Poverty?? Fool Me Once...And Again…

PoliticalChic

Diamond Member
Gold Supporting Member
Oct 6, 2008
124,897
60,268
2,300
Brooklyn, NY
Since it was so very successful in the election, why stop now? “Class warfare” is the gift that keeps on giving for progressives!

If you voted for Obama, heck, you’ll have no trouble swallowing the latest foray into the wonderful world of collectivist propaganda. After all, how much smarter could you have become in one month?



1. “To the average American, the word “poverty” means significant material hardship and need. It means lack of a warm, dry home, recurring hunger and malnutrition, no medical care, worn-out clothes for the children. The mainstream media reinforce this view: The typical TV news story on poverty features a homeless family with kids living in the back of a van.

2. But poverty as the federal government defines it differs greatly from these images…. According to the government’s own data, the typical poor family lives in a house or apartment that’s not only in good repair but is larger than the homes of the average non-poor person in England, France or Germany.

The typical “poor” American experiences no material hardships, receives medical care whenever needed, has an ample diet and wasn’t hungry for even a single day the previous year. According to the US Department of Agriculture, the nutritional quality of the diets of poor children is identical to that of upper middle class kids.






3. Previously, a family of four was considered poor if cash income was less than $22,800. The new definition sharply jerks up this threshold, especially in large cities. Now, a family of four with full medical insurance, living in Oakland, can be considered “poor” if its yearly pre-tax income is below $42,500. In Washington, DC, the figure is $40,300; in Boston, $39,500; in New York, $37,900.

4. … new poverty thresholds are linked to an “escalator” that will boost them faster than inflation year after year. The income thresholds will rise automatically in direct proportion to any rise in the actual living standards of the average American.

5. This means it will be difficult to reduce poverty in America no matter how much the living conditions of the poor actually improve. Imagine a sprinter in a race where the finish line is moved back four feet every time the runner takes a step.

6. Look at it this way: If the real income of every single American were to double overnight, the new measure would show no drop in poverty because the poverty-income thresholds also would double.






7. The goal of fighting poverty is no longer about meeting physical needs; instead it has been covertly shifted to equalizing incomes, or “spreading the wealth.”… the new government report on “poverty” is merely an advertising tool for expanding the welfare state.” ‘Poverty’ like we’ve never seen it - NYPOST.com





This is a stake through the heart of our once great nation:
Too many are simply not smart enough to realize that they are being scammed, that their good intentions are being used to invest a view that we need to help imaginary “poor,” by pretending that they exist. And, golly, ‘big daddy’ government must be the answer!

Thanks to the Obama voters, the Pod People, America will never again honor achievement, self-reliance, or success.
 
Again- simple solution.

Bring back the jobs from overseas and pay working people a fair wage.

Then they won't go to government looking for stuff.

Now,...why would you pretend that those 'overseas jobs' are important to you, Pod-ner???

Did you line up with the other Pod People and vote for this guy?

1. The Obama administration had joined the new Arab-based International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), and agreed to provide millions to support international green energy jobs. “In its fiscal 2012 budget request for international programs, the administration has asked for $5.2 million for IRENA.” U.S. Taxpayers on the Hook As Obama Joins a New International Renewable Energy Agency | CNS News How many jobs in the United States will this endeavor provide?

2. Obama regulatory and tax policies sent jobs overseas.

3. “President Barack Obama will present his “jobs plan” on Wednesday at a company which is shipping jobs overseas…. WestStar is a high-end, specialty manufacturer that just opened a new facility in San Jose, Costa Rica — creating many new jobs there, but not in the United States.” http://test.dailycaller.com/2011/09...c-company-that’s-shipping-jobs-to-costa-rica/




4. “This isn’t the first time Obama has chosen to speak at a North Carolina company outsourcing jobs overseas. In mid-June, Obama spoke at Cree LED Light Company to discuss his job creation and economic policies. Cree has been shipping jobs to China.” Ibid.

a. Cree was also a recipient of Obama stimulus funds, a portion of which was also used to send jobs overseas. Limbaugh, “The Great Destroyer,” p.27.

