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.
It is. Potshot on top of a strawman if you want to be really accurate.
Did I misstate your (pretty clearly stated) agreement with just that idea?
And yes, I think shipping people around as labor fodder is right up there with shipping them around for other reasons. So sue me. Or throw another three or five online deflectors like "ad hominem" at me. Which, by the way, would mean I was attacking you; I was not. I was throwing well-deserved scat at the idea.
You appear to have been online way too long to take disagreement as attack. I disagree with the proposition you two or three are batting around. Vehemently. But I haven't said one word about you.
But that is YOUR idea. Your invention. Your strawman.
And your attempt to paint me with YOUR brush does rise to Ad Hominum;
let alone the specific terms you applied. Fascist and Classist are offensive.
Quote:
I disagree with the proposition you two or three are batting around.
Really? What proposition is that -- exactly?
I still haven't seen you quote what was said or refer to it with any sort of accuracy.
Just your dystopian nightmare perception of well, of something not within the thread.
Get a grip.
I think the real problem is that the safety net is administered locally so the poor are not mobile. The poor people locked into Medicaid/CHIP kid Medicaid, SNAP, HUD housing vouchers, TANF, and the rest of the safety net programs can't move to places with better economic opportunity because they'll lose the safety net.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational
That's a great observation. [...] Changing that your vs mine approach is an example of the revolutionary change in thinking required.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrRational
But that is YOUR idea. Your invention. Your strawman.
Doesn't seem to be.
Quote:
Really? What proposition is that -- exactly?
Well, gosh, maybe the one above.
Quote:
Just your dystopian nightmare perception of well, of something not within the thread.
Get a grip.
And maybe it's time to turn the page on that Word-a-Day calendar; you've worn out "dystopian" without managing to actually connect it to much of anything (except ideas you disagree with, apparently).
I am the least dystopian participant in most discussions. I object to hard-ass treatment of the poor and disenfranchised to prevent your dystopia.
And there are plenty of people who would welcome a chance at a new life in a new location with a living wage job lined up. The problem is that long distance relocation is expensive if you're funding it yourself- the U-Haul and first/last/deposits/utilities to rent a home in the new location can run $3K or more and studies show that a lot of lower income families don't have that kind of money saved up.
We did a couple of those long distance moved in the 90s when we were just starting out after college, ran up the credit cards to cover it, and it took a fair amount of time to really financially recover from the moves.
Yes, you like to throw around scat. Well deserved? No.
Your comments are often perceived as attacks and/or a tone of superiority.
It might be part of your “eco warrior” approach, but that comes off as just being in it for the fight versus just having a normal discussion.
some posters just come off that way . we got all kinds in these forums . some will just say black if you say white even if they lack the facts or knowledge on a topic
Last edited by mathjak107; 02-04-2018 at 02:37 AM..
I know there are expenses associated with moving, but wouldn't you have just gotten your deposit back last month's rent from your previous home?
Which can take more than a month with even an honest but slightly disorganized landlord, and a lot of low income folks don't have the ability to float expenses on a credit card in the mean time.
Because this enormous wealth is concentrated in the hands of a very few people: the top of the 1%.
This was an issue in the recent elections that Bernie Sanders talked a lot about.
The envious always find a way to focus on someone with more wealth.
Are some really being critical of saving and investing and allowing that investment to grow with compounding and not spending it just to spend it? That is how wealth is built and to do it across generations within a family how intergenerational wealth is created which use to be a goal.
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.
