Modern Poverty Includes A.C. and an Xbox

Originally posted by neo96
omg classwarfare came from the koch brothers?

i have yet to see them say anything remotely like obama has time and time aigan.

spread the wealth

at some point youve earned enough

the more fortnuate should be paying for those who have less.

if you heard of robin hood you have heard of classwarfare and its been in practice for decades in this country.

and now your robbin hoods have robbed enough that has turned the majorty of this nation into hoods.

i swear it is amazing how clueless some people are.

How clueless are they? It's funny... at least to me... that the typical response from the right is how clueless people are. I like to imagine sometimes that I'm not clueless (a difficult exercise) and pretend I see the world as you might. I'm not being sarcastic, I really do try to think as someone on the right might think. Now I said that I try... but I fail. I must be clueless. I try, but I can't see what you see. I can't envision a society that does not in some way spread their wealth that also has a functioning middle class. And a society without a functioning middle class, isn't a functioning society at all.
In my eyes, clueless is not realizing that you were born into a country that functions as a result of "social engineering" and government run systems. But I could be wrong. Their might be children out there born in the wild, who educate themselves, build their own roadways, run their own water and sewer lines, recruit and manage their own fire dept, police force, border guards, armies. They test their own food and water to make sure it's safe and... they not only come up with their own flight safety standards and regulations, but they enforce them too.
Clueless to me is NOT realizing that the middle class is a result of "social engineering". It didn't happen by accident. Clueless would be to think it could somehow evolve on it's own, prosper and persist in a world where "wealth" isn't spread around. To think that a country could let an entire class of people go hungry because it would be socialist to feed them, to let them suffer because it would be socialist to provide them with healthcare, to allow a generation of illiterates grow up because it would somehow be wrong to take money from someone and use it to educate a child that isn't his or hers. Clueless is thinking your life wouldn't be negatively affected if society was left alone to deteriorate. Clueless is thinking that protecting the right of an individual to accumulate excessive wealth (and use that wealth to change policy in one's favour) is more important and in some way morally superior than a civilization's responsibility to itself, to protecting all people... especially the least among us and the environment we live in.
Clueless is thinking (or just ignoring... maybe hoping it doesn't happen) that a society with excessive wealth disparity does not result in a smorgasbord of social problems including alchohol and drug abuse, higher divorce, increased theft and violent crime rates, suicides, health issues such as depression, and stress related illness... the list goes on. It doesn't matter what your opinion of Robin Hood is, I can guarantee you that a world without wealth distribution is a world that does not consider or include us. It's decisions, resources and beauty will belong to a select few.
The Koch brothers and others like them play real class warfare, not the imaginary class warfare fabricated and designed to have the middle classes eat their own.
But then again, I might just be the clueless one. Like I said, I try to see the world through your eyes, but I fail.

reply to post by onebullet


what a long winded post

its not surprising some people dont get it and never will all those programs have done nothing but to make people worse off.

someone elses problems are not mine no matter how much someone else thinks they are.

its not your place or the governments place to take what i earn and give it to someone else.

dont really care if people disagree with that weve tried that for the past 50 years and it hasnt worked and it never will.

Originally posted by Unity_99
As a poor person myself, with tons of stuff over the years, and 5 boys, 2 xbox's, no air conditioner, but if we needed one we would pick it up. We get nearly 100% of our clothing and furniture, which is from 3 households now, free, and given to us, or second hand. I cut our own hair. All electronics is new, usually. Appliances second hand shops. Dishwashers and airconditioners can be second hand as well, in fact every single mother I know got theres donated or second hand.

Xbox's usually come from relatives as gifts. Oh I also have a camera, winter light therapy lamp that was 300 brand new. We also share living space with relatives to have money to get things we need.

Anyone who has a problem with that isn't worth talking to. And their opinions/free will, don't slam dunk mine.

edit on 20-7-2011 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)

You may think you are describing yourself as a poor person, but you seem more like a creative mooch.
Whatever works for you, but you won't get my sympathy.

Originally posted by dolphinfan
It certainly is a poor investment if the person is not actively seeking employment or an education and has been on welfare for more than a few years. What do we do with the person who has been on welfare for a decade?

OK, there is a couple problems with this. The job market is pretty bad right now, there are people that have actively been looking for work longer than a year. And even if someone has a job that doesn't mean they don't necessarily need assistance. A lot of jobs in this country do not pay very well and some people have families to support, and/or have lost a good paying job and are stuck in a significantly lesser paying job.

Personally, I think we have bigger fish to fry than the poor. Why don't we look at the investments that we've made with corporations and banks and see how that is turning out for America?

