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.
And what did you expect to make out of your life with an $11K annual income ? Do you expect to be able to live the American Dream on $11K per year ?
If you only make $11,000 a year you qualify for federal assistance. Being on federal assistance is only meant to assist you while you get on your feet and earn a better income. It is definitely not the American dream to subsist off federal and state social welfare programs.
If you only make $11,000 a year you qualify for federal assistance. Being on federal assistance is only meant to assist you while you get on your feet and earn a better income. It is definitely not the American dream to subsist off federal and state social welfare programs.
Maybe I'm missing something but I don't think so. I don't think there's much help out there for childless adults making $11K.
If my government allowed tiny houses I could afford (instead of minimum lot size of 10K), I could do okay.
Instead I have to rent crappy rooms in crappy crowded houses where I can't get any peace and quiet.
Umm. Even if there was no minimum lot size, you can't really get more than a room earning 11k/year. There are houses on much smaller lots than 10k square feet where I live and in many other towns here, but they still require more (often much more ) than 11k/year.
You are seriously going to beat that drum foe spending more on education?? The first thing Bush did when taking office was to let Sen. Kennedy write the largest education bill in our history. Each year after that, Bush continued to increase spending on K-12 education by 7% each year; for a comparison, it was only 3% per year under Clinton.
With all that money, we still have the left using the excuse of "not enough money" is being spent on education.
The federal government gives billion a year to higher education, and yet each year increases to tuition and books greatly outpaces inflation. We should demand colleges and universities lower tuition or they get no more federal money, and no more grants to students who attend their colleges and universities. As it stands today, the only people who can attend college are the poor, thru taxpayer funded assistance, and the wealthy, the middle class cannot afford $10,000-$40,000 a year tuition.
States have been cutting. California has taken a huge hit for example. As has Michigan and...yes, even Texas. Federal funds have not been able to replace lost state funds. Hence the increased tuition from SUNY to UC. Much of these cuts have been put in place by Republicans. In CA, for example Dems were less likely to agree with UC and CSU cuts. Republicans were more likely...yet less likely to repeal the status quo of property tax (which is notoriously low for those that bought early...Capital records pays 6 cents a square foot...whereas most people pay SEVERAL times more).
So, yes...there is less spending overall due to state and local cuts...where the bulk of funding comes from.
States have been cutting. California has taken a huge hit for example. As has Michigan and...yes, even Texas. Federal funds have not been able to replace lost state funds. Hence the increased tuition from SUNY to UC. Much of these cuts have been put in place by Republicans. In CA, for example Dems were less likely to agree with UC and CSU cuts. Republicans were more likely...yet less likely to repeal the status quo of property tax (which is notoriously low for those that bought early...Capital records pays 6 cents a square foot...whereas most people pay SEVERAL times more).
So, yes...there is less spending overall due to state and local cuts...where the bulk of funding comes from.
Is this an example of California taking a huge "hit" ?
AB 130 and AB 131 is sound financial politics ?
State Committee Passes New Version of DREAM Act - The Daily Californian (http://www.dailycal.org/article/112437/state_committee_passes_new_version_of_dream_act - broken link)
"If enacted into law, the bills would expand institutional and state financial aid to undocumented students in California respectively. "
I can't remember where I read it, but someone did a study on how many times government taxes the same dollar, as changes hands and makes its way thru the economy. The more dollars interacting between people in the market economy, the more tax revenue that is generated.
If the federal government takes an extra 5% out of everyone's paycheck, that is 5% less money people have to invest, save or spend locally.
If the federal government raises taxes and takes $5,000,000 from the county I live in, then that is $5 million that cannot be used by private businesses to remain competitive by building, expanding, investing in new infrastructure, or giving out raises or hiring new employees. If the people in the county have less income it's also potential tax revenue denied to the local city, county and state.
A large percentage of that $5 million gets wasted by the inefficient federal government bureaucracy, and then they may end up sending whatever money is left over to go overseas for birth control projects or the give it to a county in Florida to build a turtle tunnel under the highway.
That's assuming quite a bit. First off, we know that tax cuts for the rich actually decreases tax revenue. There is no sales tax (they will not spend it on tangible goods). A lot of times, for the extremely wealthy, it is sent into offshore accounts. No way is that coming back.
For the rest of us, possibly. In times of recession, increasing the highest earners means more revenue for infrastructure projects (more jobs, more jobs means more consumers).
In our economy we have not seen low taxes stimulating businesses. What has happened is that many companies made their workforce leaner and cheaper. Those that have a job are willing to do more to keep their for less. So, the lower taxes are really the icing on the annual profit report cake.
As for birth control project overseas, I feel that a country that invades sovereign nations should probably do some good will. Call it karma, call it whatever you like...humanitarian projects (to a certain extent) should happen from the only super power.
Regardless, the government does a lot more than building tunnels in Florida. It also takes care of the interstate system. It employs scientists and researchers to help cure and find the best means of delivering such cures. It, not as much as it should, provides funding for education. If it were not for the stimulus bill, my former job working with autistic children would not exist...they would not have as much as a chance (unless they came from wealthy families).
If you weigh the social implications as well, it makes sense to raise taxes on the rich. Even on a strictly economic level it makes more sense to raise taxes on the rich than keep the taxes low or lower them further.
Is this an example of California taking a huge "hit" ?
AB 130 and AB 131 is sound financial politics ?
State Committee Passes New Version of DREAM Act - The Daily Californian (http://www.dailycal.org/article/112437/state_committee_passes_new_version_of_dream_act - broken link)
"If enacted into law, the bills would expand institutional and state financial aid to undocumented students in California respectively. "
Republicans in CA cut funding to the UC system.
I think that funding should be restored and augmented. We should not have immigrants who have lived here and most likely going to contribute to the Californian economy banned from higher education and become an economic drain because something their parents did.
I think that your appeal is more an appeal to emotion, rather than an appeal to logic.
Why cut off people from higher education when that is the best way to lift oneself economically? Why diminish the talent pool?
I think that funding should be restored and augmented. We should not have immigrants who have lived here and most likely going to contribute to the Californian economy banned from higher education and become an economic drain because something their parents did.
I think that your appeal is more an appeal to emotion, rather than an appeal to logic.
Why cut off people from higher education when that is the best way to lift oneself economically? Why diminish the talent pool?
But they can't get jobs once you've paid for their college education as they are not citizens. Have you thought about that ?
If you cannot afford to educate your own citizens then why, for pete's sake, are you taking on illegals ?
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.
