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.
That is why I mentioned poor trade treaties, such as nafta that have exported the middle class.
No argument there. Those issues have to be addressed. But we also have to recognize that tax policy, especially taxing capital gains so much lower than earned income, and the monopolistic behavior allowed by large corporations, has a create a situation where wealth is concentrated into the hands of only a few individuals. It's bad for democracy, bad for the entrepreneurship, and bad for your wallet.
Yes, 0bama has an exceptionally low IQ. He can't even read a teleprompter. And he thinks there are 57 states. No! 59!
Obama graduated Magna *** Laude at Harvard, the most prestigious university in the world. You question his intelligence based on his skin color (who else would you mention AA), but I can assure you, intellectually he'd run circles around all of you and all the other right-wingers on this board.
Obama graduated Magna *** Laude at Harvard, the most prestigious university in the world. You question his intelligence based on his skin color (who else would you mention AA), but I can assure you, intellectually he'd run circles around all of you and all the other right-wingers on this board.
Obama graduated Magna *** Laude at Harvard, the most prestigious university in the world. You question his intelligence based on his skin color (who else would you mention AA), but I can assure you, intellectually he'd run circles around all of you and all the other right-wingers on this board.
That would depend on who was writing for his TelePrompter during the debate.
Theres so many incorrect assumptions here its hard to know where to start....
1. the vast majority do NOT have equal opportunity, you are a fool if you truly believe that. Heck even if you can go to a major school, you can't afford to be involved in the social interactions that determine future income. There is a social club-if you don't have the money you aren't part of it. Your odds of true success are therefore far lower.
2. The left has very little interest in completely equal outcomes. Mostly they are interested in a outcome floor. IE no matter what X will be the floor, and the majority will do better then that.
But hey if making false claims about an entire set of people is your thing, and believing them....have fun. Meanwhile in reality.....
"Mostly they are interested in a outcome floor."
That is true but only tells half the story.
What liberals are really interested in are outcomes that are slightly better than the worst possible but not as good as they could be if it means individuals get credit for their own success instead of liberal do-gooders who continue to hold the strings.
Remember, FDR, in spite of his New Deal economic policies failing by every objective standard, and that with double-digit unemployment eight years in, had to die in office to lose the White House.
He didn't succeed at anything except making otherwise proud hardworking American dependent of the hand of government, but in the grand scheme, that was all that was needed to advance the cause of liberalism and build the party's brand.
This is a lesson not lost on today's Democrats who realize that rescuing impoverished and marginalized segments of society requires that a significant portion of the greater society continue to be poor and marginalized.
Knowing that there is no penalty for speaking out of both sides of their mouths, liberals, in the name of equal opportunity defend the failed public school system and oppose school vouchers while, at the same time, incentivize single motherhood and unemployment.
I am hopeful that one day the poor and disconnected elements of society will come to recognize the parasitic nature of their liberal rescuers, but I also realize that liberalism is a flea that has learned to breed dogs.
@The OP: I find it pretty interesting when politicians who are members of the 1% talk about this and try to portray themselves as supporters of ordinary Americans.
Your answer is the large majority of Americans these days have no opportunity. Otherwise they might have seen thir real incomes increase like the GDP has increased since 1980. Unfortunately they haven't. The very very small 0.1% of Americans (Those high net worth individuals who don't rely on earned income) have set things up with largely Conservatives help to capture all of that growth mostrly due to technology which is helping cut business overhead otherwise known as payroll.
Why do you think that America's automaters make virtually the same number of cars and much better ones at that today as they did in 1970 but only need 350,000 workers not the 3.0 million they employed in 1970. It a great way to run a Capitalist economy but it does tend to throw a lot of people by the way side. Why waste all that wealth by letting nearly 330 million Americans have a shot at at and have to compete with all those people. The rich use their wealth like the Koch Bros. to defend their privilege and to kill off anyone dumb enough to believe they are fellow Americans. They are not. Capitalism is a wealth concentrating system and it hates competition which might force our wealth to spend money and take risk. How stupid would that be of them.
Nope, jobs are still there...because people don't want to do them, does not mean they are not there.
That's the difference...if you are 16 you should not expect to make 100K starting off and that is what they want...sorry to dissapoint you.
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.