I think our priorities are a little out of whack to say the least when we are going after what amounts to be a group of people that legitimately (for the most part) need help and assistance.

reply to post by neo96


If you think you owe nothing for the freedom to earn, you are welcome to give it a go in a country that does not educate it's people, protect them or their environment, provide utilities or roads for business to operate. There's a cost to living in society, I'm impressed by your declaration of being above it.
I'm also impressed with your immunity to "other" peoples problems. I wish I had such luxury that my ability to earn wasn't dependant on other peoples ability to purchase. I am jealous that the value of my home isn't pegged to the others around me. I envy your neighbourhood that is unaffected by any increase in drug use, alchohol abuse, domestic problems, homelessness. Where can I find that paradise where kids who grow up without father's and overworked mothers don't bring crime and drugs into my bubble, who aren't a danger or negative influence to my kids?
I also wish workers had never got together to fight for 40 hour work weeks, weekends, holidays, child labour laws ... What a complete and utter failure that was. Learning to read... that sure was stupid. Firefighters? What were we thinking? That has never worked, never will...

the list of what poor people have doesn't mean much.

there are homeless people with laptops, some of them have even put together websites in an attempt to find a job

tv's are cheap, I can go into salvation army, get myself a large color tv for less than $20, 2 tv's? is this 1950 now where such a thing is unheard of?

it's not hard to get a microwave, fridge, oven, etc, second hand, or even free off a relative or friend.

likewise with gaming systems and computers, there are good deals on a 360 out there, or again, can always trade or get 2nd hand off someone

just because you have things doesn't mean you aren't still poor

reply to post by origamiandurbanism


Lets take someone who has been on the dole since 1992, through the Clinton boom years. Now if they are still on the dole, what would you suggest be done with them? Don't suggest that there are not folks like that out there, generational welfare is relatively common in urban areas of the country.

Folks who are employeed yet still need assistance? Thats a bit more problematic since there is no way of knowing if the person simply does not want to work vs. someone who is simply unable to make enough to make on it despite the fact that they are working hard. They are clearly not in the same category and frankly the gent who can make more money yet does want to should not get a dime. Why on earth should he get a dime? Someone's choice of a lifestyle that is fundamentally flawed should not be living on the back of someone who has chosen a more responsible lifestyle.

Clearly there are issues with respect to the current market and the terrible job front, but this issue is a larger one since depite the health of the economy, the number of folks on assistance (with the exception of the Clinton/Gringrich years) has continued to climb. Not only have the numbers on general assistance climbed, but additional programs have been added to such as school lunches further adding to the burden these folks place on society. Perhaps it is offensive to some to call someone who is not working, not looking for a job and has been on the dole for ten years a burden (assuming they are not legitimately disabled), but what would you call them? All assistance to such individuals should be stopped. There may be some difficult issues to deal with there, but there are also reasonable solutions to those problems

reply to post by Gren


If you can not afford to feed yourself, by what right do you go out and spend $20 on a TV? Where does that logic come from?

If you are not disabled and unable to feed yourself, fine, lets give you some cash to buy some food, but if you are taking other's labor to eat, you have absolutely no business buying anything that is not a necessity and a tv is not a necessity

Originally posted by neo96
someone elses problems are not mine no matter how much someone else thinks they are.

This is exactly what the "upper class" think when they manipulate the economy and the government to create massive wealth.

So when the masses use the system to regain control of some natural resources why should they care about how you feel about it?

It's not their problem...

You people kill me. Now it appears that it is NOT ok to make money in this world. I love how the poor and the super rich preach about spreading the wealth. The poor want it spread around so they have more. The super rich feel guilty, and by "appearing" to care can relieve their conscience. The middle class are the ones who want to keep what they earn. Why? BECAUSE THEY WORKED FOR IT!!! Yet it is the middle class who get's their wealth spread around, and no one else. It's no wonder the middle class has no sympathy for the poor, and disdain for the super rich. I don't particularly care what you have. I shop thrift stores and yard sales so I know how to get a bargain. However, if you have something worth a lot (BMW, Mercedes) then I would expect a normal person to sell it and get something cheaper so they have some cash. I have had to sell/pawn things in my life to get by, so I would expect the same of anyone else.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by onebullet

 

what a long winded post

its not surprising some people dont get it and never will all those programs have done nothing but to make people worse off.

someone elses problems are not mine no matter how much someone else thinks they are.

its not your place or the governments place to take what i earn and give it to someone else.

dont really care if people disagree with that weve tried that for the past 50 years and it hasnt worked and it never will.

HTML was developed by a CERN Physicist. Without HTML the Internet would still be usenet and bbs, and you would never have heard of it.
HTML later evolved into XML, which is widely used to store documents and data.

