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.
Someone mentioned the looming insolvency of Social Security. Someone who knows more about taxes than I told me that the IRS takes Social Security taxes only up to $75K of income. Well even a dropout like me can see that if the ceiling was closer to $150K (dare I say higner?) there might be less likelihood of insolvency regardless of what present Americans do with their babymaking equipment? And, if raising S.S. withholding to $150K would be a good thing what do you imagine the effect of extending the 50% bracket to... 1M would be? Sacre bleu! He can't be serious! Why... that would... that would.... be a great idea!
I hate to confront you with inconvenient facts but we already went over the numbers on the homeless thing. Go back and read the info.
As far as demographics go it's simple math. If you have five people per retiree working and paying the retirement benefits and health care costs it costs much less then when you have two people paying those costs. The same dynamic is happening here in the US as well, just not to the same extent. Why do you think we are having all these "debates" about the solvency of Social Security? Or the looming huge increases in medicare costs? It's because the baby boomers have begun to retire and we have a demographic bomb about to hit our government finances. Good thing Bush and Obama havn't run up the national debt just as that's about to hit. Oh wait.
[/url]
No one really went over anything. Someone brought up government-supported data, and you tried to pick holes in it. I read that "debate", and was simply stating that I disagreed with your perspective. You asked me to contribute something, so I did. Sorry you didn't like my contribution, but it appears you don't really like to hear from people who don't think like you do.
So now you're advocating "socialism"! Wouldn't you just want to get rid of these entitlements and have people "prepare for the future" better and "make better financial decisions"? I agree there is definitely a problem there, though. Sadly I don't have a lot of answers for it, as I've always just assumed social security will not exist when I want to retire, and thus I WILL have to work until I'm 80 (like most of Americans), and it's not due to my "poor financial decisions".
Haggard, Metlakatla is much more right than you know. I won't bore you with my story but lets get real about some things. Do you ever look around a box store or home improvement center checkout area and note that they usually have 12 to 16 cashier stations? How many are ever manned at most? 5? 8? At most. Then there are the automated self-checkouts. For now there is human back-up for the 20% of human shoppers that just can't figure them out. How many years till there is total automation of all P.O.S. (point of sale) commerce in the U.S. 10? 20? It will happen though and when it does another avenue of employment for last ditch workers will be gone. An L-1011 jetliner can take off, cruise and land without pilot intervention. That isn't even the cutting edge of aircraft design. No airline at present dares send passengers in an unmanned airplane but how long till co-pilots and/or flight engineers are deemed uneccessary? 10 years? How long till Triment trains are unmanned? The stations are. You are completely on your own waiting for a 2:00am train at Fare Complex. That is a nice segue into the issue of security. When all the police go away and I was gobsmacked when I learned the size of the PDX Police force. Is it true that it is a few hundred officers?? Automation and simple human prediliction: NYC is 26% African American yet the FDNY has a 3% A.A. representation. Make it less likely as time goes on that employment will be the right that it was for you and others of your demographic. Homeless people beg because cash buys things that social services don't: beer, wine, cigarettes, etc. I don't get it but I know better than to put my value system on others. I am certain that it I were ever homeless I'd save every penny... heck I do it now and I am not homeless why would I start then? The main reason the Conservative message gets up my nose is because it is usually so self-righteous. "If everyone was like me and if political leaders governed like me, all would be well in the land". Some of you should try it. Get out there and run for something instead of kvetch from the sidelines. Show us how it should be done. You might find, once you get going that the monolithic Corporatocracy has something to say about your well intentioned reorganizing. Untill you actually get your patoukis in the hot seat, however, you are one of us. Please don't hate on one another. Truly "there but by the Grace of God go I" No, I am not a Believer in that sense but the meaning of that message goes across belief (unbelief) systems.
H
Yes, automation is certainly a factor; don't know that I'd ever get on a plane without an actual pilot, yikes.
Great point about "there but by the Grace of God go I" . A little compassion really costs nothing.
I think that what some people aren't getting is that the low level entry jobs just aren't there for everyone who wants one. There's little turnover anymore to speak of in those jobs and when one does become available, there are so many applicants that only a very few of them even get an interview.
After the crash, I saw a posting on the Eugene CL--a family had advertised for part time domestic help and were paying min. wage. I didn't see the original post; I only saw the post that they'd made thanking everyone who answered their ad and apologizing for not being able to answer each one personally ( a nice gesture, I thought). They had received over 80 responses and said that they typically only got 3 or 4 replies in the past.
These economic times are different from what most of us have known in our lifetimes and the old "I pulled myself up by my bootstraps and worked in a 7-11 et al for two months" just does not fly--we all done that in better times.
HHE, I probably should apologize to you because my comments weren't directed to you so much as a person as they were directed at all of us who have never yet lived through extremely tough economic times. No, I don't know the specifics of what you've been through in your life and I'm sorry that you've had some rough moments and of course it's to your credit that you've risen above that. But I think that you grew up in relatively prosperous times in the United States.
We have two new employees in our business, but twenty-somethings, who have both been unable to find work for over a year. One is a student at U of O and couldn't even find a typical student/server/customer service job; the other is a culinary school graduate. What we can offer them is just seasonal work and a place to live during that time, and they are both proving to be quality employees who are far from lowlifes just because they collected unemployment for awhile. They'll leave here at the end of the season with some more unemployment built up to get them through until the next break comes along for them as well as excellent references.
There is a whole different type of person on "the system" now than there have been previously been. It used to be a given that if you lost your job, you'd just go get some service type of gig for awhile to tide you over. But again, there simply are not enough jobs of any kind for every person who wants them.
