Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Your friends are not poor, they just don't manage money well.
I don't agree with the big-screen TV as that big a deal. Maybe in their case it's representative of a larger problem, but I have a 60" TV; it was a one-time cost of $900. It was an upgrade of my old TV I'd had for 7 years, so if I use this new one for 7 years that's about $10 a month. I watch it fairly often so I'm getting the value out of it. What would be wasteful is if they have it but don't use it or upgrade it unnecessarily.
The other things on that list seem like frivolus expenses - the new truck probably the most unnecessary. I used to think I needed to buy new too until I realized how much I "gifted" to the finance company. Now I'm all about fixing up old cars.
If you need the government to pay your bills, then you don't need a big screen TV. Sell it, cancel cable and figure out ways to make money for yourself. When you have no debt and don't need other people's money to live, THEN you have a big screen TV.
I remember coming home from a sleep over in 6th grade to a "new" used 21" color TV. The biggest TV we had ever had. I was thrilled because I could watch SNL in color.
Are you single? If so, how much does it cost to rent a room in a house or share rental expenses? Everyone can save money if they are creative in how they spend their money and opt for the choice that keeps the most money in their pocket, even if that means living in a tiny room of a house or driving a $500 K car with 130K miles on it, while saving for a better car, etc.
It could also mean returning home after college, paying token rent to your parents, and saving for awhile, but that doesn't seem to be a popular option. Years ago, my husband and I had an acquaintance who did this. We all thought he was crazy! He rode his bike to his first professional job in all kinds of Midwestern weather for three or four years. Nobody understood until he and his new wife, who had done something similar, up and bought a four-bedroom house in a very nice part of town and had three children in quick succession, while the rest of us were still struggling to afford crappy apartments. Joke was on us. He and his wife were smart cookies!
47 percent of Americans don't receive government aid. The figure Romney said actually refers to the percent who pay federal income tax. But most of those people still pay sales tax, property tax and state taxes, plus payroll tax. In fact, many of them end up paying a higher tax rate than Romney!
And the majority of these people live in red states.
I'm sure you don't see yourself as entitled but by the time you factor in things like mortgage interest deductions and sheltering income in a 401K, there's a high possibility that your entitlements have reduced your proportional tax burden below what some of these people you rail against pay.
But to your other point, the fact still stands that there are 47% of people in this country who pay no taxes to the federal government....and 49% of people in this country take those tax dollars from other tax payers.
Your statement that some people pay a higher tax rate than Romney is absurd, but you make an excellent argument for repealing the tax code/IRS and replacing it all with a national sales tax. That way "EVERYONE has some skin in the game" - to quote the current occupant of the White House.
But to your other point, the fact still stands that there are 47% of people in this country who pay no taxes to the federal government....and 49% of people in this country take those tax dollars from other tax payers.
Your statement that some people pay a higher tax rate than Romney is absurd, but you make an excellent argument for repealing the tax code/IRS and replacing it all with a national sales tax. That way "EVERYONE has some skin in the game" - to quote the current occupant of the White House.
Well, I'm sure the rest of us will appreciate it when you turn your social security check back over to the government to pay for everyone else's entitlements. Or is it not an entitlement when you are the one getting it?
And Romney's effective tax rate in 2011 was 14%. Mine was higher, was yours?
I'm sure you don't see yourself as entitled but by the time you factor in things like mortgage interest deductions and sheltering income in a 401K, there's a high possibility that your entitlements have reduced your proportional tax burden below what some of these people you rail against pay.
How is keeping the money I earn from my labor an ENTITLEMENT. Are you saying that the government is "giving" me the right to keep my own hard earned income and that is a privilege.
In your view, I receive "government entitlements" because I follow the tax code and that results in keeping more of the money I earn? So I have money to house, feed and clothe my children, without any assistance from the government?
The conditions described in the posts below are what one living in poverty or near-poverty would be expected to be facing.
No one living in America today should have to live in that kind of poverty. These really sound like a 3rd-world or even 4th-world standard of living and quality of life! Those described situations frankly almost sound like borderline-starvation, tbh and fully-candid.
What lower-income people *really* need, in MHO, is a true living wage that would eliminate anyone from having to life in these kinds of conditions...
What it took for me was to pull my head out of my arse, quit making stupid personal decisions, and do a 180 degree turn in my life. My husband and I both had to work about 60 hours a week for awhile, too. It was a series of bad choices that got us there and a series of good choices that got us out of there.
Well, I'm sure the rest of us will appreciate it when you turn your social security check back over to the government to pay for everyone else's entitlements. Or is it not an entitlement when you are the one getting it?
And Romney's effective tax rate in 2011 was 14%. Mine was higher, was yours?
Another straw man argument. Why would I turn my SS check back? I have been FORCED to pay into what the government calls "Social Security INSURANCE" since my first job at 16.
Those checks are intended to be REPAYMENT for what I have already paid in. I was not present when SS was enacted. I had no say in the terms. I have no right to "opt out" of paying into this "Insurance" scam, so what possible reason on earth would I have for refusing the return of my own money??
SS is not a GIFT from the government, it is a Ponzi scheme to FORCE people to turn over their money so it can be redistributed to people who never paid a penny towards this "INSURANCE" benefit.
Another example of the twisted logic of some people that, somehow, the money I was forced to pay into the SS fund over a 56 year work life is not MINE, but a gift or benefit the benevolent government bestows upon me, and I better give praise and thanks for getting MY money back, or else I should shut up and walk away from it.
LOL......I remember one year what I really wanted for Christmas was a can opener.
ALL I wanted once - was a comb to comb my hair -after losing everything in a house fire {some years earlier}.
I was checked into a hotel the night after the fire, and took my morning shower the next morning after the fire, lathered up my hair with the bar soap {they didn't provide much in supplies at that time} and than stepped out and dried my "mop'..and HAD NO COMB to comb my hair before going to work!
It was then that I first cried over what all I had lost then.
So now I make SURE i have a comb with me always!
P.S. RED Cross SAYS they help those displaced by a fire, BUT did NOTHING for me! SO I don't "give" to them anymore!
And the average income in the 1980's was around $20K, so a $7K car would be 28% of your annual salary. Interest rates for new car loans in the 1980's ranged from a high of 16.5% to a low of 10% (average of 13.25%). I don't think you could get a car loan for more than 3 years at that time, but even with a 5 year term, that would mean you would be paying $207 a month for 60 months.
Tax rates in the 80's were extremely high as well. The tax tables indicate around 12.6% for 20K salary and 29.2% payroll taxes (1/2 paid by employer) which means a monthly take home pay of around $1215, so your car payment would be 17% of your take home pay.
Remember, too, that a car built in 1985 did not have the technology or standard "luxury" accessories of even the basic cars of today. Also, the longevity of cars built in 1980 were no where near that of a car of built today.
Just saying that when you factor in everything, you are really comparing apples to oranges, unless you use all of the equivalent cost factors that were in play for the 1980's, i.e., high energy costs, high interest rates, high tax rates, etc.
Save up and buy the car in cash if rates are that high...
That's the point though -- no one *should have* to live in that kind of poverty, to begin with.
Sometimes -often in fact - it's personal decisions that keep a person in poverty. Sad but true. No one "should have to" bail someone else out who keeps making one poor decision after another one.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those described situations frankly almost sound like borderline-starvation, tbh and fully-candid.
