Do We Really Want a Republican President?

[Chef Jim]

do you all believe this to be an unusual story? http://ww.npr.org/2014/11/11/363318370/communities-struggle-to-reach-homeless-students-living-in-the-shadows

 

Oh not it's not an unusual story at all. I see dozens upon dozens of cars parked on the street every day here in CA with children living in the back seat. It's an epidemic I tell you!!

[birdog1960]

Ask, and you shall receive.

yes, i'd found it independently. these points weren't mentioned here before:

Researchers disagree about why people leave the labor force and how likely they are ever to return. In a report issued in February, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that about half the decline in labor-force participation was due to long-term demographic trends, a third was due to cyclical weaknesses in the labor market, and the rest a consequence of “unusually protracted weakness in the demand for labor [which] appears to have led some workers to become discouraged and permanently drop out of the labor force,” such as by taking early retirement or signing up for Social Security disability benefits. But two Federal Reserve economists have argued that cyclical factors, rather than demographic shifts, account for the bulk of the drop in labor-force participation since 2007.

[IDBillzFan]

do you all believe this to be an unusual story? http://ww.npr.org/20...-in-the-shadows

 

Unusual, no. Sad, yes. What's your point?

[Rob's House]

Unusual, no. Sad, yes. What's your point?

 

That any time a child in a country of 300 million people goes a day without a standard residence it's an epidemic that can only be addressed by exponential expansion of government welfare programs.

 

In truth, this is the most honest look into the mind of a liberal. They never argue how or why their "solutions" will be effective or beneficial, they instead find an anecdotal problem. Then they give a false choice: either you think my solution makes sense or you don't care that this kid was homeless.

[IDBillzFan]

That any time a child in a country of 300 million people goes a day without a standard residence it's an epidemic that can only be addressed by exponential expansion of government welfare programs.

 

In truth, this is the most honest look into the mind of a liberal. They never argue how or why their "solutions" will be effective or beneficial, they instead find an anecdotal problem. Then they give a false choice: either you think my solution makes sense or you don't care that this kid was homeless.

 

Ironically, the children in the story live in Liberal Central. This state, and the city of LA in particular, has been ruled by progressives for years over years and what you read is the result of their efforts.

 

But it's nothing a few more bucks can't fix.

Edited November 15, 2014 by LABillzFan

[KD in CA]

Ironically, the children in the story live in Liberal Central. This state, and the city of LA in particular, has been ruled by progressives for years over years and what you read is the result of their efforts.

 

But it's nothing a few more bucks can't fix.

 

Gee, don't you wonder why the "progressives" haven't simply capped all government union pensions at $100,000 per year (certainly no one needs to hoard more wealth than that) and direct the saving to educating homeless kids?

 

I'm sure some of resident left wingers can supply an answer. I'm sure it's not because they hate homeless kids.

[Chef Jim]

Still haven't heard a good answer why there are no Americans at the Home Depot looking for work. Driving through the "flatlands" if Oakland which is if course predominantly African American there are only Hispanics at HD and on the street corners looking for work. Come on progressives there has to be a good reason why that is.

[birdog1960]

Still haven't heard a good answer why there are no Americans at the Home Depot looking for work. Driving through the "flatlands" if Oakland which is if course predominantly African American there are only Hispanics at HD and on the street corners looking for work. Come on progressives there has to be a good reason why that is.

have no idea why you're obsessed with home depot but folks in d.c. are lining up to apply for low paying sales assoc jobs at a ratio of 38:1. http://www.slate.com...ban_stores.html.

 

Unusual, no. Sad, yes. What's your point?

you all keep repeating the chorus that the poor in this country aren't really poor. in fact, many really are and many are children. Edited November 16, 2014 by birdog1960

[Alaska Darin]

That any time a child in a country of 300 million people goes a day without a standard residence it's an epidemic that can only be addressed by exponential expansion of government welfare programs.

