The Briefing Room
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: Liberal_Spy on October 18, 2013, 05:00:23 pm
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM&feature=player_embedded
Do you disagree with the message the creator of this video is giving? Is he wrong? What are your opinions on the points he makes in his video?
-
Is this for one of your classes?...I would like to know up front...
-
Is this for one of your classes?...I would like to know up front...
No, it's not.
-
Is this for one of your classes?...I would like to know up front...
What difference, at this point, does it make?
-
What difference, at this point, does it make?
Charlie Brown is really, really planning on kicking that football this time...
-
This is not new. Karl Marx went further, and indicated what should be done.
He started with gentle measures, but later gets to armed revolution.
Liberal, is that where you would take it? What do you think?
BTW exactly how many college level econ classes have you completed, what was your grade?
I had an interesting discussion with a California secondary teacher, a few years ago. She held a full credential, meaning an education equal to a Master Degree.
She held strong opinions about politics, distribution of income, etc. She had reached that point o holding such opinions, and being able to direct the thinking of other peoples' children,
...but she had not completed even one economics course!!!
NOW I will go further. If we took the people at the very bottom, gave each one $100,000 for doing nothing at all. In a surprisingly short time, they would squander all the money.
In reality that $100,000 would have to come from somewhere. From another person, since trees and cats and governments don't have any money of their own.
Now the original owner of the $100,000 invested the money wisely, to earn income. To earn income, he had a business, which provided jobs and income to others.
The government didn't build that business. He did.
Our system is a mixed economy. Pretty much similar to Canada and Sweden, except our fraction of government involvement is somewhat smaller than theirs.
So how much of the business owners' money should be taken from them, to grant more money to unproductive people at the bottom?
Obamacare is a good illustration of how government harms, not helps people. Many people work 29 hours or less, to avoid the governments messing around with businesses and our economy.
I dream of a world like it was when I completed college, when I got 40 hours work, my employer could drill in California for more oil, health care was reasonably priced, etc.
But alas, now California politics is a monopoly by democrats, and my first two employers, although still successful, have left California, the place of their founding, to escape the insanity of redistribution policies.
So in the end, redistribution provides jobs for middlemen government meddlers, but the true producers go elsewhere.
And the level of production, the true source of wealth, goes down not up.
-
I have a problem with it in the first 8 seconds. Wealth is not “Distributed” it is earned. Is there a master overseer of all income distribution? - 3, for you, 2 for you, and 1 for you, 3, for you, 2 for you, and 1 for you……
And two important facts are missing. The majority of America’s wealthy were not born into it. They didn’t get rich because of inherited money or the transfer of estates, like can be said about most of the rest of the world. And those living in the lowest income levels compared to the rest of the world are living in luxury.
The video is Occupy propaganda, and nothing more.
-
What you, and most liberals, fail to recognize is that the wealth disparity problem in this and other countries corresponds directly with the evolution of our system from one that was primarily a free market system to one that is primarily socialistic. Why does this happen, if the goal of socialism is to redistribute wealth? The answer to the question is long and complex, but you can start by reading Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman. Virtually everything they predicted about the acceptance of socialism by society has come to pass. The rich getting richer is an entirely predictable consequence of bigger government.
If you actually want to redistribute wealth, then deregulate business, lower taxes on both businesses and individuals, reduce government spending on entitlements and allow companies to compete with each other rather than creating politically-protected monopolies. What socialism does is protect the people who are already wealthy by preventing new people from GETTING wealthy. That is why what has happened in the past several decades has come to pass. The liberals like to blame capitalism, but we haven't had anything resembling capitalism in the USA since the early 1970's when we went off the gold standard and let the banks run the economy. From that point forward, it's been an inexorable slide to more and more government and more and more wealth disparity.
Here is one little snippet from Milton Friedman on the subject:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A&noredirect=1 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A&noredirect=1)
-
Yet MORE commie propaganda - so greedy leftists "ideally" want yet MORE money, whoever knew?
The OP is ALWAYS here and I have no idea why he is so tolerated at a supposedly GOP site. I know his ideology and I reject it totally. Sheesh, see ya.
-
Yet MORE commie propaganda - so greedy leftists "ideally" want yet MORE money, whoever knew?
The OP is ALWAYS here and I have no idea why he is so tolerated at a supposedly GOP site. I know his ideology and I reject it totally. Sheesh, see ya.
If it's nothing but commie propaganda I have given you all a great opportunity to dissect it and show everybody here why it is nothing but what you say it is. Some of the posters here have given detailed reasons for why they disagree with the message of the video, and that is exactly what I was hoping for. Running from and ignoring different points of view doesn't help accomplish anything.
-
Friedman makes the case better than anyone I've ever heard.
And while Friedman was responding you could see Donahue's pained expression--because inside his head was echoing "La La La La La La La". I think if he could have Donahue would have stuck his fingers in his ears.
-
If it's nothing but commie propaganda I have given you all a great opportunity to dissect it and show everybody here why it is nothing but what you say it is. Some of the posters here have given detailed reasons for why they disagree with the message of the video, and that is exactly what I was hoping for. Running from and ignoring different points of view doesn't help accomplish anything.
I assume you are referring to me as someone who has given you detailed answers. It's only because I am a college professor and I assume you are malleable. Most people around here assume you are a troll with an agenda.
I could be wrong and they could be right, in which case I would be the one who has been played for a fool.
-
What you, and most liberals, fail to recognize is that the wealth disparity problem in this and other countries corresponds directly with the evolution of our system from one that was primarily a free market system to one that is primarily socialistic.
That's why we have an income tax and not a wealth tax.
Even the simplest simpleton should be able to understand that...
-
Liberal, is that where you would take it? What do you think?
BTW exactly how many college level econ classes have you completed, what was your grade?
One of the most interesting things to me about the video, and one of the things I wanted to get you guys to comment on, is the fact that during the Reagan administration (the president that many of you believe is the greatest to have ever taken office) income inequality wasn't even close to what it is now, and that, according to many of you, was the golden age of United States politics. I personally don't think people should have to work two and sometimes even three FULL time jobs just to barely make ends meet, and that a strong and functioning middle class is paramount to a strong and functioning economy.
I admittedly have only taken more basic econ classes because my degree does not focus on economics. My GPA is 4.0. (Not trying to brag here; he asked)
-
I am interested in the answer to Truth Seekers question. How many economics classes have you completed?
-
The video itself is well done, though it suffers from the inevitable bad voice acting.
The premise though - define fair. That is the sticking point here.
-
The liberals like to blame capitalism, but we haven't had anything resembling capitalism in the USA since the early 1970's when we went off the gold standard and let the banks run the economy. From that point forward, it's been an inexorable slide to more and more government and more and more wealth disparity.
So are you on board with breaking up the banks? If you are, you're speaking my language, because that to me is one of the single most important things we need to do.
-
The only thing the video is missing is the narrator wearing a Guy Fawkes mask.
And the redistribution arguments made are right off any Communist or Socialist candidates statement in a voters guild, or on brochures they hand out to the unwashed at OWS.
-
The only thing the video is missing is the narrator wearing a Guy Fawkes mask.
And the redistribution arguments made are right off any Communist or Socialist candidates statement in a voters guild, or on brochures they hand out to the unwashed at OWS.
Our young "friend" supports OWS.
I am waiting for an answer on how many economics classes he has taken and passed.
-
Our young "friend" supports OWS.
I am waiting for an answer on how many economics classes he has taken and passed.
I already responded to that post.
-
The part of this thread which most fascinates me has nothing to do with Liberal_Spy but rather with the Friedman/Donahue exchange.
Is anyone else amused by Donahue's seeming concern about "greed" and "wealth distribution" when you just know he and the lovely Marlo have far more wealth than probably anyone on here, and certainly far above whatever is the average income of the day. I don't think the guy is a hypocrite. I truly believe he hasn't got a clue. If he really cared he would "sell [his] possessions and give to the poor" but I doubt the thought ever enters his mind.
-
I already responded to that post.
Thank you, I went back and looked. You would do yourself a favor if you took more than a "basic" econ class even though your degree does not require it, your future does.
-
FWIW, Massadvj, I agree with you: It's only because I am a college professor and I assume you are malleable. Most people around here assume you are a troll with an agenda.
-
My post got dropped/deleted. Interesting.
-
If most people truly believe that I am only a troll sent here to disrupt and do damage, I will leave. I stated from the beginning that I'm not interested in causing problems. I've been polite, and have even tried to deescalate arguments between other posters on this forum. I'm not kidding when I say I have no problem leaving. I like talking to people here, but I'm not going to stay if I'm unwelcome.
-
Actually I think he would do very well to go up to PA and take a class one semester with our massadjv... but that is just me, mass is one of the smartest men I know and I would have loved to take one of his classes.
-
If most people truly believe that I am only a troll sent here to disrupt and do damage, I will leave. I stated from the beginning that I'm not interested in causing problems. I've been polite, and have even tried to deescalate arguments between other posters on this forum. I'm not kidding when I say I have no problem leaving. I like talking to people here, but I'm not going to stay if I'm unwelcome.
Don't worry. We're starting a pre-K for Constitutional Studies. We're very understanding and multicultural. Stay and enjoy the attention you receive.
-
A recommendation for you, L_S. Hillsdale College, a fine institution, is currently offering a FREE, online course entitled, ""Free Market Economics and the American Founding". If you are interested go to: http://online.hillsdale.edu/home
I believe you will find the course most enlightening and, in fact, believe it would prove of value to everyone on this Forum.
-
So are you on board with breaking up the banks? If you are, you're speaking my language, because that to me is one of the single most important things we need to do.
You'd have to get rid of FDIC and stop government insuring bank accounts. I'd support that. People who wanted insured accounts would have to either buy their own insurance or put their money into accounts that were privately insured. Would you support that?
It would also mean no FHA or other government mortgage programs, no subsidizing of student loans, and on and on. Once you deregulate banks, you expose the government to very, very heavy liability for its commitments.
-
Actually I think he would do very well to go up to PA and take a class one semester with our massadjv... but that is just me, mass is one of the smartest men I know and I would have loved to take one of his classes.
OPapaDoc will even lend him some money from the government to do it.
For you, Rap. :bighug:
-
If most people truly believe that I am only a troll sent here to disrupt and do damage, I will leave. I stated from the beginning that I'm not interested in causing problems. I've been polite, and have even tried to deescalate arguments between other posters on this forum. I'm not kidding when I say I have no problem leaving. I like talking to people here, but I'm not going to stay if I'm unwelcome.
You're okay with me. You appear to be an idealistic, yet unschooled younger person.
I was that way during my 20s. But I studied and worked, and realized that in order for there to be wealth, there first needed to be wealth at all.
Wealth grows by wise, skilled assembly, arrangement and management of factors of production.
The persons/institutions capable of doing this can accumulate vast wealth, for sure.
So the first question becomes what is wealth, and how does it come into existence?
That is why you need to study true economics, and not just left-wing propaganda.
There is already empirical evidence that communism simply does not work, and that is the ultimate income redistributor system.
The most wealthy nations follow free market capitalism to a great degree, versus command communism, as far as the nature of the "market."
Redistribution presupposes some source of wisdom to alter the choices of the marketplace; ie to assign a higher price to labor, and a lower price to management skills, than the market does.
-
I'll tell you what I think. I think that if you took all the money in the country today and distributed it equally amongst the adult population of the country in five years you would again have roughly the same distribution you have today!
-
I'll tell you what I think. I think that if you took all the money in the country today and distributed it equally amongst the adult population of the country in five years you would again have roughly the same distribution you have today!
:thumbsup:
-
If most people truly believe that I am only a troll sent here to disrupt and do damage, I will leave. I stated from the beginning that I'm not interested in causing problems. I've been polite, and have even tried to deescalate arguments between other posters on this forum. I'm not kidding when I say I have no problem leaving. I like talking to people here, but I'm not going to stay if I'm unwelcome.
Don't be ridiculous. If some people are threatened by the mere presence of an opposing POV then they must have some confidence issues. From what I've seen of you you've been nothing but polite and sincere. I certainly don't wish you to go.
-
or put their money into accounts that were privately insured. Would you support that?
Are you talking about credit unions? I don't use a bank, and have instead used a credit union for years. I completely support and encourage people using alternative forms of storing and insuring their money.
-
You're okay with me. You appear to be an idealistic, yet unschooled younger person.
I was that way during my 20s. But I studied and worked, and realized that in order for there to be wealth, there first needed to be wealth at all.
Wealth grows by wise, skilled assembly, arrangement and management of factors of production.
The persons/institutions capable of doing this can accumulate vast wealth, for sure.
So the first question becomes what is wealth, and how does it come into existence?
That is why you need to study true economics, and not just left-wing propaganda.
There is already empirical evidence that communism simply does not work, and that is the ultimate income redistributor system.
The most wealthy nations follow free market capitalism to a great degree, versus command communism, as far as the nature of the "market."
Redistribution presupposes some source of wisdom to alter the choices of the marketplace; ie to assign a higher price to labor, and a lower price to management skills, than the market does.
goopo :thumbsup:
-
I'll tell you what I think. I think that if you took all the money in the country today and distributed it equally amongst the adult population of the country in five years you would again have roughly the same distribution you have today!
I think you are right. Look at lottery winners how long before many of them are poor again.
-
There is already empirical evidence that communism simply does not work, and that is the ultimate income redistributor system.
I don't support or advocate communism, and I regularly school liberals that do.
-
If most people truly believe that I am only a troll sent here to disrupt and do damage, I will leave. I stated from the beginning that I'm not interested in causing problems. I've been polite, and have even tried to deescalate arguments between other posters on this forum. I'm not kidding when I say I have no problem leaving. I like talking to people here, but I'm not going to stay if I'm unwelcome.
I don't have a problem with you being here. I do think you are very young and can actually learn a lot here you will never learn in a classroom... especially if you take the advice many have given you about books you could and should read. If you truly want to expand your world view AND be a sought after and interesting - well rounded - professor, you will take the reading advice given on various threads this week.
I will add I would think you would want to take in what you are learning here and then use it when you are teaching to probe your students and make THEM think deeper. The teacher I have never forgotten was my economics teacher and that is what he did... he MADE us think, and he pushed us and pushed us hard to think rather than regurgitate.
-
Well, I think I need to clarify my previous post. "Threatened by" that stupid video the OP wanted comment on? Hardly, but not commenting on it doesn't mean one can't comment on it. It was just a whiny screed by a couple of far-left economists. I know his indoctrin-OOPS-political views, hear it all the time in Seattle. He's divisive and is suceeding in pitting the posters here against each other IMO, but maybe that's just me.
Good to see so many have the time to deprogram the liberal, but I just don't see the point in doing so. He's getting what he thinks is what he wants, so enjoy paying the elderly and the illegal immigrants' "free" healthcare with money you don't have and never will, LS. :seeya:
-
Actually I think he would do very well to go up to PA and take a class one semester with our massadjv... but that is just me, mass is one of the smartest men I know and I would have loved to take one of his classes.
Join the club. Mass always has an interesting take on things.
-
I'll tell you what I think. I think that if you took all the money in the country today and distributed it equally amongst the adult population of the country in five years you would again have roughly the same distribution you have today!