5. “The Department of Energy estimated that 82,000 jobs have been created and has acknowledged that as much as 80 percent of some green programs, including $2.3 billion of manufacturing tax credits, went to foreign firms that employed workers primarily in countries includingChina, South Korea and Spain, rather than in the United States.” 'Green' jobs no longer golden in stimulus - Washington Times


6. WASHINGTON -- Xerox, whose CEO, Ursula Burns, is advising President Obama on exports, last week told its product engineering employees that it is in outsourcing talks with India-based IT services firm HCL Technologies. Xerox CEO, an Obama appointee, may send jobs to Indian firm - Computerworld


7. (CNSNews.com) – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said today that he told his daughter to buy a Japanese car--a Toyota Sienna--and that she did so. U.S. Transportation Secretary: I Told My Daughter to Buy Japanese Car | CNS News




8. “U.S. funds, Arizona effort help Mexico trucks pollute less
Using EPA grant money, the state offered to refit the trucks with the new exhaust systems, replacing factory-installed mufflers with converters similar to what is required for U.S. trucks. The process takes two or three hours to complete at a cost per truck of about $1,600…. The entire cost - parts and labor - is paid by the EPA grant through ADEQ.” http://www.azcentral.com/news/artic...rizona-mexico-truck-pollution-regulation.html

9. “…Obama administration is now taking your American tax dollars and using them to fund the BBC World Service — Britain’s state-financed radio network.” The PJ Tatler » Your tax dollars now funding the BBC in addition to NPR



I'd laugh at you....in the same way Lord Byron suggested...

“And if I laugh at any mortal thing, 'Tis that I may not weep”



You've helped put out the lights of the shining city on the hill.
 
Since it was so very successful in the election, why stop now? “Class warfare” is the gift that keeps on giving for progressives!

If you voted for Obama, heck, you’ll have no trouble swallowing the latest foray into the wonderful world of collectivist propaganda. After all, how much smarter could you have become in one month?



1. “To the average American, the word “poverty” means significant material hardship and need. It means lack of a warm, dry home, recurring hunger and malnutrition, no medical care, worn-out clothes for the children. The mainstream media reinforce this view: The typical TV news story on poverty features a homeless family with kids living in the back of a van.

2. But poverty as the federal government defines it differs greatly from these images…. According to the government’s own data, the typical poor family lives in a house or apartment that’s not only in good repair but is larger than the homes of the average non-poor person in England, France or Germany.

The typical “poor” American experiences no material hardships, receives medical care whenever needed, has an ample diet and wasn’t hungry for even a single day the previous year. According to the US Department of Agriculture, the nutritional quality of the diets of poor children is identical to that of upper middle class kids.






3. Previously, a family of four was considered poor if cash income was less than $22,800. The new definition sharply jerks up this threshold, especially in large cities. Now, a family of four with full medical insurance, living in Oakland, can be considered “poor” if its yearly pre-tax income is below $42,500. In Washington, DC, the figure is $40,300; in Boston, $39,500; in New York, $37,900.

4. … new poverty thresholds are linked to an “escalator” that will boost them faster than inflation year after year. The income thresholds will rise automatically in direct proportion to any rise in the actual living standards of the average American.

5. This means it will be difficult to reduce poverty in America no matter how much the living conditions of the poor actually improve. Imagine a sprinter in a race where the finish line is moved back four feet every time the runner takes a step.

6. Look at it this way: If the real income of every single American were to double overnight, the new measure would show no drop in poverty because the poverty-income thresholds also would double.






7. The goal of fighting poverty is no longer about meeting physical needs; instead it has been covertly shifted to equalizing incomes, or “spreading the wealth.”… the new government report on “poverty” is merely an advertising tool for expanding the welfare state.” ‘Poverty’ like we’ve never seen it - NYPOST.com





This is a stake through the heart of our once great nation:
Too many are simply not smart enough to realize that they are being scammed, that their good intentions are being used to invest a view that we need to help imaginary “poor,” by pretending that they exist. And, golly, ‘big daddy’ government must be the answer!

Thanks to the Obama voters, the Pod People, America will never again honor achievement, self-reliance, or success.

So if the 'poor' in America are relatively well off,

that means the liberal/Democrat 'war on poverty', mostly associated with but not limited to Lyndon Johnson,

has been a great success, not the dismal failure that conservatives relentlessly attempt to label it as.

