American attitudes, where are we at today.

In reply to The Jeeza:

Your position on poor in this country can get out of poverty if they wanted also has no factual standing. A full time job at minimum wage won't cover rent much less food, clothing and transportation. But all that aside there is something else you are missing. Knowledge. Many poor do not have the knowledge and skills to just pull themselves up and start making a living.

Minimum wage jobs are not meant to support a family. If you are trying to support a family on a minimum wage job, something is really wrong with you. If you are an adult of able mind and body, and can't get more that a minimum wage job, something is really wrong with you, and no amount of welfare will fix it. Minimum wage jobs are for teenagers to learn about the workplace. If you are 35 with kids and no more skilled than a teenager, good luck with your life, I hope you enjoyed the drugs.

Once upon a time, a generation or two ago, people did a funny thing. If there were no jobs locally, they moved. This was very common, and no less convenient than it is now. Learn a new skill, move to where the jobs are, or continue to be poor. Your choice.

Boost_Crazy wrote: In reply to SVreX: My point is that the net of "poor" is cast much wider than needed and portrayed as a much larger problem than it really is. My argument is two fold. 1) Those who genuinely need assistance get less, because we give so much to those that don't need it. 2) Many of those who do not need assistance but do get it, are less likely to pull themselves out of poverty, and more likely to fall deeper into it. They are less likely to learn from their mistakes, and more likely to repeat them.

I don't even know where we are anymore, we are so far off-topic,or why we are trying to define poverty.

So I guess I'd say sure, why not.

I would add, however, that just because someone falls below the poverty line (and is perhaps eligible for something), doesn't mean they ever receive any benefits.

Most of my college classmates were eligible. I am not aware of any of my friends that received benefits.

The chronically poor, however, are in a different situation.

Let me drag this back to the original discussion...

It is politically expedient for some politicians to:

a- Keep people poor.

b- Exaggerate poverty statistics.

c- Convince some people they are "poor", when they are not.

So, we are back to page 1. I stand on my original conviction that politicians of both parties exist to create chaos.

In reply to SVreX:

I'd say this is pretty on topic- it all relates directly to American attitudes. Back to page 1, personal responsibility.

I think we are talking about two different parts of poverty. I was mostly talking about what our society (or government) has defined as poverty, which neither of us really agrees with. You were talking about 3rd world style poverty in the US. Which is overall a much smaller percentage, but I agree it's the problem that should get more of the focus. My point was that the former pretty much goes away for the infividual if left alone, yet when more is done for the poor, that is where the money goes.

In reply to SVreX:

Let me drag this back to the original discussion... It is politically expedient for some politicians to: a- Keep people poor. b- Exaggerate poverty statistics. c- Convince some people they are "poor", when they are not. So, we are back to page 1. I stand on my original conviction that politicians of both parties exist to create chaos.

Agreed. And the irony is that it's often the same politicians that the poor vote for.

In reply to The Jeeza:

The numbers I posted are not misleading. They are federal government actual budget spending for 2014 category. They, like any other data point, need to be understood to be the most accurate.

Data needs context to be useful. Partial data is useless. The states provide most of the welfare, and none of the military spending. If I showed you a pie chart that just showed state spending, you could conclude that we all speak Chinese now due to the lack of military spending.

The Jeeza wrote: In reply to aircooled: You didn't look at the source link did you? There is a very nice drop down menu so you can look at what came from where.

Of course I looked at it.

The largest part of the Pension areas seems to be parts of Social Security (the chart only drills down one level, and has a lot of acronyms). As noted, SS is a big part of the budget, but should be excluded when talking about government over spending since it is self funded (the fact that they might steal this money is not really relevant).

If each tax payer, let say, paid out $100 a year for defense spending, it would be wholly inappropriate to use defense spending as an example of government overspending or include it in a chart illustrating that (assuming it's budget is population x $100).

Using the term "pension" of course is a wee bit politically loaded. Assumptions are made.

SVreX wrote: Let me drag this back to the original discussion... It is politically expedient for some politicians and infotainment pushers to:

• Exploit data / information in a unreasonable / illogical way so as to only reinforce the point they have been pushing or are supposed to push based on the "team" they are on.

Boost_Crazy wrote: In reply to The Jeeza:

Your position on poor in this country can get out of poverty if they wanted also has no factual standing. A full time job at minimum wage won't cover rent much less food, clothing and transportation. But all that aside there is something else you are missing. Knowledge. Many poor do not have the knowledge and skills to just pull themselves up and start making a living.

