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.
Wages generally double every 10 years in a developing-State. The US ceased being a developing-State during the 1940s. Why wouldn't wages stagnate? Many people have a bigoted belief that wages are supposed to continually increase. There is nothing in the Laws of Economics to suggest or support that notion.
The wages/salaries for each of the 800+ Skill-sets is determined by the Supply & Demand of each of the Skill-sets in a given Labor Market. There are 1,539 Labor Markets in the US for many of those Skill-sets, but some Skill-sets have larger Labor markets, up to including global Labor Markets.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
Used to be you could raise a family on these types of jobs. (Which are still needed.)
And you still can.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
There are no pension plans,....
That's because they were never viable. Remember that the whole purpose of having private pension plans was to allow Organized Crime to launder money through the unions they controlled. Once you have the collective laws known as ERISA in place, and numerous other laws and regulations affecting banking and financing, money laundering through pension plans is no longer viable, so there's no point in them.
Not one of the private pension plans was ever viable from the start, but then they weren't supposed to viable, since their primary function was to launder money.
Your public employee plans are $2 TRILLION in the hole. Likewise, they were never viable.
You ain't got it. You're not going to tax your way out of it, either. If States want it, they'll have to start firing employees and cutting funding and spending on other programs.
The huge battle between public employees and non-public employees is going to be fun to watch.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
few matching 401K's, few benefits, no guaranteed sick leave or vacation....
That has much to do with government polices, rules and regulations. Don't get me wrong, I'm not ignorant of the issue with retirement plans. You need 3 sources of retirement income:
1] yourself through your own efforts
2] an employer-based plan,
3] insurance --- which is what Social Security is
If you're supporting legislation that oppresses employers, then you'll need to find some way to replace employer-based plans. With government? No, only if government surrenders Social Security and privatizes it. Two government programs would be totally stupid and very bad policy.
Since Social Security is insurance, how do you privatize it?
As insurance....not as an investment plan.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
... and yet we spew hate on those whose everyday struggles most of us cannot imagine.
Since I see it every day, I don't have to imagine. Their "struggles" are self-inflicted. Those people are their own worst enemy and the cause of their own suffering.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
Personally I cannot agree with the vitriol commonly seen on these sites against people who go to work every day, and Lordy, don't have a million to retire on.
Oh, yes, spend $50 on lotto tickets or use the $50 to purchase a $100 E-Series savings bond?
$100 on cigarettes, or $100 on stocks?
$100 a on beer, or $100 on bonds?
NetFlix or Certificates of Deposit?
Wow....such hard choices......life is so unfair as to be totally unbearable.
That's really the crux of the matter, isn't it?
You have a group of people who spend every waking moment attempting to satiate each and every infantile urge that comes upon them.....and then you have another group of people who exercise self-discipline.
So Jane spends $50 each week buying stocks, while Jim spends $50 each week on scratch off Lotto tickets. 20 years later, Jane is financially secure, and Jim is not.
You're idea of fairness and compassion is to take from Jane and give to Jim.
That makes a lot of freaking sense.
Note to self: Get far, far away from the differently twisted "compassion" freaks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
How many lost all their equity in the 07-09 meltdown?
Who cares?
What happens when government does the following:
1] artificially suppresses interest rates;
2] floods a given economic sector -- like housing -- with cash/credit Capital;
3] floods the Market further with Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac guaranteed mortgages?
You get Interest Inflation.
Your house valued at $140,000 is artificially inflated to $250,000 and you paid $250,000 for a $140,000 house and then when there's less cash/credit Capital in the housing sector, because of government policies, the balloon starts leaking and now your $140,000 home is only worth $190,000.
And some people have the unmitigated gall to complain about lost equity.
If those people didn't understand what they were doing, then they ought not to have done it.
Fannie/Freddie and Free Market are mutually exclusive. The point being Socialism and Command Markets do not work.
If there is no Freddie, then who guarantees mortgages? Well, I don't really care who guarantees them so long as it's not me and the other tax-payers. Maybe someone can spew vitriolic propaganda and disinformation and get some little green men to do it.
