Do We Really Want a Republican President?

[Chef Jim]

just a load of tired old myths. repeat em enough and you believe them. the few points that aren't myths relate to the current failure of certain systems like law enforcement. if it's broke you try to fix it not ignore it. same for education. transport is a huge issue for the working poor and those not working. better public transport would help enormously. you start from the assumption that the unemployerd don't want to work. that is certainly true for some but far from all unemployed. many would work if they could find a job and be able to commute to it.

 

Funny how you touched on public transportation the most. That is the only one I agreed with. The fact that large portions of the poor do not work because they choose not to is not a myth. Why would they? 99 weeks of unemployment. Then on to disability, welfare and food stamps allow them to survive, and survive pretty well for the lifestyle they have. Come to Oakland or any other major city and go to the poor neighborhoods and you tell me what you see.

[meazza]

Funny how you touched on public transportation the most. That is the only one I agreed with. The fact that large portions of the poor do not work because they choose not to is not a myth. Why would they? 99 weeks of unemployment. Then on to disability, welfare and food stamps allow them to survive, and survive pretty well for the lifestyle they have. Come to Oakland or any other major city and go to the poor neighborhoods and you tell me what you see.

 

Why would he do that? He could just watch the documentaries from his ivory tower.

[birdog1960]

Funny how you touched on public transportation the most. That is the only one I agreed with. The fact that large portions of the poor do not work because they choose not to is not a myth. Why would they? 99 weeks of unemployment. Then on to disability, welfare and food stamps allow them to survive, and survive pretty well for the lifestyle they have. Come to Oakland or any other major city and go to the poor neighborhoods and you tell me what you see.

then there'sa the issue of a living wage. why work when your pay won't cover necessities and you need (and receive) welfare anyway? this is true corporate welfare as we've discussed. in this way, a higher minimum wage would effectively constitute a wealth tax (more soimply, an elimination of a prevalent form of corp welfare).

[KD in CA]

then there'sa the issue of a living wage. why work when your pay won't cover necessities and you need (and receive) welfare anyway? this is true corporate welfare as we've discussed. in this way, a higher minimum wage would effectively constitute a wealth tax (more soimply, an elimination of a prevalent form of corp welfare).

Actually it would be more like a sales tax, but I understand you need to have your fantasy that all the money will come out of the evil rich man's pockets.

 

just a load of tired old myths. repeat em enough and you believe them. the few points that aren't myths relate to the current failure of certain systems like law enforcement. if it's broke you try to fix it not ignore it. same for education. transport is a huge issue for the working poor and those not working. better public transport would help enormously. you start from the assumption that the unemployerd don't want to work. that is certainly true for some but far from all unemployed. many would work if they could find a job and be able to commute to it.

Tired old myths in education? You mean like 'we need labor unions to protect teachers' or 'we need more funding to improve schools'. Those tired, old myths?

 

Meanwhile "progressives" like Bill deBlahblahblah continue to try to kill the best performing schools in NYC.

[DC Tom]

Actually it would be more like a sales tax, but I understand you need to have your fantasy that all the money will come out of the evil rich man's pockets.

 

Yeah, I was going to say...

 

In my lifetime, increases in the minimum wage drive increases in the cost of living, directly (since increased wages get reflected in consumer prices) and indirectly (since the notional increased supply of discretionary income increases demand.) Birddog's persistent harping on a "living wage" always strikes me as a triumph of good will over common sense, and the hope that the real world works along the same lines of basic economic ignorance that he does.

[Chef Jim]

then there'sa the issue of a living wage. why work when your pay won't cover necessities and you need (and receive) welfare anyway? this is true corporate welfare as we've discussed. in this way, a higher minimum wage would effectively constitute a wealth tax (more soimply, an elimination of a prevalent form of corp welfare).

 

So you really think that if McDonalds all of a sudden paid a living wage that all the guys and gals in the 'hood will line up for work? Did someone mention Ivory Tower?

 

I'll ask again. Why do you think there are zero Americans out front of the Home Depot looking for work?

Edited November 14, 2014 by Chef Jim

[TakeYouToTasker]

just a load of tired old myths. repeat em enough and you believe them. the few points that aren't myths relate to the current failure of certain systems like law enforcement. if it's broke you try to fix it not ignore it. same for education. transport is a huge issue for the working poor and those not working. better public transport would help enormously. you start from the assumption that the unemployerd don't want to work. that is certainly true for some but far from all unemployed. many would work if they could find a job and be able to commute to it.

Pew released a study today affirming that 40% of working age women and 29% of working age men have no desire to work.