Exactly what John Wayne said in 1975..... he was correct as are you
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,116927.0.html
-
Are you talking about credit unions? I don't use a bank, and have instead used a credit union for years. I completely support and encourage people using alternative forms of storing and insuring their money.
Do you also support getting rid of government subsidies such as FHA, VA, Mortgage Insurance, FNMA, college loans, Farm loans and the countless other federal loan guarantee programs? If people use alternative forms of storing and insuring money, then the government would have no power to regulate banking and these programs would have to go because there would be no sources of funds to support them.
The last I heard, OWS wants the government to simply "forgive all debt." That would, in effect, mean that the government would have to be in charge of banking, and it would screw every American who has a savings account. We are talking about people who fought in WWII, got us through the Depression and worked all their lives for what they have. Some alternative.
The problem is not that the banking industry is not regulated ENOUGH. It is that it is tied at the hip to government and must therefore be big and corrupt, just as government is big and corrupt. Making government more powerful just compounds the problem, just as we are now seeing with Obamacare.
The only mechanism capable of cleansing society is a free, open and accessible market. And the only political movement that supports free markets in the USA today is the Tea Party.
I hate to tell you this, young man, but the only people standing between you and tyranny for the rest of your life are a bunch of rednecks much like the guys on "Duck Dynasty." You should thank your lucky stars they are out there insisting on freedom, because without them and their guns, you'd be entirely screwed.
-
A recommendation for you, L_S. Hillsdale College, a fine institution, is currently offering a FREE, online course entitled, ""Free Market Economics and the American Founding". If you are interested go to: http://online.hillsdale.edu/home
I believe you will find the course most enlightening and, in fact, believe it would prove of value to everyone on this Forum.
This is the best post by far and the best advice by far.
But does anyone think there is the initiative and the sense of personal responsibility required to follow up and take this great advice? No? I didn't think so.
-
Join the club. Mass always has an interesting take on things.
:amen: :silly:
-
Do you also support getting rid of government subsidies such as FHA, VA, Mortgage Insurance, FNMA, college loans, Farm loans and the countless other federal loan guarantee programs? If people use alternative forms of storing and insuring money, then the government would have no power to regulate banking and these programs would have to go because there would be no sources of funds to support them.
The last I heard, OWS wants the government to simply "forgive all debt." That would, in effect, mean that the government would have to be in charge of banking, and it would screw every American who has a savings account. We are talking about people who fought in WWII, got us through the Depression and worked all their lives for what they have. Some alternative.
The problem is not that the banking industry is not regulated ENOUGH. It is that it is tied at the hip to government and must therefore be big and corrupt, just as government is big and corrupt. Making government more powerful just compounds the problem, just as we are now seeing with Obamacare.
The only mechanism capable of cleansing society is a free, open and accessible market. And the only political movement that supports free markets in the USA today is the Tea Party.
I hate to tell you this, young man, but the only people standing between you and tyranny for the rest of your life are a bunch of rednecks much like the guys on "Duck Dynasty." You should thank your lucky stars they are out there insisting on freedom, because without them and their guns, you'd be entirely screwed.
I completely support breaking up the banks, and would completely accept any consequences that came from that, because I feel the benefits of getting the banks under control would vastly outweigh any negatives that came from it. Occupy Wall Street was a conglomeration of LOTS of people that were fed up with lots of things (hell, there were even Tea Party members protesting at OWS), including the banks. You can't put super specific motives on a group of people that numbers in the multi-millions. Not all of us agreed on all of the specifics, but most of us knew/know that the banks are a huge part of the problem, and that something needs to be done about it.
-
I completely support breaking up the banks, and would completely accept any consequences that came from that, because I feel the benefits of getting the banks under control would vastly outweigh any negatives that came from it. Occupy Wall Street was a conglomeration of LOTS of people that were fed up with lots of things (hell, there were even Tea Party members protesting at OWS), including the banks. You can't put super specific motives on a group of people that numbers in the multi-millions. Not all of us agreed on all of the specifics, but most of us knew/know that the banks are a huge part of the problem, and that something needs to be done about it.
I know. There were a lot of Ron Paul types at OWS. But had the OWS revolution succeeded, they'd have been the first to get hanged afterwards, just as the anarchists had to go after the Russian revolution.
-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPKKQnijnsM&feature=player_embedded
Do you disagree with the message the creator of this video is giving? Is he wrong? What are your opinions on the points he makes in his video?
I disagree with several aspects but the main point being that this is a problem caused by the wealthy. Instead, I don't see this being the wealthy's fault. of course they are going to work to grow their income and value as much as possible and the more you have, the better investment tools you have. My issue, however, is what is holding the 'little guy' back from growth?
Did you know it is easier to start a business in China than it is in the US? What does that say about us when it is now easier to start a business in Communist country than what should be the bastion of Capitalism? It is even easier for an established US company to start a business in China than to grow their business here.
http://www.inc.com/guides/2010/07/how-to-start-a-business-in-china.html
The little guy has an almost impossible battle to get himself out of his hole- a battle you wouldn't have seen a decade or two ago. It is not the fault of the wealthy, except the 'wealthy' in the halls of power in DC who continue to pile on regulation upon regulation upon regulation. We have gotten to the point where you can't even cut someone's hair without getting Big Brother's stamp of approval and pay him for a special license to do it. (guess what, in China if you wanted to cut someone's hair to make a few extra dollars, you can just stick a chair in front of your house with a sign and start doing it- their government doesn't sweat small business like this any more.) Now, with Obamacare, it is even worse. I have seen many, many small home health companies have to shut their doors in the past few months because they can't afford to comply with the regulations. Many of these are one or two person operations, started by people who used to be on that bottom rung of the income ladder- who scrimped and saved to go to nursing school and were working towards those higher rungs. Now, the cost of the software alone to remain compliant is more than they earn in a year. They simply have had to shut their doors and one is back to earning about $15/hour in a call center, another just retired.
There are many other fallacies in this, but instead of continuing to ramble, I'll just post some links for you to review.
http://www.policymic.com/articles/12319/6-myths-about-income-inequality-in-america
http://www.cnbc.com/id/100286297
http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/287643/income-inequality-myth-michael-tanner
http://www.businessinsider.com/5-reasons-why-income-inequality-is-a-myth--and-occupy-wall-street-is-wrong-2011-10
http://www.economist.com/blogs/democracyinamerica/2010/09/inequality
-
The little guy has an almost impossible battle to get himself out of his hole- a battle you wouldn't have seen a decade or two ago.
I read your entire post, just so you know. This bit stuck out to me, though. How specifically can we make this not the case? How do we make it so that battle is a little less impossible for the little guy?
-
Here's a past video Oceander and I made on OWS for your viewing pleasure:
http://blip.tv/play/AYLX7EwC.html?p=1 (http://blip.tv/play/AYLX7EwC.html?p=1)
-
I read your entire post, just so you know. This bit stuck out to me, though. How specifically can we make this not the case? How do we make it so that battle is a little less impossible for the little guy?
Look at what it takes to start a business. Is the system favorable to new business or hostile to it? Is the thought of starting a business, while obviously a lot of hard work, something one sees as a joy and an opportunity or burdensome and not worth the effort?
You can't blame the wealthy. You can't blame banks. A majority of the fault lays with government regulations.
Just imagine trying to do something in the healthcare industry and having to comply with this (and that's just Obamacare, add to that the tax code and any other industry specific laws and codes):
(http://lonelyconservative.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/Obamacare-Regulations.jpg)
-
A majority of the fault lays with government regulations.
Which regulations are making it impossible for the poor to have a chance, how should we change them, and how does that then make it easier for them to thrive in our economy and overcome poverty?
-
Which regulations are making it impossible for the poor to have a chance, how should we change them, and how does that then make it easier for them to thrive in our economy and overcome poverty?
Remove them.
-
Remove them.
That only answers one of the three questions I asked.
-
I don't support or advocate communism, and I regularly school liberals that do.
They why were you an active supporter of OWS?
-
It actually answers all three.
Now, unlike a lot of people on the right - I believe that environmental regulations are a thing. You can not be a conservative without being willing to conserve. But other than those, there should be zero regulations standing in the way of new business, new creativity and new inventiveness.
-
They why were you an active supporter of OWS?
There may have been some people in the masses of OWS that supported communism, but that was nothing close to the message the movement was trying to give. There were members of the Tea Party demonstrating at OWS, and they certainly don't support communism.
-
Which regulations are making it impossible for the poor to have a chance, how should we change them, and how does that then make it easier for them to thrive in our economy and overcome poverty?
I thought I laid that out pretty clearly, but to give you a specific case (and one that is close to my family).
I have an aunt (on my wife's side) who was a RN in a small town. Although RNs generally make decent money, she would be in one of the lower brackets due to the size of town she was in. About a decade ago, she decided there was an opportunity to help serve the growing senior citizen population in the area so on her own, she started a home-health business to cater to senior citizens still living at home. This business was starting to grow rapidly and she was investing almost everything she made back into the business to help it grow (still driving a 1980s era Caddy and living in a sub $100K house). She was just at the point of being able to hire more people when Obamacare happened.
Now, she was required to pay out of pocket for software that costs well in excess of $30K (she probably paid herself less than this per year), hire lawyers and additional accountants to help complete all the regulatory filings.
She had to close shop and just retired instead.
I know several other home-health companies like hers, most independently run or with just a handful of employees that have closed shop because of this. Obamacare regulations made it impossible to continue their small business and it would be even worse if you tried to start a new one.
----------------------------------
Example #2- I wrote about this example recently here. Substitute teachers generally make very little and would also qualify as poor. Starting October 1st, they are no longer offered more than 29 hours per week. Many were using substitute teaching to barely get by and now they are moved from full time to part time or less (because of the 'look back' rules.) I know this isn't starting a business but this is an example of how regulations keep people poor (or make them worse off). Here is the full story:
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,115779.0.html
----------------------------------
These aren't isolated cases. Multiply this a million times over and you'll see why the poor stay poor. They are regulated into remaining into poverty.
-
I thought I laid that out pretty clearly, but to give you a specific case (and one that is close to my family).
I have an aunt (on my wife's side) who was a RN in a small town. Although RNs generally make decent money, she would be in one of the lower brackets due to the size of town she was in. About a decade ago, she decided there was an opportunity to help serve the growing senior citizen population in the area so on her own, she started a home-health business to cater to senior citizens still living at home. This business was starting to grow rapidly and she was investing almost everything she made back into the business to help it grow (still driving a 1980s era Caddy and living in a sub $100K house). She was just at the point of being able to hire more people when Obamacare happened.
Now, she was required to pay out of pocket for software that costs well in excess of $30K (she probably paid herself less than this per year), hire lawyers and additional accountants to help complete all the regulatory filings.
She had to close shop and just retired instead.
I know several other home-health companies like hers, most independently run or with just a handful of employees that have closed shop because of this. Obamacare regulations made it impossible to continue their small business and it would be even worse if you tried to start a new one.
----------------------------------
Example #2- I wrote about this example recently here. Substitute teachers generally make very little and would also qualify as poor. Starting October 1st, they are no longer offered more than 29 hours per week. Many were using substitute teaching to barely get by and now they are moved from full time to part time or less (because of the 'look back' rules.) I know this isn't starting a business but this is an example of how regulations keep people poor (or make them worse off). Here is the full story:
http://www.gopbriefingroom.com/index.php/topic,115779.0.html
----------------------------------
These aren't isolated cases. Multiply this a million times over and you'll see why the poor stay poor. They are regulated into remaining into poverty.
That sounds like a nice argument against Obamacare, but poverty was a huge problem before Obamacare. What was the problem before? What was causing the huge income inequality? If it is tied to regulations, which ones, and how are they keeping people poor? How will removing them help people overcome poverty and income inequality?
-
Which regulations are making it impossible for the poor to have a chance, how should we change them, and how does that then make it easier for them to thrive in our economy and overcome poverty?
...and before you say I didn't answer all three questions, it is because there are so many it would be a major task to even scratch the surface. Obamacare alone is up to 20,000 pages of regulations and growing. If we addressed one page every five minutes just in that law, it would take 66 hours straight, no breaks, to go through them (and that is just 5 minutes per, no serious analysis).
Take that into account when you realize a business has to comply with that. The rich can hire an army of accountants and lawyers to wade through it. Someone poor trying to climb out can't.
-
You can't blame the wealthy. You can't blame banks. A majority of the fault lays with government regulations.
Just imagine trying to do something in the healthcare industry and having to comply with this (and that's just Obamacare, add to that the tax code and any other industry specific laws and codes):
:amen:
And the TRUTH is that most of this over regulation is bought and paid for in order to PROTECT AGAINST free markets and competition from the little guy! The whole idea is to make complying with all of that so expensive and cumbersome that only a very few have the wherewithal to comply and thus even get on the playing field!
-
...and before you say I didn't answer all three questions, it is because there are so many it would be a major task to even scratch the surface. Obamacare alone is up to 20,000 pages of regulations and growing. If we addressed one page every five minutes just in that law, it would take 66 hours straight, no breaks, to go through them (and that is just 5 minutes per, no serious analysis).
Take that into account when you realize a business has to comply with that. The rich can hire an army of accountants and lawyers to wade through it. Someone poor trying to climb out can't.
Again, that sounds like a good argument against Obamacare, but Obamacare is new, and poverty has been an increasing problem for a long time. What was driving income inequality before that? If it was regulations again, which ones, and how are they causing poverty? How does removing them help reduce poverty? I also want to add that I am not trying to make the case for regulations. I am just trying to figure out how all of this results in poverty rates going down and income inequality improving.
-
That sounds like a nice argument against Obamacare, but poverty was a huge problem before Obamacare. What was the problem before? What was causing the huge income equality? If it is tied to regulations, which ones, and how are they keeping people poor? How will removing them help people overcome poverty?
Obamacare is just the example I used but you can look at any block of regulations and see the difficulty. It is becoming more and more and more difficult because of it but it isn't a new problem.
There will always be poor. There will always be income inequality. That is simple economics. Even in the Soviet Union's hey day when they claimed everyone was equal, you had a vast majority of people in conditions we could consider abject poverty (but they were all equal, woo hoo), but then you had the ruling class party members who, while on paper 'earned' the same thing, lived in luxury.
A simple answer to how, in my mind, is to create a system and elect those in power whose attitude is to create as much economic freedom as possible so people have the opportunity, if they choose it, to fight for their goals. We should be electing people not 'from the government and here to help' (which gets us the regulations we have been talking about) but those who have a passion to get government out of people's way. Let the American spirit soar.
-------------------------
Side note: Did you know that before LBJ enacted the "Great Society", African Americans had some of the fastest rising incomes in the country, they were starting businesses faster than any other group, they had some of the most stable family demographics, and were on track to be a wealthy demographic? After the "Great Society" (war on poverty), all of that collapsed. It wasn't until years after his death, when his White House tapes were released, the evilness of his attitude was revealed. He didn't want to help defeat poverty (if he did nothing, the African American community was defeating poverty on its own). Instead, he said he wanted to "Keep those ***** voting Democrat for 200 years". (language redacted but it starts with an "N"- his words).
