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.
My point is with the system the way it is, with no assistance unless you're under the poverty line, it's either move to a high crime neighborhood or stay childless, and we've chosen the latter. But I feel it shouldn't have to be this way
Plenty of middle-income people - which is what $60k is - live in safe apartments with one or two children. The average HHI is in the 50s. You're saying that half the families in this country can't afford to support their own children unless other people pay for them?
Here's what will happen in your case: Daycare will NOT be made free for middle-income people, and you and your wife-to-be will find a cheaper arrangement for daycare so she can work OR she will stay home for the first few years and you will move to a cheaper apartment. Tada! problem solved, and it didn't take OPM to do it.
Adding more, even less academically-inclined to the post-secondary mix will pull it down even faster. There's a 50-year history of how we got here, beginning with the shift in focus in public K-12 in the 1960s from academic excellence to "equal outcomes" out of a perceived need for "fairness" and a desire for social cooperation/cohesion (I'll post more on that, if anyone's interested). Of course, we got neither. US society is becoming increasingly polarized, and US millennials are the least capable generation on record since the OECD has been keeping track of such.
You ever get bored of copy and pasting that post over and over?
Are you talking about the corporations and investors?? Because they have tax laws written to their favor and protected by the government. And they still have profits every year and not the "need" like each one of us.
You can take this war mongering or police mongering to people in the "rallies" . In a free society like America that will never happen any time soon. However it may happen if more people come to streets unable to support themselves and the gap betweeen .000025 and common folks widen.
More cluelessness.
100+ million US workers and retirees have $28 trillion invested in their pensions and their retirement accounts. THEY are shareholders. THEY own corporate debt. THEY are investors. If they don't profit from their investments, they don't get their promised defined benefit pensions, or enough growth in their retirement accounts to be able to draw an adequate amount in their retirement.
Why is anyone paying 24% interest on debt? Doing so is one's own CHOICE, so I have no sympathy.
Selling government to special interest groups and pawn brokers and making no effort to address the debt situation is a problem. Its not that America was ever like this before - buying everything on debt.
Selling government to special interest groups and pawn brokers and making no effort to address the debt situation is a problem. Its not that America was ever like this before - buying everything on debt.
One can finance purchases without having to pay 24% interest on the debt. If anyone pays such an interest rate on their debt, they've done so of their own free will. No sympathy.
It has a low COL compared to NYC, LA or the Bay Area. But it's more expensive than the national average, and wages here don't reflect it. The average home price in good neighborhoods now is $300k, $200k either gets you in the ghetto or in the far flung exurbs, yet the median individual wage here is $27k/year (close to $50k/year household).
So yeah, people who moved here with equity are doing great, but I've never owned a home so still trying to put a downpayment together (shooting for 20%, which is $60,000 in this market), and it's just as expensive to rent here than to own right now (about breakeven)
This is just a race to the bottom. The real issue is that the top 1% now have doubled their share of the national income, from 12% to 24% and the trend continues. This are large scale trends, deliberate public policy, that cant simply be remedied by families starting to eat more canned food and selling their car and starting to walk everywhere.
The real issue is that the greed of Wall Street is unlimited. Wages for ordinary people have flatlined for decades. Sooner or later, a majority of the people will start to vote for people that advocate for a system that benefits the vast majority, and not just the wealthy few.
We are going further and further into debt. Why if we do not have to pay for our wars, do we need to pay for child care?
Spend trillions on wars and you get tac cuts. Why can't we enact child care and combine it with tax cuts? After all, the argument is tax cuts will spur the economy.
We could do that but with the increasing partisanship only one or the other will happen. So now we just get tax cuts and if the DEMS take over the white house and both branches of congress we may get child care but along with it tax increases. We need leadership in Washington that is actually interested in the common good but instead we are increasingly electing those who are simply good at attacking the other side.
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.
