My Rant about the quality of life going down in America?

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Don't you find it sad that a person is forced to work 80+ hours a week just to survive, while other working less hours and far less labor, are making a killing off of the labor of the poor.

Why does a CEO make a million a year, because his employees makes hardly anything. Why do middle management make 75,000 +, because the other employees make hardly anything.

As I said in the one of the last sentences of my last post "Show me the number of people who are poor and work as much as they can to survive and I'll feel sorry for them."

Yeah. That sucks. It also sucks when people get cancer, are born with defects, or just have a lower IQ. Some people have an easy road, some people don't. Sometimes it's consequences of previous decisions and actions, sometiems not.

Why does a CEO make more then a janitor? Because they're not as replaceable. Almost anyone can be a janitor, relatively few people can be a competent CEO. That's also why most engineers make more money then the people at taco bell. It's requires a skill that not all people posses.

[/start sarcasm] Ahhh Oh no! The evil conservative is here! Quick everyone run! I want to sterilize the masses! Ahhh I'm here to steal your children!!!! [/end sarcasm]

Did I say they should be "forced" to get another job? I'm saying you have a responsibilty to work your butt off or your complaints are going to fall on deaf ears. Did I say there shouldn't be public assistance programs?

[Albinonewt]

Re: Re: My Rant about the quality of life going down in America?

Originally posted by -Carnifex-


Yeah, damn those people having abortions, they sure ruin America for the rest of us..

Actually, completely unrestricted and affordable abortions are causing a problem in this country. Did you know that some ethnicities that primarily dwell in urban areas where quality of life tends to be below average the rampant use of abortions is actually causing negative population growth?

Please, before anyone responds, I'm not rendering any kind of opinion on whether abortion should be legal, ethical, or moral. Simply that it's causing negative population growth amound some sectors of America.

[Restola]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
Don't you find it sad that a person is forced to work 80+ hours a week just to survive, while other working less hours and far less labor, are making a killing off of the labor of the poor.

I for one would like to know why someone would be forced to work 80+ hours a week and still not be making enough to "survive".

80 hours x 6.50 (wendy's wage) = $520/week x 20% tax = $416/week take home pay. Thats $20,000/year ater taxes with two minimum wage jobs that require zero experience or skills.

Thats twice what I make during school, and $1600/month is still more than I make over the summer. I drive a newer car (which I bought), live away from home, and if I wasn't also going through flight school (which is $6,000+ additional per semester) I could quite easily fully support myself and pay for 100% of my college (I do just that, minus 2/3 of the cost of flight classes which my parents pick up). Sure I live with some roommates, and I can't play paintball, I can't eat out a lot, I have a cell phone with the cheapest plan available, I dont go on vacations.

Now why is the person making $20k/year unable to make ends meet?

-Children
-Drugs

How are either of those two things the fault of the CEO? How are either of those two things the fault of the person making $100,000 a year who didn't get hooked on drugs, or have a kid at 18?

In a capitalist society some people succeed and some people fail. A lot of it is based on skill, intelligence, and hard work. Some of it is based on luck. In America, the people who fail should have someone to turn to for help. The government does a horrible job at this and should not be involved.

We all want the same thing Collegeboy. I just don't think the government is the best thing to do it (given it's track-record with social programs).

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by aaron_mag

Some actually argue we don't need unions anymore. The good people of the corporate world will make sure people have a living wage. These saintly people devoted to capitalism, family values, and America would never deliberately try to screw over people and take a larger piece of the pie right?<-----(note that this denotes extreme sarcasm).

We don't need unions anymore. Unions destroyed steel. They destroyed the airlines. They've condemned the ports to functioning in the dark ages. They're in the process of destroying education.

No, we do not need unions.


I definetely agree with you that there is inequity. Some people start way ahead and I am not recommending that gets changed. Guess what? People work hard not only so that they enjoy the benefits of wealth but so they can pass on that wealth/power to their descendents. Is it fair? Of course not but that is human nature and not something we can change.

It's weird for you to say that after defnding unions. Since the union's sole job is to protect people from competition in their workplace and the inequities of a free market.

[Collegeboy]

Originally posted by Restola

I for one would like to know why someone would be forced to work 80+ hours a week and still not be making enough to "survive".

80 hours x 6.50 (wendy's wage) = $520/week x 20% tax = $416/week take home pay. Thats $20,000/year ater taxes with two minimum wage jobs that require zero experience or skills.

Thats twice what I make during school, and $1600/month is still more than I make over the summer. I drive a newer car (which I bought), live away from home, and if I wasn't also going through flight school (which is $6,000+ additional per semester) I could quite easily fully support myself and pay for 100% of my college (I do just that, minus 2/3 of the cost of flight classes which my parents pick up). Sure I live with some roommates, and I can't play paintball, I can't eat out a lot, I have a cell phone with the cheapest plan available, I dont go on vacations.

Now why is the person making $20k/year unable to make ends meet?

-Children
-Drugs

How are either of those two things the fault of the CEO? How are either of those two things the fault of the person making $100,000 a year who didn't get hooked on drugs, or have a kid at 18?

In a capitalist society some people succeed and some people fail. A lot of it is based on skill, intelligence, and hard work. Some of it is based on luck. In America, the people who fail should have someone to turn to for help. The government does a horrible job at this and should not be involved.

We all want the same thing Collegeboy. I just don't think the government is the best thing to do it (given it's track-record with social programs).

Drugs, why in the world would you insert that without trying to say that most poor people sue drugs.

