanket assessments of your fellow citizens based upon nothing more than your somewhat nebulous definition of "producers." Your stereotyping does nothing to either identify the problem, or to solve it. It just makes you feel good that you're not one of "them."
Location: We_tside PNW (Columbia Gorge) / CO / SA TX / Thailand
34,690 posts, read 57,994,855 times
Reputation: 46171
Quote:
Originally Posted by stillkit
....doing damage assessment and chainsaw work. ... I think I actually saw LESS community involvement than I did after Katrina, Dennis, Gustav or Ike, not to mention the 3 or 4 ice storms, ...
Part of the ineptocracy process... less folks know how to use commonsense, much less CHAINSAWS!!! The expectation that OTHERS will do the work is very prevalent.
Entitlement behavior is not uncommon either.
We will be seeing less and less social responsibility / chipping in to help.
We are now into the generation raised by Nintendo, rather than 'farmers'. The US really missed a superb opportunity in 2007/08 to put folks to work CCC (1930's) style. Thank goodness for farm kids and CCC, laborers during depression, that trained a very competent allied army for WWII, and resulted in MANY coming home from war and becoming successful job creators. Now the 'institution' makes the task SO difficult, why bother hiring employees?
That's funny. I responded to Irene, spending time in Kinston and Belhaven, NC doing damage assessment and chainsaw work. This was a couple of weeks after the storm and I think I actually saw LESS community involvement than I did after Katrina, Dennis, Gustav or Ike, not to mention the 3 or 4 ice storms, two midwest floods, California brush fires and multiple tornado events I've been to. People were just sitting around waiting for somebody to do something. AND, they were lined up at the FEMA sites, just like everyone else.
In my experience, you just can't make blanket condemnations of people based upon their region, race, ethnicity or economic status. People everywhere respond about the same to disasters. Some pitch in, some don't, but ALL need government help when it's really bad. (And, Irene wasn't really bad in NC. I've seen far, far worse. Y'all actually got out pretty light.)
By the same token, you can't make blanket assessments of your fellow citizens based upon nothing more than your somewhat nebulous definition of "producers." Your stereotyping does nothing to either identify the problem, or to solve it. It just makes you feel good that you're not one of "them."
Snow preparedness is possible to do before hand and it can either be on the back of the government or individuals can depending on their preparedness be a greater part of the solution. With weather event becoming more common in some areas of the country you either prepare or tax/pay your self into oblivion letting institutions do it for you. How much more can utilities in the North East continue to bear in making repairs before they need rate hikes that folks can't afford. Something has to give eventually if it continues. Will those rate hikes be equally distributed or will somehow an attempt be made to make some pay more of the burden while others skate either by government subsidy (taxation) or another strategy. Someone will have to pay the piper. Road crews are expensive especially when contracted elsewhere.
Yes amenities for themselves not welfare for others.
Wherever there are great influxes of wealth in a region, the indigenous peoples become displaced, remember that. Wealth moves in and the working class people are forced out.
Wherever there are great influxes of wealth in a region, the indigenous peoples become displaced, remember that. Wealth moves in and the working class people are forced out.
Consider the opposite observation as poor people on subsidies move from the cities to the near suburbs the affluent often move to the farther out suburbs putting a burden on the resources and tax base for those left behind. I will agree that in many cases government has been known to encourage the relocation of affluent to their communities and that sometimes displaces the poor. Hmmm revenues go up and social program costs stabilize or go down. What government leader would want that? Isn't that what big city mayors often try to do? Encourage the wealthy and force the poor to the near suburbs. Seniors are often great to draw as transplants when they come with money. You don't need schools or as many roads and they add to the tax base with minimal infrastructure need. Activity 55 communities can be self selective in bringing senior who can afford. Remember my reason for the thread is to put all of this in the context of retirement planning and it is very difficult for many to build their retirement resources if government keeps coming up with a new tax to from them. We are approaching crisis of folks reaching their senior years without the adequate resources to survive. We can read that in threads and news stories daily. Will we let them keep more of their money to prepare or will we need massive tax increases to support those who have worked and contributed all their lives or do we make choices about who to support and who not to and for what reason.
The current administration in the White House is making decisions that are good for some people but are hurting others including seniors who have investments that will now be reworked. They may be as a result of foreclosure programs lowering the interest rate investors thought they had loaned for ( their return) or student loans that will slow down REVENUE coming back in. So we are picking winners and losers and are the winners being picked on the basis of competency? Hmmm $60,000 in student loan debt to major in History, Art, Philosophy etc.
Conservatives argued, on the other hand, that the practice of allowing debt forgiveness allows irresponsible students to choose degrees in fields that allow no prospect of paying back the debt.
