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.
As I always say, if you think its so effin great to be poor in this country, give up all your worldly possessions and do it.
I don't like living on other people's money. That is why no job too lowly to do,work and live under your means, take on any job,save,cut coupons ,do what you have to do to get ahead of poverty.
In my younger years, I cleaned condos for the rich,worked at a golf course,factory work,cleaned offices when I was 14, sold door to door. It is the way to defeat poverty because I was born poor and now live well .
In Pennsylvania, car insurance is compulsory. Not invalid.
All forms of public transportation cost money to the users and are subsidized by the government. Not invalid.
Those that g
Millions and millions of Americans have cars AND drive them on public road ways. You have to pay taxes for those road ways because you benefit from them when trucks deliver food to the stores you shop at, police officers use them to get to your house when you call them and garbage trucks drive on your street to pick up your crap.
1. In Pennsylvania and other states, car insurance is mandatory. It is against the law to drive without insurance.
2. You are out of your mind if you think people can just choose not to drive.
Come out from your dream world and into reality buddy.
Every gallon of gas is taxed. The more you drive and use the roads the more taxes you pay because you buy more gallons of gas.
They might work at low wage jobs that qualify them for food stamps.
If they didn't cheat to get the EBT then it is not abuse.
It is abuse. They're choosing to live beyond their means and expect to be able to take others' money to do so. There are many ways to reduce expenses. They should do so.
Are people truly against Social Security and Medicare for old people? Against Unemployment Insurance and food stamps for the temporarily out of work? Against welfare for up to 18-24 months for the truly impoverished families?
You see, I think that Social Security should be fully paid out to people who have paid into the system, but gradually phased out, so that future generations don't have to pay into it or rely on it. That's fiscal prudence.
I don't think Medicare should be expanded to any more recipients than it has been, save for increases for inflation of cost of services. (And, side note, let's get rid of "Obummercare.") Market-competitive healthcare--greed-driven, for-profit healthcare, if you want to be more politically incorrect about it--continues to provide us with the quality, research-and-development-driven healthcare system we now take for granted. The innovations thereof, we have shared with the rest of the world (yes, Siemens is a Dutch company, but much of their R&D is the U.S. in addition to The Netherlands). Plus, this is fiscal prudence in the public sector... If you want to be, once again, politically incorrect, the government's institution of Medicare starting in 1965 under President Johnson really started screwing with healthcare costs; still, nothing as dramatic as the trauma dealt our healthcare system by "Obummercare."
Unemployment Insurance? Keep it at six months, and continue to expand it to 12-18 month-long eligibility during difficult economic times. Basically, the same as it is now, with perhaps some bureaucratic streamlining. (I've been employed in this system, so I know of what I speak.)
Food stamps? Make it like Unemployment Insurance, though still with its own income thresholds: six months, or 12-18 months during difficult economic times. This will also limit dependency in the long-term on the program by welfare recipients and the perpetually/seasonally unemployed.
Welfare? We had welfare reform in the 1990s, which has been overall a positive thing. Limit to two years, but provide two years' advance notice that this limiting will occur. This will provide multigenerational welfare-family recipients time to prepare--to the best of their ability. Such multigenerational welfare-family recipients can be provided with federal funding during the advance notice period to take advantage of programs such as GED classes, programs funded by the Trade Readjustment and Workforce Investment Acts, vocational-technical training, and community college classes, or even to supplement and boost signing bonuses for military service participation, if age-appropriate.
But, what do I know? I'm just an capitalistic, rolling-eyes-at-Bernie-Sanders, evil sort of fellow... Yes, I know that Americans redistribute wealth far less than our European, Australian, and New Zealander counterparts, and that still distribute generally more than the Japanese and South Koreans. It doesn't change the fact that, when debts and unfunded liabilities are considered at all levels federal, state and municipal, the U.S. is now looking at $110 trillion. With a T. We can't sustain what we've been doing forever.
Last edited by EclecticEars; 05-22-2017 at 10:53 AM..
The hypocrisy is staggering. There's a subtext of hate and resentment for anybody who has earned more than them. They're the enemy, the profiteers, the greedy who hoard their money keeping others down in some bullsh!t liberal notion of the economy as a zero-sum game. They hate the golden goose that they keep coming to for more of those golden eggs. There they stand with one hand upraised in a militant fist and the other outstretched for a handout.