-
There will always be poor. There will always be income inequality. That is simple economics. Even in the Soviet Union's hey day when they claimed everyone was equal, you had a vast majority of people in conditions we could consider abject poverty (but they were all equal, woo hoo), but then you had the ruling class party members who, while on paper 'earned' the same thing, lived in luxury.
(http://i1310.photobucket.com/albums/s658/GourmetDan/21_zpse502231c.jpg)
-
There will always be poor. There will always be income inequality. That is simple economics. Even in the Soviet Union's hey day when they claimed everyone was equal, you had a vast majority of people in conditions we could consider abject poverty (but they were all equal, woo hoo), but then you had the ruling class party members who, while on paper 'earned' the same thing, lived in luxury.
Point taken, but my point is it is getting worse. Income equality is still getting worse, more people are sinking below the poverty line, and the rich are still getting richer. It shouldn't be as bad as it is.
-
Point taken, but my point is it is getting worse. Income equality is still getting worse, more people are sinking below the poverty line, and the rich are still getting richer. It shouldn't be as bad as it is.
I disagree that it is getting worse and I posted several articles up thread that dispute this fact. Those just address recent US history, but if you look at the greater history of world civilization, it is probably better now than at any other time prior.
-
Point taken, but my point is it is getting worse. Income equality is still getting worse, more people are sinking below the poverty line, and the rich are still getting richer. It shouldn't be as bad as it is.
Uh huh. And have these conditions improved under the messiah Barack Obama, or have they gotten worse? If the types of policies being pursued by Obama (and, admittedly, GWB before him) are making things worse, then that should give you a clue as to what kinds of policies might make things better. But no. Most liberals are deluded and arrogant enough to think that things are getting worse because Obama is not liberal ENOUGH. That's how wedded they are to their ideology, and that's what makes them dangerous and evil.
-
Weeded....wedded....let's call the whole thing off.
-
Weeded....wedded....let's call the whole thing off.
Now that I fixed it no one will know what this post means.
-
Now that I fixed it no one will know what this post means.
Kudos to you professor. Please continue your good works -- for the little guy.
-
Uh huh. And have these conditions improved under the messiah Barack Obama, or have they gotten worse?
They've gotten worse because all of our politicians answer to the same masters.
-
Interesting thread. Massadvj, too bad you don't have an online course. I would take it. I know little about economics and never took any class associated it with it, so reckon I'm an uneducated bumbkin, in that I only got an AAS in Human Service. I did work all my life, so picked up things here and there, enough to steer me towards capitalism.
In reference to the graph posted by Liberal, I wasn't impressed, because wealth and poverty weren't presented in dollars and cents, making it worthless. And, what does the poverty level even mean? Because the poor don't have a lot of cash to throw around, doesn't mean they have no assets, like cell phones, televisions, computers and cars. And also, most get free or reduced utilities and house payments. How do socialists define poverty?
Perhaps the greed isn't coming from the top, but at the bottom, because, even though the poor have all the necessities without the effort, they demand more because those at the top have it. What if those at the top of the scale had half or less than what they have. Would the poor want part of that, or would they consider it fair? In either case, it is jealousy more than need that drives socialism.
Back in 2009, all the kids in New York were given $200 for school supplies. Instead, they bought electronics, and other non essential items, and the teachers were left to fill in the gaps. $175 million spent down the drain! NYC costs $20K per student for 800K children, but grades aren't improving. One excuse for the expense was high poverty demands more needs. But then, the government turns around and says the poor school districts don't have the money. Which is true?
We can give the non working people twice the money they receive now, and their lifestyles would not change. We would see even more gold teeth, tattoos, manicured nails and expensive shoes. People need to work and earn money to have respect for it. Until that is instilled in welfare recipients, then poverty will never be reduced, if there even was such a thing in the first place.
And, as much as these non workers complain, as well as those who support them, those who are really hurt are the actual poor, through no fault of their own. Where are their voices? I imagine they appreciate whatever help they can.
-
Happyg:
As posted earlier, there is an online course you can peruse and study provided by Hillsdale College. Hillsdale is a conservative liberal arts school which emphasizes the Constitution and the precepts put forth by our founders as its curricula foundation.
No offense to anyone. Suggestion only.
-
Happyg:
As posted earlier, there is an online course you can peruse and study provided by Hillsdale College. Hillsdale is a conservative liberal arts school which emphasizes the Constitution and the precepts put forth by our founders as its curricula foundation.
No offense to anyone. Suggestion only.
Thanks! My dad was a follower of Hillsdale, and sent me brochures all the time. I will definitely check it out.
-
Uh huh. And have these conditions improved under the messiah Barack Obama, or have they gotten worse? If the types of policies being pursued by Obama (and, admittedly, GWB before him) are making things worse, then that should give you a clue as to what kinds of policies might make things better. But no. Most liberals are deluded and arrogant enough to think that things are getting worse because Obama is not liberal ENOUGH. That's how wedded they are to their ideology, and that's what makes them dangerous and evil.
That I won't argue about, I was thinking bigger picture. The trend is getting worse in the short term.
-
They've gotten worse because all of our politicians answer to the same masters.
And exactly how would you propose solving this problem?
-
And exactly how would you propose solving this problem?
Vote third party and put in a candidate that is not entrenched in corruption.
-
Vote third party and put in a candidate that is not entrenched in corruption.
While I won't argue there is a need for good third party, we shouldn't be fooled to think they (existing options) are any better. There is always the 'grass is always greener' view. Unfortunately, some of the people the Libertarians and Constitution party have put up have been as much as, if not more of a joke than the main party candidates. And don't get me started on the fourth tier candidates, lol.
And for my liberal friends, don't think I'm leaving you out. Come on... Cynthia McKinney, Cindy Sheehan, & Rosanne Barr- good grief, sounds more like the line up at a mental ward.
-
Liberal-spy pretends he's knows more about the Reagan Years than we who lived it.
Ronald Reagan, For Those Under 40
written in 2004
This may sound shocking to anyone under 40, but 25 years ago, a lot of serious people were seriously wondering whether America’s best days were already past us.
Time magazine ran a cover story asking “Where have all the Heroes Gone?”
Inflation was 12%, Unemployment over 7% and both were rising simultaneously, giving birth to a new term, “stagflation”. Gasoline was just as expensive as it is today (accounting for inflation), except there wasn’t much to buy and long lines snaked around the block. Articles in respected magazines and newspapers asked whether the American Presidency was “too big a job for just one person”.
American soldiers weren’t the good guys. Just watch any war movie made in the mid-to late 70’s. If our guys weren’t bad, they were distraught, discouraged, crazy or suicidal.
Just 10 short years before becoming the world’s only Superpower, America seemed paralyzed after Vietnam while the Soviet empire expanded throughout the Third World. And it wasn’t just the Communists pushing us around. Millions of Americans watched Islamic militants sack the American embassy in Iran and march 52 blindfolded American hostages in front of television cameras. They wouldn’t release them for over 400 days.
In the Spring of 1979, President Jimmy Carter delivered one of the most unusual presidential speeches ever delivered from the White House. Known today as the “Malaise” speech, its theme was that America was suffering a “crisis of the spirit”. Even Democrats were not impressed. Carter was challenged for renomination by Senator Ted Kennedy. Carter won (or Kennedy lost, more accurately), but his party was divided and his nation was despondent.
Enter Ronald Reagan. Against this somber background, Reagan insisted that America’s brightest days were still in front of us, not behind us. He rejected the Vietnam syndrome, instead declaring that America was not the cause of corruption and evil abroad, but the cure for it, particularly in facing down Soviet communism. As for solving problems at home, we didn’t need the government to do more, we needed it to do less. The size, girth and expense of government was the problem, not the solution. In an era preoccupied with the “complexity” of insoluble problems, Reagan said “There are simple solutions - just not easy ones.”
Sophisticated people found Reagan, well....... unsophisticated. Also naive, not all that bright, and much too hard line.
But Reagan was telling Americans what they wanted to hear and what they wanted to believe about their country. And when they elected him by a 41 State landslide, he went to work doing what he said he would do.
He said his program to cut income taxes, government regulation and domestic government spending would unleash a rising tide of jobs, prosperity and opportunity. It did. He said that deregulating oil prices would lower the price of gasoline and end the “energy crisis”. It did. He said he would fire the air traffic controllers who were illegally striking if they didn’t return to work. He did.
As for dealing with the Soviets, Reagan said that his program of vastly increasing military spending, planting Pershing missiles in NATO countries and aiding anti-Soviet rebels throughout the Third World would one day relegate Marxist Leninism to “the ash heap of history”. This was too much for his critics, made up of a big chunk of Congress, most university professors, and much of the national news media. They regarded Reagan as either dumb, a warmonger or both, and they insisted that his policies would trigger a never-ending arms race and perhaps lead to the unthinkable – a nuclear war.
When Reagan announced his support for a space-based system to defend the country from a nuclear strike, tensions rose even higher. ABC aired a movie, “The Day After”, about America under nuclear attack. The “nuclear freeze” movement in 1984 was every bit as intense and its demonstrations every bit as large as the anti-Iraq-War movement is in 2004. History has yet to render a verdict on Iraq, but we already know who was right about the Soviets. The dumb warmonger won the Cold War without firing a shot. And soldiers were the good guys in the movies again. Martin Sheen and Marlon Brando in “Apocalypse Now” gave way to Tom Cruise and Tom Skerrit in “Top Gun”.
But Reagan did more than unlock the American economy and liberate millions of people from Communist captivity. He gave America back its smile. His sense of humor helped, but so did his belief that political differences weren’t personal differences, a sentiment that seems to have gone missing on both sides in recent years.
Where should history rank Reagan? Probably as the greatest President in the last 50 years because, like Franklin Delano Roosevelt, Reagan defined and ignited an entire political movement. For FDR it was New Deal liberalism. For Reagan, American conservatism.
Before Reagan, conservatism was instinctively reactive and mostly negative: stop spending on this, don’t do that, etc. Reagan made it both positive and pro-active - a movement based on core beliefs and clear ideas. As Ted Kennedy, of all people, put it, Reagan “wrote most of these ideas not only into law, but into the national consciousness.”
Dozens of conservative think tanks and more than 40 state-based policy centers around the country are daily churning out ideas for policymakers based on free markets, limited government and personal responsibility. Reaganism lives on.
Today we take it for granted in America that great days are still in front of us. We take for granted that lower taxes will stimulate growth. We take for granted that the best way to deal with deadly adversaries is to stand up to them, not make excuses for them.
25 short years ago, Americans didn’t take any of those things for granted. That’s what Reagan changed.
-
Vote third party and put in a candidate that is not entrenched in corruption.
Name a candidate who would fit the bill for you.
-
Liberal-spy pretends he's knows more about the Reagan Years than we who lived it.
Ronald Reagan, For Those Under 40
written in 2004
goopo if only he'd read it and some it would sink in. I lived through Carter, (and Nixon) it is one reason I revere Reagan.
-
Name a candidate who would fit the bill for you.
I'd vote for any candidate that ran on breaking up the banks.
-
Nixon was the first president I voted for, because at that time, you had to be 21 to vote. I didn't like the change to 18 because kids normally go for the liberal faction. They don't have the experience to understand all the issues. Now, the democrats in some areas want to give illegal immigrants voting rights. The immigration issue is supported by democrats because they are a new voting bloc. As the 18 year olds get older, many change parties, because they are part of the workforce and see problems up close and personal.
I was comfortable under Reagan. He reminded us of our greatness, and instilled a sense of pride and security, that Kennedy and Carter lacked. With Kennedy, we worried about a nuclear war. With Carter, it was joblessness and high inflation. Reagan changed that.
-
I'd vote for any candidate that ran on breaking up the banks.
Can I get anyone's input on this response after 4+ "pages" of discussion? Anyone?
-
I'd vote for any candidate that ran on breaking up the banks.
Ron Paul?
-
Can I get anyone's input on this response after 4+ "pages" of discussion? Anyone?
Well, I don't want to get into an involved discussion - but I see Liberal Spy's remarks to be consistent with what I hear from my niece and nephew. I don't have children myself, so they - being college age - are my closest connection to the mind of the younger generation. My sister is very conservative - more than I am on some issues - so I know her kids have been raised with the right values. She was vigilant about what schools they would attend, etc.
However, once they attended public schools, my sister's influence lessened and both my nephew and niece consider themselves liberals - even to voting for Obama (the first time - my niece says she didn't vote for him the second time).
Liberal Spy reminds me of my niece. He believes it is the corporations that are the problem. He believes that government can do a lot of good for people that need help. I think he and my niece are good people that really care, but they have been indoctrinated to believe that gov't is actually "helping" people. It doesn't make them bad people. I don't know what drew him here - to want to engage US - in philosophical and political banter, but I am enjoying the discourse. It keeps you alive.
-
Can I get anyone's input on this response after 4+ "pages" of discussion? Anyone?
I'd say Reagan was the best POTUS in my lifetime. From a policy standpoint, he did not accomplish all that much, but what he did do was set a very positive tone for the country. He expected the best from people, and he believed very strongly in freedom and traditional American values. He was simply an amazing leader who inspired the country to want to be great again, and the country responded.
As for Liberal's contention that he'd like to see politicians unbeholden to masters, I think I can say that there was once a very, very decent man elected to the presidency. He worked his ass off in the job, was beholden to no special interests that I know of, and turned out to be utterly incompetent. His name was Jimmy Carter.
Although many consider OPapaDoc to be Carter's reflection, I don't consider OPapaDoc decent. Far from it. He's Chicago con man all the way.
-
I'd say Reagan was the best POTUS in my lifetime. From a policy standpoint, he did not accomplish all that much, but what he did do was set a very positive tone for the country. He expected the best from people, and he believed very strongly in freedom and traditional American values. He was simply an amazing leader who inspired the country to want to be great again, and the country responded.
As for Liberal's contention that he'd like to see politicians unbeholden to masters, I think I can say that there was once a very, very decent man elected to the presidency. He worked his ass off in the job, was beholden to no special interests that I know of, and turned out to be utterly incompetent. His name was Jimmy Carter.
Although many consider OPapaDoc to be Carter's reflection, I don't consider OPapaDoc decent. Far from it. He's Chicago con man all the way.
0 reminds me a lot more of LBJ than Carter. Carter was a fool, LBJ was down right nasty.
-
I'd vote for any candidate that ran on breaking up the banks.
'Breaking up' is usually reserved for monopolies within an industry. You don't have that with banks. You have thousands of choices. Banks are also very highly regulated. I don't see breaking up as the way to go. Cracking down on criminality such as insider trading as well as separating private banks from our currency would be a better move.
-
'Breaking up' is usually reserved for monopolies within an industry. You don't have that with banks. You have thousands of choices. Banks are also very highly regulated. I don't see breaking up as the way to go. Cracking down on criminality such as insider trading as well as separating private banks from our currency would be a better move.
AB how did that work out for us with congress? It last almost as long as the requirment they - too - participate in Obamacare and then in the dead of night they voted it back in and now they - too - can insider trade legally. In lingo LS can understand Congress can legally do what they sent Martha Stewart to prison doing.
In fact I think Dodd Frank has done more damage to Americans ability to borrow money than had they left things alone.
