i really like your posts dude. you've got a grip about what is really going on.
i'd like to ask the others something.
who do you think would be happier:
bill gates in the final stages of cancer; or someone making enough to enjoy their life and in perfect health?
that question isn't rigged at all ... :rolleyes:
sure ... life isn't about material things ... but opportunity is subjective ... what people need to realize is opportunity and privilege is not an all available thing ... having choice is not necessarily always available ...
there is a fine line between just reward and exploitation ...
ps. edit - social activists believe in a "better world" for all ... everyone has contradictions in their lives ... it takes true compassion to fight for others and not just yourself ...
If they are getting "richer" at a slower rate, the are most likely getting poorer. Yes their nominal earnings are going up, but if they are going up slower than all other classes, they are losing money relatively.
Is their Standare of living going up?
While I am not an economist, I would guess that their "slower speed of getting richer" indicates that they are going up slower than inflation. If so, then they are really getting poorer.
I think what surferdude meant with his statement is that the poor are getting richer at a slower pace than the rich. So, if this is the case, in relative terms (comparing poor vs. rich) the richer are richer, while the poor are poorer. Anyway if the poorer's income is also increasing (but a slower rate), you could have less people below poverty line and yet more income inequality. This is happening in Chile: between 1990 and 2006 poverty has decreased from 38% to 13.6%, nevertheless income inequality has remained practically unaltered.
Anyway, this statement is correct: "slower speed of getting richer" indicates that they are going up slower than inflation. If so, then they are really getting poorer. If their income is growing slower than the inflation rate, their income would decrease in real terms, 'cause your spending power would diminish
I'm an economist but I could be mistaken (I graduated a long time ago )
sure ... life isn't about material things ... but opportunity is subjective ... what people need to realize is opportunity and privilege is not an all available thing ... having choice is not necessarily always available ...
there is a fine line between just reward and exploitation ...
being born dirt poor; i feel i have an opinion that goes both ways. my happiest times were when we were lower and lower middle class. when one has money they worry about how to hang on to it. how to keep the government from getting it. how to put it to work. where to invest. when to invest and when to pull out.
i like a simple normal life. i have 1 tele; my neighbour gave me a dvd player because i didn't have one but i haven't used it yet. i got dvds for christmas i haven't broken the seal on yet. i enjoy being outside. i'll talk to the buffalo like someone else will talk to their dog.
a simple life and working hard is the way to get ahead. when you spend your money on teles and things not necessary; you can't really complain about not having money.
being born dirt poor; i feel i have an opinion that goes both ways. my happiest times were when we were lower and lower middle class. when one has money they worry about how to hang on to it. how to keep the government from getting it. how to put it to work. where to invest. when to invest and when to pull out.
i like a simple normal life. i have 1 tele; my neighbour gave me a dvd player because i didn't have one but i haven't used it yet. i got dvds for christmas i haven't broken the seal on yet. i enjoy being outside. i'll talk to the buffalo like someone else will talk to their dog.
a simple life and working hard is the way to get ahead. when you spend your money on teles and things not necessary; you can't really complain about not having money.
i hear what you are saying ... but everyone has different realities - we can't judge all the people that have not with one stroke ... if everyone truly had the opportunities that you and i have had - then they only have themselves and such to blame ... but that simply isn't the case in this world ...
what do you say to the guy who has to work in poor factory conditions making a buck a day so we can enjoy cheap cups? ... life isn't fair - no need to whine about it but at the same time - there is no need to say otherwise ...
Workers in this country are generally more productive because they work with more capital. This doesn't mean the workers are performing at a higher level than before, just that they have more tools at their disposal.
In that respect just about anybody that gets a job now will be more productive than they would have been in the past.
The reason that low-skilled workers don't get higher wages, even though they are more productive than before, is because there are lots of other unskilled workers that can replace them. Their wages will only increase when the demand for unskilled labor increases.
If you want more pie (the pie is basically unlimited), you need to get some skill.
i hear what you are saying ... but everyone has different realities - we can't judge all the people that have not with one stroke ... if everyone truly had the opportunities that you and i have had - then they only have themselves and such to blame ... but that simply isn't the case in this world ...
what do you say to the guy who has to work in poor factory conditions making a buck a day so we can enjoy cheap cups? ... life isn't fair - no need to whine about it but at the same time - there is no need to say otherwise ...
i agree. when i was 10 my dad was that factory worker making $2.50/hour. at that time it was well above minimum wage. i got a job there sweeping floors on saturdays for 50 cents/hour cash. i also cut lawns.
there's a line from the song "lovers in a dangerous time" that i keep repeating to myself whenever i'm trying to do something and it's going bad or slow:
GOTTA KICK AT THE DARKNESS TILL IT BLEEDS DAYLIGHT.
i wanted to buy my daughter and son in law a small ranch in indiana. for some reason that's where they want to live and they've done good there for several years. she said "daddy; you've done so much; we want to do this on our own." i cried because that's what i told my dad when i was 16. they have 2 small babies and they're struggling but doing it themselves makes it mean so much more than being handed something. i guess that's what i was trying to say.