 

In truth, this is the most honest look into the mind of a liberal. They never argue how or why their "solutions" will be effective or beneficial, they instead find an anecdotal problem. Then they give a false choice: either you think my solution makes sense or you don't care that this kid was homeless.

Most people are homeless because of big government, not in spite of it.

[Chef Jim]

have no idea why you're obsessed with home depot but folks in d.c. are lining up to apply for low paying sales assoc jobs at a ratio of 38:1. http://www.slate.com...ban_stores.html.

 

you all keep repeating the chorus that the poor in this country aren't really poor. in fact, many really are and many are children.

 

We are saying compared to the poor around the globe they are far from it. You said many are poor and many are children. How many and what is the standard? I'm not denying there are poor people but not enough to justify your "wealth tax".

Edited November 16, 2014 by Chef Jim

[Alaska Darin]

All we need is a little more "wealth" to redistribute and everything will be sunshine and puppy dogs. Don't worry about the fact that the poverty levels in this country are within the historic norms even with all the programs we put in place to combat exactly this. Just a little more money will change how humans behave. We promise because...BUSH BAD!

 

Sincerely,

Liberals

[Azalin]

 

have no idea why you're obsessed with home depot but folks in d.c. are lining up to apply for low paying sales assoc jobs at a ratio of 38:1. http://www.slate.com...ban_stores.html.

 

 

FTA:

 

"These aren't the "good jobs" in information technology and biotech that civic officials fantasize about, but the people who are really in need simply aren't qualified for the fanciest jobs around. They need regular jobs. And they need enough of them so they can bargain for better wages and working conditions rather than being fearful of returning to the ranks of the unemployed."

 

this is the way it is pretty much everywhere in the US, and has been since before any of us were born. if you want to work in IT, biotech, or any of the other 'fancy jobs', you need training and a willingness to work hard and likely relocate, which I'm guessing many, if not most of the people here, have themselves done. education is available for anyone with a high school diploma, whether at a community college, or at a tech/trade school, most of which offer guaranteed student loans. success requires work. even those 600 sales associate jobs require the candidate to be punctual, dedicated, and have decent diction and communication skills. anyone who takes one of those sales associate jobs that isn't just trying to get a little additional income for their household, should only do so in order to eventually move up to a management position. there are no non-skilled jobs that can be counted on to continually fund a household bread-winner. that's just the way it is. no government program, supplemental or otherwise, will ever change that. entry-level is entry-level, and to expect that to change is idiotic. just because someone punches a clock does not entitle them to some kind of living wage. responsibility to ones' self will always be the key to individual success.

[DC Tom]

even those 600 sales associate jobs require the candidate to be punctual, dedicated, and have decent diction and communication skills.

 

You haven't been in a ZombieMart recently, have you?

[IDBillzFan]

you all keep repeating the chorus that the poor in this country aren't really poor. in fact, many really are and many are children.

 

It's like you can't live with gatorman being the biggest idiot here. NO ONE here ever said the poor in this country aren't really poor. Of course poor are poor, you dolt.

 

What most of us say is many of the poor are poor by choice, and we make it every easy to live poorly with tons of free food, housing, health care, cigarettes, booze, gambling money and now dope. Compare them to the poor in Haiti, where most people still live in tents after the earthquake for years ago, and America's poor look like spoiled brats.

 

When you remove the incentive to work, many will take what you have to give. Giving them MORE only makes things worse.

 

Unfortunately, in your mind, throwing other people's money at things is the way to address the issue.

 

The poor you see getting poorer right now are directly tied to this president and what he considers his economic efforts. If you weren't so busy trying to sell your ideology, you'd see it clearly.

[Azalin]

You haven't been in a ZombieMart recently, have you?

 

to be honest, I find the clientele to be more disconcerting than the sales associates. cammo pants with a plaid flannel shirt scream 'you should have gone to Target'.

[/dev/null]

just because someone punches a clock does not entitle them to some kind of living wage

Everyone gets a trophy

[birdog1960]

It's like you can't live with gatorman being the biggest idiot here. NO ONE here ever said the poor in this country aren't really poor. Of course poor are poor, you dolt.