The economy *is* a zero-sum game. I know a lot of wealthy people - in fact, I grew up surrounded by them. They came from all walks of life, but the one common denominator was that none of them got to where they were without screwing others over, at least to some noticeable extent.
It's very difficult to become wealthy if you're always ethical.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,604,784 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by ohhwanderlust
The economy *is* a zero-sum game. I know a lot of wealthy people - in fact, I grew up surrounded by them. They came from all walks of life, but the one common denominator was that none of them got to where they were without screwing others over, at least to some noticeable extent.
Exactly, the housing market is the best example. And housing is people's biggest expense
Ah, the progressive ideal, promoting to solve all the peoples woes by spending other people's money!
Get back to me when you and all those who think like you have spent a large portion of your incomes of your own choice before you go on about how you care.
When you do that, when you people have put your money where your mouth is, then... maybe... you can have a self righteous position.
Until then, I call BS, on the "we care for the poor" argument. It is easy to care when you aren't picking up the bill.
When are you going to start paying extra to fund the wars? Seems I never see you call for this.
Are people truly against Social Security and Medicare for old people? Against Unemployment Insurance and food stamps for the temporarily out of work? Against welfare for up to 18-24 months for the truly impoverished families?
You see, I think that Social Security should be fully paid out to people who have paid into the system, but gradually phased out, so that future generations don't have to pay into it or rely on it. That's fiscal prudence.
I don't think Medicare should be expanded to any more recipients than it has been, save for increases for inflation of cost of services. (And, side note, let's get rid of "Obummercare.") Market-competitive healthcare--greed-driven, for-profit healthcare, if you want to be more politically incorrect about it--continues to provide us with the quality, research-and-development-driven healthcare system we now take for granted. The innovations thereof, we have shared with the rest of the world (yes, Siemens is a Dutch company, but much of their R&D is the U.S. in addition to The Netherlands). Plus, this is fiscal prudence in the public sector... If you want to be, once again, politically incorrect, the government's institution of Medicare starting in 1965 under President Johnson really started screwing with healthcare costs; still, nothing as dramatic as the trauma dealt our healthcare system by "Obummercare."
Unemployment Insurance? Keep it at six months, and continue to expand it to 12-18 month-long eligibility during difficult economic times. Basically, the same as it is now, with perhaps some bureaucratic streamlining. (I've been employed in this system, so I know of what I speak.)
Food stamps? Make it like Unemployment Insurance, though still with its own income thresholds: six months, or 12-18 months during difficult economic times. This will also limit dependency in the long-term on the program by welfare recipients and the perpetually/seasonally unemployed.
Welfare? We had welfare reform in the 1990s, which has been overall a positive thing. Limit to two years, but provide two years' advance notice that this limiting will occur. This will provide multigenerational welfare-family recipients time to prepare--to the best of their ability. Such multigenerational welfare-family recipients can be provided with federal funding during the advance notice period to take advantage of programs such as GED classes, programs funded by the Trade Readjustment and Workforce Investment Acts, vocational-technical training, and community college classes, or even to supplement and boost signing bonuses for military service participation, if age-appropriate.
But, what do I know? I'm just an capitalistic, rolling-eyes-at-Bernie-Sanders, evil sort of fellow... Yes, I know that Americans redistribute wealth far less than our European, Australian, and New Zealander counterparts, and that still distribute generally more than the Japanese and South Koreans. It doesn't change the fact that, when debts and unfunded liabilities are considered at all levels federal, state and municipal, the U.S. is now looking at $110 trillion. With a T. We can't sustain what we've been doing forever.
What do you know, you ask? Very little, apparently. Do a little research on what conditions were before social security. Without social security you will have beggars in the streets and soup lines wrapping around city blocks. Old ladies back to eating cat food and huddled in doorways for the night. Crime will skyrocket as people claw for crumbs. That is your America? Well, there are enough of us who are going to make sure you don't get it. it is easy to blame the poor for not saving enough on their own for their old age. When do you start blaming the corporate masters for scooping up all of the rewards for increased productivity for themselves and their shareholders and leaving the workers with increasingly empty pockets?
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.