Workers in this country are generally more productive because they work with more capital. This doesn't mean the workers are performing at a higher level than before, just that they have more tools at their disposal.
In that respect just about anybody that gets a job now will be more productive than they would have been in the past.
The reason that low-skilled workers don't get higher wages, even though they are more productive than before, is because there are lots of other unskilled workers that can replace them. Their wages will only increase when the demand for unskilled labor increases.
If you want more pie (the pie is basically unlimited), you need to get some skill.
i understand what you're saying and i agree; but technology replaces workers too. for example; my dad and i bought a small machine shop. it had 3 employees but each one was a skilled machinist and we paid good wages. then we bought a cnc lathe and realized i could program it and a monkey could open the collet; put a piece of metal in it; and hit the start button. we noticed our production went up and so did profits. 6 months later we bought another. when the recession of the 70's hit; we saw that the employee was sitting idle while the machine did the work. so we turned the machines face to face and 1 employee ran both machines. we kept the skilled machinists for prototype work and because they were loyal to us; but they're dead now and the entire workforce is kids out of high school. a couple run 3 machines. i retired from that but my dad has 1 person who programs but the rest of the employees don't know a monkey wrench from a monkey's arse.
Everyone is off topic here anyway. The story is about how the media tells of a booming economy yet politicians claim at the same time that we can't afford many of the social programs that already exist. It's not about fucking socialism here. It's about the rich and powerful cutting social security and medicare. Why? Because they obviously don't need it, that's why.
Everyone is off topic here anyway. The story is about how the media tells of a booming economy yet politicians claim at the same time that we can't afford many of the social programs that already exist.
and let me tell you where you are confused.
our nations booming economy has nothing to do with our governments ability or inability to pay for social programs.
our economy IS booming. unemployment is low, capital spending is rising, the stock market is at record highs, our economy is strong enough to shake off a slump in home prices and record high gas prices.
but since you arent getting free handouts such as "free" health care, you conclude our economy is NOT booming?
our nations booming economy has nothing to do with our governments ability or inability to pay for social programs.
our economy IS booming. unemployment is low, capital spending is rising, the stock market is at record highs, our economy is strong enough to shake off a slump in home prices and record high gas prices.
but since you arent getting free handouts such as "free" health care, you conclude our economy is NOT booming?
there is no correlation.
A moral society would create a correlation if none exists. But I disagree with you that there is no correlation. When they use the words "can't afford" for social programs then it's 100% bullshit. 100% bullshit. The answer is obviously to NOT cut back spending on social programs. Jesus. It's not fucking rocket science.
our nations booming economy has nothing to do with our governments ability or inability to pay for social programs.
our economy IS booming. unemployment is low, capital spending is rising, the stock market is at record highs, our economy is strong enough to shake off a slump in home prices and record high gas prices.
but since you arent getting free handouts such as "free" health care, you conclude our economy is NOT booming?
there is no correlation.
A country is supposed to work for the benefit of it's people not just it's corporations. The country's booming economy means nothing if it's society isn't showing any reflection of it.
The good ole US of A....willing to pull out all the stops to guarantee it's citizens have the best possible life and live in prosperity. Oh wait...that only goes for the ones lucky enough to buy the golden ticket. The rest might as well be from somewhere else.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
A moral society would create a correlation if none exists. But I disagree with you that there is no correlation. When they use the words "can't afford" for social programs then it's 100% bullshit. 100% bullshit. The answer is obviously to NOT cut back spending on social programs. Jesus. It's not fucking rocket science.
I agree. if they say they cant afford it, thats bullshit. we spend alot of money and what seems like nothing.
but I disagree that its somehow our moral right to have our government pay for all these social programs you want.
personally, I hate government involvement in anything, and I dont want my government taking 60% of my pay and hand it over to someone who is too lazy to work.
