Report: Level of poverty growing

[boedicca]

Knock yourself out. Most of us do strive for better lives. But to deny that real poverty exists and that without government programs, the impoverished would have better opportunities through private charity alone is just being downright stupid.

What you advocate is far far beyond providing a safety net for the truly unfortunate. Your policy positions GUARANTEE that there will be much less opportunity for people to lead self-sufficient lives.

How Humane.

 

[DiamondDave]

And you do realize that raising minimum wage increases unemployment, right??

You do realize to that you are the one responsible for advancing your skills to demand more compensation?? And that even the most incapable fool can earn more than minimum wage with time served in a fast food job... Even morons get shift supervisor positions in McDonalds

I've already posted a link that shows there has been no net loss of jobs the last several times the minimum wage was raised. It also showed that the majority of those making minimum wage are adults, not teenagers.

The truth is that we had a much better economy when the wealthy paid more taxes and minimum wage had more spending power.

My circle of friends includes wealthier people, and I can tell you right now that none of them complained when their tax rate went up to around 39% when Clinton and the Republicans were trying to balance the budget.

then you know wealthy idiots...

I would not mid a 39% tax, if everyone had 39% of every dollar they earn... equal treatment and taxation of all, not selective equality
Funny thing is you start taxing everyone like that, and not just those you like to label as the 'evil rich', you'll get even more of a call for reducing taxation and the government spending

 

[Oldandtired]

And yet you still continue to be the one, along with your leftist buddies, that love to proclaim classes of people helpless or incapable

First of all, I was objecting to your exposed INSULTS. Second, yes, there most definitely ARE suppressed people in this country. Too bad you never venture outside a gated community apparently. Try visiting a crowded school room in a lower class neighborhood and check out the quality of education being provided by overly stressed teachers, as opposed to the Cadillac facades and salaries and working conditions of Beverly Hills 90210. Then get back to me.

No... it makes you feel good to say there are.... there are not suppressed people in this country... there are people who succeed, people who do ok, and people who do not succeed.... I do not live in a gated community and have lived in the poorest parts of various areas before getting to the neighborhood I am now.... I visit the schools of both of my daughters that are over capacity due to recent growth in the area...

You seem to think that people that are like me could never have stated as the lowest of the low on the ladder of life... that is where you are completely wrong and full of bullshit... just as it is complete bullshit that you put the label of incapable on 'the poor'... anyone can make it in this country... just because everyone does not, does not prove your stance

I am one that was brought up in Middle Class America.....made my mistakes early on.....and found myself penniless and homeless....with nothing but a job as a bagger in a grocery store. Once I started to blame myslef and not everyone else, I pulled myself up and made something of myself...Sold my first company after 5 years.

The only thing that holds people back is the convenience of being poor....like it or not.
Make it inconvenient, and see how long many of them stay poor.

 

[boedicca]

Right on O&T!

 

[uscitizen]

That's an excellent question.

I don't know.

How do you weed out those who are too lazy to work from those who cant' find a job or are unable to work?

There needs to be an entirely different thread debate about that. I too think there are far too many slackers who know how to game the system and because there are not enough rules in place, and enough people to police those rules, it is allowed to happen. What we SHOULD be discussing elsewhere is how to fix that. But you cannot "fix" abject need, which in today's bad economy for many thousands of people means IMMEDIATE need, not some far off solution based on pure ideological solutions.

Yep and not all slackers are in congress either.

 

[Care4all]

I've already posted a link that shows there has been no net loss of jobs the last several times the minimum wage was raised. It also showed that the majority of those making minimum wage are adults, not teenagers.

The truth is that we had a much better economy when the wealthy paid more taxes and minimum wage had more spending power.

My circle of friends includes wealthier people, and I can tell you right now that none of them complained when their tax rate went up to around 39% when Clinton and the Republicans were trying to balance the budget.

then you know wealthy idiots...

I would not mid a 39% tax, if everyone had 39% of every dollar they earn... equal treatment and taxation of all, not selective equality
Funny thing is you start taxing everyone like that, and not just those you like to label as the 'evil rich', you'll get even more of a call for reducing taxation and the government spending

unless those paying that 39% of their upper income inherited a silver spoon in their mouths, THEY DID NOT pay 39% tax rate when they were working hard for very little money, making mistakes, and eventually climbing the ladder....why should others have to?

they don't pay any taxes on their FIRST 20k earned either ya know....just like the guy who only makes 20k.... that wealthy guy in the highest tax bracket pays no more in taxes for the same amount of money levels as those in the tax brackets before them....

it is fair ya know....they don't pay 35% taxes on all of their income....their income is taxed the same as everyone elses income in that particular income tax bracket/tier???

