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.
Public housing in the Bronx. Not even close to the shack town in Rio.
What do you think?
Co-op city isn't public housing, it's a HUGE private cooperative development, the largest in the nation. However, the largest Public Housing Project in the world is in Queens, Queenboro Houses(since Robert Taylor Homes in Chicago were torn down).
With minimum-wage jobs, people in ghettos will still live in ghettos.
nope.. because they wouldnt be sitting around producing children they cant afford to feed.. Its much easier to have 10 kids when someone else is paying for it...
Welfare could easily be eliminated, but the private sector is not willing to do what it takes to eliminate it and make this country a better place. Companies/employers need to hire, train and give skills to workers, along with paying full benefits and a living wage.
Bad trade agreements like NAFTA need to be repealed, corporations who export jobs should be fined or held criminally liable. Massive tariffs should be placed on all imports. CEO pay should never be more than 20 times the pay of the average worker in a company.
We had 2.9% unemployment in 1953 & thus welfare was not needed then.
Welfare could easily be eliminated, but the private sector is not willing to do what it takes to eliminate it and make this country a better place. Companies/employers need to hire, train and give skills to workers, along with paying full benefits and a living wage.
Bad trade agreements like NAFTA need to be repealed, corporations who export jobs should be fined or held criminally liable. Massive tariffs should be placed on all imports. CEO pay should never be more than 20 times the pay of the average worker in a company.
We had 2.9% unemployment in 1953 & thus welfare was not needed then.
You cant hold someone criminally liable for exercising their constitutional rights to go to business friendly areas.. We had low unemployment in the 1950's because government moved out of businesses way and they let the demand outpace the supply of the labor force.. Todays its the opposite.. and you can once again, thank government for that..
You cant hold someone criminally liable for exercising their constitutional rights to go to business friendly areas..
The passage of a few laws could change that. If they want to go to more business friendly areas like from California to Texas, that's great, just keep it in the US. Forget about Asia and Mexico, let those leeches create their own jobs.
Really, they should be criminally liable, and not sentenced to a cushy white collar prison with tennis courts. They should be sent to a hardcore federal penetentiary with rapists, kidnappers, and terrorists. That would be a good deterrant.
The passage of a few laws could change that. If they want to go to more business friendly areas like from California to Texas, that's great, just keep it in the US. Forget about Asia and Mexico, let those leeches create their own jobs.
Really, they should be criminally liable, and not sentenced to a cushy white collar prison with tennis courts. They should be sent to a hardcore federal penetentiary with rapists, kidnappers, and terrorists. That would be a good deterrant.
Under what constitutional authority would you be able to enforce a law saying an individual cant go where they want to go? What justification would you use to limit my right to go to another country, and if I choose to setup a business in another country, where I legally went to, then under what legal justification would you deny me my right, to open up a business?
I cant wait to hear how you want to deny individuals their right to assemble, how you think american laws would be enforceable in other nations, how you now dont care about humans unenumerated rights, etc.
If welfare was cut, they would not move out nor improve their position.
You can get welfare in Mexico, but only in the Federal District state in Mexico City, and also for a maximum of 1 year. Also, you will only get it, if you had a job prior for a year and a half.
Look at some of the slums of in Mexico and ask, why are they there? Why do they exist throughout Mexico if there is no welfare?
If welfare was cut, they would not move out nor improve their position.
You can get welfare in Mexico, but only in the Federal District state in Mexico City, and also for a maximum of 1 year. Also, you will only get it, if you had a job prior for a year and a half.
Look at some of the slums of in Mexico and ask, why are they there? Why do they exist throughout Mexico if there is no welfare?
The slums in Mexico are due to poor currency evaluations, a lack of jobs, the value of the peso, crime, gams, corruption, a lack of basic utilities like water, overpopulation, lack of quality education, and a LOT of other things not having anything to do with a lack of welfare..
You pretend the slums would disappear if Mexico suddently handed people poverty wages to not work.. They would not.. I've spent months in Mexico, all over the country, and they have a very good work ethic, even those living in the slums, unlike many americans. I've seen their schools, some of them are made out of clay, lacking windows, doors, even chairs and desks.. With poor education you get poverty, not a lack of welfare..
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.
We had low unemployment in the 1950's because government moved out of businesses way and they let the demand outpace the supply of the labor force.. Todays its the opposite.. and you can once again, thank government for that..