A country is supposed to work for the benefit of it's people not just it's corporations. The country's booming economy means nothing if it's society isn't showing any reflection of it.
how is the country not showing any reflections? people are rewarded for hard work
The good ole US of A....willing to pull out all the stops to guarantee it's citizens have the best possible life and live in prosperity.
I see the good ol US of A as the people. not the government. I dont expect the government to guarantee me anything. i'm quite capable of doing it on my own. I and came from having nothing.
The good ole US of A....willing to pull out all the stops to guarantee it's citizens have the best possible life and live in prosperity.
Except for the extreme poor, a very small number, the poor in the US probably have the highest standard of living of material goods as compared with the poor in other countries.
As an outisder where I see the problem is that the poor want to keep their material/consumption wealth while gaining a shitload of expensive social programs. It's all what can my country and the rich do for me, and no what can I do in return. There's no thought of asking for reduced income tax deductions in return for socialized healthcare. It's all gimme, gimme, gimme while offering nothing in return and then blaming the rich. The threshold for paying taxes is higher than ever, resulting in more people than ever before not paying taxes and all it has resulted in is people yelling louder for services they know they'll never pay a dime for. Meanwhile all blame is put on the evil rich people. I'd love for some of these people to get a mirror and take a good long look in it.
“One good thing about music,
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
I see the good ol US of A as the people. not the government. I dont expect the government to guarantee me anything. i'm quite capable of doing it on my own. I and came from having nothing.
Anything? Good then lets drop this military bullshit. You can defend yourself.
What is hard work to you? What do you think manual labor is?
hard work is going to work everyday and pushing yourself to do better. yes, I think manual labor is hard work. but you also need a brain. if a person has no strive to do better or the determination to think, why should that person be handed things for free? I dont want laziness rewarded simply because I love my fellow man. sorry.
Anything? Good then lets drop this military bullshit. You can defend yourself.
i'm all for cutting military spending. a government does have a few roles. one of them defending its people. (police, fire dept, military to protect our borders)
hard work is going to work everyday and pushing yourself to do better. yes, I think manual labor is hard work. but you also need a brain. if a person has no strive to do better or the determination to think, why should that person be handed things for free? I dont want laziness rewarded simply because I love my fellow man. sorry.
So people with bad fortune or a lower IQ are just SOL? Wake up and smell the circumstances that are life. People who want to be lazy and live off the government are already doing it.
i'm all for cutting military spending. a government does have a few roles. one of them defending its people. (police, fire dept, military to protect our borders)
So you get to decide what the govt's roles should be and include? How about the the war on poverty or the war on no health coverage, the war on pollution, the war on eroding rights....we need defense from these. This is supposed to be a democracy, right? Let's let the people decide what roles the govt should have instead this bullshit we see now of the rich buying out the govt and using it to only benefit their selfish interests....which aren't reflecting the needs of our society as a whole
I don't despise people with money. I despise people with greed and no concern about how their actions create huge problems for the rest of us.
i just posted something relevent to this on my thread but i'll give you the short version.
when someone with money dies and leaves money to a family member; the recipient has to pay inheritence tax. yes; they pay tax on money grandad already paid taxes on. i don't know if there's a sliding scale because i'm not an accountant but i paid 65% more or less. so when family works hard to build a good future for their family members; they're penalized. let's say you save up a million dollars to give to your children. will you willingly give up $650,000 and leave only $350,000 for your children? a million dollars is nothing. you can't even live decently off the interest. so what you perceive as greed; is simply putting back money the government is going to take in the future.
So people with bad fortune or a lower IQ are just SOL? Wake up and smell the circumstances that are life.
I do know the circumstances of life. and life isnt always fair. that doesnt mean I should be forced to give 60% of my hard earned money to the unfortunate.
How about the the war on poverty or the war on no health coverage, the war on pollution, the war on eroding rights....we need defense from these. This is supposed to be a democracy, right? Let's let the people decide what roles the govt should have instead this bullshit we see now of the rich buying out the govt and using it to only benefit their selfish interests....which aren't reflecting the needs of our society as a whole
its nice to be free isnt it? bitch all you want, i'm sure someone will listen. but i'd be more happy with less government involvemnent. like I said, I can take care of myself.
I do know the circumstances of life. and life isnt always fair. that doesnt mean I should be forced to give 60% of my hard earned money to the unfortunate.
Considering the less fortunate tend to give up about that much to mostly the well-off, it seems only fair.
its nice to be free isnt it? bitch all you want, i'm sure someone will listen. but i'd be more happy with less government involvemnent. like I said, I can take care of myself.