 

[DiamondDave]

My circle of friends includes wealthier people, and I can tell you right now that none of them complained when their tax rate went up to around 39% when Clinton and the Republicans were trying to balance the budget.

then you know wealthy idiots...

I would not mid a 39% tax, if everyone had 39% of every dollar they earn... equal treatment and taxation of all, not selective equality
Funny thing is you start taxing everyone like that, and not just those you like to label as the 'evil rich', you'll get even more of a call for reducing taxation and the government spending

unless those paying that 39% of their upper income inherited a silver spoon in their mouths, THEY DID NOT pay 39% tax rate when they were working hard for very little money, making mistakes, and eventually climbing the ladder....why should others have to?

they don't pay any taxes on their FIRST 20k earned either ya know....just like the guy who only makes 20k.... that wealthy guy in the highest tax bracket pays no more in taxes for the same amount of money levels as those in the tax brackets before them....

it is fair ya know....they don't pay 35% taxes on all of their income....their income is taxed the same as everyone elses income in that particular income tax bracket/tier???

Because we tax income.. we do not keep taxing the money you have saved over and over and over again... now should we... so inherited makes no difference

Why should others or everyone pay, for it is the epitome of equality... just as sales tax is equality based... we don't have a 30% sales tax for the rich and a 0% sales tax for the poor... the sales tax is indiscriminate, and so the income tax should be as well...

But no.. the graduated penalty system just makes it so easy for class warfare... so the government can grab more and more power

 

[MaggieMae]

The number of homeless in our own country has increased. And while some of the poor have big screen tvs, not all of them do. I know someone that got one 2nd hand and it was so bad they had to get rid of it but couldn't afford the dump fee. Some idiot rich or middle class person decided to avoid paying the dump fee themselves by giving it to those less fortunate than themselves. Kind of them, wasn't it?

As for being overweight, starch is cheap, lean meats and fresh vegetables are expensive and not everyone can do a garden. I've tried, this will be my 3rd year and each time so far it's cost me more than I've saved.

I know a guy that flew clear across the country for a job, only to be laid off a few months later. It took him two years before he found a charity willing to pay for his ticket home, in the meantime he lived in a storage shed, did odd jobs and got food from various churches.

Oh, and btw, our height is going down too.

We don't live in a Utopia.

You can pick the uncertainty of freedom or the certainty of totalitarian misery. That's about it. Those of us who prefer the former have an optimistic view of humanity - we believe individuals will be more successful in determining their own lives than having a state apparatus decide for them. The problems you point out in our country exist in others that are less free on a much more massive scale.

There is a little saying: Perfection Should Not Be The Enemy Of The Good.

Chew on that.

We're already free, which is a certainty, just as never reaching a point of totalitarianism is also a certainty. You're relying on scare tactics generated by extremists by making those exaggerated claims.

 

[MaggieMae]

Sheer nonsense. Those of us who are Anti Big Government believe that the poor are competent enough to manage their own lives if not brainwashed with government dependency.

Its the Lefties that want to keep them on a Virtual Plantation of Poverty - mostly illiterate and much easier to herd to voting booths with their list of "approved" selections.

What a bunch of faux crap. That kind of bullshit isn't even believed by smart conservatives who might find themselves in a position to contribute to a government more to your liking. Grow the fuck up.

 

[MaggieMae]

Those of us who are Anti Big Government believe that the poor are competent enough to manage their own lives if not brainwashed with government dependency.

Oh yeah? How's that working so far? We have literally no safety net for the working poor. If you are an able male who loses his job, runs out of unemployment and becomes homeless, can you get on welfare? The answer is no. Also, I believe the time limit for being on welfare is 5 years (varies by state but that is the limit). It's not like you can LIVE on welfare indefinitely. The only people who are allowed on welfare are mothers with children. Jobs are disappearing. There are not enough jobs for everyone to "take care of themselves" and many of the jobs that are available do not pay anything near a living wage. What, exactly, do you expect these people to do?

Why do you cons want this country to turn into a bonafide third world nation? I just don't understand it.

General assistance varies from state to state. Some will provide a small housing subsidy and emergency utilities. Anyone can qualify for food stamps if he/she meets the income eligibility but it's nowhere near enough to actually feed a family nutritiously for a month. Housing has become such a problem where I live that some people who have lost their jobs and have nowhere to live are actually trying to fake addictions in order to get into rehab centers until they can figure out their next move. But of course those already have waiting lists.