-
Ron Paul?
If Ron Paul had run for the Republicans I would have voted for him without a second thought. I don't agree with everything he says, but I agree with a lot of what he says, and I think he would be a magnificent president.
-
Well, I don't want to get into an involved discussion - but I see Liberal Spy's remarks to be consistent with what I hear from my niece and nephew. I don't have children myself, so they - being college age - are my closest connection to the mind of the younger generation. My sister is very conservative - more than I am on some issues - so I know her kids have been raised with the right values. She was vigilant about what schools they would attend, etc.
However, once they attended public schools, my sister's influence lessened and both my nephew and niece consider themselves liberals - even to voting for Obama (the first time - my niece says she didn't vote for him the second time).
Liberal Spy reminds me of my niece. He believes it is the corporations that are the problem. He believes that government can do a lot of good for people that need help. I think he and my niece are good people that really care, but they have been indoctrinated to believe that gov't is actually "helping" people. It doesn't make them bad people. I don't know what drew him here - to want to engage US - in philosophical and political banter, but I am enjoying the discourse. It keeps you alive.
It may take another depression for a lot of these kids to wake up.
-
If Ron Paul had run for the Republicans I would have voted for him without a second thought. I don't agree with everything he says, but I agree with a lot of what he says, and I think he would be a magnificent president.
How about Rand Paul?
-
AB how did that work out for us with congress? It last almost as long as the requirment they - too - participate in Obamacare and then in the dead of night they voted it back in and now they - too - can insider trade legally. In lingo LS can understand Congress can legally do what they sent Martha Stewart to prison doing.
In fact I think Dodd Frank has done more damage to Americans ability to borrow money than had they left things alone.
That seriously needs to change. There are many crimes Congress can commit that would land any of us in jail. I am a strong supporter of a Constitutional Amendment to require all members of government be accountable to the same laws as the people. (and enforceable statues on top of that as Congress has a way of ignoring the Constitution).
-
How about Rand Paul?
I honestly don't know a lot about Rand Paul. If his stances on banks and drugs are the same as Ron I would vote for him.
-
It may take another depression for a lot of these kids to wake up.
Probably true. Sometimes you have to hit rock-bottom to finally see the light. I've done that several times in my life. Going through something like a depression is an awful thing - but most of the people I know that lived through it - it made them stronger and made them realize that they could survive even under the worst conditions.
So yeah, it's going to take something big like that I guess - to force everyone to wake up. It's coming.
-
That seriously needs to change. There are many crimes Congress can commit that would land any of us in jail. I am a strong supporter of a Constitutional Amendment to require all members of government be accountable to the same laws as the people. (and enforceable statues on top of that as Congress has a way of ignoring the Constitution).
Same here... It galls me they are treated "special." They are not special and the founders never expected them to be treated as a special class separate from those they are supposed to represent.
-
I honestly don't know a lot about Rand Paul. If his stances on banks and drugs are the same as Ron I would vote for him.
Then you'll need to register as a Republican so you can support him in 2016. You won't need a third party. What state are you in?
-
Then you'll need to register as a Republican so you can support him in 2016. You won't need a third party. What state are you in?
Now I need to go research Rand Paul. I will come back to this.
EDIT: I definitely agree with a lot of what he says about the banks. I haven't found anything about his stance on drugs yet, though. Some of the stuff he says I disagree with, but the banks and the war on drugs are such a problem that they may outweigh the issues I disagree with him on. If he's for ending the drug war and legalizing all drugs like Ron, though, I would definitely consider it. I would MUCH prefer it if he ran third party though, because I still believe that corruption is infesting the 2 party system.
-
Probably true. Sometimes you have to hit rock-bottom to finally see the light. I've done that several times in my life. Going through something like a depression is an awful thing - but most of the people I know that lived through it - it made them stronger and made them realize that they could survive even under the worst conditions.
So yeah, it's going to take something big like that I guess - to force everyone to wake up. It's coming.
My grandparents on both sides lived through it. My dad's parents had their dairy farm and they survived - but my grandmother hoarded money until the day she died as a result and paid cash for everything - a very good habit IMHO. My mothers parents lost everything and they had to move from a beautiful big house out to the country into a small home. I honestly do not think my mother ever recovered from that experience and I think it is what made her the way she was all my life. It never mattered how much money she had in her mind she was ALWAYS poor...
-
People who lived through the depression acted differently. My grandfather was a spendthrift. He said back then, he didn't have a nickel to spend, and 'now' he has a dollar and , "By damn, I'm going to spend it." Grandma, though, hoarded money. She quilted and did crochet work to earn money, and did pretty good.
My father paid cash for everything. We had no money, but somehow, he eked out a savings and, when we got older, invested. He was always frugal, and Mom got after all of us were grown, so she could buy nice things. Mom retired right after Dad, and they moved to Florida. After dad died, 2 1/2 years ago, he left her well-off. On one hand, she was relieved that he left her able to fend for herself, but on the other hand, she was angry they lived so sparingly.
-
My grandparents on both sides lived through it. My dad's parents had their dairy farm and they survived - but my grandmother hoarded money until the day she died as a result and paid cash for everything - a very good habit IMHO. My mothers parents lost everything and they had to move from a beautiful big house out to the country into a small home. I honestly do not think my mother ever recovered from that experience and I think it is what made her the way she was all my life. It never mattered how much money she had in her mind she was ALWAYS poor...
My husband's grandmother told me that she and her family lost the home they lived in twice - lost everything. My maternal grandmother was left widowed with five children to feed (she used the little bit of insurance from her husband's death to open a small country grocery store & worked it until she retired in her seventies). She hoarded money until the day she died too. I think we've had it too good and we are fat and lazy by it. We have no comprehension of what hard living really is!
The thing is, I think we may be about to find out. 8888crybaby
-
My husband's grandmother told me that she and her family lost the home they lived in twice - lost everything. My maternal grandmother was left widowed with five children to feed (she used the little bit of insurance from her husband's death to open a small country grocery store & worked it until she retired in her seventies). She hoarded money until the day she died too. I think we've had it too good and we are fat and lazy by it. We have no comprehension of what hard living really is!
The thing is, I think we may be about to find out. 8888crybaby
I do, too.
Want an example I heard on Wilkow this afternoon of how corrupt our system has become?
When Newt pushed through welfare reform under Clinton they had a mandatory work requirement. This work requirement did a good job in bringing down unemployment and welfare. Along comes Obama and an EO suspending this congressionally mandated work requirement. Then - as we all know he started pushing food stamps which has ballooned.
Now the kicker here.. the people charged by our government with the job of routing out welfare fraud, food stamp fraud, etc... well they don't want to rout it out... because it is job security for them...
This reminded me of something a friend in California told be a couple of months ago - they have prosecuted almost zero Californian's for Workers Comp Fraud in the state. Oh they have investigators, but for some reason no one ever gets prosecuted - even when they KNOW the person is committing it. I suspect it is the same "job security" for the investigator story.
-
I honestly don't know a lot about Rand Paul. If his stances on banks and drugs are the same as Ron I would vote for him.
So you think drugs are good?
So tell us. What is your frame of reference. What have you read. Have you read
Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged)
New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America
The 5000 Year Leap: A Miracle That Changed the World
Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
The Federalist Papers
The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic
Downsizing the Federal Goverment
Brave New World
Comeback America: Turning the Country Around and Restoring Fiscal Responsibility
Common Sense, The Rights of Man and Other Essential Writings of Thomas Paine?
America-Lite: How Imperial Academia Dismantled Our Culture
The Original Argument: The Federalists' Case for the Constitution, Adapted for the 21st Century
The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party
Culture and Imperialism
Coolidge
Why Coolidge Matters: How Civility in Politics Can Bring a Nation Together
The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression
James Madison and the Spirit of Republican Self-Government James Madison and the Spirit of Republican Self-Government
Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Liberalism
The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin
Franklin: The Essential Founding Father
Seven Events That Made America America: And Proved That the Founding Fathers Were Right All Along
The Road to Serfdom
Lies The Government Told You: Myth, Power, And Deception In American History
The Signers: The Fifty Six Stories Behind The Declaration Of Independence
Samuel Adams: A Life Samuel Adams: A Life
Lincoln at Peoria: The Turning Point
-
goopo if only he'd read it and some it would sink in. I lived through Carter, (and Nixon) it is one reason I revere Reagan.
I second that! Great post!
-
So you think drugs are good?
So tell us. What is your frame of reference. What have you read. Have you read
Ayn Rand (Atlas Shrugged)
New Deal or Raw Deal?: How FDR's Economic Legacy Has Damaged America
The 5000 Year Leap: A Miracle That Changed the World
Liberty and Tyranny: A Conservative Manifesto
The Federalist Papers
The Liberty Amendments: Restoring the American Republic
Downsizing the Federal Goverment
Brave New World
Comeback America: Turning the Country Around and Restoring Fiscal Responsibility
Common Sense, The Rights of Man and Other Essential Writings of Thomas Paine?
America-Lite: How Imperial Academia Dismantled Our Culture
The Original Argument: The Federalists' Case for the Constitution, Adapted for the 21st Century
The Shadow Party: How George Soros, Hillary Clinton, and Sixties Radicals Seized Control of the Democratic Party
Culture and Imperialism
Coolidge
Why Coolidge Matters: How Civility in Politics Can Bring a Nation Together
The Forgotten Man: A New History of the Great Depression
James Madison and the Spirit of Republican Self-Government James Madison and the Spirit of Republican Self-Government
Woodrow Wilson and the Roots of Modern Liberalism
The Autobiography of Benjamin Franklin
Franklin: The Essential Founding Father
Seven Events That Made America America: And Proved That the Founding Fathers Were Right All Along
The Road to Serfdom
Lies The Government Told You: Myth, Power, And Deception In American History
The Signers: The Fifty Six Stories Behind The Declaration Of Independence
Samuel Adams: A Life Samuel Adams: A Life
Lincoln at Peoria: The Turning Point
Excellent reading list! Couple I haven't read yet.
-
Excellent reading list! Couple I haven't read yet.
I could have listed all the Clinton (Hillary and Bill) - for instance
The Secret Life of Bill Clinton: The Unreported Stories
Dereliction of Duty: Eyewitness Account of How Bill Clinton Compromised America's National Security
Unlimited Access : An FBI Agent Inside the Clinton White House
Absolute Power: The Legacy of Corruption in the Clinton-Reno Justice Department
and this book is a must read IMHO...
Betrayal: How the Clinton Administration Undermined American Security
In addition...
The Puzzle Palace (about the founding of the NSA)
The Real Jimmy Carter: How Our Worst Ex-President Undermines American Foreign Policy, Coddles Dictators and Created... by Hayward, Steven F. (May 25, 2004)
Reagan's Secret War
and with the 50'th anniversary of his assassination approaching:
The Road to Dallas
-
Excellent reading list! Couple I haven't read yet.
Good morning EC
May I add the following BASIC TEXTS to Rap's excellent list:
1) Democracy in America (Alexis de Tocqueville)
2) The Road to Serfdom (Friedrich von Hayek) NB: Suggested this to LS eons ago
(NB: The Hayek treatise was already listed. My error)
-
Good morning EC
May I add the following BASIC TEXTS to Rap's excellent list:
1) Democracy in America (Alexis de Tocqueville)
2) The Road to Serfdom (Friedrich von Hayek) NB: Suggested this to LS eons ago
Excellent suggestions.
Perhaps we need a suggested reading section here, I am certain there is some excellent material others can add as well.
-
When my husband was alive and we had our boat, I would take books out on the lake and read all day.. and then when we went to Lake Powell I would tote a huge bag of books with me... oh for a Kindle back in those days.
-
Good morning EC
May I add the following BASIC TEXTS to Rap's excellent list:
1) Democracy in America (Alexis de Tocqueville)
2) The Road to Serfdom (Friedrich von Hayek) NB: Suggested this to LS eons ago
(NB: The Hayek treatise was already listed. My error)
I would add
The Prince (Machiavelli)
The Art of War (sun tzu)
My Life (Bill Clinton) - I know, but it is literally a text book of how to advance.
And, if fiction is permitted:
Catch 22 (Joseph Heller)
-
I'll add some modern books, and they are entertaining books as well. The first author will surprise you, but the book he wrote may well be the best treatise yet written on the decline of American civilization in the second half of the 20th century. It is must reading for any conservative.
American Pastoral by Philip Roth
Man in Full by Tom Wolfe
-
So you think drugs are good?
I think it's wrong to spend 35-40 billion dollars a year on a failed drug war that perpetuates the problems in black communities and helps militarize the police. Legalize the drugs, tax them, and use the taxes to build rehabs to help drug addicts. You can get legal over the counter drugs that are just as bad as anything you find on the street.
-
I'll add some modern books, and they are entertaining books as well. The first author will surprise you, but the book he wrote may well be the best treatise yet written on the decline of American civilization in the second half of the 20th century. It is must reading for any conservative.
American Pastoral by Philip Roth
Man in Full by Tom Wolfe
Think I am gonna disagree with Roth being on the list? Ain't gonna happen. :laugh:
Was dozing and thinking - If we are still permitting fiction, add Time Enough for Love by Robert Heinlein. Sure, more libertarian than conservative, but a huge cross over.
I was blessed enough to meet him once. Some dumb ass kid with stars in his eyes, bugging some old, grumpy and immensely respected author. He made me work for me chat - we talked all day and worked like hell while doing so, hauling rock and digging.
-
I think it's wrong to spend 35-40 billion dollars a year on a failed drug war that perpetuates the problems in black communities and helps militarize the police. Legalize the drugs, tax them, and use the taxes to build rehabs to help drug addicts. You can get legal over the counter drugs that are just as bad as anything you find on the street.
Going to throw something out there - with comments - courtesy of AA, the only damned reason I am still breathing:
We admitted we were powerless over alcohol—that our lives had become unmanageable.
It does not need be alcohol. Drug culture is as powerful and as evil.
Came to believe that a power greater than ourselves could restore us to sanity.
This might be where we disagree. I hold to God and personal responsibility as the cure. You seem to see it as a government problem.
Made a decision to turn our will and our lives over to the care of God as we understood Him.
Again. Personal responsibility. If you bleep up, if you drink or drug to excess, ain't no one forcing you but the defective wiring in your own brain. You have no one else to blame but yourself.
Made a searching and fearless moral inventory of ourselves.
See above - that scares the shit out of everyone. God hates a coward.
Admitted to God, to ourselves, and to another human being the exact nature of our wrongs.
Do you know how hard this is? It is hard enough admitting we are wrong on a forum where there is no real comeback. Try doing it when your entire life is a mess.
Were entirely ready to have God remove all these defects of character.
This one I got problems with. A work in progress. Skip, for the moment. You don't need to do the steps in order. :laugh:
While I don't necessarily disagree with you regarding legalization, I suggest you look deeper. Drug use is not only rampant, it is prevalent. It might be worth the time to examine why that is the case.
Boredom?
Lack of faith?
Just the way life is?
-
I think it's wrong to spend 35-40 billion dollars a year on a failed drug war that perpetuates the problems in black communities and helps militarize the police. Legalize the drugs, tax them, and use the taxes to build rehabs to help drug addicts. You can get legal over the counter drugs that are just as bad as anything you find on the street.