Or, we could ask a simple question like, "Who are the parties to this home-buying transaction?"
That would be the lender and the home-buyer....notice this transaction does not include me or other tax-payers.
The lender can purchase private mortgage insurance on the Free Market, and is free to pass those costs onto the home-buyer in the form of fees or higher interest rates.
If home-buyers have issue with that, then they can go out on the Free Market and get pre-approval for private mortgage insurance at their own expense.
Do you think a private insurance company who's last resort is shareholders is going to be playing fast and loose with loan documents?
You'd best think again. Funny how that works, isn't it? I mean everyone plays fast and lose with OPM Dollars --- Other People's Money -- but when their money is at stake, they suddenly incredibly get a giant raging case of conscientiousness.
One other thing.....do you think private mortgage insurance is going to allow people to buy credit cards and live in them? Oh, sorry, I hate it when that happens, I meant to say buy a house and use it as a giant credit card? Get 2nd Mortgages? 3rd Mortgages? Refinance the primary mortgage and roll up $10s of Thousands in credit card debt, auto loans, fantasy island vacations and such?
Not gonna happen.
Isn't it just amazing how less government regulation and the Free Market could have prevented most of your housing mess?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
Had to raid their 401K's to feed themselves or save their underwater homes?
They did not have to. There were dozens and dozens of other options, but like usual, they took the path of least effort.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
Had to take SS @ 62 in order to live when the unemployment insurance ran out when no one would hire a greybeard?
What is the difference between those people and immigrants?
Immigrants are smarter. WWHHD?
What Would Homo Habilis Do?
When Homo Habilis became unemployed because there were no more nuts or berries to pick, do you think he sat around crying for compassion and for government to save him?
No, he was smart enough to relocate, so how stupid is someone with 62 years that can't figure that out?
They're hiring in India.
Oh, that's right, I forgot the chant: "Slave Wages!â„¢"
Did you know that English is one of the 10 official languages in India?
My sister and I were talking and if we could do it over again, she'd send my younger nephew to Romania to live with me, since the schools there are so much better.
Imagine being 55+ and living and working India, and having your grand-daughter live with you during the school year. You could send her to the most expensive private school in India, and then when she graduates, she'd easily get into university, then she can go back to the US and take some poor fool's job.
How much is the most expensive private school in India?
That's certainly a lot less than the $60,000 Dream Weddings and $100,000 Casino Holiday Gambling Sprees for which I'm footing the bill.
I didn't even get an invite to any of those weddings.
Maybe one day you'll understand that by forcing everyone to pay for those Dream Weddings and Holiday Gambling Sprees and Fantasy Island Vacations and SUVs and Credit Card Debt that you've bled everyone dry of compassion (and money).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
It's like blaming the downs syndrome kid for not placing high on the SAT. Should we just kill those who are less?
No, it is nothing like that at all.
I'd trade any 10 Welfare Pukes for a retard/syndrome kid --- even from another foreign State --- anytime. Maybe that's what the US should do to eliminate the trade deficit.
Whenever I have morning appointments at the VA, I ride up on the bus with a bunch of retarded kids. They're going to work. They work at a place called Goodwill Industries. They show up every day, on time, with a good attitude and without being under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and they don't steal anything.
I got more respect for those kids than I do for some turd who sits around making a million excuses about why I should pay their Guaranteed Student Loan because they got a degree in The Economic and Social Contributions of Transvestite Lesbian Dwarves in 14th Century Lombardy and can't get a job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
But there are also folks who have worked strenuously to put themselves through college only to find professional jobs lacking once they graduate.
What I'm hearing you say is that they failed to do any research, made very bad choices with respect to vocational planning and career progression and now they're crying because they didn't do things the right way.
