Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by darksithpro, May 2, 2018.
Interesting article I found...
Hopefully the Millies are smart enough not to embrace predigious liars.
This is like saying Hannity isn't a republican, he's a conservative.
Interestingly this falls in line with a number of other similar articles I have read recently - not Dem, not GOP, not tied to a particular party.
The quote you always hear is:
"When you're young, if you have a heart, you're a liberal. When you're older, if you've made any money, you're a conservative."
A decade or two (or three) of working your butt off to pay the bills changes your taste pretty quick for those that want everything for free, for just existing within the USA boundaries.
Personal responsibility is only a bad thing if you're lazy.
The Republicans just need to shift more Libertarian now that the evangelicals are dying off and the super conservative 'social issues' are not popular anymore.
So that leaves out basically all of Washington DC politicos .....
There are other elements at play such as opportunity for the masses, and coming out of college with a mountain of debt.
Yes, I agree.
I know a girl that paid $200,000+ for a 4-year art degree. She works at a retail store now for $40k/year.
Who do you blame there? Would the government clearing away her loan debt do anything to solve the real problem there?
I agree a new breed is needed, but if you are an average citizen and want someone representing your interests, it’s not Republicans, no way. I would hold up the DC Democrat Representatives against Republican leadership any day. The GOP in their defense of Trump are sinking to new lows by leaps and bounds. It’s very alarming how quickly they want to throw away every standard that used to be respected and embraced, truth being the first casualty. Most have become lying sacks.
College and vocational education should be free and education should be tracked.
I’d blame your friend and her job guidance councilor.
However, when I was in college, I graduated with a BFA, Bachelor of Fine Arts. There are well paying jobs in that field, but it was and probably is still very competitive. I was going into the USN, so it did not really matter if I found work as a commercial artist. Those in straight art degrees, the college suggested they take vocational courses to pay the bills before becoming renowned artists.
I think one of the bigger issues here (at least when I was in high school 2005-2009) is that it was basically ingrained in my (and classmates) head that I needed to go to college if I ever wanted to make any money. Looking back on it I see that isn't entirely true. At the time you're young and don't think about the actual amount of money you are spending each and every semester. It doesn't become real until you're out of college and start making the payments. It would be nice if in high school they talk to you about the financial aspect of college and what you are getting into as well as alternatives to college that may align more with what you want to do.
I'm not complaining about this. I get how it works and compared to many others my payments are not a lot. Just wish I wouldn't have been so "pressured" to go to college before I was ready and actually knew what I wanted to do. I get this is off topic from the thread, just a mini rant on my part as I prepare to make yet another monthly student loan payment..
Not to sound adversarial, but-
There are tons of high paying jobs that require a college degree to get in the door. It’s probably very competitive. Vocations pay decently, but it’s the company owner that strikes it big as with most local business endeavors that rely on relatively low paying positions for the benefit of the bottom line and the owner. You want to be a store manager? You can revel in your $.50 an hour pay raise. I know someone in this position.
I believe lower college expense is a must for our collective future.
Blame? Her, if she was making an economic calculation that her B.A. was going to be garner her a commensurate salary compared to the debt. But, likely she was trying to study something she loved and never understood how to leverage her degree into a career.
There are law students not in law and economics students working in coffee shops. Lots of computer science kids also found themselves struggling. They were all guaranteed a well-paying career, but came out during periods of saturation. Even STEM degrees will likely struggle within the next generation, especially if everyone is flooding those fields.
The real problem is that college got wickedly expensive within a decade—largely because states decided that tax cuts were more important than keeping tuition at state schools reasonable—rising more than 400 percent, but the culture didn't fully grasp the issue, so lots of parents sent kids to school or kids went to school without going the math. Moreover, people a degree, even underwater basket weaving, tend to have higher salaries.
As for just clearing away the debt, arguably this is a fine idea. Your friend is likely paying hundreds of dollars per month (even income-adjusted payments are likely to be high) to pay off her debt, resulting in less money otherwise going into the economy. People with large students debts often struggle to buy houses, cars and durable goods, which creates a drag on the economy.
The counter argument is largely centered around moral hazards, but if we don't care about this when it comes to banks and investment firms, it seems that we shouldn't worry here either.
Absolutely, I'm not advocating against college at all. I'm not saying I regret going to college. I just wish I would have been more prepared for what was to come from a financial perspective. I know a number of people that didn't go to college and are now in a real rough spot. On the other hand I know a number of friends who went to trade schools and are doing very very well for themselves.
