What about the working poor? 10.4 million Americans work... and live below the poverty line.
And most have cable TV/direct TV, blackberries/droids, Nintnedo DS/Wii, new sneakers, etc. Its all about "image" these days.
The issue is NOT the poverty line or income gap; its that the "needs" vs "wants" line has moved way off center, and by subsidizing this imbalance, those with less income will continue to make idiotic financial decisions and expect others to bail them out.
When Maxine Waters reaches the pearly gates, I hope St. Peter bitch-slaps her with a large, wet teabag
Skjellyfetti wrote:
What about the working poor? 10.4 million Americans work... and live below the poverty line.
And most have cable TV/direct TV, blackberries/droids, Nintnedo DS/Wii, new sneakers, etc. Its all about "image" these days.
The issue is NOT the poverty line or income gap; its that the "needs" vs "wants" line has moved way off center, and by subsidizing this imbalance, those with less income will continue to make idiotic financial decisions and expect others to bail them out.
Works for Wall St.
You matter. Unless you multiply yourself by c squared. Then you energy.
"I really love America. I just don't know how to get there anymore."John Prine
And who encouraged the Wall Street Banks into lending practices that they otherwise would have not made?
Fm/Fm under the oversight of "nothing is wrong here" Barney Frank" COERCED banks into stopping reasonable redlining practices in high-risk neighborhoods under a social experiment that began with the Carter administration Community Reinvestment Act. New branches, expansion, etc, were tied to more liberal lending practices under the "every American deserves a home" philosophy.
Yet again, in an effort to socially engineer America, the government (and its NGAs) stepped in to incent behavior counter to sound business practices, resulting in a pollutant into a market (like unions) that ultimately causes it to crash.
Let GM fail, let bad banks fail, etc. However, when the government incents behavior that causes that failure, the ROOT cause of the issue is GOVERNMENT.
And you can shove your snarky relativistic morality comments up your arse.
When Maxine Waters reaches the pearly gates, I hope St. Peter bitch-slaps her with a large, wet teabag
JayBilasBitesPillows wrote:And who encouraged the Wall Street Banks into lending practices that they otherwise would have not made?
Fm/Fm under the oversight of "nothing is wrong here" Barney Frank" COERCED banks into stopping reasonable redlining practices in high-risk neighborhoods under a social experiment that began with the Carter administration Community Reinvestment Act. New branches, expansion, etc, were tied to more liberal lending practices under the "every American deserves a home" philosophy.
Yet again, in an effort to socially engineer America, the government (and its NGAs) stepped in to incent behavior counter to sound business practices, resulting in a pollutant into a market (like unions) that ultimately causes it to crash.
Let GM fail, let bad banks fail, etc. However, when the government incents behavior that causes that failure, the ROOT cause of the issue is GOVERNMENT.
And you can shove your snarky relativistic morality comments up your arse.
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
JayBilasBitesPillows wrote:And who encouraged the Wall Street Banks into lending practices that they otherwise would have not made?
Fm/Fm under the oversight of "nothing is wrong here" Barney Frank" COERCED banks into stopping reasonable redlining practices in high-risk neighborhoods under a social experiment that began with the Carter administration Community Reinvestment Act. New branches, expansion, etc, were tied to more liberal lending practices under the "every American deserves a home" philosophy.
Yet again, in an effort to socially engineer America, the government (and its NGAs) stepped in to incent behavior counter to sound business practices, resulting in a pollutant into a market (like unions) that ultimately causes it to crash.
Let GM fail, let bad banks fail, etc. However, when the government incents behavior that causes that failure, the ROOT cause of the issue is GOVERNMENT.
And you can shove your snarky relativistic morality comments up your arse.
You know something, you're previous post was a very well reasoned argument against the nanny state, and then this.
Everybody is at fault for the housing bubble; Wall Street, poor people, realtors, builders, mortgage lenders, F and F, Democrats, Republicans, and Wall Street. The collapse has as much to do with the Casino as it did with low income folks becoming "owners".
“It’s like someone found a manic, doom-prophesying hobo in a sandwich board, shaved him, shot him full of Zoloft and gave him a show.” - The Buffalo Beast commenting on Glenn Beck
Skjellyfetti wrote:
What about the working poor? 10.4 million Americans work... and live below the poverty line.
And most have cable TV/direct TV, blackberries/droids, Nintnedo DS/Wii, new sneakers, etc. Its all about "image" these days.
The issue is NOT the poverty line or income gap; its that the "needs" vs "wants" line has moved way off center, and by subsidizing this imbalance, those with less income will continue to make idiotic financial decisions and expect others to bail them out.
And do you want to know how many of those mouth breathers spend the vast majority of their "disposable" income at indian casinos?
Fuckin' indians....they got the last laugh, didn't they?
"Ah fuck. You are right." KYJelly, 11/6/12
"The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam." Barack Obama, 9/25/12
Skjellyfetti wrote:
What about the working poor? 10.4 million Americans work... and live below the poverty line.
The world needs ditchdiggers, too.