I showed a yearly expense in one of the previous threads that I am sure you have seen. A family of 4 can not survive on anything less then 25,000 a year without using government funding. And I was using lower Alabama prices on the cheapest I can find around here (since lower Alabama is one of the cheapest areas to live in).

[Restola]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
A family of 4 can not survive on anything less then 25,000 a year without using government funding.

Why would a couple making less than $25,000 a year have children, and whose to blame if they cant support them? The CEO? You? Me?

They will get help whether the government is doing it or private organizations are doing it. The difference is that the government hasn't helped fix the problem, they've made it worse.

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
I showed a yearly expense in one of the previous threads that I am sure you have seen. A family of 4 can not survive on anything less then 25,000 a year without using government funding.

His example specifically stated that the $20,000 was for a single person and that children would make living under that threshold difficult at best.

So, to say a family of 4 requires more then $20,000 doesn't dispute his claim in the slightest

[1stdeadeye]

Nor another debate!

I refuse to be drawn into this debate!

That being said, my $0.02:

I take umbrage at anyone saying that wealthy people don't work as hard as the poor. That is total BS and a copout! My father worked his way into a heart attack in May. He lost vision in his left eye due to a burst blood vessel 3 years ago. He is 56! He is an EVP with a telecom firm in the DC metro area. He works crazy long hours! He travels all over the world on business and he HATES to travel. He earns every penny of the salary he makes. He also carries a ton of stress around 24/7 as a reward for his success. How many of the working poor take their job home with them?
I make a nice living as well. I work hard to earn it though. While on vacation, I ended up driving to a client's to salvage a loan closing. I go above and beyond to achieve. Why? Because that is what I have to do to earn what I earn. I take my work home with me. I do what I have to do!

Maybe is is not a question of working harder, but working smarter?

Maybe these people need to take advantage of some of the government programs offered to better themselves? Job training programs, discounted child care, etc... America is a country of limitless possibilities. No one is ever doomed to a lot in life. You can make yourself better!! For every poverty story you want to throw up, I'll match you with a story of determination and hard work leading to a rags to richs story.

..and that is all I have to say about that!

[Collegeboy]

So shall we deny the right to have children for anyone who is determined to be poor by the state. So you really would like the world I described three post back.

1de. If you read, I am sure you will find that I am not saying that people who make alot of money do not earn their money. I am saying that one of the reason's they make that high amount is because the factory or basic workers are paid much lower then they should be.

[shartley]

Originally posted by 1stdeadeye
I refuse to be drawn into this debate!

That being said, my $0.02:

I take umbrage at anyone saying that wealthy people don't work as hard as the poor. That is total BS and a copout! My father worked his way into a heart attack in May. He lost vision in his left eye due to a burst blood vessel 3 years ago. He is 56! He is an EVP with a telecom firm in the DC metro area. He works crazy long hours! He travels all over the world on business and he HATES to travel. He earns every penny of the salary he makes. He also carries a ton of stress around 24/7 as a reward for his success. How many of the working poor take their job home with them?
I make a nice living as well. I work hard to earn it though. While on vacation, I ended up driving to a client's to salvage a loan closing. I go above and beyond to achieve. Why? Because that is what I have to do to earn what I earn. I take my work home with me. I do what I have to do!

Maybe is is not a question of working harder, but working smarter?

Maybe these people need to take advantage of some of the government programs offered to better themselves? Job training programs, discounted child care, etc... America is a country of limitless possibilities. No one is ever doomed to a lot in life. You can make yourself better!! For every poverty story you want to throw up, I'll match you with a story of determination and hard work leading to a rags to richs story.

..and that is all I have to say about that!

[Albinonewt]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Collegeboy
So shall we deny the right to have children for anyone who is determined to be poor by the state. So you really would like the world I described three post back.


No, of course children shouldn't be denied by the state, BUT, people should really think long and hard about children, and if they can afford to spawn, before doing so. It's called responsibility, and people should exercise it before they breed.

[ShooterJM]

Originally posted by Collegeboy
I am saying that one of the reason's they make that high amount is because the factory or basic workers are paid much lower then they should be.

So the replacement value of a factory worker is artificially low? Explain please.

[Albinonewt]

Originally posted by ShooterJM


So the replacement value of a factory worker is artificially low? Explain please.

Wow, what a spectacular word usage! Color me impressed.

And yes, please explain

[Star_Base_CGI]

Originally posted by ShooterJM


So the replacement value of a factory worker is artificially low? Explain please.

I think what hes trying to say is Micheal Eisner is worth $500,000,000 million a year more than the people that work 10-6 scrubbing the park for $8 because they push those heavy machines around in the heat and he has to sit at the desk all day or get his dumb butt driven around in everywhere in a $50,000 car...

Dood WEalthy people have no clue what work is. They dont even drive...

And Im not talking about Shatner. Shatner knows how to drive.

[Collegeboy]

So you are saying that poor people shouldn't have children?

The lower strata of workers are paid way under what they should be paid. They can not be given a raise for then the company will have to raise prices, which will make them have to pay more for their stuff which takes away their raise. You can trim the fat from the upper strata, but since they are the ones making the decisions they will more then likely not do it. So you have to have a government regulated and enforced redistribution of the wealth in order to make sure that those who make way under what they should make can survive while trying to keep inflation steady.

You are either on one of the other side of this debate.

You can believe that without government regulations and enforcement the good will of the people will kick in and help those in need.

Or you can think that without government enforcement the good will of the people will force others to starve while looking out for themselves.

Throughout history I feel the last one is correct and the best way to solve this problem is through government regulation, for I see alot more problems with the first then the second.