/dev/null Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 Is "chubby" the right word for an old crusty labia? Even the most dried up granola hippie gets wet thinking about the Government cracking down on those who would dare to question the will of the Collective®. Kind of like how Muslims jerk off to beheading videos on Youtube© Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alaska Darin Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 An associates degree is the only thing standing between fourth generation welfare recipients in government housing projects and high paying white collar jobs. It's the marijuana of college degrees. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azalin Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 An associates degree can provide the background necessary for entry level positions in fields where there is plenty of opportunity for promotion. That's exactly what I did, and I'm glad I did it. The mistake many people make is that they assume the degree itself qualifies them for a good job, when the reality is that it only helps to open doors by providing a foundation for the graduate to build upon through job-specific training provided by your employer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 I'm not talking about chaos between the gov't and citizens. I'm talking about chaos between citizens. When people that have property simply shoot those that want to take it from them because they feel they are entitled to it. I'm not talking about chaos between the gov't and citizens. I'm talking about chaos between citizens. When people that have property simply shoot those that want to take it from them because they feel they are entitled to it. You think the poor are going to and steel my stock portfolio? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 You think the poor are going to and steel my stock portfolio? My guess is you'll be one of the first ones to be shot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 (edited) So...why not pass a law restricting how much 4-year colleges/universities can charge? Or encouraging more people who can pay for them to go to 2-year programs? we could certainly incentivize needed degrees over less needed by the amount and interest rates for gov't loans available for each. no reason similar incentives couldn't be imagined to prioritize in-demand degrees at 2 year schools. it wouldn't require a stick when a carrot would work better. My guess is you'll be one of the first ones to be shot. when i read/hear such sentiments, i'm often of the impression that those speaking are actually in favor of eventual mass treason…and then somehow rationalize it as patriotism. Edited January 25, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 25, 2015 Share Posted January 25, 2015 My guess is you'll be one of the first ones to be shot. Luckily, your guesses are worthless Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 You think the poor are going to and steel my stock portfolio? Not sure what you are trying to say because your sentence makes no sense, but on the off chance that you are concerned about your "steel" portfolio I'd dump it now. This new plastics thing seems like the way to go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4merper4mer Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 we could certainly incentivize needed degrees over less needed by the amount and interest rates for gov't loans available for each. no reason similar incentives couldn't be imagined to prioritize in-demand degrees at 2 year schools. it wouldn't require a stick when a carrot would work better. Why not just skip a few steps and have the government tattoo the name of their designated job onto every babies forehead at the time of their birth? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 The shrinking middle class http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/26/business/economy/middle-class-shrinks-further-as-more-fall-out-instead-of-climbing-up.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 Even as the American middle class has shrunk, it has gone through a transformation. The 53 million households that remain in the middle class — about 43 percent of all households — look considerably different from their middle-class predecessors of a previous generation, according to a New York Times analysis of census data. In recent years, the fastest-growing component of the new middle class has been households headed by people 65 and older. Today’s seniors have better retirement benefits than previous generations. Also, older Americans are increasingly working past traditional retirement age. More than eight million, or 19 percent, were in the labor force in 2013, nearly twice as many as in 2000. As a result, while median household income, on average, has fallen 9 percent since the turn of the century, it has jumped 14 percent among households headed by older adults. The growing prominence of older people in the middle class reflects, in part, the way Social Security and Medicare — originally set up as safety nets to protect seniors from falling into poverty after retirement — have provided a substantial cushion for them against hard times. Social security and medicare really are helping the elderly, a lot! And yet this demographic votes Republican mostly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 (edited) Why not just skip a few steps and have the government tattoo the name of their designated job onto every babies forehead at the time of their birth? because incentivizing training to produce workers with needed skills thereby improving the economic outlook for both individulas and scociety as a whole is just like what you describe.... and speaking of sedition: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/daddy-issues-are-ron-pauls-hard-core-stands-a-problem-for-sons-presidential-bid/2015/01/25/e23b1cdc-a4a9-11e4-a7c2-03d37af98440_story.html Edited January 26, 2015 by birdog1960 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 because incentivizing training to produce workers with needed skills thereby improving the economic outlook for both individulas and scociety as a whole is just like what you describe.... and speaking of sedition: http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/daddy-issues-are-ron-pauls-hard-core-stands-a-problem-for-sons-presidential-bid/2015/01/25/e23b1cdc-a4a9-11e4-a7c2-03d37af98440_story.html Good! I'm all for them creating a new no tax no government country. That would be awesome. “The America we thought we knew, ladies and gentlemen, is a mirage. It’s a memory. It’s a foreign country,” Jeff Deist, Ron Paul’s former press secretary and chief of staff, told the group. “And that’s precisely why we should take secession seriously.