 

[MaggieMae]

Oh yeah? How's that working so far? We have literally no safety net for the working poor. If you are an able male who loses his job, runs out of unemployment and becomes homeless, can you get on welfare? The answer is no. Also, I believe the time limit for being on welfare is 5 years (varies by state but that is the limit). It's not like you can LIVE on welfare indefinitely. The only people who are allowed on welfare are mothers with children. Jobs are disappearing. There are not enough jobs for everyone to "take care of themselves" and many of the jobs that are available do not pay anything near a living wage. What, exactly, do you expect these people to do?

Why do you cons want this country to turn into a bonafide third world nation? I just don't understand it.

No safety net for the working poor? If "we cons" had our way, the economy would be much more vibrant, with the resulting economic growth creating jobs.
Then what is the private sector doing about it? How can employers improve on the existing economy? WHERE ARE YOUR ALTERNATIVES?

When employment is high, the competition for workers increases the income of the working poor. If you think the working poor are poor because of free market forces, think again.

The last question is a "when did you quit beating your wife" bit of disingenuous rhetoric, and not worthy of a serious response.

Well I sure would like a serious response to my big red question.

 

[MaggieMae]

I appreciate your intelligent response, although I don't agree with it.
I'm thinking how to phrase this to make it rather gentle.
People who own businesses and own apartment buildings are people too. Just because they own a business doesn't mean that they are making a living or have a lot of money.
Most small businesses fail.
What is the survival rate for new firms?
Seven out of ten new employer firms last at least two years, and about half survive five years. More specifically, according to new Census data, 69 percent of new employer establishments born to new firms in 2000 survived at least two years, and 51 percent survived five or more years. Firms born in 1990 had very similar survival rates. With most firms starting small, 99.8 percent of the new employer establishments were started by small firms. Survival rates were similar across states and major industries. [/I]
People who own apartment buildings can get foreclosed on too.
The difference is if you lose your job, you lost a job, when a business fails, a business owner is losing a big investment and often can now be in large debt as a result.
Yes, if you own a business, and let's say an employee sells a vase that cost $5, the employee doesn't get that $5. Why? Because you also have to pay from that $5 the employee's wages, rent, utilities, taxes, and who knows what else. You also have taken a great deal of risk maintaining a small business.
Your landlord can charge you $600, and yes the landlord does make a profit. What happens though if the apartment has a number of vacancies. The landlord can soon go into foreclosure and lose the building.
These people are human too. Many of them can have a lot of financial trouble as well. They just probably have more zeros attached.

I don't understand why you feel that if I succeed someone failed.

I was a salesperson doing door to door sales on commission only.

I created my own business doing the same thing, selling the same product.

I now employ a bunch of salespeople. Some of them I pay $2,000/week.

Who failed because I succeeded?

I am providing livelihoods to people who may not have jobs. I provide a product to my customers, and I pay a lot of taxes. How exactly is that bad?

I was struggelling for over 10 years. As I said I was nervous buying lettuce in the grocery store. For a time, my wife and I lived in my brother in law's basement. We paid him rent for it.

Yeah, it is tough out there, but it's not impossible. The defeatist attitude bothers me. If that's what people believe that's what will happen.

I agree with you regarding credit cards. IMO it's legalized loan sharking without the actual leg breaking.

I want to stress again that I have the greatest sympathy for those who can't work like the elderly, and those who are truely seeking work, and aren't too proud to take a job that they feel isn't at their level.

I have disgust for those who would rather live off the system than work hard, and I have encoutered a lot of them.

This is America. Anything is possible.

Just as a side note. I mentioned that I used to get nervous buying lettuce in the grocery store I know feel wonderful that I buy my wife flowers once a week

I get everything you're saying. You take it too personally, and what I mean by that is, you think I'm talking about you personally. I'm not. You and me and everyone else on here are small potatoes, not even a blip on the radar. The people I'm talking about certainly do not spend any of their free time on USMB.

However in your situation, whose going down because you're going up? Well I don't know what you're selling, but anyone else who's selling it is going down. If you're still marketing door-to-door, the local stores that sell it are losing revenue. If it's non-commodity, you're taking a portion of your customer's disposable income that would have been spent elsewhere. And that's fine, that's competition, that's capitalism. It's a game I play too.

The people I'm talking about are big box retailers... Bankers... importers... huge, mutli-national firms that stifle competition... Pharmaceutical companies... Insurance (that's a big one.)

For example, let's take... Oh I dunno... Wal-Mart.