 

What most of us say is many of the poor are poor by choice, and we make it every easy to live poorly with tons of free food, housing, health care, cigarettes, booze, gambling money and now dope. Compare them to the poor in Haiti, where most people still live in tents after the earthquake for years ago, and America's poor look like spoiled brats.

 

When you remove the incentive to work, many will take what you have to give. Giving them MORE only makes things worse.

 

Unfortunately, in your mind, throwing other people's money at things is the way to address the issue.

 

The poor you see getting poorer right now are directly tied to this president and what he considers his economic efforts. If you weren't so busy trying to sell your ideology, you'd see it clearly.

"perhaps if we stopped pretending that people were poor when they're not"…see kd's post 77. perhaps if you could read you'd be more qualified to judge my intellect.

 

FTA:

 

"These aren't the "good jobs" in information technology and biotech that civic officials fantasize about, but the people who are really in need simply aren't qualified for the fanciest jobs around. They need regular jobs. And they need enough of them so they can bargain for better wages and working conditions rather than being fearful of returning to the ranks of the unemployed."

 

this is the way it is pretty much everywhere in the US, and has been since before any of us were born. if you want to work in IT, biotech, or any of the other 'fancy jobs', you need training and a willingness to work hard and likely relocate, which I'm guessing many, if not most of the people here, have themselves done. education is available for anyone with a high school diploma, whether at a community college, or at a tech/trade school, most of which offer guaranteed student loans. success requires work. even those 600 sales associate jobs require the candidate to be punctual, dedicated, and have decent diction and communication skills. anyone who takes one of those sales associate jobs that isn't just trying to get a little additional income for their household, should only do so in order to eventually move up to a management position. there are no non-skilled jobs that can be counted on to continually fund a household bread-winner. that's just the way it is. no government program, supplemental or otherwise, will ever change that. entry-level is entry-level, and to expect that to change is idiotic. just because someone punches a clock does not entitle them to some kind of living wage. responsibility to ones' self will always be the key to individual success.

that post was in reply to chef's bizarre home depot obsession (which i assume referenced illegal, off the book employment).

 

if you want to argue this other point, then i would reply that many 1st world nations pay unskilled workers more than the us on avg. these include australia, canada, switzerland and france (these are those that i recall off the top of my head).

Edited November 16, 2014 by birdog1960

[Alaska Darin]

FTA:

 

"These aren't the "good jobs" in information technology and biotech that civic officials fantasize about, but the people who are really in need simply aren't qualified for the fanciest jobs around. They need regular jobs. And they need enough of them so they can bargain for better wages and working conditions rather than being fearful of returning to the ranks of the unemployed."

 

this is the way it is pretty much everywhere in the US, and has been since before any of us were born. if you want to work in IT, biotech, or any of the other 'fancy jobs', you need training and a willingness to work hard and likely relocate, which I'm guessing many, if not most of the people here, have themselves done. education is available for anyone with a high school diploma, whether at a community college, or at a tech/trade school, most of which offer guaranteed student loans. success requires work. even those 600 sales associate jobs require the candidate to be punctual, dedicated, and have decent diction and communication skills. anyone who takes one of those sales associate jobs that isn't just trying to get a little additional income for their household, should only do so in order to eventually move up to a management position. there are no non-skilled jobs that can be counted on to continually fund a household bread-winner. that's just the way it is. no government program, supplemental or otherwise, will ever change that. entry-level is entry-level, and to expect that to change is idiotic. just because someone punches a clock does not entitle them to some kind of living wage. responsibility to ones' self will always be the key to individual success.

I remember my "living wage" when I first joined the military. I was taking home $162 every two weeks. I was making significantly more money before I signed up working 60+ hours a week at a couple of minimum wage jobs. I worked a part time job for pretty much the first decade of my military career because we just couldn't get ahead on what we were bringing home from our 40+ hour military gigs. There were times (especially when we lived in California) where we were eligible for food stamps and/or WIC.