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3rdnlng Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 The shrinking middle class http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/26/business/economy/middle-class-shrinks-further-as-more-fall-out-instead-of-climbing-up.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 Social security and medicare really are helping the elderly, a lot! And yet this demographic votes Republican mostly. It makes perfect sense. Generally, Republicans are for shoring up Social Security while Democrats bury their heads in the sand and hope it stays solvent. Democrats stole money from Medicare in order to support Obama's transfer the wealth plan, more commonly known as the ACA. Is it any wonder that the more experienced people would back the more realistic party? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keepthefaith Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 The shrinking middle class http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/26/business/economy/middle-class-shrinks-further-as-more-fall-out-instead-of-climbing-up.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0 Social security and medicare really are helping the elderly, a lot! And yet this demographic votes Republican mostly. So using the numbers from your article, I see that the percentage of low income people has dropped since '67, the percentage of upper income has increased and the middle class has shrunk some. That looks like a great story to me. Fewer that are low income and more that are upper income. Fewer in the middle. This is all good. Shows a migration from the middle class to upper income. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
B-Man Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 POLITICO: Where Was Obama When The Middle Class Needed Him? The past six years have seen a series of hits to middle-class economic security in the form of radical changes in healthcare; decreased pension guarantees from companies; less job security; and volatility in financial markets that has made retirement planning challenging. Cap that off with the massive hit to financial net worth because of the bursting of the housing bubble and you have a recipe for roiling discontent. Washington, meanwhile, anchored by the Obama administration, is widely seen as having done precious little other than shore up the financial system and the banks in 2009. When it comes to the economy, in fact, Obama arguably has spent most of his presidency focused either on the needs of the very poor (the uninsured) or the very rich (Wall Street’s banks, which were nursed back to health). Hey, they don’t call him President Goldman Sachs for nothing. OBAMAVILLES: More homeless camps are appearing beyond downtown L.A.’s skid row. They told me if I voted for Mitt Romney, oligarchs would grow fabulously wealthy even as poverty worsened. And they were right! . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 POLITICO: Where Was Obama When The Middle Class Needed Him? Hey, they don’t call him President Goldman Sachs for nothing. OBAMAVILLES: More homeless camps are appearing beyond downtown L.A.’s skid row. They told me if I voted for Mitt Romney, oligarchs would grow fabulously wealthy even as poverty worsened. And they were right! .so wait. is obama a socialist or an uber capitalist? something in between? perhaps neither? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiberius Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 So using the numbers from your article, I see that the percentage of low income people has dropped since '67, the percentage of upper income has increased and the middle class has shrunk some. That looks like a great story to me. Fewer that are low income and more that are upper income. Fewer in the middle. This is all good. Shows a migration from the middle class to upper income. They discussed that in article, saying that since 2000 it has mostly been from middle to lower class but as you stated before that we saw an increase to upper class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 .so wait. is obama a socialist or an uber capitalist? something in between? perhaps neither? Like all rulers who fool the ignorant with 'equality' rhetoric, he's an oligarch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
birdog1960 Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 Like all rulers who fool the ignorant with 'equality' rhetoric, he's an oligarch. so which definition is fitting? noun: oligarch · plural noun: oligarchs a ruler in an oligarchy. (especially in Russia) a very rich businessman with a great deal of political influence if you choose #1 then all US presidents are necessarily oligarchs choice #2 is not applicable since obama is and never has been a businessman. and by american standards, i don't think he qualifies as very rich. so he's not an oligarch. maybe he's a politician trying to make things more equitable within the constraints of an economic system that is designed to result in just the opposite. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted January 26, 2015 Share Posted January 26, 2015 so which definition is fitting? noun: oligarch · plural noun: oligarchs a ruler in an oligarchy. (especially in Russia) a very rich businessman with a great deal of political influence if you choose #1 then all US presidents are necessarily oligarchs choice #2 is not applicable since obama is and never has been a businessman. and by american standards, i don't think he qualifies as very rich. so he's not an oligarch. maybe he's a politician trying to make things more equitable within the constraints of an economic system that is designed to result in just the opposite. He doesn't qualify as rich?? He makes more than $250k a year. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts