Why do the rich get richer and the poor not more money! (attorney, marijuana)
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.
What use is all that information to someone who lives at poverty level and pays half their income to rent a room?
To me, those who are too lazy to take responsibility for themselves cause their own problems and should never be dependent on the Federal Government. Our Constitution guarantees each and every one of us the right to "be responsible for ourselves" and that means that what we put into accomplishing a good life pays us back in the amount we apply.
For those that truly have physical or mental handicaps that don't allow them to take responsibility for themselves, that should be a local issue...never Federal, State, or County. Local combines local government in step with private which can identify those truly in need and those "free loaders" who are more interested in doing nothing because "someone else who works" will pay for their sorry life-style.
The U.S. doesn't exist in isolation. The post to which you responded is unworkable as long as the rest of the world experiences even very moderate inflation (economic growth).
The problem here is that we have armchair economists spewing their theories without really understanding macroeconomics or thinking through all the consequences of what they propose/support.
LOL, are you not an armchair economist too, with your undying devotion toward the Federal Reserve system?
Many, many people disagree with you. Watch that documentary "Money for Nothing" and get back to me.
Growing the Fed balance sheet and creating so much made up money through quantitative easing to protect your banks and corporations will have drastic results. Your policies are contributing to the destruction of our dollar and country.
I would be ashamed to be parroting such non-sense.
A lot of qualified people cannot afford med school or law school. Where is their equal opportunity?
Face reality...a very small percentage of people are oriented or capable of becoming doctors or lawyers/attorneys.
Funny how Americans of the past who truly were dedicated to a particular goal for themselves would put themselves out to accomplish whatever education they needed. I know two of them who slept in phone booths and worked night jobs in order to pay for that education, themselves.
I know for a fact that government loans have allowed schools to jack up prices to unbelievable amounts because "the government will pay without questioning." Get rid of those government loans and fees come down. There are several other areas that need to be addressed, but that's for another thread. Those government student loans cause terrible problems for those young people starting out in life such as:
1. Puts the borrower into debt before they get started and takes years to replay
2. Puts people in Universities/Colleges who have no business being there. The majority of our citizens should be learning a trade. In the world of work, one can start at the bottom and work up. Many people I know have done that and with hard work, work ethics and taking responsibility for learning to accomplish advancement have actually started their own businesses and become extremely successful, both in their business and in their financial positions.
If you want to enjoy prosperity...you have to work for it and never, ever think someone else should "give it to you." Not gonna happen!
What use is all that information to someone who lives at poverty level and pays half their income to rent a room?
Education is power no matter where it comes from. Anyone with a radio can listen to folks like Dave for FREE. I'm in no way poor, but I grew up poor and knew I didn't want to live my life that way. So, I LISTENED to people who were doing better than I was and I LEARNED what to do and what not to do in order to better myself. I am no longer poor as a result. I've been listening to Dave for many years and read his books (you can borrow them free from the library).
While I do not agree with him 100% of the time, he does have some great advice on how to better your situation. He's helped millions of people get out of debt and build wealth. My hubby gets irritated at me every time he wants to do something of a financial nature because I always ask "WWDD" (What Would Dave Do). LOL This has kept us motivated to be on pace to pay off our brand new home in 5 years instead of 30. We've also saved 6 months of expenses in our savings account, increase our retirement savings contributions to 20% of our annual salaries, pay cash for everything so no credit card debt, no car loans, etc. Our story is only one of millions that Dave can take partial credit for because he helped keep us motivated and gave some darn good sound advice. We just LISTENED, LEARNED and more importantly EXECUTED.
Just because you live in poverty doesn't mean you have to continue to do so. Using poverty as an excuse for not finding ways to change it is exactly what will keep you there.
Rich people are rich for obvious reasons, working hard and a mentality that calls for valuable economic innovation play a part.
