Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [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 02-09-2010, 01:30 AM
 
Location: southern california
61,288 posts, read 87,395,538 times
Reputation: 55562

Advertisements

if you are grown and sponging off your parents it should hurt, but where is the pain???
1 in 3 lives at home.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-09-2010, 05:57 AM
 
Location: Location: Location
6,727 posts, read 9,948,595 times
Reputation: 20483
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huckleberry3911948 View Post
if you are grown and sponging off your parents it should hurt, but where is the pain???
1 in 3 lives at home.
All due respect, it isn't necessarily "sponging". In many cases, living with parents is a necessity, because they cannot find employment that pays
wages sufficient to live on one's own. It can safely be said that helping to pay for groceries or utilities is not "sponging".

Back in the day, young people, male and female alike, lived at home until they went off to college, or until they married. That was the norm. The whole mentality of moving into a place of their own is a trend that developed during the sexual revolution, and since then it has somehow become shameful to remain at home.

It is my personal feeling that living in the parental home is beneficial to all parties involved. If the young person is unable to afford a separate domicile, they can contribute, if not monetarily, by taking over some of the tasks that aging parents may find it difficult to do.

Certainly, there are those who are "sponging" because of lack of employment/sense of entitlement/laziness, but for the most part, the parents have engendered these behaviors from an early age. In that case, the "spongees" pretty much are reaping what they have sown.

Conversely, would there be such criticism of the circumstance where parents are living with their grown children? For six months last year, I lived with my youngest son and his family following surgery and during chemotherapy. They never asked me for any financial contribution, and when I offered, they refused to accept my money. None of us viewed it as "sponging."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 06:56 AM
 
Location: Bradenton, Florida
27,232 posts, read 46,645,569 times
Reputation: 11084
My room mate's boyfriend, who is on disability and has custody of a son, lives with his mother. She claims that she can't make the bills without his income to supplement.

But I suppose it's the son's fault he lives with his mom?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 08:58 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,554 posts, read 86,941,000 times
Reputation: 36644
Quote:
Originally Posted by jetgraphics View Post
The simple fact: inequitable trade.
The cause: socialist government.
.
The good news: The USA has by far the least socialist government of any modern industrialized nation on earth. And rapidly becoming even less socialist. There is no functioning model of a modern nation that is less socialist than the US. Ian Smith's Rhodesia was probably the last of them.

The really wonderful thing about extreme radicals, is that you can always safely predict that they will become even more extreme radicals, and scream the loudest in the process of doing so.

Last edited by jtur88; 02-09-2010 at 09:08 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 12:33 PM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,765,227 times
Reputation: 24863
There was a major shift from the save and then spend mentality on the 60's to the borrow and spend attitude of today. Starting with Nixon financializing college grants by involving the private banks to Raygun's firing the air traffic controllers over a wage strike the conservatives, as represented by the Republican Party, have been transferring money from the working class to the financial class with great success. The massive use of credit cards at usurious, but legal, interest rates has been a major factor. Continuous bombardment with demand creating advertisement is another. In addition the lower to mid level manufacturing jobs has been sent overseas or replaced with robots. This has eliminated millions of decent paying jobs in our economy.

One poster gave the example of a young person not being able to afford a separate home without having first saved $20,000. Twenty five years ago I had to put down $25k on our first separate home. Fortunately we had saved that much. Saving that much where even beater cars cost $5,000 is almost impossible. If I were a young person looking for a job I would do my best to get and keep a government job in the security services. Give our government's propensity to use fear to keep people too frightened to think security is the most secure of jobs.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 02:06 PM
 
30,895 posts, read 36,943,634 times
Reputation: 34516
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
The good news: The USA has by far the least socialist government of any modern industrialized nation on earth. And rapidly becoming even less socialist. There is no functioning model of a modern nation that is less socialist than the US. Ian Smith's Rhodesia was probably the last of them.

The really wonderful thing about extreme radicals, is that you can always safely predict that they will become even more extreme radicals, and scream the loudest in the process of doing so.
Rapidly becoming less socialist? That wasn't even true when Bush was in office. We are galloping fast to more socialism.