You might be surprised to find some people here who agree with you on most of that, myself included. We don't consider it to be the most pressing issue of the day, however. Restoring fundamental American liberties, especially economic freedom, is far more important, and I'll tell you why. We don't want there to be more crack whores, and that will require a higher level of morality than exists in society today. If you want to improve morality, you must increase freedom and release people from the bonds of government dependency. A high degree of morality cannot exist without freedom.
"It is, on the one hand, an old discovery that morals and moral values will grow only in an environment of freedom, and that, in general, moral standards of people and classes are high only where they have long enjoyed freedom—and proportional to the amount of freedom they have possessed."...Friedrich Hayek
The above is just a snippet on an excellent discourse on this subject. Here's a link to the whole thing:
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-moral-element-in-free-enterprise#ixzz2iAeWj7o9 (http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-moral-element-in-free-enterprise#ixzz2iAeWj7o9)
PS: I am certain Ron Paul would agree with Hayek on this.
-
Think I am gonna disagree with Roth being on the list? Ain't gonna happen. :laugh:
Was dozing and thinking - If we are still permitting fiction, add Time Enough for Love by Robert Heinlein. Sure, more libertarian than conservative, but a huge cross over.
I was blessed enough to meet him once. Some dumb ass kid with stars in his eyes, bugging some old, grumpy and immensely respected author. He made me work for me chat - we talked all day and worked like hell while doing so, hauling rock and digging.
Just about anything by Heinlein is worth reading.
I can't think of a better way to get to know someone than by doing construction work with him. My differences between my stepsons and I seemed irreconcilable until we built an add-on together.
-
I don't support or advocate communism, and I regularly school liberals that do.
Sounds like you may in actuality be a "compassionate conservative"—a term I hate—minus the abortion integrity, you just don't know it yet. By the way, in case you didn't know, there is a pro-abortion wing of Republicans—or, at least there are agnostics on the subject.
-
Sounds like you may in actuality be a "compassionate conservative"—a term I hate—minus the abortion integrity, you just don't know it yet. By the way, in case you didn't know, there is a pro-abortion wing of Republicans—or, at least there are agnostics on the subject.
I myself am pro-choice, at least as far as federal law is concerned. I consider abortion highly immoral, but I don't believe fetuses have rights.
That is never good enough for liberals. They want me to support the idea of stealing the money from conscientious, moral people who, like me, consider abortion repulsive, in order to pay for someone else's abortion. And if I object, I am "anti-woman" in spite of the fact that more than half the babies killed with my tax money are female.
-
It actually answers all three.
Now, unlike a lot of people on the right - I believe that environmental regulations are a thing. You can not be a conservative without being willing to conserve. But other than those, there should be zero regulations standing in the way of new business ....
Government is an impotent middleman, sucking money from the productive. Government is an unnecessary and burdensome overhead. They steal our money then lord over us using the compassion and pseudoscience ruse. The framers would never have tolerated what the government has become today.
-
They certainly would not.
Yet you are old enough to remember Lake Erie being dead and the Cuyahoga River fire. If you kill what is basically an inland freshwater sea or set a river on fire, you are really doing something wrong.
-
Point taken, but my point is it is getting worse. Income equality is still getting worse, more people are sinking below the poverty line, and the rich are still getting richer. It shouldn't be as bad as it is.
Wait one cotton picking minute. Have you seen what the poor have today? Smart phones and big-screen TVs— that's what they have! In the meanwhile my income as a doctor has been ravaged by taxation and burdensome regulations. Do you know I make less today than I did my first year in practice nearly 30 years ago! Practice for me is a nightmare. Talk to other doctors, privately. You'll get an earful.
-
You might be surprised to find some people here who agree with you on most of that, myself included. We don't consider it to be the most pressing issue of the day, however. Restoring fundamental American liberties, especially economic freedom, is far more important, and I'll tell you why. We don't want there to be more crack whores, and that will require a higher level of morality than exists in society today. If you want to improve morality, you must increase freedom and release people from the bonds of government dependency. A high degree of morality cannot exist without freedom.
"It is, on the one hand, an old discovery that morals and moral values will grow only in an environment of freedom, and that, in general, moral standards of people and classes are high only where they have long enjoyed freedom—and proportional to the amount of freedom they have possessed."...Friedrich Hayek
The above is just a snippet on an excellent discourse on this subject. Here's a link to the whole thing:
http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-moral-element-in-free-enterprise#ixzz2iAeWj7o9 (http://www.fee.org/the_freeman/detail/the-moral-element-in-free-enterprise#ixzz2iAeWj7o9)
PS: I am certain Ron Paul would agree with Hayek on this.
Yes indeed! I to am one of them but my argument may differ somewhat.
I contend that it is impossible to have personal liberty without personal responsibility. Those two things are inextricably linked together which means that if you choose to do drugs and have to steal from me or harm me in any other way in order to support that then I'm going to hold you accountable for that harm no matter WHY you did it!
I guess that really doesn't differ all that much from what Victor said when I think about it.
I agree completely with what Hayek had to say in the above quote.
-
Wait one cotton picking minute. Have you seen what the poor have today? Smart phones and big-screen TVs— that's what they have! In the meanwhile my income as a doctor has been ravaged by taxation and burdensome regulations. Do you know I make less today than I did my first year in practice nearly 30 years ago! Practice for me is a nightmare. Talk to other doctors, privately. You'll get an earful.
Back in 1991, I were teaching. We had a questionnaire come out to see how many of our students were below the poverty line. One of the questions was "Do you have a VCR?" In our department, apparently all but oe of us was below the poverty line,
-
Wait one cotton picking minute. Have you seen what the poor have today? Smart phones and big-screen TVs— that's what they have! In the meanwhile my income as a doctor has been ravaged by taxation and burdensome regulations. Do you know I make less today than I did my first year in practice nearly 30 years ago! Practice for me is a nightmare. Talk to other doctors, privately. You'll get an earful.
:amen:
As has already been said by others above we REALLY need to get away from this dependency society and get back to one where individuals are self motivated to do whatever it takes to deliver themselves from their current circumstance regardless of what that may be! To site an example, I am fully convinced that one of the main reasons our country has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world is our idiot tax code! The kid who goes out and get's a legitimate job making hamburgers at McDonald's pays a heck of a price over the one who goes out and pushes drugs, pimps, whores or whatever and that would NOT be the case IF we had a tax code that did not discriminate!
Citing what you said above Doc, how do you think a tax code that required you to collect a sales tax on the services you rendered but allowed you to keep ALL of your income until you actually purchased a new good or service (not for your business but for your personal consumption only) would work for you?
If we, as a nation, had REALLY been all that concerned about a "separation of Church and state" we would have been marching in the streets when the government began taking over traditional roles of the Church!
-
Yes indeed! I to am one of them but my argument may differ somewhat.
I contend that it is impossible to have personal liberty without personal responsibility. Those two things are inextricably linked together which means that if you choose to do drugs and have to steal from me or harm me in any other way in order to support that then I'm going to hold you accountable for that harm no matter WHY you did it!
I guess that really doesn't differ all that much from what Victor said when I think about it.
I agree completely with what Hayek had to say in the above quote.
As usual, you are right, Big. Whether morality causes freedom or freedom causes morality is a "chicken and egg" argument. The point is you can't have one without the other. If you are going to support drug deregulation without supporting economic freedom then you are only going to make society's problem worse.
As it is, the drug war is a very profitable proposition for the Democrat machine. They hand out the welfare and food stamps to lock in the vote from lower class people, then the food stamps and welfare pay for drugs, then they have to hire gobs of law enforcement -- public employees all, so more votes -- to enforce the drug laws. It's a beautiful thing for them.
-
Citing what you said above Doc, how do you think a tax code that required you to collect a sales tax on the services you rendered but allowed you to keep ALL of your income until you actually purchased a new good or service (not for your business but for your personal consumption only) would work for you?
Thinking on it....
-
...
While I don't necessarily disagree with you regarding legalization, I suggest you look deeper. Drug use is not only rampant, it is prevalent. It might be worth the time to examine why that is the case.
Boredom?
Lack of faith?
Just the way life is?
That's the core of it. I think our society is heading toward rock bottom at the speed of a bullet. It is morally dead, all decisions are being made for us, and the result is that it is killing the human spirit in many, many people.
-
As usual, you are right, Big. Whether morality causes freedom or freedom causes morality is a "chicken and egg" argument. The point is you can't have one without the other. If you are going to support drug deregulation without supporting economic freedom then you are only going to make society's problem worse.
As it is, the drug war is a very profitable proposition for the Democrat machine. They hand out the welfare and food stamps to lock in the vote from lower class people, then the food stamps and welfare pay for drugs, then they have to hire gobs of law enforcement -- public employees all, so more votes -- to enforce the drug laws. It's a beautiful thing for them.
OH yes! And it results in copious quantities of newly born future democrat voters because of the way it's structured as well!.
The other day one a friend called my attention to getto video, available somewhere on the internet I suppose, in which a number of scantily clad young "ladies" were dancing around showing off cell phones, gold chains, TVs etc while singing "All you gotta do Is F- - - !" to a catchy tune. I had to tell him that as unfortunate as that is they were telling the truth!
-
:amen:
As has already been said by others above we REALLY need to get away from this dependency society and get back to one where individuals are self motivated to do whatever it takes to deliver themselves from their current circumstance regardless of what that may be! To site an example, I am fully convinced that one of the main reasons our country has one of the highest incarceration rates in the world is our idiot tax code! The kid who goes out and get's a legitimate job making hamburgers at McDonald's pays a heck of a price over the one who goes out and pushes drugs, pimps, whores or whatever and that would NOT be the case IF we had a tax code that did not discriminate!
Citing what you said above Doc, how do you think a tax code that required you to collect a sales tax on the services you rendered but allowed you to keep ALL of your income until you actually purchased a new good or service (not for your business but for your personal consumption only) would work for you?
If we, as a nation, had REALLY been all that concerned about a "separation of Church and state" we would have been marching in the streets when the government began taking over traditional roles of the Church!
I like the tax code you described - it gives the individual control over their destiny. You pay as you go.
Your quote at the end of your post about the Church and State is spot on! We only have ourselves to blame.
:amen:
-
I like the tax code you described - it gives the individual control over their destiny. You pay as you go.
Your quote at the end of your post about the Church and State is spot on! We only have ourselves to blame.
:amen:
Thanks Alice! and You are, of course, right as rain!
-
Thinking on it....
While you're thinking please keep in mind that the code I propose would no longer have need of a thing called the IRS.
-
Citing what you said above Doc, how do you think a tax code that required you to collect a sales tax on the services you rendered but allowed you to keep ALL of your income until you actually purchased a new good or service (not for your business but for your personal consumption only) would work for you?
I'd like to get rid of the IRS—but I'm not sure as a healthcare practice I want to be a tax collector for the government.
Still thinking on it...
-
I'd like to get rid of the IRS—but I'm not sure as a healthcare practice I want to be a tax collector for the government.
Still thinking on it...
I owned various retail businesses for 26 years. We collected sale tax for the state - the paperwork is a headache, but not horrible. I think the idea is a good one. Of course, with anything gov't - it has the potential to be obscenely mismanaged.
-
I like the tax code you described - it gives the individual control over their destiny. You pay as you go.
I am going to ditto that too. Although I know it is almost an impossible task to get to this and all the more willing to start with a flat tax, going to a fair ta system really does give the power back to the people. If people have a ethical or political conviction against what the government is doing, they can impact it by changing what they do. Limit spending and stop feeding the beast. It is almost one last check and balance in the system. The people have even more power over the purse.
My fear in jumping into this is, of course, knowing our politicians, we would end up with a sales tax and income tax.
-
I am going to ditto that too. Although I know it is almost an impossible task to get to this and all the more willing to start with a flat tax, going to a fair ta system really does give the power back to the people. If people have a ethical or political conviction against what the government is doing, they can impact it by changing what they do. Limit spending and stop feeding the beast. It is almost one last check and balance in the system. The people have even more power over the purse.
My fear in jumping into this is, of course, knowing our politicians, we would end up with a sales tax and income tax.
Not if we pass HR25/S122 we won't! Can't happen!
BTW we are much closer than you might imagine! The House Ways and Means Committee is supposed to vote on this early next year and we are picking up new co-sponsors quickly.
It is my firm belief that if this ever gets out of committee to the floor it's a done deal as there will be so much public pressure for it that they won't be able to stop it.
-
I'd like to get rid of the IRS—but I'm not sure as a healthcare practice I want to be a tax collector for the government.
Still thinking on it...
Even if your business was compensated for it's trouble? The fairtax bill does that.
-
Wait one cotton picking minute. Have you seen what the poor have today? Smart phones and big-screen TVs— that's what they have! In the meanwhile my income as a doctor has been ravaged by taxation and burdensome regulations. Do you know I make less today than I did my first year in practice nearly 30 years ago! Practice for me is a nightmare. Talk to other doctors, privately. You'll get an earful.
I can vouch for that....
-
As usual, you are right, Big. Whether morality causes freedom or freedom causes morality is a "chicken and egg" argument. The point is you can't have one without the other. If you are going to support drug deregulation without supporting economic freedom then you are only going to make society's problem worse.
As it is, the drug war is a very profitable proposition for the Democrat machine. They hand out the welfare and food stamps to lock in the vote from lower class people, then the food stamps and welfare pay for drugs, then they have to hire gobs of law enforcement -- public employees all, so more votes -- to enforce the drug laws. It's a beautiful thing for them.
This so Lon our diff said two meth addicts. Both on Medicaid both once again strongly encouraged to go to rehab. Ny way you look at it we are paying for their habit.
-
So, since your only reply this morning is to the drug question LS are we to assume you've not read any of the books recommended on this thread?
-
So, since your only reply this morning is to the drug question LS are we to assume you've not read any of the books recommended on this thread?
Maybe he's out reading them right now, which might explain where he's been. Either that, or he's out using drugs. :silly:
-
Sounds like you may in actuality be a "compassionate conservative"—a term I hate—minus the abortion integrity, you just don't know it yet. By the way, in case you didn't know, there is a pro-abortion wing of Republicans—or, at least there are agnostics on the subject.
I am definitely not a conservative. I'll admit that some liberals (dumb ones) think that Communism is a good idea, but most of them don't actually believe that. I support cutting government in places I think it is highly unnecessary and wasted (drug war/excess military spending/etc), but support growing government in places I believe it helps people.
-
Maybe he's out reading them right now, which might explain where he's been. Either that, or he's out using drugs. :silly:
Today was my son's birthday.
-
I am definitely not a conservative. I'll admit that some liberals (dumb ones) think that Communism is a good idea, but most of them don't actually believe that. I support cutting government in places I think it is highly unnecessary and wasted (drug war/excess military spending/etc), but support growing government in places I believe it helps people.
Maybe you could name some areas where you think the federal government has improved things, and should be expanded?
-
Can't wait to hear the answer :pop41:
-
Maybe you could name some areas where you think the federal government has improved things, and should be expanded?