Compare the following job interviews:
I, uh, um, you know --- looks at iPhone screen --- graduated in 2010, but, uh, I never, um --- looks at iPhone screen --- you know, I couldn't find a job anywhere --- fiddles with iPhone screen --- so I couldn't work in my degree field, but --- looks at iPhone screen --- uh, I have, uh, um, you know, been working part-time at Taco John's for --- plays with iPhone screen --- the last, uh, 6 years or so, and uh, I know --- looks at iPhone screen --- how to make a Taco Bel Grande really good, and I sort of remember, you know, uh, --- looks at iPhone screen --- some of the stuff that was taught in class.
versus
I was graduated in 2010, but unable to find desirable employment. I went to Germany seeking employment, but ended up at a small private company in Orly, France working in my degree field. After 3 years, I took a position at Proctor & Gamble's manufacturing facility in Timisoara, Romania where I reported directly to the Comptroller.
One of those people is smarter than the other.
Who can guess which one?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joliefille
Plus having 50-100K in student debt.
One of the things I accomplished this Century, was returning to university to obtain two additional undergrad degrees and two graduate degrees. I do not have student loans. I worked full-time and/or part-time to pay tuition.
Student Loans are for those who look for the easy way out.
Looks like it turned out to be not so easy....
Let your fingers do the walking. Information is out there if one bothers to look:
It hurts one's neck looking at all the slanted info.
Quote:
"Social Security is the sole source of income for about one in five (21 percent) of people aged 65 and older. Certain subgroups are particularly reliant on Social Security. Of those age 65 and older, Social Security is the sole source of income for 36 percent of Hispanics and African Americans, 25 percent of Asian and Pacific Islanders, 19 percent of whites, and 20 percent of unmarried women."
HUD benefits and Food Stamps (to name but a few) are income, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
Ah, there's the rub. It's not really relevant as a concern to Joe Sixpack...but it is extremely relevant to Joe Taxpayer. THIS is where the income-inequality-isn't-a-problem people get a wakeup call.
Income Inequality does not exist. To the extent that it might exist, it's as normal as being left-handed.
A good film you need to watch is Lifeboat (Albert Hitchcock).
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
Define "irresponsible spending". I'm part of the 31% and the most I've earned in a year is $17K.
And that was your choice.
The wonderful part is that you get to spend the rest of your life thinking about all the bad choices you made.
Quote:
Originally Posted by nicet4
What is surprising is the number of people (44%) taking social security at 62 and the over half who took it at age 63 or under.
45% of working Americans get some form of government hand-out.
44% / 45% = 97.8%
So you're shocked that 97.8% of the people who are already on the government dole, jump on the flat-beds when the train rolls by, instead of waiting for the train with the sleeper cars and the restaurant/dining car?
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
How many people would you say are effectively 'ghettoized' in the low-wage labor market due to background issues (e.g. criminal history, bad credit, etc)?
Who cares? They can get a passport and go to a foreign State to work.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
How exactly is my bad credit relevant to employers when it's all at least 10 years old with no original activity within the past 10 years?
It proves whether or not you’re lying to your potential employer. It lists addresses. It also lists previous employers. And salary history, too.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anifani821
I understand where you are coming from but I find it perplexing that the majority of people in this country seem to think that no matter what they contribute (including nothing) "someone" is supposed to make sure they have a middle class lifestyle.
Yes, and it’s disgusting.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
Because SO MANY people in this forum seem to think minimum wage workers can adequately save for retirement, and I would like them to quantify that expectation.
They can.
Your own government says there are 1,539 separate economies in the US, and each one of those is also a Labor Market for certain Skill-sets.
You can buy a home in many places in the US on minimum wage. Maybe you can’t buy a $250,000 4,400 sq ft McMansion, but you can get a 3-bedroom ranch on half acre or acre of land.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lenora
The above is exactly why Maryland and 9 or 10 other states severely restrict employers from pulling credit reports. In Maryland, employers must first make a firm job offer and then can only pull the report if it's substantially related to job duties, blah, blah, blah.
There’s ways around that.
All you did was increase the cost of hiring, and those costs are passed onto you.
Good job.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt
So if a driver carries only the state-mandated coverage, and not comprehensive, how is their credit score relevant to the insurance premium they pay?