The Waltons are worth about US$90Billion, but they didn't produce a single thing, ever. How did they get this money? The answer is, exploitation on all fronts, plain and simple. They exploit a flooded labor pool by paying employees as little as possible (Less than $20k on average). They do business with 3rd world nations who exploit workers even worse; And with their massive buying power, they have an unmatched ability to "Beat them up" on price even more, leading to further exploitation. Nothing they sell there is made in the USA, even though that was a big part of their image in the early days. The local competitors go out of business because they can't compete with the buying power they have, which makes unemployment even worse. In a single breath, they exploit the daylights out of a situation they helped to create. Where does all this money go? Up to the Waltons. Just what the hell do you do with another $500 million when you're already worth $90 billion?

Banks are just as bad. Competition has been shaken down for decades through mergers, acquisitions, and simple market manipulation. It'd be enough to make Rockefeller blush. They used to make their money through lending, you know our fractional reserve system. But the problem is that nowadays the average person is broke, so they found new creative ways to make money off broke people. Fees, rather than interest income, have become the new cash cow for banks; Low balance fees, overdraft fees, late payment fees, whatever they can think of to monetarily punish you for not having money. I did $4k in fees one year, 04 I think when I was just starting out. That was a LOT of money to me back then, a lot. It's still a lot of money to me now, but back then, my bank almost put me out of business! And of course the amazing interest rate that doubles when you pay late as we discussed earlier; You're broke, no problem, just give us some more money!

Now myself, I climbed out of it. But I had every advantage in the world too; Young, intelligent, white, good looking, personable, born male. I also had my mom co-sign my first business loan when I was the ripe old age of 20. What if mom's credit sucked too, or she had no credit?

I guess my point is, yes it's feasible to climb out of a hole, but with every advantage in the world (except actual money to start with), it took me 7 years and everything I've got to do it. What if I was born not so intelligent? Or black? Or not good looking or personable (Let's face it, these things affect your ability to sell, whether they should or not)? In the current system, I wouldn't stand a chance! In the 50's I could just get a factory job. My grandfather raised 3 kids as an ex-Army guy who worked in a 8 man tool and die factory until he retired in his 60's, raised 3 kids and his wife never had to work. Think that kind of story exists these days?

Bravo! Thank you for putting so much effort into a knowledgeable explanation.

 

[MaggieMae]

Let's see, trickle down economics failed, and yet the poor keep increasing, the poor under Obama are still poor, and millions of jobs are gone to educated masses in foreign nations. And Democrats make up the bulk of all government except the military throughout our nation since WWII and beyond, and we can not blame Democrats for the current situation.

Right?

If that's your logic, then you'll need to credit the Democrats for the successes of the 90's when nobody was hanging around the Internet bitching and moaning about high tax rates, unemployment and high poverty rates.

Ironically, however, as I believe I said previously in this thread, since Reagan was elected in 1980, Republicans have held the presidency 24 of 30 years. Republicans held the Senate for 16 different years and directly controlled the House for 10 of those 30 years. So no, you cannot continue to blame the Democrats for everything that is currently wrong with the economy.

 

[MaggieMae]

He's been in long enough to pass a fraudulent Porkulus bill, and propose a multi trillion dollar ripoff called Health care "reform", continue TARP, maintain Iraq, and ramp up Afghanistan/Vietnam to fight a drug war, and watch our people suffer with zero movement towards reversing the trend.

No? You have to stop defending this hoodlum US, it's time to face the facts. This guy Obama is a bad man.

How does anyone even attempt to refute such a fact-free opinion like that? You can't read just headlines or pay attention to what's going on 2% of the time and think you have everything all figured out. Headlines, soundbytes, platitudes, and the loudest voices--even all combined--do not tell the whole story of any given issue.

 

[MaggieMae]

He's not attacking manufacturing, I'll have to ask you to source that. To the contrary, reigning in outsourcing is among the things he's campaigned on.

I'll give you this; He hasn't done shit yet in that area, which has been a big disappointment to me. I'm sure you've seen me ranting about that particular issue in other threads. Outsourcing is THE source of our unemployment. Not government, not "socialism," not the banksters -- Outsourcing, period.

We'll see what the next few years bring, once all this healthcare and rabble-rousers prattling about socialism blows over.

Uh.Dood. We've lost manufacturing jobs - the biggest area of creation is health care, which Obama is attacking.

If you want to reverse outsourcing, then the cost of doing business (taxes and regulation being large drivers) has to be reduced. I doubt even that will be enough. We are seeing a major shift in the global economy as China, India et al develop a middle class, at a lower cost point than the U.S. The real answer for us is more innovation, but the current environment doesn't create much incentive for that.

I agree that innovation is what will generate the jobs. The old ones aren't coming back. But if you guys would stop berating green jobs that would result from new technology in alternative energy, it would be a start.