That's because Social Security and Medicare alone are going to bust the Federal budget all by themselves if benefits aren't cut. 60% of the Federal Budget is Medicare & SS. That number is going to rise with each passing year. This is not sustainable. But Baby Boomers are not going to take a cut in their benefits. Which means we are going to go bust.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 02:17 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,554 posts, read 86,941,000 times
Reputation: 36644
Quote:
Originally Posted by mysticaltyger View Post
Rapidly becoming less socialist? That wasn't even true when Bush was in office. We are galloping fast to more socialism.

.
We have significantly cut food stamps.
Medicaid is frozen in most states.
Higher education funding has been curtailed.
Benefits for veterans have been abolished or reduced.
Criteria for medical disability have been made more stringent.
Some states have virtually shut down their welfare benefits.
Subsidies for public transportation have been cut.
Fees for amenities like passports have skyrocketed.
Agencies processing IRS and Medicare and incarceration have been privatized.
New highways are toll roads.
Parks and recreation facilities are user-fee areas.
School books must be rented.
Broadcast frequencies are sold to the highest bidder.

All galloping fast to more socialization.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 07:30 PM
 
6,205 posts, read 7,457,574 times
Reputation: 3563
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
The good news: The USA has by far the least socialist government of any modern industrialized nation on earth. And rapidly becoming even less socialist. There is no functioning model of a modern nation that is less socialist than the US. Ian Smith's Rhodesia was probably the last of them.
Let me try to explain their position in other words. I am neither a conservative nor a republican.
I guess that most people in this group have not lived anywhere but the US. Many had probably not visited other countries with the exception of Bahamas, Caribbean islands or Mexico
Quote:
The really wonderful thing about extreme radicals, is that you can always safely predict that they will become even more extreme radicals, and scream the loudest in the process of doing so.
Their view point is different then ours. In their mind we should have followed religiously the constitution and the founding fathers will. US should have been a republic all the way. For example, not everyone should vote for president, only reps in congress. We should have had independent states, with only a lose link between them. Very little fed government. They don't understand why the government should have so much power over its citizens including a huge budget. They disapprove the whole idea of income tax. From their perspective the fed government should have no funds and no way to borrow. Fed government should not be involved in economy, to bailout banks or create jobs. Neither any involvement in healthcare.
So when all these things exist, they view us as a socialist country (even during Reagan, Bush 41 and 43...). And now they see with horror Obama hoping to care for the health of 300 million citizens and non citizens...
So yes, from 1776 or 1787 perspective, we are socialists!

Last edited by oberon_1; 02-09-2010 at 07:42 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-09-2010, 10:23 PM
 
5 posts, read 10,474 times
Reputation: 12
No, it's not their fault. Not only are single workers suffering couple workers are affected as well. We are experiencing an economic depression in our country. We were all taught that by age 18 we should be independent and able to stand on our own, however, the complete breakdown in our economy make that philosophy impossible. It's not their fault that they work and don't have enough to make ends meet. Almost everyone is living paycheck to paycheck. Solution to the problem would be to increase minimum wage and provide more jobs. Reality is that the cost of living is more expensive than it was plus plus years ago. The nightmare is that incomes are not meeting the needs of those expenses. So who is to blame?
[SIZE=3] [/SIZE]
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-10-2010, 01:15 AM
 
30,895 posts, read 36,943,634 times
Reputation: 34516
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
We have significantly cut food stamps.
Medicaid is frozen in most states.
Higher education funding has been curtailed.
Benefits for veterans have been abolished or reduced.
Criteria for medical disability have been made more stringent.
Some states have virtually shut down their welfare benefits.
Subsidies for public transportation have been cut.
Fees for amenities like passports have skyrocketed.
Agencies processing IRS and Medicare and incarceration have been privatized.
New highways are toll roads.
Parks and recreation facilities are user-fee areas.
School books must be rented.
Broadcast frequencies are sold to the highest bidder.