Irresponsible people drive irresponsibly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by s1alker
A single kid can cost 600k+ at least until age 18. That would be a nice nestegg. And you can't bet on your kids taking care of you in old age today.
No, that’s not true at all, and that figure has been repeatedly debunked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Costaexpress
Many of these 40s and 50s people have difficulty finding jobs. The tech industry favors younger workers. Younger workers have up to date education, skills, and simpler lives. Older workers may be more mature but not necessarily more experienced or better at technology. They are usually more entitled and have more complicated lives.
Now that BRICS is doing what the US refused to do, there's plenty of jobs in developing-States for older workers.
What about the responsibility of banks, insurance companies, and other corporations that were gifted trillions of taxpayer money but won't lend money to small businesses to create jobs, won't pay their workers a fair and living wage,...
They weren't gifted $TRILLIONS and wages/salaries are determined by Supply & Demand, not someone's differently twisted view of "fair."
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
.... and won't stop sending all of the jobs to foreign nations to avoid paying taxes?
Comments like that are proof that so many people have no understanding of Economics or Reality, and can't even apply common sense.
Jobs are being sent overseas to compete globally, not avoid paying taxes.
Here's a dose of both Reality and common sense: $5 Profit = $5 Profit.
Because Fat Union Fred gets paid $35/hour, the company must sell their product for $48 in order to get a $5 Profit.
Contrast that with Vlad in Romania who earns the minimum wage of $1.40/hour. His company can sell their products for $7 and make a $5 Profit.
Explain to us all why Rajiv in India who makes $0.28/hour is going to pay $48 for something US made when he can buy the same item of equal quality made in Romania priced at $7?
How did you put it?
Oh, yeah, I remember....
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
So many mistaken beliefs are evident in your post.
I suppose the real question is when do mistaken beliefs rise to the level of bigotry?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
In my opinion, here are some of them:
1. Good decisions don't necessarily translate into economic success, much less a fully funded retirement.
They don't have to.
I don't recall electing you as Arbiter of Success.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
2. Corporations, banks, insurance companies, the currency, the Federal Reserve, etc etc are most certainly contributing to the drastically reduced standard of living that this generation is presently enduring.
None of those entities are responsible.
Blame rests solely with your government, and its policies since 1898.
Since you elected the government, that means you are solely blame. You can blame your mammy and daddy, and grandpa and grandma and opa and oma, and everyone that's voted in a political election since 1898.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
Put another way, it's perfectly logical to blame these entities, at least in part, for the the collective 'lot in life' of thousands (if not millions) of people.
It has only the appearance of being "perfectly logical" for those who hold bigoted beliefs.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
3. You assume that people that don't earn enough money aren't doing what they can to make their lives better. In my opinion, you couldn't be more wrong. Very few people, especially those with families, are happy to make minimum wage and live a life of poverty.
And you determined that how, exactly?
Did you use Remote Viewing or did you rely on ESP?
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
Do you know what really bothers me? It's the attitude that poor people, need to "do whatever they can", or "look to make their lives better" or "go back to school", or (my favorite) "get vocational training" to change their circumstances. Of course, these solutions are always discussed in generalities and never examined closely for their practical real world application.
Right, because forcing those people to cease their alcohol and drug use just long enough to save $125 to take that MIG/TIG welding course at the local vocational is Cruel & Unusual Punishment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
Vocational training/go back to school to do what?
I don't know. Why don't you visit one of the federal government, State government, county government, municipal government, university, public school or private groups that offers "free"
vocational and career counseling and ask them?
My tax dollars pay for that, you know.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
How much will it cost? How long will it take? How will the person support themselves and their families while they train/go to school? What happens when the training doesn't produce a job? What happens when a person tries a new field, the new field doesn't work out, and they can't go back to their old job as a result?
Again, they can sit down with a professional whose "free" services are paid by my taxes, and obtain guidance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
What I object to is when poor people are classified as lazy or irresponsible simply because they don't make enough money.
You've created a Straw Man.
No one cares how much money they make.