[FireChan]

 

 

Yeah, I was going to say...

 

In my lifetime, increases in the minimum wage drive increases in the cost of living, directly (since increased wages get reflected in consumer prices) and indirectly (since the notional increased supply of discretionary income increases demand.) Birddog's persistent harping on a "living wage" always strikes me as a triumph of good will over common sense, and the hope that the real world works along the same lines of basic economic ignorance that he does.

 

You're trying to tell me that if we artificially raised wages, other things would go up in price? Get real!

 

What's next? A raised minimum wage would result in more incentive for companies to ship their jobs overseas?

Edited November 14, 2014 by FireChan

[/dev/null]

Pew released a study today affirming that 40% of working age women and 29% of working age men have no desire to work.

 

So you've been examining a Pew poll?

[KD in CA]

You're trying to tell me that if we artificially raised wages, other things would go up in price? Get real!

 

 

Really. Everyone knows businesses would keep prices the same just cut the CEO's salary to pay for it!

 

That makes sense because minimum wage only applies to Fortune 500 companies that have evil, rich, CEOs.

[TakeYouToTasker]

 

 

So you've been examining a Pew poll?

...

[Keukasmallies]

The alternatives don't appear too appealing....

[Very wide right]

Yes I do want a Republican president.I feel that this country needs to get back to the idea that an individual can become wildly successful if he works hard and the result of that hard work shouldn't make that individual the object of ridicule.We currently have a government that loves to divide people and create winners and losers based solely on ones need of the government.The needier,the better.I'm not opposed to helping people in need but there is a subculture in this country that feel they are entitled to other peoples money without working for anything.

[Rob's House]

 

 

You are so stupid. They exist now so they can't be bigger or smaller?

 

Please, tell us how the poor operate.

 

 

The chronically poor (as distinguished from most of us who at one time in our younger days had a year or 3 where we were in the bottom 1/3 of earners but who have progressed to gainful employment) are almost exclusively within one of the following categories:

 

1. Mentally ill: Libraries and diplomas don't fix that.

 

2. Addicted to narcotics: I'll never demonize someone for struggling with addiction, but government housing, education, & food stamps don't fix that either.

 

Or

 

3. People who just don't give a fu©k: People who either live off the government, mooch off others who live off the government, or take advantage of someone unfortunate enough to give a **** about them.

 

With very few exceptions, that's the poor. I know some of you derive a sense of importance and self esteem by believing this country is filled with good, hard working folks who just got the **** end of the stick in life's lottery, but that's a fantasy you choose to believe because it makes you feel good about yourself.

 

 

 

Funny how you touched on public transportation the most. That is the only one I agreed with. The fact that large portions of the poor do not work because they choose not to is not a myth. Why would they? 99 weeks of unemployment. Then on to disability, welfare and food stamps allow them to survive, and survive pretty well for the lifestyle they have. Come to Oakland or any other major city and go to the poor neighborhoods and you tell me what you see.

 

Throw the transport down the well; so my country can be free.

 

then there'sa the issue of a living wage. why work when your pay won't cover necessities and you need (and receive) welfare anyway? this is true corporate welfare as we've discussed. in this way, a higher minimum wage would effectively constitute a wealth tax (more soimply, an elimination of a prevalent form of corp welfare).

 

Or, you know, you could structure welfare so it encourages pursuing gainful employment. Unless, of course, you think coercion is preferable.

 

Yes I do want a Republican president.I feel that this country needs to get back to the idea that an individual can become wildly successful if he works hard and the result of that hard work shouldn't make that individual the object of ridicule.We currently have a government that loves to divide people and create winners and losers based solely on ones need of the government.The needier,the better.I'm not opposed to helping people in need but there is a subculture in this country that feel they are entitled to other peoples money without working for anything.

 

You sound like a 1%. Now that I've labeled you I can marginalize you without having to address your position on the merits. Suck it!

Edited November 15, 2014 by Rob's House

[birdog1960]

The chronically poor (as distinguished from most of us who at one time in our younger days had a year or 3 where we were in the bottom 1/3 of earners but who have progressed to gainful employment) are almost exclusively within one of the following categories:

 

1. Mentally ill: Libraries and diplomas don't fix that.

 

2. Addicted to narcotics: I'll never demonize someone for struggling with addiction, but government housing, education, & food stamps don't fix that either.

 

Or

 

3. People who just don't give a fu©k: People who either live off the government, mooch off others who live off the government, or take advantage of someone unfortunate enough to give a **** about them.