You've just demolished one of conservatisms' favorite points.
 
Again- simple solution.

Bring back the jobs from overseas and pay working people a fair wage.

Then they won't go to government looking for stuff.

Tell the dems to quit trying to tax the fuck out of businesses and that wouldn't be necessary. Share the wealth bitch!
 
Again- simple solution.

Bring back the jobs from overseas and pay working people a fair wage.

Then they won't go to government looking for stuff.

On Sunday, Governor Cuomo of New York announced that the Federal Government had granted 27 million dollars to NY to create 5,000 jobs to help with the cleanup froim Sandy.

36 hours after it was announced on all local TV stations, radio stations and printed in all newspapers, only 800 people had applied for these jobs.

So what were you saying about overseas jobs?
 
Since it was so very successful in the election, why stop now? “Class warfare” is the gift that keeps on giving for progressives!

If you voted for Obama, heck, you’ll have no trouble swallowing the latest foray into the wonderful world of collectivist propaganda. After all, how much smarter could you have become in one month?



1. “To the average American, the word “poverty” means significant material hardship and need. It means lack of a warm, dry home, recurring hunger and malnutrition, no medical care, worn-out clothes for the children. The mainstream media reinforce this view: The typical TV news story on poverty features a homeless family with kids living in the back of a van.

2. But poverty as the federal government defines it differs greatly from these images…. According to the government’s own data, the typical poor family lives in a house or apartment that’s not only in good repair but is larger than the homes of the average non-poor person in England, France or Germany.

The typical “poor” American experiences no material hardships, receives medical care whenever needed, has an ample diet and wasn’t hungry for even a single day the previous year. According to the US Department of Agriculture, the nutritional quality of the diets of poor children is identical to that of upper middle class kids.






3. Previously, a family of four was considered poor if cash income was less than $22,800. The new definition sharply jerks up this threshold, especially in large cities. Now, a family of four with full medical insurance, living in Oakland, can be considered “poor” if its yearly pre-tax income is below $42,500. In Washington, DC, the figure is $40,300; in Boston, $39,500; in New York, $37,900.

4. … new poverty thresholds are linked to an “escalator” that will boost them faster than inflation year after year. The income thresholds will rise automatically in direct proportion to any rise in the actual living standards of the average American.

5. This means it will be difficult to reduce poverty in America no matter how much the living conditions of the poor actually improve. Imagine a sprinter in a race where the finish line is moved back four feet every time the runner takes a step.

6. Look at it this way: If the real income of every single American were to double overnight, the new measure would show no drop in poverty because the poverty-income thresholds also would double.






7. The goal of fighting poverty is no longer about meeting physical needs; instead it has been covertly shifted to equalizing incomes, or “spreading the wealth.”… the new government report on “poverty” is merely an advertising tool for expanding the welfare state.” ‘Poverty’ like we’ve never seen it - NYPOST.com





This is a stake through the heart of our once great nation:
Too many are simply not smart enough to realize that they are being scammed, that their good intentions are being used to invest a view that we need to help imaginary “poor,” by pretending that they exist. And, golly, ‘big daddy’ government must be the answer!

Thanks to the Obama voters, the Pod People, America will never again honor achievement, self-reliance, or success.

So if the 'poor' in America are relatively well off,

that means the liberal/Democrat 'war on poverty', mostly associated with but not limited to Lyndon Johnson,

has been a great success, not the dismal failure that conservatives relentlessly attempt to label it as.

You've just demolished one of conservatisms' favorite points.

your simple mind is amusing.

Such is why the "middle class" has diminished.

What we used to accurately call the middle class is now deemed as poor.
 
Since it was so very successful in the election, why stop now? “Class warfare” is the gift that keeps on giving for progressives!

If you voted for Obama, heck, you’ll have no trouble swallowing the latest foray into the wonderful world of collectivist propaganda. After all, how much smarter could you have become in one month?



1. “To the average American, the word “poverty” means significant material hardship and need. It means lack of a warm, dry home, recurring hunger and malnutrition, no medical care, worn-out clothes for the children. The mainstream media reinforce this view: The typical TV news story on poverty features a homeless family with kids living in the back of a van.