Minimum wage jobs are not meant to support a family. If you are trying to support a family on a minimum wage job, something is really wrong with you. If you are an adult of able mind and body, and can't get more that a minimum wage job, something is really wrong with you, and no amount of welfare will fix it. Minimum wage jobs are for teenagers to learn about the workplace. If you are 35 with kids and no more skilled than a teenager, good luck with your life, I hope you enjoyed the drugs. Once upon a time, a generation or two ago, people did a funny thing. If there were no jobs locally, they moved. This was very common, and no less convenient than it is now. Learn a new skill, move to where the jobs are, or continue to be poor. Your choice.

Says every single mom that is doing that right now.

Boost_Crazy wrote: In reply to The Jeeza:

The numbers I posted are not misleading. They are federal government actual budget spending for 2014 category. They, like any other data point, need to be understood to be the most accurate.

Data needs context to be useful. Partial data is useless. The states provide most of the welfare, and none of the military spending. If I showed you a pie chart that just showed state spending, you could conclude that we all speak Chinese now due to the lack of military spending.

State welfare data. Here is a nice chart

I like data. I look at the root. Verify the source and understand each category. That makes 99% of the GOPs arguments fall apart and 95% of the Dems.

The villify the poor argument has never had data to support it was the crux of the problem. Never.

In reply to The Jeeza:

State welfare data. Here is a nice chart I like data. I look at the root. Verify the source and understand each category. That makes 99% of the GOPs arguments fall apart and 95% of the Dems. The villify the poor argument has never had data to support it was the crux of the problem. Never.

Really, I'm trying, but all the graphs and charts aren't helping you. What are you saying? And are we even having the same conversation? Your federal and state charts don't match- one is in percentages, the other is in dollars. I know the info is out there, but without knowing what point you are trying to make...

I already told you that you misunderstood me. I originally said that a disproportionate amount of the money spent on welfare goes to those who don't need it. You don't have a chart for that. Are you saying we don't spend enough on welfare? You still haven't explained what the big blue section of pie labeled "healthcare" is. Tell me with a strait face that there is no welfare on that big slab of pie. Please elaborate, I can only guess at your interpretation.

I've said this before- no one is stopping you from being as charitable as you want with your money. But it loses most of it's nobility when it's my money that you want to be charitable with.

In reply to The Jeeza:

If you are a single mom trying to raise kids on minimum wage, you really screwed up in life. You made a series of bad choices. Thankfully, we still live in the land of opportunity. And excuses. One will lead you to improve your life, one will make you feel better while it passes you by. That's the great thing about choice.

I actually blame women for much of what ails society. Want to fix things real quick? Women- STOP SLEEPING WITH GUYS THAT DON'T HAVE A JOB.

Boost_Crazy wrote: Women- STOP SLEEPING WITH GUYS THAT DON'T HAVE A JOB.

I didn't get any strange when I was recently unemployed???

I wish you people would quit changing your names.

I agree. Bring back Beef Supreme.

Beef Supreme has matured, changed his name and is running for Prez on the Dem ticket. I think he's got my vote.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vermin_Supreme

Boost_Crazy wrote: In reply to The Jeeza: If you are a single mom trying to raise kids on minimum wage, you really screwed up in life. You made a series of bad choices. Thankfully, we still live in the land of opportunity. And excuses. One will lead you to improve your life, one will make you feel better while it passes you by. That's the great thing about choice. I actually blame women for much of what ails society. Want to fix things real quick? Women- STOP SLEEPING WITH GUYS THAT DON'T HAVE A JOB.

not every single Mom is a baby factory because … welfare yo …. many people get married way young, then break up after having kids … many times the Dad becoming a dead beat Dad … leaving Mom to take care of the kids … many times without any family structure behind them … and as often as not, with zero skills … this usually equals min. wage jobs ..assuming they can find some way to take care of the kids AND work .. day care is more expensive than a min. wage job can support … that throws them back into the welfare racket

none of that means they're sleeping around … much less with guys that don't have jobs

your rant sounds a bit elitist, snobby, and condescending (as do the rest of your rants … i.e. "if you're trying to raise a family on a min. wage job, you're doing something wrong" ) keep in mind that without skills min. wage is often the only thing available … assuming it's available at all … and "just move" … ain't possible in many cases … like I said, very condescending and snobby … sounds to me like you've never been it that type of situation and had responsibilities that "kept" you down … it's a pretty vicious cycle

SVreX wrote: Let me drag this back to the original discussion... It is politically expedient for some politicians to: a- Keep people poor. b- Exaggerate poverty statistics. c- Convince some people they are "poor", when they are not. So, we are back to page 1. I stand on my original conviction that politicians of both parties exist to create chaos.

Absolutely.

But to get back to the topic of attitudes, how you are brought up often makes a big difference. To further this topic, I'll offer two examples: adults in their mid-40's, one reasonably successful, the other notsomuch.

