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.
Pay people to get education/training by making grants available, for starters. This should include large incentives for employers to train new employees, in an attempt to solve the "can't get a job without experience and can't get experience without a job" problem. The first priority for the grants should be people who were disabled for 6 months or more, or who have cared for a family member with a disability for 6 months or more.
Give employers tax credits in proportion to their employees/profit ratio to incentivize hiring.
Finally, crack down on employers who won't hire someone because they don't own a car. This is actually illegal, IIRC, but virtually never enforced.
There are already a vast number of programs for this.
I'll give you a perfect example. About ten years ago, I was asked to consult for a government housing agency as they pursued grant money. Part of my assignment was to interview 100 residents of a housing project. It took several days to do. My questions ranged from how they ended up on in public housing to how they were taking advantage of the many educational and job training programs.
The respondents fell into two broad categories. The first category was those who were in public housing because life handed them a number of challenges. A house that burned down. Laid off when a plant closed. Injuries that temporarily kept them off the job. Almost to a person, these folks were taking advantage of the many opportunities that were offered to them through the housing authority. Job boards, job training, GED programs, child care, nutrition programs, you name it.
The second group? They were gaming the system. They made no bones about it. A couple of guys went into considerable detail about how if they mowed a yard here, did a couple of menial jobs there, they could earn enough cash to supplement whatever benefit they were getting from the government.
The first group? I'd move heaven and earth to help. The second group? Not a chance. Because, believe it or not, there are a small number of people who simply do not want to work, even when opportunities come their way.
There has been plenty of research on the effect of welfare reform on poverty. It's revealing how it turned out to not be the catastrophe people thought, but actually dramatically reduced the poverty rate. The Effects of Welfare Reform
That is my question also. I have not read articles from billionaires telling me that. I have read that some billionaires like Warren Buffett live fairly modest lives.
Somewhat overblown. That was a rather large amount to spend on a house when he bought it, and it is in an upscale part of Omaha
Let's say we took the trillion dollars that some people say we spent on the war in Iraq (I have no idea if the number is correct), and divided it among the 100 million least fortunate Americans in some way. That's $10,000 a person. How would you distribute it (tax cut, welfare check, educational voucher, whatever) and what do you think the long-term consequences would be?
I'm not saying that it would or would not help, I'm just wondering what you'd do with the money. It's easier to talk about helping people than to do it.
Like anything else some would spend or save all part or none. Long term nothing really changes. Most are unwilling to change their spending habits.
Time and time again I keep reading articles by Billionaires telling us to live modestly and donate to charity. They tell the middle class don't live beyond their means and that keeping up with the Jones is what will get you in trouble. Then I read all the cool toys like mansions, yachts, fast cars, and stuff these rich keep buying while telling us not to emulate them. I really hope the pitch forks show up at their country club and mansions. The rich has the world under their control far far too long and all this rhetoric they keep talking is just to tell the poor and the middle class not to compete with them or get jealous of their lifestyles.
Why ask questions to which you already know the answer?
Time and time again I keep reading articles by Billionaires telling us to live modestly and donate to charity. They tell the middle class don't live beyond their means and that keeping up with the Jones is what will get you in trouble. Then I read all the cool toys like mansions, yachts, fast cars, and stuff these rich keep buying while telling us not to emulate them. I really hope the pitch forks show up at their country club and mansions. The rich has the world under their control far far too long and all this rhetoric they keep talking is just to tell the poor and the middle class not to compete with them or get jealous of their lifestyles.
I would just question what I was reading. Journalsts love that sort of attention grabbing stuff.
If Billionaires really "controlled" things how was Romney defeated?
I laugh at our goverment telling us cut down on electricity in our homes.... when they live in 20 odd room mansions, can you imagine how much power they take to maintain .. laughable.. when I have a tiny wee house.. not forgetting the monster cars they mostly all drive... the many foreign holidays they take.. and their posh eating habits....This isnt the most expensive but Im sure Blair the warmonger has other houses over the world with the money hes made giving lectures.. 6 bedroom terraced house for sale in Connaught Square, Hyde Park, London, W2, W2
We're in a different country with similar issues. Carter had the White House temp set to 58 degrees and suggested we all follow suit. Gore seemed to be more laughable when he stressed something similar while (or whilst ) living in his non-green and massive mansion. We can't do go at 58 degrees F, but we do keep the temp down and layers of clothes on.
Jottucker99: Same stuff happens here. Many people I see living in poor neighborhoods have Caddys that make them look good. It goes beyond the middle class to the poor. I started seeing this 40 years ago.
Arehel: Your last line sums everything up nicely. You say, "Live modestly, give to charity, and seek happiness in human relationships rather than in material things: that's good advice no matter who gives it. Would that more people would heed it! We'd live in a better world if everyone did." Amen to that.
But then we are down to our billionaires are better than your billionaires......
I don't have to remind you that billionaires like Ross Perot (and others) simply were not elected. It seemed like 2012 was full of billionaires who lost.
The the woman we all saw on UTube screeching about Obama-Phones could not tell you one thing about George Soros or Tom Steyer...She just voted in her own interest.
There are already a vast number of programs for this.
I'll give you a perfect example. About ten years ago, I was asked to consult for a government housing agency as they pursued grant money. Part of my assignment was to interview 100 residents of a housing project. It took several days to do. My questions ranged from how they ended up on in public housing to how they were taking advantage of the many educational and job training programs.
The respondents fell into two broad categories. The first category was those who were in public housing because life handed them a number of challenges. A house that burned down. Laid off when a plant closed. Injuries that temporarily kept them off the job. Almost to a person, these folks were taking advantage of the many opportunities that were offered to them through the housing authority. Job boards, job training, GED programs, child care, nutrition programs, you name it.
The second group? They were gaming the system. They made no bones about it. A couple of guys went into considerable detail about how if they mowed a yard here, did a couple of menial jobs there, they could earn enough cash to supplement whatever benefit they were getting from the government.
The first group? I'd move heaven and earth to help. The second group? Not a chance. Because, believe it or not, there are a small number of people who simply do not want to work, even when opportunities come their way.
There has been plenty of research on the effect of welfare reform on poverty. It's revealing how it turned out to not be the catastrophe people thought, but actually dramatically reduced the poverty rate. The Effects of Welfare Reform
A vast number of programs? I pay half my income to rent a room in an insane house in a crummy neighborhood. I have no marketable job skills and don't know of any programs that would help.
Sure, welfare reform reduced poverty rates - replace government benefits (not considered cash income) with $8/hr wages (definitely considered cash income) and VOILA! Poverty rates necessarily plummet. But did those people actually enjoy a higher standard of living, or just trade government dependency for wage dependency?
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.
) living in his non-green and massive mansion. We can't do go at 58 degrees F, but we do keep the temp down and layers of clothes on. 