2. But poverty as the federal government defines it differs greatly from these images…. According to the government’s own data, the typical poor family lives in a house or apartment that’s not only in good repair but is larger than the homes of the average non-poor person in England, France or Germany.

The typical “poor” American experiences no material hardships, receives medical care whenever needed, has an ample diet and wasn’t hungry for even a single day the previous year. According to the US Department of Agriculture, the nutritional quality of the diets of poor children is identical to that of upper middle class kids.






3. Previously, a family of four was considered poor if cash income was less than $22,800. The new definition sharply jerks up this threshold, especially in large cities. Now, a family of four with full medical insurance, living in Oakland, can be considered “poor” if its yearly pre-tax income is below $42,500. In Washington, DC, the figure is $40,300; in Boston, $39,500; in New York, $37,900.

4. … new poverty thresholds are linked to an “escalator” that will boost them faster than inflation year after year. The income thresholds will rise automatically in direct proportion to any rise in the actual living standards of the average American.

5. This means it will be difficult to reduce poverty in America no matter how much the living conditions of the poor actually improve. Imagine a sprinter in a race where the finish line is moved back four feet every time the runner takes a step.

6. Look at it this way: If the real income of every single American were to double overnight, the new measure would show no drop in poverty because the poverty-income thresholds also would double.






7. The goal of fighting poverty is no longer about meeting physical needs; instead it has been covertly shifted to equalizing incomes, or “spreading the wealth.”… the new government report on “poverty” is merely an advertising tool for expanding the welfare state.” ‘Poverty’ like we’ve never seen it - NYPOST.com





This is a stake through the heart of our once great nation:
Too many are simply not smart enough to realize that they are being scammed, that their good intentions are being used to invest a view that we need to help imaginary “poor,” by pretending that they exist. And, golly, ‘big daddy’ government must be the answer!

Thanks to the Obama voters, the Pod People, America will never again honor achievement, self-reliance, or success.


:lol:

You hopeless tool.


Feel better now?
 
Again- simple solution.

Bring back the jobs from overseas and pay working people a fair wage.

Then they won't go to government looking for stuff.

On Sunday, Governor Cuomo of New York announced that the Federal Government had granted 27 million dollars to NY to create 5,000 jobs to help with the cleanup froim Sandy.

36 hours after it was announced on all local TV stations, radio stations and printed in all newspapers, only 800 people had applied for these jobs.

So what were you saying about overseas jobs?

How many unemployed are aware of the announcement?
 
Since it was so very successful in the election, why stop now? “Class warfare” is the gift that keeps on giving for progressives!

If you voted for Obama, heck, you’ll have no trouble swallowing the latest foray into the wonderful world of collectivist propaganda. After all, how much smarter could you have become in one month?



1. “To the average American, the word “poverty” means significant material hardship and need. It means lack of a warm, dry home, recurring hunger and malnutrition, no medical care, worn-out clothes for the children. The mainstream media reinforce this view: The typical TV news story on poverty features a homeless family with kids living in the back of a van.

2. But poverty as the federal government defines it differs greatly from these images…. According to the government’s own data, the typical poor family lives in a house or apartment that’s not only in good repair but is larger than the homes of the average non-poor person in England, France or Germany.

The typical “poor” American experiences no material hardships, receives medical care whenever needed, has an ample diet and wasn’t hungry for even a single day the previous year. According to the US Department of Agriculture, the nutritional quality of the diets of poor children is identical to that of upper middle class kids.






3. Previously, a family of four was considered poor if cash income was less than $22,800. The new definition sharply jerks up this threshold, especially in large cities. Now, a family of four with full medical insurance, living in Oakland, can be considered “poor” if its yearly pre-tax income is below $42,500. In Washington, DC, the figure is $40,300; in Boston, $39,500; in New York, $37,900.

4. … new poverty thresholds are linked to an “escalator” that will boost them faster than inflation year after year. The income thresholds will rise automatically in direct proportion to any rise in the actual living standards of the average American.

5. This means it will be difficult to reduce poverty in America no matter how much the living conditions of the poor actually improve. Imagine a sprinter in a race where the finish line is moved back four feet every time the runner takes a step.