When my ex- bought her MINI back in '03 we quickly joined the growing MINI community in the area. We met a wide range of people from all walks of life. The diversity was (and still is, really) staggering and she particularly enjoyed the fact there were/are so many more women than in the M3 and VW communities we had previously participated in.

One woman is an interesting case. She is a couple of years older than me, high school education, lives with her divorced mother in central PA and has worked at Walmart for years. Having known her for ~10 years now, I know she isn't stupid and has the intelligence to do anything she wants to. So why hasn't she? Hard to say.

Conversely, there's me. Also high school level education (with some college), but I work at an engineering company designing electrical systems. I make more money than I could have dreamed of and am reasonably well respected in my industry for my abilities. So why/how did I succeed when she hasn't? Well, I'd guess some of it has to do with how I was brought up.

Both of my parents have college degrees. I was raised in a rather odd environment of living with a military historian (I've forgotten more about the Civil War and WW2 than most people will ever know). I was told from day-one I was smart and could be anything I wanted to be. Even as well as I've done, I still often feel I haven't lived up to my potential, so I'm always pushing to be better and I'm somewhat plagued with the feeling I don't deserve what I have. Still, when opportunities have been presented to me, there is no "I can't do this" just "how will I do this?" It never enters my mind that I can't do something (not to be confused with not wanting to do something). I've also had the good fortune of being in the right place at the right time and made the most of those opportunities.

I don't think my friend was ever presented with those opportunities. I don't think she was brought up with that same mindset that she could do anything. It seems more likely she was brought up with the attitude of "get married, have some kids, and do what you have to do to get by." For whatever reason, the "married with kids" thing never happened for her. While one could blame her parents/mother, I don't think it ever occurred to them either. It's just the way it is.

So there's something to be said for the concept of "success breeds success." Yes, some of it is in the education - those with money can send their children to good schools and colleges and thus give them the best chance to succeed possible. But some of it is also in the attitude. When you are bought up with the attitude that you will succeed, it gives you a distinct advantage over someone who has to fight and work for their opportunities.

In reply to Ian F:

one thing to add to what you posted … with her upbringing, she might not consider herself as a "failure" or un-successful … she might consider herself just fine the way she is ….

wbjones wrote: In reply to Ian F: one thing to add to what you posted … with her upbringing, she might not consider herself as a "failure" or un-successful … she might consider herself just fine the way she is ….

Hmm... No. She hates working at Walmart, but after decades in the retail industry she doesn't know anything else.

Datsun1500 wrote: The underpaid teachers thing comes up here every year or so. I have had the stance of "They're paid fine" and supported it with facts, so I don't see the need to type it all out here again. I am only bringing up the "They work long hours, before and after school" argument because it was mentioned above. My office is across the street from an elementary school. School starts at 8:15 and gets out at 3:20. I can see the teachers parking lot from my front door. It is pretty empty at 7:45 and again at 4:15, so I am not sure when all of the "extra hours" come into play.

My wife teaches fourth grade. She arrives at work at 8:00 a.m, gets a 20-minute lunch some days and leaves at 4:30 p.m. with a couple hours of correcting to do at home before falling into bed. Plus, her principal is a total Bob Costas.

Imagine the workload of a high school English teacher with a stack of 50 twenty-page papers to go through. No, teachers aren't overpaid.

IT professionals are.

Ian F wrote:

wbjones wrote: In reply to Ian F: one thing to add to what you posted … with her upbringing, she might not consider herself as a "failure" or un-successful … she might consider herself just fine the way she is ….

Hmm... No. She hates working at Walmart, but after decades in the retail industry she doesn't know anything else.

gotcha … some get in a rut like that and end up just living with it … others it bothers enough for them to do something about it

In reply to Datsun1500:

Not getting divorced helped you quite a bit as well. Imagine if instead of clawing your way up once, you were booted from your home after ten years of marriage, forced to start your personal life over (dating/house/possessions/etc) but now with one financial hand tied behind your back (supporting the ex and kids) while you do that. Not everyone makes the right choices along the way and sometimes the curveball life throws at you comes from a direction you least expect.

Being smart, educated, driven is a good start. Sometimes lucky is a big part of the equation though.

wbjones wrote: gotcha … some get in a rut like that and end up just living with it … others it bothers enough for them to do something about it

Essentially. Guys like Datsun above fight their way out of it. Others don't. Can't say why some are driven to fight and others aren't. Or why some look at the "American Dream" and just see the road blocks in front of them and why others say "berk-you!" and push past those obstacles.

KyAllroad wrote: In reply to Datsun1500: Being smart, educated, driven is a good start. Sometimes lucky is a big part of the equation though.

Thumbs up to you and a +1. Best words written on this thread so far.