Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
The U.S. has many policies and practices in place, via the government, that alleviate the condition of the poor.
They happen to be the policies conservatism most adamantly objects to.
That was my point.
Your point is at the top of your noggin.
"... policies and practices in place, via the government, that alleviate the condition of the poor."
Liberal policies are designed to trap the poor and keep them in welfare...
The following may be over your head, so let me know where you need elucidation:
There is no way out of the Poverty Trap- those who try to work to find their way out of the trap will find that, as income rises, the loss of their welfare benefits is the same as a huge tax on their earnings!
a. Take the example of someone receiving $12,000 in welfare benefits. She takes a new job earning $16,000 a year. But if she loses 50 cents in benefits for every dollar she now earns, that is the equivalent of a 50% tax! Plus, the payroll tax is another 7.65%, and federal tax is another 10% on the margin, plus state tax of 5%.... total: 72.65% tax. Where is the incentive to work? Comes to a salary of $84.15/ week. Now subtract transportation, lunches, etc., etc.
b. but the central point is obvious. Marginal tax rates for inner-city inhabitants are prohibitively high. Over the entire wage range from zero to $1,600 per month (equivalent to a gross paycheck of $1,463 per month), the family's monthly spendable income rises by $69. This corresponds to an average tax "wedge" of 95.7 percent. More shocking, between zero and $1,200 per month in gross wages, the family loses $46 in monthly spendable income -- an average tax in excess of 100 percent. This loss in net spendable income is concentrated between gross wages of $700 and $1,200 per month. As monthly wages paid rise by $500 in this span, the family loses its entitlement to $385 in AFDC benefits and $9 in food stamps. In addition the housing subsidy is reduced by $23 and the value of medical benefits declines an estimated $130. At the same time the family's tax liabilities increase by a total of $161 -- $8 in state income and disability insurance taxes, $68 in payroll taxes, and $85 in federal income tax. (Details of these calculations are given in the appendix.) The Tightening Grip of the Poverty Trap
Now, unless you take the position that welfare is good, and provides a respectable life choice, you must feel really, really dumb for saying:
"...The U.S. has many policies and practices in place, via the government, that alleviate the condition of the poor."
Wise up. Libs want to keep folks poor and reliant on them....so they think and vote the way you do.
Okay, you tell us how the U.S. gets to a better place by ending all of the following (all of which fall under my reference to alleviating the condition of the poor - note: poor being a relative term)
End the following:
1. Medicaid
2. Food stamps (and any other needs based assistance related to food)
3. Housing assistance
4. Heat/energy assistance
5. Public schools (i.e., education available regardless of your ability to pay)
6. the progressive income tax and all income based tax benefits (i.e. lower taxes based on lower income)
7. needs based higher education benefits (i.e. tuition assistance, etc.)
8. the minimum wage
9. the right to bargain collectively
10. cash assistance to the poor (i.e. 'welfare')
...and whatever I've left out...
All of the above are policies imposed by the GOVERNMENT to alleviate the condition of being (relatively) poor.
You call the above a 'trap', or whatever, and call it all a detriment?
Then show us how America gets better if all of that were gone.
Where do you get the idea that just because someone works harder then the next through labor or ideas, they suddenly have an higher duty.
THEY DONT.................
You think Rush Limbaugh works harder than a migrant farm worker?
From the left field stands...........................................
What?
You think Rush Limbaugh works harder than a migrant farm worker?
From the left field stands...........................................
What?
Is that a yes or a no?
We have all that AND record Poverty.
Amazing
I thought our poor were better off than any poor people in the world.
You idiots need to coordinate your propaganda.
They are. Our poor would be considered quite rich in almost any other Progressive Utopia
From the left field stands...........................................
What?
Is that a yes or a no?
Did you miss the section that had the words labor or ideas?
A laborer works 40 and goes home the guy that put in 60 probably is better off.
Is that a yes or a no?
Did you miss the section that had the words labor or ideas?
A laborer works 40 and goes home the guy that put in 60 probably is better off.
Rush Limbaugh works 60 hours a week?
when has unfettered markets ever produced what you claim?
I'm going to ignore the word "unfettered" in this context, unless you would care to define same, but will repeat the obvious about capitalism:
" Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished, and revolution would be the anodyne that would result in the common good. But by the early 20th century, it was clear that this assumption was completely wrong! Under capitalism, the standard of living of all was improving: prices falling, incomes rising, health and sanitation improving, lengthening of life spans, diets becoming more varied, the new jobs created in industry paid more than most could make in agriculture, housing improved, and middle class industrialists and business owners displaced nobility and gentry as heroes."
All of that happened as GOVERNMENT began to intervene more and more to restrain Capitalism. At least in the U.S.
We never had our own great Communist/Marxist Revolution, like Russia, or China, or Cuba, because Liberalism was constantly winning smaller battles for the benefit of the poor and working classes,
and via GOVERNMENT was incrementally alleviating the injustices and atrocities committed by Capitalism.
Government and Liberalism saved us from becoming a Communist nation.