I think we could do a LOT of good for education in this country if we started actually providing good funding to public schools. Maybe they'd be able to hire some more teachers and reduce the size of classrooms so teachers would be able to properly teach our children. Maybe they'd be able to buy some of the teaching materials that a lot of public schools desperately need. Maybe if we reduced some of our enormously bloated military spending as well as ended the war on drugs we could easily afford to let people do something horrible like go to college for free (or even for reasonable prices that don't put them in debt for the next 20 years). Maybe we could afford to hire more good professors so professors aren't overwhelmed with more students than they can handle and the quality of education can be improved in college as well.
-
I think we could do a LOT of good for education in this country if they started actually providing good funding to public schools. Maybe they'd be able to hire some more teachers and reduce the size of classrooms so teachers would be able to properly teach our children. Maybe they'd be able to buy some of the teaching materials that a lot of public schools desperately need. Maybe if we reduced some of our enormously bloated military spending as well as ended the war on drugs we could easily afford to let people do something horrible like go to college for free (or even for reasonable prices that don't put them in debt for the next 20 years). Maybe they could afford to hire more good professors so professors aren't overwhelmed with more students than they can handle and the quality of education can be improved in college as well.
Most of us here went to school in classrooms of 30 or more students and received a far superior education than what passes for education today. If you want to go to college - pay for it yourself, something the majority of us did. Also, not everyone is cut out for college, and there is a lot of jobs that pay a lot more, have more of a need for employees and all that is required is a trade school. The problem with the quality of education is not a lack of professors, it is a overload of liberal professors.
-
If you want to go to college - pay for it yourself, something the majority of us did.
How long did it take the majority of you to pay off your massive student loan debt after you were finished with college?
-
How long did it take the majority of you to pay off your massive student loan debt after you were finished with college?
I worked and paid as I went. I didn't expect some Joe schmoe I didn't even know to pay for my education... and THAT is the problem with the attitude of you young libs today, you all think you are owed something. News flash - you are not. You are owed an opportunity to go to school and to work - provided you actually get a useable education. What you are not owed is for me to support you. Your parents birthed you, let them support you or get a scholarship to help out with your education and get a job. Besides, you said you were in the military and going on the GI Bill.. so what are you complaining about - I am already paying for you since the GI bill comes out of tax dollars and it is in return for your service to our nation.
-
I worked and paid as I went.
My student loans are nearing 50 thousand dollars and I have not even finished my masters degree yet. Where exactly can young inexperienced students today work that allows them to make ends meet as well as pay off the gigantic amount of student loan debt they are accruing while they attend college?
-
My student loans are nearing 50 thousand dollars and I have not even finished my masters degree yet. Where exactly can young inexperienced students today work that allows them to make ends meet as well as pay off the gigantic amount of student loan debt they are accruing while they attend college?
Frankly, that is not my problem. I didn't have children. I already paid for you to go through 12th grade. The rest is on you.
BTW you ignored my question about your GI benefits.
Also this government you liberals all love to support is why the cost of your education is through the roof. When the government took over student loans all that did was encourage universities to charge even more. Like we said yesterday, you really should take a economics course or two.
And you do have alternatives........ here is one....
http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2013/10/12/the-educational-trend-that-could-put-an-end-to-stu.aspx
The Educational Trend That Could Put an End to Student Loan Debt
By Amanda Alix |
October 12, 2013
Imagine obtaining a college degree from the comfort of your own home, using your own computer or laptop -- without having to actually enroll in the institution that offers the courses. Not only would you be learning from the best minds from schools like Yale and MIT, but the coursework would be offered at minimal cost, or no charge at all.
As college attendees continue to rack up record levels of student loan debt, any innovation that promises to cut college costs is welcome. Thanks to the increasing popularity of Massive Open Online Courses, which offer global audiences course lectures and assignments over the Internet, the above scenario is moving closer to reality.
The evolution of online courses
Online courses are not new, but the idea of MOOCs has only been around for a couple of years. It may seem like the two types of courses would be very similar, but they actually differ quite a lot.
While online courses usually are a dedicated offering at a particular college or university, MOOCs are available to anyone with a computer and an Internet connection. As for affordability, online courses at a given school may not be much cheaper than traditional classroom offerings -- because of the need to train faculty, as well as develop the courses themselves. MOOCs, for the most part, cost nothing.
MOOCs are not perfect. Most, for example, are not being offered for credit, which means getting a degree from the experience is nearly impossible. The dropout rate is extremely high, as well; experts estimate that up to 90% of those that sign up for these courses never complete them.
Things are changing -- fast
But MOOCs are quickly becoming the next big thing in higher education, and colleges and universities are jumping on the bandwagon. This semester, Georgetown University is offering a seven-week MOOC that has attracted 20,000 enrollees from all over the world. The University of Wisconsin at Madison rolled out its own MOOC this October, which consists of four pilot courses, with an enrollment of 80,000.
With MOOCs getting a lot more attention, the idea of treating them more as for-credit, matriculating courses is catching on. The University of Maryland is now taking a look at bestowing transfer credit to those who are able to demonstrate a specific level of knowledge after completing a MOOC.
The Georgia Institute of Technology has taken the MOOC concept to the ultimate level, opening the application process earlier this month for the first-ever degree program delivered through the MOOC platform. The Master of Science in Computer Science will be offered for a cost of less than $7,000 -- an absolute bargain, especially when compared to the traditional on-campus price of $45,000.
An education-industry partnership
The speed with which MOOCs are taking off and becoming a true alternative to an on-site college education may be due to the involvement of big business. The Georgia Tech program involves communications giant AT&T, which plans to utilize the program for employee training. The platform is being provided by Udacity, an online education provider, which will share in the MOOC's profits.
Meanwhile, Google has taken an interest in the technology, as well. The company has partnered with university coalition edX in order to create a massive open-source educational platform. The new project, dubbed Open edX, will provide a means for anyone to create and host online courses.
Whether MOOCs become an integral part of higher education remains to be seen, and much will depend upon the success of Georgia Tech's new offering. If the degree program performs well, the model will likely be duplicated very quickly -- good news for students, who will stand a better chance of beginning their working lives free of crippling student loan debt.
You also have not replied to our questions about what you have read.
-
Winston Churchill once said, "Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel of envy. It's inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery".
-
Frankly, that is not my problem. I didn't have children. I already paid for you to go through 12th grade. The rest is on you.
That's all you needed to say.
-
How long did it take the majority of you to pay off your massive student loan debt after you were finished with college?
My parents could not afford to send any of their kids to college, and none of us kids believed that racking up a huge debt for college was a wise decision so we didn't take that route. So instead after high school I chose the military, so that if I wanted to continue on with a college education I could do so on the GI Bill. My brother got right into the job market after high school not wasting a moment. Both of us today are probably making a larger salary than many of our classmates that went on to college, and far more than I dreamed I would ever make. All through hard work and good work ethics. The problem with college is way too many people are going to college. It not only causes tuition to skyrocket, it also waste a lot of young peoples time.
I heard said once that there are 3-things that if done will give you an 89% chance of having a successful fulfilling life.
1. Finish High school
2. Don't have children before marriage
3. Don't get married until you are at least 24.
That's it, just those 3 things. 89% is fantastic odds. If you add college as #4 it has very little impact on the percentage.
-
My student loans are nearing 50 thousand dollars and I have not even finished my masters degree yet. Where exactly can young inexperienced students today work that allows them to make ends meet as well as pay off the gigantic amount of student loan debt they are accruing while they attend college?
I had the GI bill, and a family, and I worked full time. And it took me 8 years for a BA. I went to schools that I could afford, without loans. I repaid one small loan.
And I took hard subjects which would prepare me for a good paying job, in fields which were in demand. Accounting, economics, engineering, etc.
I started but didn't finish a masters, because at age 26, it was time to work hard at my career position.
I never, never thought of having something like school loans that would be forgiven, when I ran them up beyond my ability to repay.
Your attitude illustrates what is wrong with a generation that has come to feel entitled to more than their ability to EARN.
Do you realize the national debt has been nearly doubled under Obama? Do you realize he has added as much to the national debt as all 43 Presidents before him?
Many people are very pissed off about such irresponsibility. EBT and Disability have exploded. Full time jobs are becoming part time jobs of 29 hours or less.
If you had studied and learned basic economics, you'd be pissed that your opportunities are being downsized while government cost is exploding, and you are on the hook to repay it to the Chinese and Japanese, who are admonishing the Obama administration for irresponsibility.
A generation which grows up on a delayed, relaxed schedule or not at all. You'll find scant sympathy for loans one has no means or plans or ability to repay.
More money won't improve education. It will be squandered by highly paid administrators, who have low expectations for students, who promote based on birthdays, not demonstrated mastery of basic material previous generations learned for much less school funding.
Thanks by the way, thanks for your service, but with a bachelors degree, you should by now have some marketable skills, or it wasn't worth the $50,000.
-
I worked during the day and went to college at night. I paid for each semester at the start of the semester. Taking out a loan for the semester never even crossed my mind.
A nephew of one of my best friends graduated with an MBA from Princeton three years ago. He studied "writing." So far he has managed to find a couple of part time writing positions - very part time - and a job at McDonald's. Having met him, I do not hold out a lot of hope for him to find a great job any time soon, he lacks the basic skills of eye contact, firm handshake and speaking up in a strong voice when you ask him a question. Frankly, I have no idea how he will ever be able to pay back his student debt. BTW my friend and her husband own two businesses, their son runs the business in California. They would not hire the nephew for anything - not even shipping.
-
How long did it take the majority of you to pay off your massive student loan debt after you were finished with college?
3 years, first working double shifts in a factory that made beds, then in a cheese factory, then in the army which at least fed and housed us for cheap. My debt may not sound massive - it was a hair over $10,000, but this was back in the 70's when that was a serious chunk of change.
Doctorates I earned taking night courses and studying while working , so no debt for those.
-
Where LS goes wrong is in thinking the department of education adds value. It does not. It is just one more federal middleman that drains money from the system.
Liberal_Spy, did you know the federal agency did not exist before 1980? How did America's children learn before the federal Department of Education was forced on us by the liberals of Jimmy Carter's day? (by the way, Ronald Reagan campaigned on getting rid of the Department of Education – and won on that "dangerous" campaign promise. "He hates children" the liberals screamed! Why, he must be crazy!)
How did we build the greatest nation on earth? How did we invent computers and get to the moon without the Department of Education?
Stop thinking constructing one more federal agency will solve problems. They only take away choices and freedom and your money—which IS your freedom. Americans have many problems. If we keep constructing federal agencies to deal with these problems pretty soon they'll construct a building in Washington DC and cut the ribbon on the Department of Ingrown Toenails.
-
The USA had a 98% literacy rate in 1910. It is now hovering around 60%. Something went wrong. Badly.
-
The USA had a 98% literacy rate in 1910. It is now hovering around 60%. Something went wrong. Badly.
People wanted to learn back then. Learning was even a form of entertainment. Now, kids just want to be entertained, and consider education as work. There are so many options today, and parents take the easy route, which is television and other electronics.
-
Where LS goes wrong is in thinking the department of education adds value.
Regardless of what the situation is now, I feel devoting money to education and learning can add value, and that is just one of several places I feel money from the federal government could help a lot. It'd certainly do a lot more good than it is doing while wasted on the war on drugs.
-
and parents take the easy route, which is television and other electronics.
My ex and I will be homeschooling my son because of how atrocious the public school system is. I can give my son a much better education than he would receive from public schools.
-
Learning is a form of entertainment. :patriot: :patriot:
Fun as hell, pushes your boundaries and makes you think, not just absorb passively while half asleep.
-
My ex and I will be homeschooling my son because of how atrocious the public school system is. I can give my son a much better education than he would receive from public schools.
Be grateful you have that option. Most countries do not.
However - well done to both of you.
-
I think we could do a LOT of good for education in this country if we started actually providing good funding to public schools. Maybe they'd be able to hire some more teachers and reduce the size of classrooms so teachers would be able to properly teach our children. Maybe they'd be able to buy some of the teaching materials that a lot of public schools desperately need. Maybe if we reduced some of our enormously bloated military spending as well as ended the war on drugs we could easily afford to let people do something horrible like go to college for free (or even for reasonable prices that don't put them in debt for the next 20 years). Maybe we could afford to hire more good professors so professors aren't overwhelmed with more students than they can handle and the quality of education can be improved in college as well.
Good golly man you REALLY don't have a clue do you? We are spending 5 times the money on education we did just a few years ago and getting half the results! Money ios not, and never has been the answer!
Buy a clue!
-
My student loans are nearing 50 thousand dollars and I have not even finished my masters degree yet. Where exactly can young inexperienced students today work that allows them to make ends meet as well as pay off the gigantic amount of student loan debt they are accruing while they attend college?
I believe I remember you saying somewhere that you were ex military. What happened to your GI benefits?
I worked a full time job and went to school at night while my sweet wife (almost 46 years now) worked and kept things at home together. Payed with GI benefits and out of my own pocket! All of this was pre computer and word processor so all papers had to be manually typed on a typewriter (do you know what a typewriter is?). No fancy graphing calculators either! We used a thing called a slide rule!
Get to work and STOP Whining!
-
If I never see a slide rule again - to the heat death of the Universe - it will be too soon.
-
The USA had a 98% literacy rate in 1910. It is now hovering around 60%. Something went wrong. Badly.
:amen: :amen: and :amen:!
And one of those things that went wrong was the federal department of Education! That and the rise of Colleges of Education in our universities!
-
Regardless of what the situation is now, I feel devoting money to education and learning can add value, and that is just one of several places I feel money from the federal government could help a lot. It'd certainly do a lot more good than it is doing while wasted on the war on drugs.
The federal government dramatically expanded its role in both primary and secondary education over the past 20-30 years. If federal involvement makes things better, then why are things going in the wrong direction? Costs are up, student performance is down, in direct correlation to heavier federal involvement. Why do you think that is?
-
People wanted to learn back then. Learning was even a form of entertainment. Now, kids just want to be entertained, and consider education as work. There are so many options today, and parents take the easy route, which is television and other electronics.
Back then people understood the difference between being exposed to a certain body of knowledge and the ability to actually DO something! Those are two VASTLY different things!
-
How long did it take the majority of you to pay off your massive student loan debt after you were finished with college?
When I went to college, a college education was affordable. I worked my way through. I didn't have to grovel to the government and make myself their slave for life.
You owe them $50k and yet you think they aren't doing enough. You ever hear of Stockholm Syndrome?
-
Regardless of what the situation is now, I feel devoting money to education and learning can add value, and that is just one of several places I feel money from the federal government could help a lot. It'd certainly do a lot more good than it is doing while wasted on the war on drugs.
You say you want to be a professor of history so that means you have to play the game and get all of the proper creds. but at the end of the day you STILL will have little knowledge of ACTUAL history. If you REALLY want to learn history you will be far better off spending your time in libraries researching original documentation rather than spending all that money to be pumped full of the revisionist crap they are now teaching!
-
If I never see a slide rule again - to the heat death of the Universe - it will be too soon.
LOL! I couldn't agree more!
I used to have a bunch of them and wish I still did because they have become quite valuable to collectors.