Did you ever pay a cent to CERN? No? then get the heck off my Internet!
Get rid of every application that uses XML (yes, config and help files count)
It's been founded by socialist redistribution.
Oh, do you have cable?
For decades cable companies have been exempt from licensing their content, since the US governement thought that having people dig in copper cables was a good idea.
So unsubscribe, please.

These are just 2 examples of things that have come into being by forcing other people to give up some of their income, and would never have happened otherwise. Want more?

Originally posted by haarvik
You people kill me. Now it appears that it is NOT ok to make money in this world. I love how the poor and the super rich preach about spreading the wealth. The poor want it spread around so they have more. The super rich feel guilty, and by "appearing" to care can relieve their conscience. The middle class are the ones who want to keep what they earn. Why? BECAUSE THEY WORKED FOR IT!!! Yet it is the middle class who get's their wealth spread around, and no one else. It's no wonder the middle class has no sympathy for the poor, and disdain for the super rich. I don't particularly care what you have. I shop thrift stores and yard sales so I know how to get a bargain. However, if you have something worth a lot (BMW, Mercedes) then I would expect a normal person to sell it and get something cheaper so they have some cash. I have had to sell/pawn things in my life to get by, so I would expect the same of anyone else.

When and where did you hear someone say it's not okay to make money? That's Glen Beck flavoured fiction, as is the notion there is some epidemic of poor people that just want something for nothing. Their poor, and the vast majority are more concerned about paying the rent, feeding their children and finding inside themselves hope . Their not plotting a middle class coup.

How many of you shop at Wal-Mart? if you do you are feeding into the numbers of people trapped on public assistance. You want to get people off public assistance why not boycott employers like Wal-Mart who do not pay their employees a living wage. People who still have a job here in the states work way more hours than their counter parts in other "wealthy" nations. They are not lazy just underpaid.

reply to post by debunky


You presume that those things would never have been invented or developed absent government intervention or that that non-government entities (small business folks) would not have developed something better, something I fundamentally don't agree with.

Technology is all about mass standards, XML is a great example. Once the government adopts a standard, all entities are required to use that standard to do business with the government. Since they have the infrastructure to do business with the government, they simply apply that infrastructure to the rest of their enterprise. It makes no economic sense to do otherwise. Then all of the firms that do business with that firm need to adopt that standard.

Think about a shop like IBM and how the government requiring them to be on a certain platform and how that would ripple outward. Thousands of firms would adopt XML. It would be economically foolish for them not to.

The government kills ideas, innovation and prevents new products being brought to market. They do it every day and thay have been doing it for years. Makes sense.

Here's a question. You have a large defense contractor that has a tool that is used to encrypt secure transfers of data. The firm gets millions of dollars from the government in the form of liscences, implementation fees and product maintenance. The firm is tossing spiff in the form of cash, in kind contributions to the folks who sit on the Joint Senate and House intelligence committees who approve all of the budgets and their underlying content for the intelligence committee. A budget is put forth with a tool from a tiny shop that blows away the defense contractors encryption tool. Better technology, 100x cheaper. By implementing this tool, it would become the defacto standard, the defense conractor would also lose a ton of money. Is that tool ever going to be approved, either functionally or financially? No way.

The government retards innovation, it does not create it or enhance it.

reply to post by onebullet


Read the posts. People are bashing those of us who work for a living and talk about spreading the wealth. My post was a fact and a reason why the middle class is so fed up with providing for the poor. We are the ones who get taxed to death. And yet if we talk about the ones who abuse the system we get lambasted for not caring about the poor or stereotyping them. I speak and have my opinions based on MY real life experiences, not anything anyone has reported on or said. I grew up in section 8 housing, I know what goes on. I have dated women on welfare and know how they abuse the system. Does everyone? No, but that doesn't ease my mind any. Since I know facts about it I have my opinion.

I don't begrudge anyone getting assistance who genuinely needs it and is trying to better themselves. I do have a problem with people who milk the system. I have a problem with people getting assistance and then buying drugs/alcohol/cigarettes. If you can't afford to feed your family, then stop buying these things. The cheapest cigarettes are $5 a pack. That's $150/mo at a pack a day habit. I'm sure that would buy some food or pay a light bill. And no, a cell phone/tv/xbox/internet/cable is NOT a necessity. Food, clothing and shelter are. I grew up when we didn't have these things and I did just fine. Most of this (other than TV) has come in the last 15 to 20 years. Society survived before they existed and can still. Looking for work? The library has FREE internet. Oh and there's this thing called a NEWSPAPER! Has it all. News, sports, entertainment AND jobs! GASP!! Yes, Virginia, you can live without them.