Shows how much you know. Most of the working poor are women and children.
Z, you are without a doubt the biggest pile of shit here. You're a greedy mean fuck who villifies women and children - the majority of the poor.
Fucking dickhead.
"Sarah Palin absolutely blew AWAY the audience tonight. If there was any doubt as to whether she was savvy enough, tough enough or smart enough to carry the mantle of Vice President, she put those fears to rest tonight. She took on Barack Obama DIRECTLY on every issue and exposed... She did it with warmth and humor, and came across as the every-person....it's becoming mroe and more clear that she was a genius pick for McCain."
I'm saying if someone puts in 40 hours a week of work.... they shouldn't be impoverished... whether they're digging ditches or flipping burgers.
But should they be able to afford a cell phone, cable TV, computer, etc.?
No.
Of course there are people that just simply can't budget and spend their money on stupid crap. But the fuckups shouldn't be what we base our view of the poor on.
There are HARD working people that have trouble meeting basic necessities. I'm on their side.
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
kalm wrote:
But should they be able to afford a cell phone, cable TV, computer, etc.?
No.
Of course there are people that just simply can't budget and spend their money on stupid crap. But the fuckups shouldn't be what we base our view of the poor on.
There are HARD working people that have trouble meeting basic necessities. I'm on their side.
typical college age liberal douche who believes not in "equality of opportunity" but in "equality of results".
"Duty is the sublimest word in the English Language"
"Save in defense of my native State I hope to never again draw my sword"
Genl Robert E. Lee
Confederate States of America
When have I said anything close to "equality of result."
I'm not saying everyone should be paid the same. Never said anything remotely close to that.
I'm saying... anyone who works 40 hours a week... whether that be at McDonald's or landscaping... shouldn't be impoverished. Why is that so controversial?
"The unmasking thing was all created by Devin Nunes"
- Richard Burr, (R-NC)
kalm wrote:
But should they be able to afford a cell phone, cable TV, computer, etc.?
No.
Of course there are people that just simply can't budget and spend their money on stupid crap. But the fuckups shouldn't be what we base our view of the poor on.
There are HARD working people that have trouble meeting basic necessities. I'm on their side.
You obviously don't know any of those 10.4 million.
youngterrier wrote:
You obviously don't know any of those 10.4 million.
Yeah. I do.
I'm sure you come across tons at Wofford though.... their mommies and daddies only give them $2,000 out of their trust fund every month. Poor kids.
Your dad's a priest, right? I'm sure he's spent a lot of time working with poor folks. Ask him if he knows any hardworking poor folks.
Hey you dipshit fuck, I live in Gaffney, SC where there is a 40% High school drop out rate. The School district has 20% more children on free and reduced lunch than any of the surrounding counties. The minority of people have a college degree, in comparison to the rest of SC the unemployment numbers are higher. I see poverty everyday. Those 40 an hour a week working poor that you described are lots of my friends. I see and hear about their situation every day, the issue they have is that of poor decisions with spending and not accepting the fact that they can't have Xbox Live or an Android or a brand new laptop and that the world will not give them everything and that the world is not one big party. The problems that the working poor face are that of poor choices and materialism rather than the inability to earn sufficient funds for living
Last edited by youngterrier on Wed Jun 08, 2011 3:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Take deep breaths and calm down, Opie Jr. This is just the internet. Everything will be ok.
Also, here's what the United Methodist Church has to say on it:
Every person has the right to a job at a living wage. Where the private sector cannot or does not provide jobs for all who seek and need them, it is the responsibility of government to provide for the creation of such jobs. We support social measures that ensure the physical and mental safety of workers, that provide for the equitable division of products and services, and that encourage an increasing freedom in the way individuals may use their leisure time.
unlike you, just because I support something or someone I'm not going to agree with everything they advocate or propose. So I really don't care what the UMC says about poverty or anything economical Typical Skelly, you bring nothing to conversation but charts that hold bearing to discussion, how your parents let you on the internet for so long unchecked I will never know
Doggoneit, Kalm, we've been through that before. Wealth is not a fixed quantity. It's quite possible for the "wealth gap" to grow without redistribution of wealth.
And you still haven't convinced me that you're right about that. You have to do more than just say; "it ain't so". Many civilizations collapsed believing in your theory.
Whether you agree with it or not, we decided as a democratic society to provide backstops for the elderly and infirm in the form of social security and medicare, and to be the world's policeman. We have to pay for that with taxes and unfortunately, because wages are stagnant, that burden falls on a minority who are wealthy. Yet the upper echelons of that minority are continuing to grow their wealth. Go figure.
And too many people think that living wage should provide a cellphone, computer with internet access, cable TV, etc, etc.
Also HS and college age don't need a job with a "living wage".
JMU Football:
4 Years FBS: 40-11 (.784). Highest winning percentage & least losses of all of G5 2022-2025.
Sun Belt East Champions: 2022, 2023, 2025
Sun Belt Champions: 2025
Top 25 ranked: 2022, 2023, 2025
CFP: 2025