6. Look at it this way: If the real income of every single American were to double overnight, the new measure would show no drop in poverty because the poverty-income thresholds also would double.






7. The goal of fighting poverty is no longer about meeting physical needs; instead it has been covertly shifted to equalizing incomes, or “spreading the wealth.”… the new government report on “poverty” is merely an advertising tool for expanding the welfare state.” ‘Poverty’ like we’ve never seen it - NYPOST.com





This is a stake through the heart of our once great nation:
Too many are simply not smart enough to realize that they are being scammed, that their good intentions are being used to invest a view that we need to help imaginary “poor,” by pretending that they exist. And, golly, ‘big daddy’ government must be the answer!

Thanks to the Obama voters, the Pod People, America will never again honor achievement, self-reliance, or success.

So if the 'poor' in America are relatively well off,

that means the liberal/Democrat 'war on poverty', mostly associated with but not limited to Lyndon Johnson,

has been a great success, not the dismal failure that conservatives relentlessly attempt to label it as.

You've just demolished one of conservatisms' favorite points.

your simple mind is amusing.

Such is why the "middle class" has diminished.

What we used to accurately call the middle class is now deemed as poor.

Middle class has diminished because of stagnant wages. Upper class has flourished because of increased wages.
 
So if the 'poor' in America are relatively well off,

that means the liberal/Democrat 'war on poverty', mostly associated with but not limited to Lyndon Johnson,

has been a great success, not the dismal failure that conservatives relentlessly attempt to label it as.

You've just demolished one of conservatisms' favorite points.

your simple mind is amusing.

Such is why the "middle class" has diminished.

What we used to accurately call the middle class is now deemed as poor.

Middle class has diminished because of stagnant wages. Upper class has flourished because of increased wages.

So you believe that doubling the income used to determine one is no longer middle calss and now deemed as poor had no affect whatsoever?
 
Again- simple solution.

Bring back the jobs from overseas and pay working people a fair wage.

Then they won't go to government looking for stuff.

On Sunday, Governor Cuomo of New York announced that the Federal Government had granted 27 million dollars to NY to create 5,000 jobs to help with the cleanup froim Sandy.

36 hours after it was announced on all local TV stations, radio stations and printed in all newspapers, only 800 people had applied for these jobs.

So what were you saying about overseas jobs?

How many unemployed are aware of the announcement?

Measures were taken to ensure anyone unemployed and actively looking for a job is aware of it. I am retired, yet I STILL received notification as a former recruiter to offer the information to anyone seeking a job....which means ALL recruiters in NYC received it....not to mention alll unemployment reps are aware of it.
 
On Sunday, Governor Cuomo of New York announced that the Federal Government had granted 27 million dollars to NY to create 5,000 jobs to help with the cleanup froim Sandy.

36 hours after it was announced on all local TV stations, radio stations and printed in all newspapers, only 800 people had applied for these jobs.

So what were you saying about overseas jobs?

How many unemployed are aware of the announcement?

Measures were taken to ensure anyone unemployed and actively looking for a job is aware of it. I am retired, yet I STILL received notification as a former recruiter to offer the information to anyone seeking a job....which means ALL recruiters in NYC received it....not to mention alll unemployment reps are aware of it.

Oh, measures. heh. Stop being such a blow hard, dude. Not everyone uses recruiters to look for employment.
 
How many unemployed are aware of the announcement?

Measures were taken to ensure anyone unemployed and actively looking for a job is aware of it. I am retired, yet I STILL received notification as a former recruiter to offer the information to anyone seeking a job....which means ALL recruiters in NYC received it....not to mention alll unemployment reps are aware of it.

Oh, measures. heh. Stop being such a blow hard, dude. Not everyone uses recruiters to look for employment.

You ignored Local TV, local radio, local newspapers and unemployment representatives.

If someone is actively looking for a source of income, it would be impossible to miss it.

So I suggest YOU stop ignoring the reality of the situation.

Curious...if someone is actively seeking employment and, in the meantime ON unemployment.....exactly why would they NOT be interacting with all, if not some of the sources I mentioned?
 
Measures were taken to ensure anyone unemployed and actively looking for a job is aware of it. I am retired, yet I STILL received notification as a former recruiter to offer the information to anyone seeking a job....which means ALL recruiters in NYC received it....not to mention alll unemployment reps are aware of it.