“One of the failings of our public school systems is the lack of basic economic literacy of so many of our students,” writes RedState’s Kevin Holtsberry. “If you are a bright student who wants to go into engineering or science education or nursing (or some other field with a clear need and a career path) but can’t afford it, I am open to scholarships and incentives. But if you want to get an advanced degree with no plan or idea on what type of career you want and no plan to ever be able to pay back your gargantuan debt, then no, you can’t borrow money.”
Thus fuel for the emergence of the word ineptocracy per the OP. Again the ability to save for retirement by those making good decisions will be hindered by providing for those who didn't. It was listening to my daughter inlaw last weekend then hearing the word early this week that really had me thinking.
Part of the ineptocracy process... less folks know how to use commonsense, much less CHAINSAWS!!! The expectation that OTHERS will do the work is very prevalent.
Entitlement behavior is not uncommon either.
We will be seeing less and less social responsibility / chipping in to help.
We are now into the generation raised by Nintendo, rather than 'farmers'. The US really missed a superb opportunity in 2007/08 to put folks to work CCC (1930's) style. Thank goodness for farm kids and CCC, laborers during depression, that trained a very competent allied army for WWII, and resulted in MANY coming home from war and becoming successful job creators. Now the 'institution' makes the task SO difficult, why bother hiring employees?
You're right. That single Mom with 3 kids under foot should be able to get that limb hanging above her roof down all by herself. If she doesn't know how, that's her fault. Or, the 87 year old man on oxygen shouldn't have an trouble getting rid of those trees down in his yard or lying in his bedroom. If he can't, too bad for him. Maybe that single Mom across the street will come help.
Darn lazy bums. Just lying around waiting for someone else to do their work.
Unemployment can indeed be multigenerational because good jobs and wealth-building are tied to good education/training. Since the beginning of time poverty breeds more poverty and keeps people from acquiring the education and skills to compete in a capitalist society. One cannot deny the overall superior advantages that those born to class (middle or upper), despite the outlier stories.
There are issues of ideology and issues of sustainability and the pool of available resources to sustain programs is a challenge and thus our current political debate.
In a capitalist society founded on "Democracy" you cannot do away with the middle classes. You have something entirely "else" when you have mainly the tiny pool of elite and the masses hovering just above, and in, poverty.
The middle class is now not likely to sustain its mass (global shifts in power and economies) over time; it is unlikely it will ever move into the tiny space at the top. With current policy, the general middle class most likely will struggle like mad in the middle and start dropping into the lower base over time.
For those of means to contribute to "programs" (not welfare programs but serious jobs creations programs) is not charity; to advocate for this is in their own best interest in order to keep the overall wealth structure and freedoms we have enjoyed as a country afloat. It's not about eliminating "programs," it is about radically changing their strategic purpose and goals.
Speaking of the unemployed. Consider the Boomer in their 50's who loses their job and draws down their savings to survive. Eventually they recover find a new job and begin to try to reconstruct the path they were on.
Although it would be nice to believe this, it's a pretty naive statement. Anyone over the age of 50 is not going to regain a comparable position to their previous one unless they were already working a lower job. Anyone who must live on savings today, who is reemployed at a lesser position is not likely to regain any degree of asset they had previously. You do not reconstruct, generally, after age 50, especially in an era of risky investment environment. You maintain what you have had, or you slip farther from what you had, hoping to simply survive the senior years. Sure, a business owner who loses her business at age 52 may raise the venture capital to rise again, but come on, on a broad level, how realistic or common is that? More likely we are speaking of job holders in the private and public sectors.
Once again being productive albeit without their nest egg they are backed to being a target of wealth transfer to support those who are long term, multi generational failures to produce or who made decisions that have them behind the eight ball long term.
Making decisions works for when you have options. To understand the cycle that keeps people in genuine (not "lazy") poverty is something you learn in sociology, a subject that is notoriously weak in public and higher education.
With "lazy" poverty (even with genuine poverty), the strategy to mandate that people work a public-serving job while receiving hardcore job training and weaning from welfare is the only thing that would break the seemingly endless welfare cycle. That said, you have to wonder in depth about the benefit any government derives from creating and expanding a welfare state.
Sorry I am on the side of the Boomer trying to secure THEIR retirement. With a 30 percent dropout rate in many states and a 50% drop out rate in many areas those are bad decisions being made that those who studied are going to be asked to cover for. We have many boomers who are struggling to recover from the recession and that recovery will be hindered by efforts to renew the transfer of wealth from them.
The majority of Boomers are doing pretty well at securing their retirements. They are not likely to end up on the streets. That said, I do not disagree with your logical point of view. However, if you view the dilemma from a macro point of view, you'll see a longterm problem that is not going to be addressed by one sector of humanity hunkering down defending their stash. The social structure will break down with serious consequences to all if the highly educated Boomer generation doesn't get its act together to create public policy that keeps a capitalist "Democratic" society securely in place.
^
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.