But these reasons do not explain huge inequalities between hard working employees and hard working employers. People belonging to the latter might work three times as hard and be twice as smart (in some cases, just a provocative example), this does not explain or justify why they do not tend to have two, three or even five times as much money, but sometimes a thousand times more money. Ever heard about the extraction of surplus value from workers? What is surplus value? definition and meaning Surplus value - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Do not come with totalitarianism, I can refute your argument before you bring it:
1. His economic theory can be coherent and correct, even if his political views were too extreme.
2. Social democratic, democratic socialist and even "progressive" governments largely adhere to many of his principles, and other than communist governments they did not have millions of dead people on their back, they could still support certain marxist principles.
3. Wage slavery kills people too, capitalism in its most extreme and unbalanced forms no longer has to do with merit, it simply kills people, or would you say that collapsing garment factories because of owners who do not care do not lead to victims of capitalism? Is this not political too?
We let others work for us, this is especially extreme concerning multinational huge corporations, but this concept does not only (partially, I'm not saying business owners aren't working hard!) explain extreme differences between American workers and businesspeople, it also explains why poorer people in the whole industrialized world (not just the US, also welfare Europe) tend to have enough money to buy stuff far above the basic needs of people (and become absurdly fat for example). The Bangladeshi or Burmese sewist will not become fat, she can work 16 hours a day for about a dollar, not per hour, per day. Wage slavery grants their employers more money than they've deserved, it also grants relatively cheap clothing in the already fully industrialized countries, leading to ridiculously few money being spent on basic goods such as clothing or food which is why this stuff, desite sometimes having blood on its hands is being cast away so easily without another deeper thought. That is why we got so much money to purchase video games, cosmetic surgeries, football game tickets or free time to rant against stupid and lazy workers, and welfare queens, do not forget them. At least they are not included so clearly in this unhumanist process of production as hard working owners of huge corporations are.
Equal opportunity? How cute. Ever heard about inheritance? No more needs to be said about equal opportunity.
I really enjoy thinking about those times in the 1960s where American workers were more respected and when young people selfconfidently protested against war, western (also European) capitalism and also of course against Soviet imperialism. With progressives these days you often (not always) have people strongly supporting a government and a president who advocates the trans-pacific partnership. And what happened to Occupy?
I find it a bit naive and cute how liberals tend to argue with conservatives about selfishness and other whiny values when they know they will always lose the argument without making clear it's a simple a conflict of interests. Since market mechanisms have proven to be efficient and successful on quite some issues I would never advocate replacing them with totalitarianism (and it is really not the American way, even for American workers who tend to have absolutely valid objections about these stupid regimes in the 20th century), there are different theories and models concerning market socialism: Market socialism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Another point: I strongly support Senator Warren and I am serious about that. I am strongly against bloody revolutionary s*it and I support a peaceful reformist approach (but seriously reformist, not like pro-capitalist Obama). Her opinions on consumer protection and banking regulation are largely positive and "You didn't build that!" is essentially a marxist sentence, (including what collective merit via public spending contributes to a positive business climate and also including what workers merits contribute to a functioning economy, I think she also meant the extraction of surplus value by saying this which is indeed a bit socialist ) something I was stunned to hear from a Democratic Party senatorial candidate, even from Massachusetts.
Puuh, now I guess, that was the most leftist post you've read in a while.
Some will view this as disgusting and disturbing and I accept that, but please be respectful and calm with criticisms, then they're welcome.
For those, who believe I am too extreme, well at least I am honest, not a majority, but at least some of the liberals also have opinions that go into that direction. I call it what it is and I support it that way (socialist and marxist).
As I recall, and I could be wrong, you graduated from college with a degree in computers.
Did you get a job in your chosen field?
The computer industry, as well as many others constantly change.
YOU did NOT change but moped around complaining how your "knowledge" was no longer needed.
Then you come on here and whine and cry about being a burger flipper and can't afford anything.
If I am wrong, please set me straight. I will not be offended.
No, I graduated with a degree in political science and a minor in computers. Political science is a great degree for getting into law school but not for much else.
Not all great paying jobs need a degree.........but, you have to be willing to get dirty......and hot....or, cold.
Mike Rowe, is that you?
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.
spewing their theories without really understanding macroeconomics or thinking through all the consequences of what they propose/support.
) something I was stunned to hear from a Democratic Party senatorial candidate, even from Massachusetts.