 

I was the network/IT guy who didn't have a PC at home because he couldn't afford one. Didn't go out to eat or to movies because we couldn't afford such luxuries. Didn't have a cell phone until I left the military and my first employer paid for mine every month. Didn't have anything more than basic cable. Drove cheap, dependable cars for at least a decade at a time because that's what we could afford. Literally spent every non-sleeping moment either working or watching my kids so my wife could work full time and go to school to get ahead.

 

You'll forgive me for not giving a flying **** about people who aren't willing to sacrifice to get ahead and want everything handed to them. You can forget debating it because I've been seeing it every single day of my life. The vast majority of "poor" people live lives much better than my parents (or I) did growing up. They don't worry about where they're going to live or whether there's going to be food because that **** is taken care of by Uncle Sugar and there's absolutely no pressure to do anything about their situations, despite the fact that it's easier now than it has ever been.

 

Take your hyperbole and bull **** and try and sell it somewhere else. Those of us who've lived it and work with it every day know better. You should be ashamed of yourselves because you're part of the problem, not part of the solution. Everyone doesn't get a !@#$ing trophy.

[birdog1960]

I remember my "living wage" when I first joined the military. I was taking home $162 every two weeks. I was making significantly more money before I signed up working 60+ hours a week at a couple of minimum wage jobs. I worked a part time job for pretty much the first decade of my military career because we just couldn't get ahead on what we were bringing home from our 40+ hour military gigs. There were times (especially when we lived in California) where we were eligible for food stamps and/or WIC.

 

I was the network/IT guy who didn't have a PC at home because he couldn't afford one. Didn't go out to eat or to movies because we couldn't afford such luxuries. Didn't have a cell phone until I left the military and my first employer paid for mine every month. Didn't have anything more than basic cable. Drove cheap, dependable cars for at least a decade at a time because that's what we could afford. Literally spent every non-sleeping moment either working or watching my kids so my wife could work full time and go to school to get ahead.

 

You'll forgive me for not giving a flying **** about people who aren't willing to sacrifice to get ahead and want everything handed to them. You can forget debating it because I've been seeing it every single day of my life. The vast majority of "poor" people live lives much better than my parents (or I) did growing up. They don't worry about where they're going to live or whether there's going to be food because that **** is taken care of by Uncle Sugar and there's absolutely no pressure to do anything about their situations, despite the fact that it's easier now than it has ever been.

 

Take your hyperbole and bull **** and try and sell it somewhere else. Those of us who've lived it and work with it every day know better. You should be ashamed of yourselves because you're part of the problem, not part of the solution. Everyone doesn't get a !@#$ing trophy.

since your talent and labor were clearly exploited, it would seem logical that you would be in favor of higher minimum wages and a more equitable division of the great wealth of this nation. but no, you seem to choose the hazing mentality so common of schoolboys. "i was hazed (and it sucked) but the next group is gonna get theirs."

 

it's apparently the same psychology we see in some of the poorest states (especially the south) that support regimes that have economic policies in direct conflict of their own economic interests. at least in those cases there are political shenanigans that help explain some of the paradox.

[DC Tom]

to be honest, I find the clientele to be more disconcerting than the sales associates. cammo pants with a plaid flannel shirt scream 'you should have gone to Target'.

 

Why do you think I call it ZombieMart? People don't walk in there...they aimlessly shamble. I feel like I'm on the set of a George Romero film on the rare occasions I go into one.

 

since your talent and labor were clearly exploited, it would seem logical that you would be in favor of higher minimum wages and a more equitable division of the great wealth of this nation. but no, you seem to choose the hazing mentality so common of schoolboys. "i was hazed (and it sucked) but the next group is gonna get theirs."

 

it's apparently the same psychology we see in some of the poorest states (especially the south) that support regimes that have economic policies in direct conflict of their own economic interests. at least in those cases there are political shenanigans that help explain some of the paradox.

 

Yes, minimum wage is a frat prank and should be stopped.

 

You're a !@#$ing idiot. I can't believe people are indulging you in this nonsense.