 

With very few exceptions, that's the poor. I know some of you derive a sense of importance and self esteem by believing this country is filled with good, hard working folks who just got the **** end of the stick in life's lottery, but that's a fantasy you choose to believe because it makes you feel good about yourself.

 

 

 

 

 

Or, you know, you could structure welfare so it encourages pursuing gainful employment. Unless, of course, you think coercion is preferable.

 

 

 

someone mentioned a pew study but never linked it. here's one that does a good job of describing poor in the us: http://www.pewresear...-data-portrait/. while changing, there's still a lot of kids and old people in the group. the geographic distribution is also interesting. i believe you live in the south like me. i suspect many of the poor you encounter have very different stories than those that i do even though we're in the same state. rural poverty has different demographics than urban poverty. doesn't matter, there are still gov't interventions that can help. the solutions will likely be different in different regions. but education for poor kids and provision of basic necessities would seem a common approach for all in this group. i previously stated that there are those that are beyond help. serious mental illness is rarely cured but leaving those folks to live desperate homeless lives seems pretty uncivilized. there are better solutions. same for drug abuse. a good start there would be to crack down on over prescribers of prescription controlled substances. as you probably know, they're pretty prevalent in the south.

 

in conclusion, when somethings broke it's usually better to try and fix it then neglect it.

 

to your second point, from a purely selfish viewpoint (which i think we can assume many .1 or 0.01 percenters gravitate toward), the reason you don't use your solution is the risk of civil unrest. we don't want pitchforks (or shotguns) outside the gated communities. take away welfare without offering alternatives and that's the likely outcome. plus, it's the cheaper way to maintain the peace. riots and police cost lots of money.

 

finally, here's an interesting data set that speaks to the frequent observation here that the poor have so much stuff that they don't deserve help: http://www.pewresear...-rich-in-stuff/. they may well have more stuff, unfortunately it's often not the right stuff.

Edited November 15, 2014 by birdog1960

[Rob's House]

someone mentioned a pew study but never linked it. here's one that does a good job of describing poor in the us: http://www.pewresear...-data-portrait/. while changing, 1. there's still a lot of kids and old people in the group. the geographic distribution is also interesting. i believe you live in the south like me. i suspect many of the poor you encounter have very different stories than those that i do even though we're in the same state. rural poverty has different demographics than urban poverty. doesn't matter, there are still gov't interventions that can help. the solutions will likely be different in different regions. but education for poor kids and provision of basic necessities would seem a common approach for all in this group. i previously stated that there are those that are beyond help. 2. serious mental illness is rarely cured but leaving those folks to live desperate homeless lives seems pretty uncivilized. there are better solutions. same for drug abuse. a good start there would be to crack down on over prescribers of prescription controlled substances. as you probably know, they're pretty prevalent in the south.

 

in conclusion, when somethings broke it's usually better to try and fix it then neglect it.

 

to your second point, from a purely selfish viewpoint (which i think we can assume many .1 or 0.01 percenters gravitate toward), 3. the reason you don't use your solution is the risk of civil unrest. we don't want pitchforks (or shotguns) outside the gated communities. take away welfare without offering alternatives and that's the likely outcome. plus, it's the cheaper way to maintain the peace. riots and police cost lots of money.

 

finally, here's an interesting data set that speaks to the frequent observation here that the poor have so much stuff that they don't deserve help: http://www.pewresear...-rich-in-stuff/. they may well have more stuff, unfortunately it's often not the right stuff.

 

1. I think a great deal of that has to do with the fact that young people tend to lack marketable skills (and often live with their parents where they require less income) and old people tend to have greater wealth but less income. If looked at only through that prism it paints a false picture. People tend to move through income brackets throughout their lifetime.

 

2. I don't suggest we should leave the mentally ill to fend for themselves, but I don't think giviing them a check is the answer.

 

3. What solution are you referring to?

[KD in CA]

someone mentioned a pew study but never linked it. here's one that does a good job of describing poor in the us: http://www.pewresear...-data-portrait/. while changing, there's still a lot of kids and old people in the group. the geographic distribution is also interesting. i believe you live in the south like me. i suspect many of the poor you encounter have very different stories than those that i do even though we're in the same state. rural poverty has different demographics than urban poverty. doesn't matter, there are still gov't interventions that can help. the solutions will likely be different in different regions. but education for poor kids and provision of basic necessities would seem a common approach for all in this group. i previously stated that there are those that are beyond help. serious mental illness is rarely cured but leaving those folks to live desperate homeless lives seems pretty uncivilized. there are better solutions. same for drug abuse. a good start there would be to crack down on over prescribers of prescription controlled substances. as you probably know, they're pretty prevalent in the south.