I added a comment to my previous post that lower college costs should be an important national priority. Good luck getting this from the GOP.
This all rotates around corporate greed. Capitalism is sound in theory, but its really an upside-down funnel that defies gravity. Much like water circles the drain faster the closer it gets, so does untethered greed and the laws of Washington allowing literally a small hand-full of people to control things.
I look at many of the reps from my state (Cali) and shudder. Both state and federal level. It isn't Dem or GOP or Ind.
--- Post Merged, May 2, 2018 ---
You should also add employer expectations. They not only have degree expectations but what level or college / university you graduated from.
When I took my current job the educational requirements were far less. These days the educational requirements are far higher and I personally do not see why. I have seen this with many other jobs that are tossed my way for consideration.
--- Post Merged, May 2, 2018 ---
The biggest takers of free stuff are the top 1%'ers and people like Trump.
No, sorry, this is standard BS used by conservatives to justify their own selfish lack of empathy for others, nothing more.
I'm a well above average earner. I also have a lot of assets and am in my mid-40s. I vote Labour rather than Conservative here in the UK, even though it would mean I pay more in tax. Because I think public services should be properly funded, that we should go after tax-dodging nom-doms, and most importantly that full time public sector workers should earn enough to afford a place to live and to put food on the table.
The way I see it Conservatives, be it large or small c, are nothing more than short-sighted people who are so wrapped up in their own personal circumstances they can no longer see the bigger picture. That isn't an age thing, it's an attitude.
Agreed, want our cake and eat it too, everything has been driven by the promise of lower taxes always, but absolutely no discussion what we want our taxes to do for us as if the things we need will magically be taken care of without us paying for it, part of the conservative fantasy.
There is a reason every new highway in Texas is a toll road, can’t raise taxes... just fees so you think you are not paying any taxes.
Ok, so think this type of thinking is woefully misguided.
I understand the desire for empathy for others, and I agree the strength of a community helps all the individuals... but as I said in the Bernie Sanders thread, I think people get so wrapped up in the idea of “helping” that they lose perspective for what is actually the best way to help the people stuck at the bottom.
I agree that we should go after tax-dodgers. I do think that public services should be properly funded. I do think that public sector workers should be able to earn a living wage. I would also agree that we massively overspend on the military and wars.
But that doesn’t mean we should just ‘give’ free money to people just because they’re poor. We need a safety net, not a hammock. In the USA we have generations of people that are stuck in permanent dependancy with nothing pushing their ass off the couch. It’s the whole give a man a fish vs teach a man to fish concept.
Also, you have to remove yourself from the bubble of the USA or the UK. When you talk about programs for things like free healthcare, free education, free food stamps, etc... think of it from this perspective? Why should someone poor in Chicago get more for free than someone in Mexico City? Or someone in Africa? Or someone in Asia? Why aren’t they getting the same handouts due to some line on a map? They’re not less of a person.
It’s becuase those kind of programs are not sustainable on any scale.
If you look at the uber-rich like Bill Gates and other billionaires that have more than can ever be spent..... their foundations don’t just give free money away to poor people. Why? Because that doesn’t really help people long term. They instead invest in things like new medicine to wipe out disease. Or in engineered crops to create more food supply in isolated areas. Things that actually make a difference for people that are also working to improve their own lives.
THAT is the bigger picture. Just aimlessly being happy to pay more taxes doesn’t help if the money is being squandered by waste and corruption.
This is an opinion piece.
This study shows that children may be more likely to apply for disability insurance in Norway.
Most salient point: "Suggestive evidence for this comes from an analysis showing children whose parents got a lenient judge are not only more likely to apply for disability insurance but also are more inclined to report the same type of medical disorder."
The U.S. and Norway have fundamentally different systems. And, this study shows a correlation and guesses at the reason—the academic use of "suggestive evidence" is suspect.
Good piece, but it doesn't show dependency breeds dependency, rather that as the nut-graf notes:
Note, the issue of dependency is an oft-cited reason for getting rid of the programs, but most programs are time-limited.
Which is why, as the U.S. Census noted in 2015 using data from 2012:
So, lots of people stop using benefits within one year. That seems like a bunch of people learned how to fish.
Sure, there's generational dependencies, but that just highlights that it's more difficult to move up the economic strata in the United States, and that people consider welfare and disability as tools to ensure they can endure economic hardships.
Removing these programs, or making them so difficult to access won't create a generation of fishermen, it will remove a generation through starvation and poverty. (See Appalachia's before the New Deal.)