-
When I went to college, a college education was affordable. I worked my way through. I didn't have to grovel to the government and make myself their slave for life.
You owe them $50k and yet you think they aren't doing enough. You ever hear of Stockholm Syndrome?
Bingo. I paid as I went while working 24 hours a week at a grocery store.
-
You say you want to be a professor of history so that means you have to play the game and get all of the proper creds. but at the end of the day you STILL will have little knowledge of ACTUAL history. If you REALLY want to learn history you will be far better off spending your time in libraries researching original documentation rather than spending all that money to be pumped full of the revisionist crap they are now teaching!
If he is a history major, he is not really learning American history. He is learning "identity" history: the revised history of African Americans, the revised history of women, the revised history of GBLT peoples, etc. Basically, the curriculum follows the political strategy of the Democrat Party. Find subcultures and split them off from the dominant culture by showing them how oppressed they were, and are.
Virtually no one teaches traditional American history today, and when they do, the books all make heroes out of people like Wilson and FDR, and paint people like Coolidge and Reagan as short-sighted idiots.
I really feel sorry for you, LS, that you have put yourself $50K in debt to be programmed to think the way you do. As a marketing professor, however, I have to really admire the marketing savvy of the Democrat machine. Not only did they reel you in as an advocate to their way of thinking, they got you to pay $50K for the privilege of being brainwashed by them.
-
Slightly different system, but let me spin you a tale here.
I loved teaching. The sheer joy of seeing someone "get it" got me up in the morning and got me through the day in a tough inner city school. Lots of crap, lots of shit, all ignorable for that look in a kid's eyes when they finally understand something - be it the laws of thermodynamics or valences or "Mix this with this and it goes boom and this is why."
So, why haven't I taught in 15 years? Because for the 4 years preceding my quitting, I was not teaching. I was ticking boxes and filling out forms. I had a full class load - 36 hours per week. Another 40 hours a week doing the obligatory paperwork. I never signed up to do paperwork. I wanted to teach. Not just my subjects, but a little about life and a little about tolerance and a little bit about fun.
Instead of looking at each student as a person, with their own needs and interests, I was looking at them as boxes to be ticked, grades to be obtained and assets to be kept. Not for me. Sorry. Anything that depersonalizes a person into a pigeonhole is something I detest.
My very first day on the job - I remember it well. Some stroppy kid pulled a blade on me in the hallway. Told him to put it away before it went up his ass. He, oddly, turned out to be one of my best students and someone I am still proud of 25 years later. We keep in touch. Went to his wedding. :laugh:
My first A level class - that was frightening. They were dedicated and - most of them - a hell of a lot smarter than me. 23 of them in the class. 18 of them are now Ph.Ds, or doctors, or lawyers. Two are dead, three are in prison. Not a bad average, over all.
-
Regardless of what the situation is now, I feel devoting money to education and learning can add value, and that is just one of several places I feel money from the federal government could help a lot. It'd certainly do a lot more good than it is doing while wasted on the war on drugs.
As someone in the education industry myself this is quite important to me. I want to challenge you on something. I challenge you to do a bit of analysis of the ratio of funds put into the school system through the federal government and performance.
Based on that trend line, your next challenge is to try to figure out why (spoiler alert) more federal money has resulted in far lower performance.
-
When I went to college, a college education was affordable.
How do we make a college education affordable again?
-
How do we make a college education affordable again?
Get the federal government out of it, for starters. All the tax credits and student loans just drive up the cost and add no value to the product. These programs are designed to make politicians look indispensable, and to make people government-dependent. They are also designed to inflate the salaries of the academically privileged, who are disproportionately Democrat. In short, young man, you are being screwed.
-
How do we make a college education affordable again?
Like most things today...
Tremendously scale back the (not so) free government subsidies and loans. Get government regulation out of the way and let the free market work.
-
What's interesting is liberal spy acknowledges the problems within our educational system and yet when presented with unassailable logic can't seem to connect the dots—or won't:
More federal money has not resulted in better educational outcomes.
Please, liberal spy, if you can, pick that sentence apart. Enlighten us.
-
Get the federal government out of it, for starters. All the tax credits and student loans just drive up the cost and add no value to the product. These programs are designed to make politicians look indispensable, and to make people government-dependent.
Did I type yours, or did you type mine?
-
Did I type yours, or did you type mine?
Well, if I'd have known what you were going to type, I'd have just used copy and paste.
-
If he is a history major, he is not really learning American history. He is learning "identity" history: the revised history of African Americans, the revised history of women, the revised history of GBLT peoples, etc. Basically, the curriculum follows the political strategy of the Democrat Party. Find subcultures and split them off from the dominant culture by showing them how oppressed they were, and are.
Virtually no one teaches traditional American history today, and when they do, the books all make heroes out of people like Wilson and FDR, and paint people like Coolidge and Reagan as short-sighted idiots.
I really feel sorry for you, LS, that you have put yourself $50K in debt to be programmed to think the way you do. As a marketing professor, however, I have to really admire the marketing savvy of the Democrat machine. Not only did they reel you in as an advocate to their way of thinking, they got you to pay $50K for the privilege of being brainwashed by them.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
I know of only one place, Hillsdale College, that even comes close and even that is slanted toward a particular viewpoint.
-
Get the federal government out of it, for starters. All the tax credits and student loans just drive up the cost and add no value to the product.
How are young students just leaving their parents houses supposed to pay for college without student loans? It's hard for young people with no experience to get a decent paying job. You might be looking at 10 dollars an hour starting somewhere if you're lucky. Minimum wage in Florida is 7.25. Do you think the cost would actually go down enough to make it possible for students to pay for college out of pocket? There are lots and lots of students that just barely make enough to get by.
-
How are young students just leaving their parents houses supposed to pay for college without student loans? It's hard for young people with no experience to get a decent paying job. You might be looking at 10 dollars an hour starting somewhere if you're lucky. Minimum wage is Florida is 7.25. Do you think the cost would actually go down enough to make it possible for students to pay for college out of pocket? There are lots and lots of students that just barely make enough to get by.
So you think expanding the student loan program and increasing the minimum wage will do the trick, huh? Good luck with that.
-
Slightly different system, but let me spin you a tale here.
I loved teaching. The sheer joy of seeing someone "get it" got me up in the morning and got me through the day in a tough inner city school. Lots of crap, lots of shit, all ignorable for that look in a kid's eyes when they finally understand something - be it the laws of thermodynamics or valences or "Mix this with this and it goes boom and this is why."
So, why haven't I taught in 15 years? Because for the 4 years preceding my quitting, I was not teaching. I was ticking boxes and filling out forms. I had a full class load - 36 hours per week. Another 40 hours a week doing the obligatory paperwork. I never signed up to do paperwork. I wanted to teach. Not just my subjects, but a little about life and a little about tolerance and a little bit about fun.
Instead of looking at each student as a person, with their own needs and interests, I was looking at them as boxes to be ticked, grades to be obtained and assets to be kept. Not for me. Sorry. Anything that depersonalizes a person into a pigeonhole is something I detest.
My very first day on the job - I remember it well. Some stroppy kid pulled a blade on me in the hallway. Told him to put it away before it went up his ass. He, oddly, turned out to be one of my best students and someone I am still proud of 25 years later. We keep in touch. Went to his wedding. :laugh:
My first A level class - that was frightening. They were dedicated and - most of them - a hell of a lot smarter than me. 23 of them in the class. 18 of them are now Ph.Ds, or doctors, or lawyers. Two are dead, three are in prison. Not a bad average, over all.
Great story! And all to common these days!
It is also worth noting that when I was going to school there were lots of people in classrooms who had done other things for varying lengths of time before the came to teaching but now days that is virtually impossible to find for all manner of reasons all of which I'm sure you are quite aware of!
-
How are young students just leaving their parents houses supposed to pay for college without student loans? It's hard for young people with no experience to get a decent paying job. You might be looking at 10 dollars an hour starting somewhere if you're lucky. Minimum wage in Florida is 7.25. Do you think the cost would actually go down enough to make it possible for students to pay for college out of pocket? There are lots and lots of students that just barely make enough to get by.
Hard to find a job huh! Perhaps you should blame that on the FACT that the minimum wage laws you so love work strongly against the very people you are talking about! And also perhaps you are looking in all the wrong places. You want to know who in your generation is going to be making the kind of money doctors and lawyers make today? Well I'm gong to tell you anyway! It's going to be plumbers, electricians, pipe fitters, engineers of all stripes, and anything else that requires one to get his hands dirty! OH!. BTW every one of those trades I mentioned are begging for competent young folks to join their apprenticeship programs which PAY you to learn a trade!
-
Well, if I'd have known what you were going to type, I'd have just used copy and paste.
Those who created education budgets can learn a lot from you- find efficiencies. :)
-
So you think expanding the student loan program and increasing the minimum wage will do the trick, huh? Good luck with that.
I was asking you what you think. What is your solution to that problem? I'm sure young people would love to be able to work hard and pay for college as they go, but the reality is most of them can't.
-
How are young students just leaving their parents houses supposed to pay for college without student loans? It's hard for young people with no experience to get a decent paying job. You might be looking at 10 dollars an hour starting somewhere if you're lucky. Minimum wage in Florida is 7.25. Do you think the cost would actually go down enough to make it possible for students to pay for college out of pocket? There are lots and lots of students that just barely make enough to get by.
My son has six kids, two biological, three step kids, and one foster kid. The dads are out of the picture financially, and they don't take foster care money. The older three are in college, and two took out student loans. However, they have been saving money since they were small, as well as their parents setting aside a little here and there, so they don't have the burden other kids do. All three worked at mowing lawns, baby sitting, and when they got their license, one worked at Arby's while the boys did roofing. The girl got scholarships, so is working her way through college. The preparation for college needs to begin as children.
-
Hard to find a job huh! Perhaps you should blame that on the FACT that the minimum wage laws you so love work strongly against the very people you are talking about! And also perhaps you are looking in all the wrong places. You want to know who in your generation is going to be making the kind of money doctors and lawyers make today? Well I'm gong to tell you anyway! It's going to be plumbers, electricians, pipe fitters, engineers of all stripes, and anything else that requires one to get his hands dirty! OH!. BTW every one of those trades I mentioned are begging for competent young folks to join their apprenticeship programs which PAY you to learn a trade!
Not everybody wants to have a blue collar job for the rest of their lives. I have done construction work before. I know first hand how hard they work. I don't want to do that crap for the rest of my life. I choose to do other things because I am better suited for them.
-
Just to back up what I said up thread:
(http://www.heritage.org/static/reportimages/796DF8C7C231CFFE366308277E88CF57.gif)
From http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2008/09/does-spending-more-on-education-improve-academic-achievement
-
How are young students just leaving their parents houses supposed to pay for college without student loans? It's hard for young people with no experience to get a decent paying job. You might be looking at 10 dollars an hour starting somewhere if you're lucky. Minimum wage in Florida is 7.25. Do you think the cost would actually go down enough to make it possible for students to pay for college out of pocket? There are lots and lots of students that just barely make enough to get by.
I did it. Work hard, take your time going to college, get a job, did I mention work hard? I found an employer who offered tuition assistance and I finished my Bachelors and Masters through that. I see college students do it all the time. There is just a big mindset difference. I see single mothers work their butt off during a day at a low paying job and go to nursing school at night without taking out loans. Everyone's circumstance is different and living on campus, joining frats, taking 15 hours, and having the traditional 'college experience' isn't for everyone.
How one was able to attend and pay for college used to be one of the first big life lessons for the young that helped define their success in the future.
I have one friend who was dirt poor, and I mean dirt.... as in dirt driveway, bumming rides off friends, plywood floors, dirt poor. He worked his butt off to attend a 2 year Jr. College and while he was doing that, he earned money by installing car stereos in his garage. He and some friends opened a stereo shop a few years later (and he continued to go to college after hours, one or two classes at a time). Now, he is probably the youngest millionaire in our city (39). He took his business and his eduction, and looked for any opportunity to grow. Now, he is a property developer who has built about 6 hotels and 2 restaurants.
The irony is he couldn't do that in today's regulatory environment. Most of what I described he was able to achieve from about 1993 to 2006. He told me if he tried to do this today, he couldn't because there were just too many regulations in place. He would probably still be installing car stereos.
-
Not everybody wants to have a blue collar job for the rest of their lives. I have done construction work before. I know first hand how hard they work. I don't want to do that crap for the rest of my life. I choose to do other things because I am better suited for them.
Fine! But when you are whining be sure to tell the truth and say that I can't find a job THAT I LIKE!
Oh and BTW! This is the LAST post you will see from me! Hope you find what you are looking for and have a nice life!
-
My son has six kids, two biological, three step kids, and one foster kid. The dads are out of the picture financially, and they don't take foster care money. The older three are in college, and two took out student loans. However, they have been saving money since they were small, as well as their parents setting aside a little here and there, so they don't have the burden other kids do. All three worked at mowing lawns, baby sitting, and when they got their license, one worked at Arby's while the boys did roofing. The girl got scholarships, so is working her way through college. The preparation for college needs to begin as children.
Not everybody has the luxury of being able to set aside money to help their kids with college. In fact a LOT of parents do not have the ability to do that. Student loans are absolutely massive. That would be a lot of money for anybody to pay.
-
I loved teaching. ..., I was not teaching. I was ticking boxes and filling out forms. I had a full class load - 36 hours per week. Another 40 hours a week doing the obligatory paperwork. I never signed up to do paperwork. I wanted to teach. ...
Substitute "practice" for "teach" and you've underscored my feelings about my healthcare practice today.
-
Not everybody has the luxury of being able to set aside money to help their kids with college. In fact a LOT of parents do not have the ability to do that. Student loans are absolutely massive. That would be a lot of money for anybody to pay.
My son didn't have extra money. He and his wife gave up a lot, and the money they set aside was $5 here or $10 there. And, the kids all worked for extra money. My neighbor kid has the cash to buy his first car. He is only 14 years old, but is looking ahead. I imagine he will get to college the same way. They used to be dirt poor, but slowly worked their way out of it, sometimes working several jobs.
-
Substitute "practice" for "teach" and you've underscored my feelings about my healthcare practice today.
LOL! My daughter is a trauma certified RN with a degree in business management who is now teaching and loves it!
-
I was asking you what you think. What is your solution to that problem? I'm sure young people would love to be able to work hard and pay for college as they go, but the reality is most of them can't.
You are not going to like my answer.
I teach my students to think of themselves as individuals who are responsible for themselves. This means they must set goals and objectives for themselves, then develop a plan to achieve those goals. Their responsibility is not to the society, but to themselves. Paradoxically, the best thing each of them can do for the society is to be successful as individuals.
I also teach them that the macroenvironment, which includes politics, is something they should consider uncontrollable. They may like or not like the things that are happening in society, but they must not let that cloud their judgment in terms of predicting what is going to happen next. Since their primary responsibility is to themselves, then pursuing their plans requires that they figure out what is going to happen in the macroenvironment (we call this "forecasting") and then try to capitalize on it so that when it happens, they benefit. In the coming years, my students are going to be capitalizing on all the turbulence that is certainly coming to society as you and your ilk chase rainbows looking for unicorns.