Oh, measures. heh. Stop being such a blow hard, dude. Not everyone uses recruiters to look for employment.

You ignored Local TV, local radio, local newspapers and unemployment representatives.

If someone is actively looking for a source of income, it would be impossible to miss it.

So I suggest YOU stop ignoring the reality of the situation.

Curious...if someone is actively seeking employment and, in the meantime ON unemployment.....exactly why would they NOT be interacting with all, if not some of the sources I mentioned?

"on Sunday"

1 day bro.

Stop being a pretender.

Yea, some people are lazy on the dole. That doesn't mean that most of the unemployed are liking it that way. People who keep that line are disgusting little parrokeets. The human nature inside of their cynical selves is being anecdotally projected unto human beings, en masse. And it's wrong.

If most people you've met in life are lazy pieces of shit who want hand outs, you need a new life. Must be sad.

I have way more faith in human beings, and must have a more-so enriched life it seems. You're obviously jaded because of what you've done for your career - you see the lazy portion of society that came through your office and think that you can apply it to million. You haven't even MET one hundred thousand people. Think about that.
 
Last edited:
Since it was so very successful in the election, why stop now? “Class warfare” is the gift that keeps on giving for progressives!

If you voted for Obama, heck, you’ll have no trouble swallowing the latest foray into the wonderful world of collectivist propaganda. After all, how much smarter could you have become in one month?



1. “To the average American, the word “poverty” means significant material hardship and need. It means lack of a warm, dry home, recurring hunger and malnutrition, no medical care, worn-out clothes for the children. The mainstream media reinforce this view: The typical TV news story on poverty features a homeless family with kids living in the back of a van.

2. But poverty as the federal government defines it differs greatly from these images…. According to the government’s own data, the typical poor family lives in a house or apartment that’s not only in good repair but is larger than the homes of the average non-poor person in England, France or Germany.

The typical “poor” American experiences no material hardships, receives medical care whenever needed, has an ample diet and wasn’t hungry for even a single day the previous year. According to the US Department of Agriculture, the nutritional quality of the diets of poor children is identical to that of upper middle class kids.






3. Previously, a family of four was considered poor if cash income was less than $22,800. The new definition sharply jerks up this threshold, especially in large cities. Now, a family of four with full medical insurance, living in Oakland, can be considered “poor” if its yearly pre-tax income is below $42,500. In Washington, DC, the figure is $40,300; in Boston, $39,500; in New York, $37,900.

4. … new poverty thresholds are linked to an “escalator” that will boost them faster than inflation year after year. The income thresholds will rise automatically in direct proportion to any rise in the actual living standards of the average American.

5. This means it will be difficult to reduce poverty in America no matter how much the living conditions of the poor actually improve. Imagine a sprinter in a race where the finish line is moved back four feet every time the runner takes a step.

6. Look at it this way: If the real income of every single American were to double overnight, the new measure would show no drop in poverty because the poverty-income thresholds also would double.






7. The goal of fighting poverty is no longer about meeting physical needs; instead it has been covertly shifted to equalizing incomes, or “spreading the wealth.”… the new government report on “poverty” is merely an advertising tool for expanding the welfare state.” ‘Poverty’ like we’ve never seen it - NYPOST.com





This is a stake through the heart of our once great nation:
Too many are simply not smart enough to realize that they are being scammed, that their good intentions are being used to invest a view that we need to help imaginary “poor,” by pretending that they exist. And, golly, ‘big daddy’ government must be the answer!

Thanks to the Obama voters, the Pod People, America will never again honor achievement, self-reliance, or success.

So if the 'poor' in America are relatively well off,

that means the liberal/Democrat 'war on poverty', mostly associated with but not limited to Lyndon Johnson,

has been a great success, not the dismal failure that conservatives relentlessly attempt to label it as.

You've just demolished one of conservatisms' favorite points.

your simple mind is amusing.

Such is why the "middle class" has diminished.

What we used to accurately call the middle class is now deemed as poor.

Believe it or not, as civilization advances, economic standards change. I am not surprised you can't understand that.
 
