that's lie number one: it's because of social security, a LIBERAL accomplishment. Before it existed, 50% of all senior citizens lived in poverty.
Nobody lives a comfortable retirement off of Social Security. You can barely get by on that. It does pad one's retirement, however, but cannot be used as the sole tool for retirement.
If there kids are in school, not jail, you can thank the public school system...
Thank the school, but not the parents? Don't you think the parents are the ones primarily responsible for shaping the lives of their kids? If children are successful in school the odds are they have parents at home who actively participate in their education and encourage them to succeed. The kids that don't usually have parents who don't take the time to give a crap.
Almost nobody makes the minimum wage. Even high school students tend to find jobs that pay more than that.
80% of millionaires are self made.
http://www.nytimes.com/books/first/s/stanley-millionaire.html
Again, that's speculation. You don't know that the single mother at home isn't encouraging her child to get out of the ghetto. I do agree, though, in this scenario a good teacher likely plays a role.
Very true.
no...it's because by definition accomplishment is forward thinking, not regressive...
I would argue that some of what is considered progressive is in itself regressive as well.
there hasn't been a conservative solution to any problem... ever.
That's not true. We've had very successful economic booms due to more conservative economic policies. Presidents like John Kennedy, Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and George Bush 43 understood what made an economy tick and all of them practiced fairly conservative economic policies when it came to limits on taxation and enabling growth.
Bear in mind, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate here I am neither conservative nor liberal, but both political ideologies have their good points and bad points. I don't think either one of you have made a very compelling case.