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.
Perhaps Madoff doesn't, but that still isn't a convincing argument to suggest that the guy mopping up at night has as much right to the amenities that Steve Jobbs or Bill Gates may have. If the janitor wants better, then he better work for it. Learn new skills and get a new job.
Discussing housing prices in this fashion is a moot point anyhow,--because the bottomline is that those particular jobs do not hold equal value nor will they be compensated for such. Therefore speculaor or no speculator, the lady who serves lunches in your kids cafeteria isn't getting the loft unless she does something drasticially innovative to warrant the higher pay check.
your posts are dishonest and obtuse. of course, a janitor doesn't deserve the same pay as a bill gates and that is not what people are saying.
the fact is though someone has to do those jobs and be satisfied in those types of positions and make enough to live decently or otherwise you get too much turnover and people always thinking the grass is greener on the other side. the unrealism is not realizing those jobs are just as necessary for a society to run so they should be compensated well enough and fairly(not elaborately).
the clue in your post is how you said they should get an education and go for a higher paying job (pfft), when in reality (uh, hello??) someone has to end up doing that job they are leaving as it is necessary. some people have a hard time being realistic, eh?
if you like the idea of someone eyeing 'your' job and thinking thier position isn't good enough because of either poor or unfair wages, then by all means encourage it. lol
"Wow. Really? I do. Very much. You want to eat? EARN IT. Too lazy or too busy stealing from someone else (etc)? Starve. Key point is you have a choice and live w/the consequences. I'd love to see some of these soup kitchens/etc present it like this ie have people do something, even if it's simple little chores, to earn that meal. I guarantee you'd see some of these "starving" people scatter like flies. Repeat: some. Not all."
I've had restaurants give me chores to do in echange for a meal, and I gladly took it. Even in this tough economy, I am glad that there are opportunities to earn a meal if not money.
I did not read any of the replies BUT I find this topic ironic because I hear ALOT more demonizing of the rich...the weathy seem to be the only minority group left in the US that is still PC to bash. I have always wondered how that is fair???
So sooooo many times the poor.....the "poor" demonize themselves. Welfare has made them a permanent underclass eliminating incentive and any attempt at self improvement.....or pursuing education (let alone ADVANCED education)....
All too often the "poor" card gets played just like the "race" card in a vain attempt to silence any criticism aimed at the slovenly lazy uneducated lumps of fat who live off the system....
The OP has a thoughtful and intelligent post, but I question the following:
"The biggest "Welfare" giveaway in the US today is Social Security, which unlike welfare, is currently set to bankrupt the US treasury in anywhere from 10-50 years. So, is your grandma a "Slacker"?"
This is partly true and partly untrue. There are "welfare" aspects to Social Security, such as disability benefits, spousal benefits, and SSI. Although this is undeniable, it seems unfair to characterize the whole system that way because most people receiving benefits are receiving retirement because they paid into the system all their lives. This latter group is not receiving a handout; in fact their retirement benefits are reduced because of the disabled, the child survivors, SSI, etc. Whether this is good or bad can be debated, but it is the overall characterization of Social Security as a "welfare giveaway" that is inaccurate.
I see. But defining "enough" seems to be where the debate is. Does the guy who puts in 40+ hours a week emptying cans and vaccuming floors deserve the $50 million Manhattan Loft? Does he deserve luxury car and the best medical care? Well sure...if he can afford it.
Seems to me that the problem isn't necessarily about the wealthy oppressing the poor, just more so about everyone living within their means and being satisfied with what they are actually able to attain.
Of course not and non of the poor or asking for that much. How can the poor be happy when they do not know if they will have enough money to eat everyday?
I did not read any of the replies BUT I find this topic ironic because I hear ALOT more demonizing of the rich...the weathy seem to be the only minority group left in the US that is still PC to bash. I have always wondered how that is fair???
Because the majority of them made their money in industries the required the labor or the purchases of many poorer people. The rich can't exist without the underclasses.
I am willing to say that most of the rich are parasitic on the economy as they neither weave or spin but only collect the profit from those that do. Owning is different from doing and always has been. We have switched from an nation of doers to a nation of owners and that destroys the creation of wealth that supports the system.
If we want to unlock the money that is currently invested outside this country we need to revise our tax system so it is applied to all income from all sources and uses a progressive system that eliminates the bottom 85 to 90% from any income tax liability. This would provide much more cash for both the consumer and small investor economy and place the burden of maintaining the country on the people that own it.
If this is considered "deamonizing" the rich it is only because they deserve it.
How did they come to own it? Oh, yeah...they worked really hard, took risks, sacrificed, and then bought it. Now you begrudge them the income stream. People like you are impossible to reason with because any time someone comes up with a good and honest plan to better their lives, they are 'parasites.'
Your tax revisions provide no solutions on how to employ the poor or motivate them to better their own lives. Only how to funnel more money to those who accomplish and contribute less in our society.
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.
Social Security a "welfare giveaway"?