In short, I don't teach them to sit in a nest and beg for scraps from mama bird government, unless, of course, that's the best avenue available to them to personally succeed.
Either way, they are taught to understand that change is fundamentally good, since without change there will be no opportunity.
-
My son didn't have extra money. He and his wife gave up a lot, and the money they set aside was $5 here or $10 there. And, the kids all worked for extra money. My neighbor kid has the cash to buy his first car. He is only 14 years old, but is looking ahead. I imagine he will get to college the same way. They used to be dirt poor, but slowly worked their way out of it, sometimes working several jobs.
My sons just turned 21. They have had odd jobs for years. This year, each deposited $2,000 in a Roth IRA for their retirement - and they are full-time college students.
Any time government subsidizes what can and should be done by a free market (free as in unshackled), the system becomes distorted and bloated. What astonishes me is how willing people can take on huge debt because they "can't afford" it. What is life's penalty for having a $50,000 or $100,000 student loan debt?
Let the higher learning institutions compete for students and watch what happens to tuition. Remove the smothering regulations from employers and watch what part-time jobs emerge for college students. Let the free markets expand to create opportunity for the graduate. And de-bloat the government machine. at every turn, every opportunity.
-
Substitute "practice" for "teach" and you've underscored my feelings about my healthcare practice today.
Healing (physically or mentally), teaching - I was always taught they were vocations, not careers. They used to be. Now, they are tick the box, get paid and ignore the recipient as an inconvenience.
I do still teach. My grandkids and their friends. We talk in the shed or in the garage. Equations written on a concrete wall in used motor oil or chalk. Just confine it to my own, now.
-
Excellent! massadvj. Listen to the professor. I sure am.
-
Fine! But when you are whining be sure to tell the truth and say that I can't find a job THAT I LIKE!
Oh and BTW! This is the LAST post you will see from me! Hope you find what you are looking for and have a nice life!
I'm sorry you feel that way. I didn't mean to offend you.
-
I'm sorry you feel that way. I didn't mean to offend you.
Now stop doing that.
You stand for something, you will offend people. You got the choice - be a mouse or stand up for what you believe.
Totally your call.
-
Excellent! massadvj. Listen to the professor. I sure am.
Absolutely! Wish he'd taught me back when.....
Somehow...Obama is going to find a way to cancel everybody's student loan balance. It's coming.
It's called the "How-Do-You-Like-Me NOW?" Syndrome. Surfaces in early winter, especially election years.
-
I'm sorry you feel that way. I didn't mean to offend you.
Not offended! Sickened would more properly describe it.
-
Thanks, AC and Lando.
LOL! I wish I had you guys in the classroom. My students are bored with me after 5 minutes.
-
Not offended! Sickened would more properly describe it.
It was never my intention to make you feel that way. I don't dislike you.
-
It was never my intention to make you feel that way. I don't dislike you.
Nor do I dislike you! And, to be perfectly honest it is not you personally at all! It's an entire generation of people we have lost to thinking like that which you display.
-
Nor do I dislike you! And, to be perfectly honest it is not you personally at all! It's an entire generation of people we have lost to thinking like that which you display.
Been thinking a lot on this today.
We bleep up. Wanted to give our kids the best. Smooth their way, make life easier. Not a bad thing, and totally understandable. Yet not good for them.
-
Been thinking a lot on this today.
We bleeped up. Wanted to give our kids the best. Smooth their way, make life easier. Not a bad thing, and totally understandable. Yet not good for them.
:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:
-
My ex and I will be homeschooling my son because of how atrocious the public school system is. I can give my son a much better education than he would receive from public schools.
Good for you LS!
-
“All of the great achievers of the past have been visionary figures; they were men and women who projected into the future. They thought of what could be, rather than what already was, and then they moved themselves into action, to bring these things into fruition." - Bob Proctor Author and Speaker
-
LOL! I couldn't agree more!
I used to have a bunch of them and wish I still did because they have become quite valuable to collectors.
Now you tell me. When George died I tossed his slide rule in the garbage..... 8888crybaby
-
Now you tell me. When George died I tossed his slide rule in the garbage..... 8888crybaby
OMG no! You could have gotten enough for it to pay for a pedicure!
-
Slightly different system, but let me spin you a tale here.
So, why haven't I taught in 15 years? Because for the 4 years preceding my quitting, I was not teaching. I was ticking boxes and filling out forms. I had a full class load - 36 hours per week. Another 40 hours a week doing the obligatory paperwork. I never signed up to do paperwork. I wanted to teach. Not just my subjects, but a little about life and a little about tolerance and a little bit about fun.
The same thing has happened to medical doctors in America over their the last 20 years... started camping up uafter Hillary and Newt messed with CMS.
-
The slide rule (mine is a K & E) is a work of art and a single feat of mechanical and mathematical genius. Everything I enjoy now is entirely due to the beauty and accuracy of the K&E and my ability to put it to effective use.
How can one put a monetary value on such a magnificent invention of man? It's monetary value has no meaning against its contributions to the R&D community.
Collectors can collectively go to hell, IMHO.
PS: We sent a man to the moon largely double checking early IBM 790's computation reults using slide rules.
-
One of the things I like about here - you learn. It isn't deliberate, it just happens. Someone will make a passing reference that sends you on an odessy of searches and links. Next thing you know it is 3 hours later and work has not been done. :beer:
-
Not everybody has the luxury of being able to set aside money to help their kids with college. In fact a LOT of parents do not have the ability to do that. Student loans are absolutely massive. That would be a lot of money for anybody to pay.
Frankly your comments on this thread proves the free advice you are receiving from lot of very smart conservatives who have been there, done that, raised kids and or teach or taught kids is going in one ear and out the other because you have been do indoctrinated in your liberal education you are truly unable to step back and objectively examine a situation. You're looking for someone here to tell you what you WANT you hear and not getting it you keep asking US the same question instead of pressing for us to expand your knowledge base and world view. What I see in your questions is also what I see wrong with America and that is education... as in lack of... the fact you are working on your MBA and think the government ... or to be more accurate more government ... Is the answer scares me for your generation. You say you've worked construction before and don't want to work hard forever.. fine, work it while going to school to pay for school and you will accomplish two things.. no debt when you graduate and you'll actually get some real world experience.
BTW what about your GI Bill... you still have not responded.
-
Maybe this guy can help since he is speaking to LS's contemporaries:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FNXwKGZHmDc
-
the fact you are working on your MBA and think the government ...
I don't think he's working on an MBA. I think he is working on a Master's in history.
-
OMG no! You could have gotten enough for it to pay for a pedicure!
NOW you REALLY upset me 8888crybaby 8888crybaby
-
Now you tell me. When George died I tossed his slide rule in the garbage..... 8888crybaby
Vintage slide rule- $400
http://www.ebay.com/itm/VINTAGE-LARGE-7-FT-PICKETT-SLIDE-RULE-MODEL-N803-ES-FREE-SHIPPING-/331048284916?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4d1403f2f4
-
Who calls it a luxury?
A piece of paper to wave in recruiters faces is no luxury, it is obligatory now.
Kid born? The day they are born you open a bank account in their name and start popping money into it. Some months it might be $10. Some months it might be $100. You don't need the latest electronics and games and crap. You do need to look out for your kids. Sorry, that is your job for the next 18 years. Don't like the idea - don't have kids.
-
I don't think he's working on an MBA. I think he is working on a Master's in history.
I stand corrected. Trying to shorten keystrokes on my pad here.
-
Vintage slide rule- $400
http://www.ebay.com/itm/VINTAGE-LARGE-7-FT-PICKETT-SLIDE-RULE-MODEL-N803-ES-FREE-SHIPPING-/331048284916?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4d1403f2f4
Nice work moderators of the site--making a valid point into a trivial joke. I'm confident we are all impressed with your collective wisdom and wit. Keep it up please. You're the smartest people in the room I'm told.
-
There are several depictions of Gen Y, many of which are not complimentary.
http://www.livescience.com/38061-millennials-generation-y.html
and
http://nation.time.com/2013/05/09/millennials-the-next-greatest-generation/
"I am about to do what old people have done throughout history: call those younger than me lazy, entitled, selfish and shallow. But I have studies! I have statistics! I have quotes from respected academics! Unlike my parents, my grandparents and my great-grandparents, I have proof.
Here's the cold, hard data: The incidence of narcissistic personality disorder is nearly three times as high for people in their 20s as for the generation that's now 65 or older, according to the National Institutes of Health; 58% more college students scored higher on a narcissism scale in...
Read more: http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2143001,00.html#ixzz2iI6cnb8b
-
Nice work moderators of the site--making a valid point into a trivial joke. I'm confident we are all impressed with your collective wisdom and wit. Keep it up please. You're the smartest people in the room I'm told.
I did throw it out, that isn't a joke. He saved everything... I'd rather endure a root canal than a garage sale so what I didn't give away I threw away...
-
Once again I'd like to point out that Liberal's presence here has contributed to the longest and most interesting discussions since maybe the presidential election season.
While I would never have trolled a liberal site myself, Liberal had the courage to come here and face us in his resplendent naiveté. So, for that, I thank you Liberal_Spy! And on behalf of myself only—and perhaps a handful of others—please accept an honorary membership to my favorite group, Conservatives For Reality. Your membership card plus this 8 x 10 glossy photo suitable for framing will arrive by United States postal Service (that is if the line at the post office isn't too long):
(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2870/10373146405_e5309a6f22.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/105575503@N07/10373146405/)
-
Sadly I don't think k o e word written here has changed his world view even little bit.
-
Sadly I don't think k o e word written here has changed his world view even little bit.
No, but it's a helluva thread nonetheless.
-
No, but it's a helluva thread nonetheless.
true
-
Sadly I don't think k o e word written here has changed his world view even little bit.
Possibly not. When you were that young, you thought you knew it all. Know I did!
Still - it is a good thread, so thank you L-S.
-
Possibly not. When you were that young, you thought you knew it all. Know I did!
Still - it is a good thread, so thank you L-S.
I didn't think of government as my mommie and daddy... ever... I always have known I am responsible for me. I not only put myself through school.. never in my life did I ever take one dime from my parents for anything...I babysat and worked in high school to buy my own school clothes and when I left home at 18 I didn't even take my car... I went out and bought my own car... So I've been aware always that the only person responsible fir me and my good or bad decisions in life is me. I can't ever thinking if only Uncle Sam would pay for something
.. I want less Uncle Sam, not more... always have felt that way.
-
School was very different back then, even here in liberal New York. They reinforced the lessons we learned at home not contradict them like today
-
School was very different back then, even here in liberal New York. They reinforced the lessons we learned at home not contradict them like today
Yep... remember civics class back then? I LOVED civics.
-
I didn't think of government as my mommie and daddy... ever... I always have known I am responsible for me. I not only put myself through school.. never in my life did I ever take one dime from my parents for anything...I babysat and worked in high school to buy my own school clothes and when I left home at 18 I didn't even take my car... I went out and bought my own car... So I've been aware always that the only person responsible fir me and my good or bad decisions in life is me. I can't ever thinking if only Uncle Sam would pay for something
.. I want less Uncle Sam, not more... always have felt that way.
Same. I left home at 15 - with my parents blessing and approval. They scraped up £150 to stick in my pocket, which was both surprising and frightening. More money then I had ever seen in my life, at the time.
I have never taken a cent from the government. I have worked jobs that would make you puke just to keep food on the table. One year - I recall spending most of my time not working in the bath, trying to get clean again. 3 kids between the ages of 1 and 4 and my job was literally shoveling human shit 10 hours a day in the sewers. It paid well. Mainly cause no bugger wanted to do the job.
-
The slide rule (mine is a K & E) is a work of art and a single feat of mechanical and mathematical genius. Everything I enjoy now is entirely due to the beauty and accuracy of the K&E and my ability to put it to effective use.
How can one put a monetary value on such a magnificent invention of man? It's monetary value has no meaning against its contributions to the R&D community.
Collectors can collectively go to hell, IMHO.
PS: We sent a man to the moon largely double checking early IBM 790's computation reults using slide rules.
I had a couple of Picketts and several others the manufacturers of which I can't even recall now. I gave a couple away to people who needed them and couldn't afford them. Have no idea what happened to the others. Got lost in moves I presume.
-
I didn't think of government as my mommie and daddy... ever... I always have known I am responsible for me. I not only put myself through school.. never in my life did I ever take one dime from my parents for anything...I babysat and worked in high school to buy my own school clothes and when I left home at 18 I didn't even take my car... I went out and bought my own car... So I've been aware always that the only person responsible fir me and my good or bad decisions in life is me. I can't ever thinking if only Uncle Sam would pay for something
.. I want less Uncle Sam, not more... always have felt that way.
When we were coming of age such an idea had yet to be conceived and to tell you the truth I REALLY had a hard time taking money from uncle sugar for my education even after having "earned" it through my service in Vietnam. The idea was foreign!
-
Once again I'd like to point out that Liberal's presence here has contributed to the longest and most interesting discussions since maybe the presidential election season.
While I would never have trolled a liberal site myself, Liberal had the courage to come here and face us in his resplendent naiveté. So, for that, I thank you Liberal_Spy! And on behalf of myself only—and perhaps a handful of others—please accept an honorary membership to my favorite group, Conservatives For Reality. Your membership card plus this 8 x 10 glossy photo suitable for framing will arrive by United States postal Service (that is if the line at the post office isn't too long):
(http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2870/10373146405_e5309a6f22.jpg) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/105575503@N07/10373146405/)
Reading his posts, I would take it he is far more libertarian than liberal. I think to many young, being liberal is just what you are supposed to be in order to be accepted and they still have the naive view that liberalism=accepting and open mindedness. Liberal politics is just the opposite of accepting and open. It is the vast difference between the 'classic liberal' of Jefferson and the political Liberal of today like Pelosi and Obama.
-
Who calls it a luxury?
A piece of paper to wave in recruiters faces is no luxury, it is obligatory now.
Actually, now because 'that piece of paper' is becoming a dime in a dozen, specific certifications are much more highly prized by recruiters. PMP is the hot certification right now and one can earn it for a fraction of the time and price of getting a degree. A degree does help you stand apart from those who don't have one, but it is like a car with no air conditioning- it will get you from here to there but no one will want to hop in with you.
-
Reading his posts, I would take it he is far more libertarian than liberal. I think to many young, being liberal is just what you are supposed to be in order to be accepted and they still have the naive view that liberalism=accepting and open mindedness. Liberal politics is just the opposite of accepting and open. It is the vast difference between the 'classic liberal' of Jefferson and the political Liberal of today like Pelosi and Obama.
Very true. I'm glad you pointed that out.
-
Reading his posts, I would take it he is far more libertarian than liberal. I think to many young, being liberal is just what you are supposed to be in order to be accepted and they still have the naive view that liberalism=accepting and open mindedness. Liberal politics is just the opposite of accepting and open. It is the vast difference between the 'classic liberal' of Jefferson and the political Liberal of today like Pelosi and Obama.
He's a history major but I doubt he knows the difference between classical liberalism and modern liberalism. He would, however, know every minor figure in history who was female, gay or black. And he would know that they managed whatever they did -- inventing the pumpkin seeder or something -- in spite of the fact that the system was rigged against them.