The issue is that they incessantly make fantastical demands of others.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
Look what's happened to the USA! In the 1960's a man making an average salary could support a large family and own a house. This new normal is not the result of poor people's works. It's the fault of the rich.
No, it's the fault of your government.
And who elects your government? You do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
False dichotomy. What about those that make more than the minimum wage, but not enough to support themselves? In the industry I worked in, an industry that was touted 20 years ago as being 'recession proof', a good worker is not paid about half what they were paid 20 years ago. And a good worker in my field is most certainly in short supply as well. So forget the supply/demand nonsense that we have all been fed as well.
It isn't nonsense.
If you drank someone's Kool-Aid® and bought into the "recession proof" job nonsense, then you have only yourself to blame.
Your claim that workers in your field are in short supply is imaginary and not supported by any facts.
You have also ignored the fact that in new fields, Wage Inflation drives up the price of Labor temporarily until Supply meets Demand.
The classic example of this is key-punch operators.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
Who own these corporations?
The People. Specifically a certain class of people called "shareholders."
Any person may be a shareholder, they just have to want to be one.
Only 3% of business in the US are publicly traded corporations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
I strongly suggest that you watch at least 30 minutes of that video.
I would rather watch videos of David and Julie Eisenhower's wedding.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
No way. Federally guaranteed student loans are nothing short of a perverse money making scheme that impairs job creation, not enhances it.
And yet you keep electing those who support it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
Why? Because the interest and principle repayment of the loans represents lost 'opportunity costs' in the form of discretionary income that never gets spent and recycled throughout the economy.
No, that's not true at all.
In the first place, government suppresses the interest rate, floods the Market with cash/credit Capital, and then guarantees the loans, creating Interest Inflation that results in the price of tuition artificially sky-rocketing.
Let interest float on the Free Market and stop guaranteeing the loans, and that will dry up the excess cash/credit Capital that is artificially pumping up the price of tuition.
Yes.....tuition prices decrease drastically.
Your application of Opportunity Costs is misleading and grotesquely disingenuous.
Let's do start at the beginning.
The first application of Opportunity Costs comes when you choose to finance your tuition through Guaranteed Student Loans, or through other means, such as working.
A little over 10 years ago, I went back to get additional undergrad degrees and go to grad school.
Had I used Student Loans, I could have been hooded two years earlier, and never taken any summer classes.
Instead, I chose to forgo the loans and work. Yes, it took me 2 years longer, and I had to take classes over the summer each year, and juggle my class schedule between full and part-time so I could work full or part-time, and juggle my classes so I could work 3rd Shift or 2nd Shift or teach classes, but I did it, and I owe no one anything.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
It creates a negative feedback loop where people have less/no discretionary income so businesses have less customers and need fewer workers, etc etc.
That money is in the system, so whether you tax the snot out of Americans to pay for the bad choices that some Americans made, or you keep the burden on those who made the bad choices, the effects are the same.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
To say that these loans don't get paid back is false. Federally guaranteed student loan servicers are able to garnish 15% of wages without a court order, taxes are offset without a court order, and Title 4 benefits are suspended without a court order on defaulted loans. Furthermore, these loans are in general never dischargeable through bankruptcy and accrue interest for life.
Which only proves people made stupid choices.
Quote:
Originally Posted by dysgenic
As to mortgage subsidies, the same principle applies. What's worse is that both these types of loans create price inflation of the underlying product (college, housing) that essentially results in the banks making even more money and taking even more money from the circulation of the economy.
It's called Interest Inflation.
Again, you keep electing the people who keep those programs in place. You just don't understand that there is no such thing as "free." Everything costs, and when government is involved, it always costs more.
I do think that not enough people have enough money for retirement but I also think some people are "scared" into saving too much for retirement... Looking around at NORMAL everyday retired people who DON'T WORK anymore, none of them have 1 million dollars saved up but if you read the many journals out there, 1 million is not even enough... these people are fine... you don't need 1 million (although, it would be nice if you did) to retire...
I don't buy the need for big money either unless you are in a high cost of living area.