 

in conclusion, when somethings broke it's usually better to try and fix it then neglect it.

 

to your second point, from a purely selfish viewpoint (which i think we can assume many .1 or 0.01 percenters gravitate toward), the reason you don't use your solution is the risk of civil unrest. we don't want pitchforks (or shotguns) outside the gated communities. take away welfare without offering alternatives and that's the likely outcome. plus, it's the cheaper way to maintain the peace. riots and police cost lots of money.

 

finally, here's an interesting data set that speaks to the frequent observation here that the poor have so much stuff that they don't deserve help: http://www.pewresear...-rich-in-stuff/. they may well have more stuff, unfortunately it's often not the right stuff.

 

It describes "the poor" (in its current laughable American definition) as being far better off than at any time before, to the point of commonly having numerous items that would have been considered extravagant luxury just a generation or two ago. So what's the problem? Oh yeah....jealousy. Other people have more.

 

Perhaps if we stopped pretending that people were poor when they are not, we could devote more resources to those who actually are poor. The richest country in history and we've put 35% of us on welfare. And the only 'solution' from thinkers like you is to keep increasing that #, using the 1% boogyman as an excuse.

[Chef Jim]

someone mentioned a pew study but never linked it. here's one that does a good job of describing poor in the us: http://www.pewresear...-data-portrait/. while changing, there's still a lot of kids and old people in the group. the geographic distribution is also interesting. i believe you live in the south like me. i suspect many of the poor you encounter have very different stories than those that i do even though we're in the same state. rural poverty has different demographics than urban poverty. doesn't matter, there are still gov't interventions that can help. the solutions will likely be different in different regions. but education for poor kids and provision of basic necessities would seem a common approach for all in this group. i previously stated that there are those that are beyond help. serious mental illness is rarely cured but leaving those folks to live desperate homeless lives seems pretty uncivilized. there are better solutions. same for drug abuse. a good start there would be to crack down on over prescribers of prescription controlled substances. as you probably know, they're pretty prevalent in the south.

 

in conclusion, when somethings broke it's usually better to try and fix it then neglect it.

 

to your second point, from a purely selfish viewpoint (which i think we can assume many .1 or 0.01 percenters gravitate toward), the reason you don't use your solution is the risk of civil unrest. we don't want pitchforks (or shotguns) outside the gated communities. take away welfare without offering alternatives and that's the likely outcome. plus, it's the cheaper way to maintain the peace. riots and police cost lots of money.

 

finally, here's an interesting data set that speaks to the frequent observation here that the poor have so much stuff that they don't deserve help: http://www.pewresear...-rich-in-stuff/. they may well have more stuff, unfortunately it's often not the right stuff.

 

First off, and Rob already mentioned this but I'll put it differently, no one is saying and has ever said we should leave the mentally ill to fend for themselves. As you know I live in the Bay Area which is pretty much the homeless mentally ill capital of the world. Ronald Reagan can take a lot of the blame from when he was Governor and President. Unfortunately we are not only a society that takes care of those that can't take care of themselves we also don't believe in rounding people up and shipping then off. Quite the conundrum. So what do we do? We step over them as they lie in the street and pretend they're not there. But these aren't the people we typically thinks of as the poor in this country. Or who we're talking about here.

 

You mentioned children. Who are they typically? The children of people that couldn't afford them so shouldn't of had them or children of the chronic system abusers. I feel sorry for them but as often is the case children in shi**y situations the parents are to blame. You also mentioned the elderly. Well we as Americans have a responsibility when we are young. That is to start to save and create a nest egg for our golden years. You all know what I do for a living. I tell people all the time. When you stop working the quality of the rest of your live will depend solely on how well you saved all those years up to that point. It's 100% up to them. There are no do overs when you turn 65. That's a pretty powerful thought. You did mention usuing some of that "wealth tax" for education. In my mind the only education people need is how to financially plan. How to budget, save and invest. And don't give me that crap about people not making enough to save for retirement. We have become a society that cannot so without luxuries. Everyone has a smart phone, computer, tablet, big screen nice car. I'm the child of depression/WWII parents. They knew what it was like to do without. So many people are "poor" not because life just magically gave them some real hard times. They're "poor" because they created that life. And now you want the rich to help them. Sorry. The old saying "you made your bed now lie in it" needs to be used more often.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Chef Jim

[TakeYouToTasker]

someone mentioned a pew study but never linked it.

Ask, and you shall receive.

[birdog1960]

do you all believe this to be an unusual story? http://ww.npr.org/2014/11/11/363318370/communities-struggle-to-reach-homeless-students-living-in-the-shadows