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.
No, I think all American citizens- including poor,working-,and middle-class people- should be entitled to the basics since they are living in the richest country in the world:
That includes housing, education, and health insurance.
I DON'T think these 3 things should be only affordable for the wealthy and upper-middle class.
And who should pay for the poor decisions they make?
You should take a ride thru the poorest ghettos in NY/NJ. There you will find housing projects, public schools and people w free healthcare. You let me know how that is "helping" them.
After you do that, go on Amazon and search for "Uncle Sam's Plantation". Maybe then you will understand what a poverty trap is and how one party has brainwashed people to continue voting for failed policies.
No, I think all American citizens- including poor,working-,and middle-class people- should be entitled to the basics since they are living in the richest country in the world:
That includes housing, education, and health insurance.
I DON'T think these 3 things should be only affordable for the wealthy and upper-middle class.
Health insurance is no longer affordable for the middle class. Obamacare is merely income redistribution. Poor people get subsidies and uses healthcare more while working middle class don't get much usage out of it have to pay 2-5x what they used to pay even with a workplace group plan.
Some people just opt out of insurance and pay the tax. Cheaper than paying outrageous medical insurance.
No president can fix housing and education, those are local problems.
NY+ NJ homes are expensive because a lot more jobs are here which creates demand and the state & town governments expect citizens to fund their costly operations and entitlements for the poor.
Why is this amazing? Most of them ACT against their interest in their daily personal choices (drugs, alcohol, doing things out of order, having babies out of wedlock, amassing debt, evading reality, etc.) Why would they inconsistently choose wisely in politics?
I think there are different levels of poor today, we need to expand those classifications.
There are:
- Handicap, incapable of work, incapable of making rational decisions
- Criminal background, leeches social programs
- Lazy, environmental & societal effects
- Long term drug abusers
Then there are:
- Out of work for a long period due to changes in economy
- Deep debt from disasters and economic turbulences. Bankruptcy no longer available
- Behind on debt, too old to make good pay, not yet retirement age
- No retirement savings, house underwater, behind on payments
After you do that, go on Amazon and search for "Uncle Sam's Plantation". Maybe then you will understand what a poverty trap is and how one party has brainwashed people to continue voting for failed policies.
We've had poverty in America long before the war on poverty began.
The big difference is today the vast majority of the US poverty class is not starving and has a bed at night. This is the success story of these "failed" policies.
Trumpindicated his support for war in a radio interview with shock jock Howard Stern on Sept. 11, 2002 — a little more than six months before the war started.
Trumpindicated his support for war in a radio interview with shock jock Howard Stern on Sept. 11, 2002 — a little more than six months before the war started.
it wasnt exactly strong support:
"Stern asked Trump directly if he supported going to war with Iraq, and Trump hesitantly responded, “Yeah, I guess so.”
i am not really sure what to expect when it comes to trump and war. i am not happy with the obama overseas mass murder efforts but I prefer them to bush's. i dont believe trump has said anything about slashing the military budget, something very important to me (and most Americans). i dont know off the top of my head what hillary would do with the military. i would rate her as probably less likely to initiate large scale mass murder wars and probably more likely to cut the military budget, which is a big plus for me.
To put things in their proper perspective, The US already spends more annually on the military than China, Russia, The UK, Saudi Arabia, France, India, and Japan combined spend on their military forces: U.S. defense spending compared to other countries | pgpf.org
Before he left office, Dwight Eisenhower warned us to beware of the influence of the US Military-Industrial Complex, but apparently nobody took old Ike seriously.
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.