Abuse of the system certainly takes place, but the real abuse hasn't occurred among the low wage workers of this country. And I agree with you that we're way too soft on criminals; most of Wall Street should be in Club Fed.
Anyway, excuse me for the rant but it just gets to me to see people being referred to as "lowlifes" because they are collecting unemployment benefits.
If you guys ever do get a major league baseball team, I think it should be called the "Portland Panhandlers". But seriously, reading some of these post I must have missed something. When I visited Portland for a week researching neighborhoods I wasn't panhandled one time. I did see homeless people but only from the car driving passed the greyhound station, but I don't think that would be somewhere I would ever walk anyway. Just like I wouldn't hang out here around the bus station. We currently live Ohio and she is completely burnt out from traveling, so we will be moving out that way soon. My partner travels the entire west coast from San Diego to Vancouver. We basically have a choice of any western city, but she chooses Portland. She has been everywhere in Portland and has been panhandled one time in the N.W 23rd area. She has been panhandled more times in San Francisco and in Berkeley she was followed and called me because she was scared. She has never been scared in Portland and loves it there and if it weren't for me and my endless researching (stalling) we would've been there yesterday. I think the truth always lies somewhere in the middle!
I'm not sure where you went, but getting panhandled in neighborhoods is uncommon.
You get panhandled downtown, business parking lots, etc. Last night, I got panhandled at HOME DEPOT parking lot. I was nice enough to actually give this guy a few seconds of my time to see if he's got something legitimate he needs help with, like directions, needing a jump or the like. "hey brah, my brother and I blah blah blah blah gas... blah blah blah... spare anything, like a dollar" I said "no" and he started swearing at me.
Not that long ago, some dirty transient sat net to my friend and I at NW 20th/Burnside Taco Bell while we were eating.
Try going to NE 7th Ave /Weidler Taco Bell, especially late at night. Good chance you'll get approached by panhandler as you enter/leave drive through, or as you walk on the parking lot. Either the management don't care enough to have the police pluck them off, or the police don't care enough to do the plucking.
These creatures contribute erosion of welfare of community.
If you guys ever do get a major league baseball team, I think it should be called the "Portland Panhandlers". But seriously, reading some of these post I must have missed something. When I visited Portland for a week researching neighborhoods I wasn't panhandled one time. I did see homeless people but only from the car driving passed the greyhound station, but I don't think that would be somewhere I would ever walk anyway. Just like I wouldn't hang out here around the bus station. We currently live Ohio and she is completely burnt out from traveling, so we will be moving out that way soon. My partner travels the entire west coast from San Diego to Vancouver. We basically have a choice of any western city, but she chooses Portland. She has been everywhere in Portland and has been panhandled one time in the N.W 23rd area. She has been panhandled more times in San Francisco and in Berkeley she was followed and called me because she was scared. She has never been scared in Portland and loves it there and if it weren't for me and my endless researching (stalling) we would've been there yesterday. I think the truth always lies somewhere in the middle!
Try standing at a crowded bus stop in downtown Portland. You will be askend for money or will see others being asked.
I was panhandled a couple of times by some smart mouthed teenagers in my neighborhood once. They wearing shoes I could never afford. I told them off.
Anywhere there is a large congreation of people, there will be panhandlers. I have given food to those that looked like they were truly in need including food for their pets if they have them. I will never give anyone money because I don't know what they will spend it on.
The people who have followed and/or threatend me were obviously druggies. Women are more vulnerable targets. The homeless in my neighborhood (you see them only very early in the morning) do not ask for handouts. People give them cans and bottles to redeem for money. They aren't out to hurt anyone, even the clearly confused guy I often see at the bus stop in my neighborhood in the morning who will look me up and down and mutter "That is not a man; that is not a man."
You need to live here for awhile before you can make a competent judgement as to whether or not it exists in abundance and whether or not it is a problem.
So, many of you keep claiming that if we raise taxes on someone other than yourself that will solve the homeless problem. I don't agree, as I've stated, but let's assume you're right, that the solution to having homeless people is that taxes are too low.
What would you do with all that extra tax money to help homeless people?
Someone mentioned the looming insolvency of Social Security. Someone who knows more about taxes than I told me that the IRS takes Social Security taxes only up to $75K of income. Well even a dropout like me can see that if the ceiling was closer to $150K (dare I say higner?) there might be less likelihood of insolvency regardless of what present Americans do with their babymaking equipment? And, if raising S.S. withholding to $150K would be a good thing what do you imagine the effect of extending the 50% bracket to... 1M would be? Sacre bleu! He can't be serious! Why... that would... that would.... be a great idea!
H
See, there you go again quoting anecdotal "evidence". Social security is taken out of the first $106k of annual income in 2010 and it normally goes up every year. Google is your friend if you want to talk facts versus making things up. It has not been a $75k limit for 10 years.
Instead of taxing "rich" people even more, why don't you go back and finish your degree (you did state you are a drop out) and make more money so YOU can contribute more money to government coffers?
So, many of you keep claiming that if we raise taxes on someone other than yourself that will solve the homeless problem. I don't agree, as I've stated, but let's assume you're right, that the solution to having homeless people is that taxes are too low.
What would you do with all that extra tax money to help homeless people?
Excellent point TDNY. There's money now - it's a matter of priorities. We've spent a mind boggling amount of money on the wars in Iraq and Afganistan, and a fraction of that would be enough to pay for building real low income / free housing for all homeless people in the US. It doesn't happen because the people we elect don't make it happen. It's not that there isn't enough money - there's plenty of money for what we as a country deem important enough.
A commercial that drives this point home quite well with regard to hungry children in the US is this one:
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.