I'm getting ready to retire, it's getting very close and with my wife getting on Medicare next month it's a reminder to me time is passing and it won't be long. It's getting a bit exciting because I could get online tomorrow to tell everyone it was my last day.
I got a feeling it is going to come without warning. Some day I will just had enough and since I don't have to work I won't.
With it being close we've gone over the budget many, many times and we just don't need savings.
We don't have a house payment, no car payments, no loans to pay off or kids to raise. We got medicare so medical costs are fixed.
We're going to be a one car/one electric golf cart family. A tank of gasoline should last us a month or better unless we go on a road trip.
We eat very well but both of us are eating less. Fact is whenever we eat out most of the time we split a meal but not to save money. Neither of us can eat the portions anymore and the extra food goes to waste.
Not needing the money as a couple we decided the savings will go to the surviving spouse.
Humans are emotional creatures, by and large, and we will not and cannot fix any of these "societal" issues until everyone stops letting emotional responses get in the way of critical thinking.
Translation: The only way right-wingers can get their way is if cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations are given an unrebutted soapbox. The reality is that the solution to these issues require that the cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations you advocate for are tempered with humanity - the solution to these issues require that the cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations you advocate for factor in the impact on those most vulnerable in society.
Translation: The only way right-wingers can get their way is if cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations are given an unrebutted soapbox. The reality is that the solution to these issues require that the cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations you advocate for are tempered with humanity - the solution to these issues require that the cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations you advocate for factor in the impact on those most vulnerable in society.
Just who is it you definitively declare to be "most vulnerable in society"?
And don't I recall you once stating that you didn't care if '500' freeloaders got away with it if it meant that one of those 'most vunerable' got taken care of?
Translation: The only way right-wingers can get their way is if cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations are given an unrebutted soapbox. The reality is that the solution to these issues require that the cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations you advocate for are tempered with humanity - the solution to these issues require that the cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations you advocate for factor in the impact on those most vulnerable in society.
You left this part out, I think most people have compassion for those that are less fortunate through no fault of their own. Which is precisely why we have all of these governmental programs and charitable organizations to help them. .
Because it doesn't fit into your box that you want to put me, and most others on this thread in, and for the record, I am neither conservative, nor a Republican, but don't let those "facts" get in the way of your "truth".
This has worried me. I believe the way the system works is the young ones work to take care of the elders...whether within family or society as a whole. Meaning our tax dollars are allocated among the retirement systems...year by year. Then when it comes to our kids...the process repeats. This is the type of retirement we are having today. As per 401k and savings for retirement, honestly it doesn't have to be so serious. In the end, how long do we think we can live? Some people I know, they are rich, saved up a lot, and then around their 70s, they got sick and died. So throughout 60+ years they worked, in the end money can't be buried. I personally think retiring in reality is just a word.
Translation: The only way right-wingers can get their way is if cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations are given an unrebutted soapbox. The reality is that the solution to these issues require that the cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations you advocate for are tempered with humanity - the solution to these issues require that the cold, calculating, self-centered rationalizations you advocate for factor in the impact on those most vulnerable in society.
Oh boy. Here we go with the safety net whine again.
We have a safety net in this country.
We also have millions of people accessing everything from Medicaid to food stamps to Disability to AFDC. We also have homeless, the chronically mentally ill, druggies, felons, neglected children of the mentally ill, druggies and felons/the imprisoned . . .plus the disabled and elderly.
Half of us work so the other half can participate, at some level, in that safety net.
I would say that my humanity has been greatly tempered with taxation to provide for those who manage to qualify for the benefits they receive through the governmental safety net.
If you want to hand over more of your paycheck to the government to mismanage . . . you are free to donate more on your IRS return every year.
It is amusing to me that the very people pointing fingers at those of us who demand accountability are the least likely to be writing out checks to donate to NGOs. Those "conservatives" (anyone who believes in fiscal responsibility, not necessarily registered GOP) that folks love to bash as being "selfish" contribute more money, per capita, to NGOs than any other segment of the population.
And that's on top of the taxes.
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.