 

[MaggieMae]

It isn't "forced" redistribution any more than it's "forced" redistribution of revenue by way of tax cuts that benefit the wealthy to the detriment of the lower classes. It is EXACTLY the same kind of "redistribution" of wealth.

I posted this in another thread - and it's applicable here. Reducing the taxes of the person who pays the taxes is not redistribution of wealth away from those who don't pay. It is a specious and disingenuous to claim it is.

Suppose that everyday 10 men go to PJ's for lunch. The bill for all ten comes to $100. If it were paid the way we pay our taxes, the first four men would pay nothing; the fifth would pay $1; the sixth would pay $3; the seventh $7; the eighth $12; the ninth $18. The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. The 10 men ate lunch in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until the owner threw them a curve.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." Now lunch for the 10 would costs only $80. The first four are unaffected. They still eat for free. Can you figure out how to divvy up the $20 savings between the remaining six so that everyone gets his fair share?

The men realize that $20 divided by 6 is $3.33, but if they subtract that from everybody's share, then the fifth and the sixth man would end up being paid to eat their meal. The restaurant owner suggested that it would be only fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount that each paid and he started to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of $59. Outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man pointing to the tenth, "and he got $7!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!"

"That's true," shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks."

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor."

The nine men surrounded the tenth man and beat him up. The next day he didn't show up for lunch, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important: They were $52 short!

And that, boys and girls and college instructors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore. There are lots of good restaurants in Switzerland and the Caribbean.

A Tax Fable

I'm glad it's called a "fable" because when you put the analogy of taxes to that tale using a 1040, the larger amounts are ALWAYS reduced to the lowest figure possible by available tax writeoffs enjoyed by the upper classes. Nice lunch.

 

[boedicca]

We're already free, which is a certainty, just as never reaching a point of totalitarianism is also a certainty. You're relying on scare tactics generated by extremists by making those exaggerated claims.

Really? We're already free? And the government fores us to:

- Use certain types of light bulbs
- Wear bicycle helmets
- Pay extra for foods and drinks they think we shouldn't eat

The Nanny State is running amok, on top of the punitive tax system which rewards sloth and dependency while punishing entrepreneurial effort/risk taking and independence.

People like you do a lot of damage by minimizing the accumulated damage and ignoring the trajectory.

 

[boedicca]

[
I'm glad it's called a "fable" because when you put the analogy of taxes to that tale using a 1040, the larger amounts are ALWAYS reduced to the lowest figure possible by available tax writeoffs enjoyed by the upper classes. Nice lunch.

It's clear that you don't understand that a Fable is a Moral Lesson - and hardly surprising.

 

[MaggieMae]

I've already posted a link that shows there has been no net loss of jobs the last several times the minimum wage was raised. It also showed that the majority of those making minimum wage are adults, not teenagers.

The truth is that we had a much better economy when the wealthy paid more taxes and minimum wage had more spending power.

My circle of friends includes wealthier people, and I can tell you right now that none of them complained when their tax rate went up to around 39% when Clinton and the Republicans were trying to balance the budget.

then you know wealthy idiots...

I would not mid a 39% tax, if everyone had 39% of every dollar they earn... equal treatment and taxation of all, not selective equality
Funny thing is you start taxing everyone like that, and not just those you like to label as the 'evil rich', you'll get even more of a call for reducing taxation and the government spending

I never called anyone "evil rich," and tax indexing has been going on since 1913 (just to correct some of your obvious (a) lies and (b) incorrect perceptions).

It's clear that no common sense logic, nor facts, nor even an impassioned plea to get it will make a dent in your stoic position on this, so I'm outta here. May you never find yourself in a position where you're unemployed, homeless and worst of all, too sick to do anything about it.

 

[boedicca]

Sheer nonsense. Those of us who are Anti Big Government believe that the poor are competent enough to manage their own lives if not brainwashed with government dependency.

Its the Lefties that want to keep them on a Virtual Plantation of Poverty - mostly illiterate and much easier to herd to voting booths with their list of "approved" selections.

What a bunch of faux crap. That kind of bullshit isn't even believed by smart conservatives who might find themselves in a position to contribute to a government more to your liking. Grow the fuck up.

Impressive.

Not.

The Left has a huge vested interest in keeping poor people on government entitlements in a dependent position. I live in a city where I see the real life implications of this every day. It's sad to see the waste of human life and potential.

Want proof? Why does the left oppose School Vouchers? The success rates for students who do have them is very high? Why keep kids in failing schools instead of giving them the choice to move to a school that better suits their goals?

The answer is quite simple - it's important to keep control of what they learn to ensure they are appropriately indoctrinated and that the teachers unions continue their monopoloy (and campaign donations).

Now, go wash out your mouth.