All galloping fast to more socialization.
Actually, all we need is to do is NOTHING regarding Social Security and Medicare and we will gallop faster toward more socialism, even if we cut all the other programs. That is how bad it is. This is not something I'm making up. And I'm not exaggerating for dramatic purposes. It's just the mathematics of it. This is pretty much how socialism works in the US, especially with medical care. You basically have the government throwing more and more money at a broken system, doing nothing to fix the cost issues. See link below:

Jim Jubak: US can't grow its way out of deficit - MSN Money

But I'll address some of the other issues you raise:

Same thing is happening with education. We spend as much as other countries on K-12 education as well as unviersity ed. But we don't get much for what we pay. This has been true for decades. But still, nothing is done about it.

Medicaid may be frozen. But when the cost per person keeps rising at double the rate of inflation, you can see why. No one in the government is taking any serious steps to do anything to make the health care system more cost effective. Democrats foucus on getting more people heath insurance without focusing on why people can't afford it in the first place. Republicans do nothing or provide watered down versions of what Dems want (witness Bush's prescription drug plan for Medicare). We spend gobs of money on health care, but we are not healthier than people in other countries. It's actually horrifically sad that 2/3 of us are overweight and 1/3 are obese. At the rate we're going we'll all going to need to spend 1/2 our lives at doctors' offices.

Higher ed. is mostly funded by states. And once again, the cost of providing higher ed has been moving well past the typical rate of inflation for 30+ years, just like it has been for medical care. Once again, we need to deliver higher ed in a more cost effective way. We've known this for decades, but nothing has been done about it, mostly because tenured faculty have too much power.

We would have to eliminate the ENTIRE disability component of Social Security disability for Social Security to be on sound financial footing again (or do something else equally drastic).

Passport fees? There are worse problems to deal with.

Public transit. Agreed. But once again, that is partly because most people don't give a sh*t about it. I agree this is unfortunate, but most Americans are still stuck in this "single house in the suburbs is the only way I can be happy" kind of mentality.

New highways: Again, part of the problem is excessive sprawl development policies. A natural outgrowth of endless sprawl is more expensive infrastructure, including roads. But since people b*tch endlessly about living at higher densities, then you are going to pay more for roads. People drive more today than they did 10 or 20 years ago because of sprawl oriented, auto-dependent land use policies. If we lived at even moderately higher densities, we would be able to spend less on building and maintaining roads and divert some of that money to mass transit.

I can't speak to welfare benefits. They are a small part of the Federal Budget. It all goes back to SS & Medicare. We must make Medicare more efficient, raise taxes, and reduce benefits to make SS & Medicare on sound financial footing.

As far as agencies being privatized....it is not a panacea. But I can sometimes see why it has been tried. In short, public sector unions are greedy. Now, I work in the public sector, so I see the entitlement mentality first hand. My job starts paying out retirement benefits at age 55. In an age when people are living into their late 70s and living longer all the time, the cost of providing these pensions is clearly not sustainable. Now sure, I will love collecting the pension---if the US economcy doesn't collapse between now and the time I'm 55, 16 years from now. (Personally, I think our economy will collapse, because people like yourself are not prepared to do what it takes to set things right--and people with your attitude, are, unforunately, in the majority).

Prisons are a perfect example of union greed in my state of California. Prison guards have been getting outsized raises year in and year out for more than a decade in my state (I'm talking that in one year a few years back they actually got an 11% pay raise!!! 11%. That is unheard of even in other public sector agencies).

So, in many respects, we are paying more for our public services and not getting anything for it. In some instances that's our own fault (wanting to live in endless auto-dependent sprawl---the cost of maintaining all those roads goes up over time). In other cases (greedy prison guards), it's not--at least not directly.

Quite frankly, America has been living beyond it's means for a long time. Conservatives have been saying this forever, although it's true, they don't always practice what they preach. However, even the liberal think tanks like the Brookings Institution would agree with what I'm saying here.

It's a combination of the government not handling tax money judiciously and American citizens wanting more government than they're willing to pay for. And now the bill has come due.

So, if we don't want to end up a 3rd World country like Argentina (which used to have the 5th highest per capita income in the world back in 1930 before they started running huge budget deficits, etc.), we are going to have to have both drastic increases in taxes and drastic cuts in benefits (as well as drastic improvements in the cost effectiveness of medical care).

The problems you are describing now are just the warm up.

Last edited by mysticaltyger; 02-10-2010 at 01:37 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top