Now, having said that, I reiterate that I don't care if you do have them. Be responsible, look at how you spend your money and try to do better. I know it can be hard I've lived it. Of course I am from a family that raised me not to accept hand outs. We were taught to take care of ourselves and to provide the best we could. We were taught to work hard, you do what needs done. You don't complain because someone will always have it worse than you do.

reply to post by dolphinfan


Actually no, there isn't anyone who has been on the dole since '92. Clinton passed a law in '96 stating that a person can only receive cash assistance for 4 years total in their life time.

Sorry but Poor is a mentality.
Broke is a physical definition.
If you have money for TVs, Xbox/games and entertainment, then you are neither.

Get your priorities straight, instead of pissing money away on crap and then crying that you have no food.

Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by Gren

 

If you can not afford to feed yourself, by what right do you go out and spend $20 on a TV? Where does that logic come from?

If you are not disabled and unable to feed yourself, fine, lets give you some cash to buy some food, but if you are taking other's labor to eat, you have absolutely no business buying anything that is not a necessity and a tv is not a necessity

Here's the problem, let me help you out.

How is anyone taking someones labor to eat? The argument used by Conservatives, Republicans and Democrats in itself is flawed and nitpicking. I've never looked at my check and saw where $5 was going to Tyrone who gets welfare...can you say different? If you're honest you can't. You may see where money is taking from your check in the form of taxes going to social security, state, any number of things. In reality, you don't know where the money you contribute is being allocated.

Your problem as well as many others is JUDGEMENT. That's not your job or title, the only entity who should Judge is God. However, in mans arrogance we have taken it upon ourselves to judge our fellow man. This should not be because we are also merely men and not above reproach. While you're typing on your computer to respond to this, someone can sneak up behind you and place a bullet in your head (God forbid) not killing you but rendereing you disabled. Guess what....you will now be on the dole. See how this works?

The people who wish to judge others have no idea how this creation we live in works. Remind you, I work for the welfare and employment office, and someone just left my desk who I'm sure previously had the attitude you have of judgement of others. But you know, # happens and her job has gone out of business and low and behold SHE is in my office being judged by others. Should I tell her to go and sell all of the nice things she has in her home? Simply because if she is going to be receiving dole in the form of my taxes, I don't want her to have them?

What type of "petty" disease do people with your logic suffer from? I believe if we have someone who is a psychologists visit this thread they can articulate better exactly the emotions persons such as yourself exhibit and where they come from.

JUDGEMENT

reply to post by DZAG Wright


Actually there is a 5 year maximum - 5 years of assistance where the person is deemed "capable or ready for work" that they can receive benefits. In other words, the person can be on assistance for a long time, be designated as "ready for work" and then the clock starts ticking. If a year later the social worker for what ever reason determines they are no longer "ready or able to work", the clock stops ticking. The designation of "capable or ready for work" is a call made by a social worker and there are no standards in place at the federal level, despite the fact that it is a federal program. Although in aggregate Clinton's welfare reform was successful in getting folks off of assistance, about 1/3 of the folks who were on assistance prior to the enactment of the reforms remain on assistance, or largely on assistance. For example, showing up at a job bank will extend your benefits when the person has no intention in finding a job. Going in and out of drug/alcohol treatment will do the same.

The challenge of course is what to do with someone who is able bodied yet has no real job skills. They don't know how to read or write despite the availability of at least a marginal public education, they have no experience with things like getting to work on time, what a deadline is, taking instruction from someone else. These are not folks who are disabled in the true sense, but from an employment perspective they are fundamentally disabled. What to do with them? I guess we continue to send them checks. In the long run its probably cheaper to do that then attempt to design and implement some other program on top of the scores of others that won't work.

reply to post by DZAG Wright


Again you miss the point, which is exactly what people like you do. It has nothing to do with the fact that someone lost their job and now must get assistance. It has to do with those who do receive it and then waste their money on things they should not be buying and providing for their family. It has to do with taking some responsibility for your life/choices/actions. It has to do with people defrauding the system instead of using it as it was intended to be used.

When I lived in NC, my uncle knew a guy who was a millionaire and lived in an exclusive community. Every morning he would get up, put on nasty clothing and drive his beamer to a parking lot. He would then pan handle and beg for money. He made more that way than he did working. Why? Because a gift under $10k is not taxable. He paid no income tax because all his money was given to him. So when I see someone standing on a corner, or in the median of traffic begging and smoking a cigarette or talking on a cell phone, I think of that guy. Sorry, but I have to believe if one is doing it, then there are more.