Oh, measures. heh. Stop being such a blow hard, dude. Not everyone uses recruiters to look for employment.

You ignored Local TV, local radio, local newspapers and unemployment representatives.

If someone is actively looking for a source of income, it would be impossible to miss it.

So I suggest YOU stop ignoring the reality of the situation.

Curious...if someone is actively seeking employment and, in the meantime ON unemployment.....exactly why would they NOT be interacting with all, if not some of the sources I mentioned?

"on Sunday"

1 day bro.

Stop being a pretender.

Yea, some people are lazy on the dole. That doesn't mean that most of the unemployed are liking it that way. People who keep that line are disgusting little parrokeets. The human nature inside of their cynical selves is being anecdotally projected unto human beings, en masse. And it's wrong.

If most people you've met in life are lazy pieces of shit who want hand outs, you need a new life. Must be sad.

I have way more faith in human beings, and must have a more-so enriched life it seems. You're obviously jaded because of what you've done for your career - you see the lazy portion of society that came through your office and think that you can apply it to million. You haven't even MET one hundred thousand people. Think about that.

Nearly 3 decdes of recruiting....over 2 decades of running a temporary employment agency.....you would be dismayed at what I have seen, heard and experienced.

FYI....I NEVER referred to them as lazy....EVER.

To the contrary, I seem them as far from lazy and, instead, quite innovative.

I will explain....this is a common response I would get....with variations....but the point is the same...

"you are offering me 15 an hour for a temporary job. I am currently receiving 405 a week unemployment and my brother in law is paying me 10 an hour off the books to bang up sheetrock for his contracting company....so working 40 hours a week, I am getting 800 of which only half is taxable. Why would I take a temporary job that pays me 600 a week of which ALL is taxed?"

And to be honest?

I dont condone it...but I understand it.
 
So if the 'poor' in America are relatively well off,

that means the liberal/Democrat 'war on poverty', mostly associated with but not limited to Lyndon Johnson,

has been a great success, not the dismal failure that conservatives relentlessly attempt to label it as.

You've just demolished one of conservatisms' favorite points.

your simple mind is amusing.

Such is why the "middle class" has diminished.

What we used to accurately call the middle class is now deemed as poor.

Believe it or not, as civilization advances, economic standards change. I am not surprised you can't understand that.

Really?

A deep statement...now...back it up.

FYI....all is ALWAYS relative. Your statement can not be backed up.
 
You ignored Local TV, local radio, local newspapers and unemployment representatives.

If someone is actively looking for a source of income, it would be impossible to miss it.

So I suggest YOU stop ignoring the reality of the situation.

Curious...if someone is actively seeking employment and, in the meantime ON unemployment.....exactly why would they NOT be interacting with all, if not some of the sources I mentioned?

"on Sunday"

1 day bro.

Stop being a pretender.

Yea, some people are lazy on the dole. That doesn't mean that most of the unemployed are liking it that way. People who keep that line are disgusting little parrokeets. The human nature inside of their cynical selves is being anecdotally projected unto human beings, en masse. And it's wrong.

If most people you've met in life are lazy pieces of shit who want hand outs, you need a new life. Must be sad.

I have way more faith in human beings, and must have a more-so enriched life it seems. You're obviously jaded because of what you've done for your career - you see the lazy portion of society that came through your office and think that you can apply it to million. You haven't even MET one hundred thousand people. Think about that.

Nearly 3 decdes of recruiting....over 2 decades of running a temporary employment agency.....you would be dismayed at what I have seen, heard and experienced.

FYI....I NEVER referred to them as lazy....EVER.

To the contrary, I seem them as far from lazy and, instead, quite innovative.

I will explain....this is a common response I would get....with variations....but the point is the same...

"you are offering me 15 an hour for a temporary job. I am currently receiving 405 a week unemployment and my brother in law is paying me 10 an hour off the books to bang up sheetrock for his contracting company....so working 40 hours a week, I am getting 800 of which only half is taxable. Why would I take a temporary job that pays me 600 a week of which ALL is taxed?"

And to be honest?

I dont condone it...but I understand it.

Like I said, jaded from anecdotal evidence. Became a cynic because of being a pessimist. Study psychology, study it good. Learn thyself.
 

Forum List

Back
Top