I'm going to ignore the word "unfettered" in this context, unless you would care to define same, but will repeat the obvious about capitalism:
" Marxism rested on the assumption that the condition of the working classes would grow ever worse under capitalism, that there would be but two classes: one small and rich, the other vast and increasingly impoverished, and revolution would be the anodyne that would result in the common good. But by the early 20th century, it was clear that this assumption was completely wrong! Under capitalism, the standard of living of all was improving: prices falling, incomes rising, health and sanitation improving, lengthening of life spans, diets becoming more varied, the new jobs created in industry paid more than most could make in agriculture, housing improved, and middle class industrialists and business owners displaced nobility and gentry as heroes."
All of that happened as GOVERNMENT began to intervene more and more to restrain Capitalism. At least in the U.S.
We never had our own great Communist/Marxist Revolution, like Russia, or China, or Cuba, because Liberalism was constantly winning smaller battles for the benefit of the poor and working classes,
and via GOVERNMENT was incrementally alleviating the injustices and atrocities committed by Capitalism.
Government and Liberalism saved us from becoming a Communist nation.
Useful idiot.
Did you miss the section that had the words labor or ideas?
A laborer works 40 and goes home the guy that put in 60 probably is better off.
Rush Limbaugh works 60 hours a week?
I dont know...
Does he?
Did you have a point?
dude your team fucked it all up before nancy and harry got there.
What fool would wage two wars and not riase taxes?
One who wanted the country DEEP in debt for poltical reasons
All of that happened as GOVERNMENT began to intervene more and more to restrain Capitalism. At least in the U.S.
We never had our own great Communist/Marxist Revolution, like Russia, or China, or Cuba, because Liberalism was constantly winning smaller battles for the benefit of the poor and working classes,
and via GOVERNMENT was incrementally alleviating the injustices and atrocities committed by Capitalism.
Government and Liberalism saved us from becoming a Communist nation.
Useful idiot.
That you can't provide one substantive point of refutation is more than enough proof that I'm absolutely right.
You idiot, we haven't had a Communist/Marxist Revolution because useful idiots such as yourself are legislating Communism/Marxism a little at a time.All of that happened as GOVERNMENT began to intervene more and more to restrain Capitalism. At least in the U.S.
We never had our own great Communist/Marxist Revolution, like Russia, or China, or Cuba, because Liberalism was constantly winning smaller battles for the benefit of the poor and working classes,
and via GOVERNMENT was incrementally alleviating the injustices and atrocities committed by Capitalism.
Government and Liberalism saved us from becoming a Communist nation.
Useful idiot.
That you can't provide one substantive point of refutation is more than enough proof that I'm absolutely right.
You idiot, we haven't had a Communist/Marxist Revolution because useful idiots such as yourself are legislating Communism/Marxism a little at a time.
Useful idiot.
That you can't provide one substantive point of refutation is more than enough proof that I'm absolutely right.
Fool.
A "free market" exists only in the text books within the ivy covered walls of the CON$ervative universities.The best way to reduce welfare is to not allow wealth to concentrate into too few hands
It's known as the free market!
Glad you've come to your senses.
Better late than never.
In the real world there is only MONOPOLY.
Bullshit!A "free market" exists only in the text books within the ivy covered walls of the CON$ervative universities.It's known as the free market!
Glad you've come to your senses.
Better late than never.
In the real world there is only MONOPOLY.
Monopoly in the real world is where the Federal Government takes control away from the private sector, and comes up with "ideology" concepts like Obamacare and "single payer" system.
There is no "free market." The free market exists only in the fantasy land of elitist CON$ervative academics who have never run a business.A "free market" exists only in the text books within the ivy covered walls of the CON$ervative universities.
In the real world there is only MONOPOLY.
I understand that it doesn't exist in your folks basement....but change out of those
pajamas, shave, and get out in the real world.
You will find a relationship between one's efforts and remuneration.
That's called the free market.
The problem is useful idiots such as Carby and other mindless Obamabots don't even realize what they're supporting.You idiot, we haven't had a Communist/Marxist Revolution because useful idiots such as yourself are legislating Communism/Marxism a little at a time.That you can't provide one substantive point of refutation is more than enough proof that I'm absolutely right.
Fool.
Obama explained it well in an interview long before he was a candidate. In which he said he was for Single Payer Health Care, but that you had to take Baby steps to get to it, because the Nation would not accept it as a whole all at once.
That's how their whole agenda of Making America a copy of European Socialist countries work. Baby steps, Because the people would run them out of DC if they told the truth about what they really want.
Useful idiot.
That you can't provide one substantive point of refutation is more than enough proof that I'm absolutely right.
You might want to back up a bit with those assumptions. In our beginnings. The French, Spanish and English were our concerns. Not communism.
That you can't provide one substantive point of refutation is more than enough proof that I'm absolutely right.
You might want to back up a bit with those assumptions. In our beginnings. The French, Spanish and English were our concerns. Not communism.
Since the topic was the 20th century, well, you do the math.