Givin a choice between two parties that have the same platform-similar ideas regarding the economy and war, the country can more accurately be described as fascist than free. I hate country music.
And less gov't is fine with me, as it sits now. But you realize this is supposed to be a democracy, so the less involvment by gov't amounts to less involvement by the people, insofar as the country is democratic.
That always makes me laugh, the cons claiming they need gov't out of their lives and out of the economy...but like I said, to take gov't out of the picture removes the public from the situation, and that kind of goes againt the ideas of democracy.
fine, hate greed. but the rest of this statement makes no sense at all. stop blaming successful people for your problems.[/quote]
When one makes 20 million, ten thousand people lose.
For every well-off individual in this 'free' society, there are many individuals that are paying for that 'success'. Just how it goes in a class based society.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I do know the circumstances of life. and life isnt always fair. that doesnt mean I should be forced to give 60% of my hard earned money to the unfortunate.
and you see this as ok? and condone more of it?
no I didnt decide. the founding fathers did. I just live here.
its nice to be free isnt it? bitch all you want, i'm sure someone will listen. but i'd be more happy with less government involvemnent. like I said, I can take care of myself.
fine, hate greed. but the rest of this statement makes no sense at all. stop blaming successful people for your problems.
dude; did you work for me in the 70's or 80's at a machine shop on pulaski near pederson? i swear you're an old friend of mine.
Considering the less fortunate tend to give up about that much to mostly the well-off, it seems only fair.
Givin a choice between two parties that have the same platform-similar ideas regarding the economy and war, the country can more accurately be described as fascist than free. I hate country music.
And less gov't is fine with me, as it sits now. But you realize this is supposed to be a democracy, so the less involvment by gov't amounts to less involvement by the people, insofar as the country is democratic.
That always makes me laugh, the cons claiming they need gov't out of their lives and out of the economy...but like I said, to take gov't out of the picture removes the public from the situation, and that kind of goes againt the ideas of democracy.
fine, hate greed. but the rest of this statement makes no sense at all. stop blaming successful people for your problems.
When one makes 20 million, ten thousand people lose.
For every well-off individual in this 'free' society, there are many individuals that are paying for that 'success'. Just how it goes in a class based society.[/quote]
i had a reply prepared but then i noticed your name. you support communism. you must be against free enterprise. so let me ask a question; do you think bill gates still would have invented windows if he didn't have an incentive? because if he still would have; then he wouldn't be worth billions now. he gives a bloody 10% to charity and everyone oooohhhs and aaahhhsss.
I do know the circumstances of life. and life isnt always fair. that doesnt mean I should be forced to give 60% of my hard earned money to the unfortunate.
and you see this as ok? and condone more of it?
no I didnt decide. the founding fathers did. I just live here.
its nice to be free isnt it? bitch all you want, i'm sure someone will listen. but i'd be more happy with less government involvemnent. like I said, I can take care of myself.
fine, hate greed. but the rest of this statement makes no sense at all. stop blaming successful people for your problems.
Since you really didn't bother to address the points I was making other than to reply with sound byte style generalizations...I guess I'll just leave it at this.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Considering the less fortunate tend to give up about that much to mostly the well-off, it seems only fair.
Givin a choice between two parties that have the same platform-similar ideas regarding the economy and war, the country can more accurately be described as fascist than free. I hate country music.
And less gov't is fine with me, as it sits now. But you realize this is supposed to be a democracy, so the less involvment by gov't amounts to less involvement by the people, insofar as the country is democratic.
That always makes me laugh, the cons claiming they need gov't out of their lives and out of the economy...but like I said, to take gov't out of the picture removes the public from the situation, and that kind of goes againt the ideas of democracy.
fine, hate greed. but the rest of this statement makes no sense at all. stop blaming successful people for your problems.
When one makes 20 million, ten thousand people lose.
For every well-off individual in this 'free' society, there are many individuals that are paying for that 'success'. Just how it goes in a class based society.
Always nice to see your name pop up around these parts.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
When one makes 20 million, ten thousand people lose.
For every well-off individual in this 'free' society, there are many individuals that are paying for that 'success'. Just how it goes in a class based society.
i had a reply prepared but then i noticed your name. you support communism. you must be against free enterprise. so let me ask a question; do you think bill gates still would have invented windows if he didn't have an incentive? because if he still would have; then he wouldn't be worth billions now. he gives a bloody 10% to charity and everyone oooohhhs and aaahhhsss.
the name is misleading.
I am no longer in any way affiliated with the communist party.
I wish he gave 10%.
But your question is misleading, because it implies that there is no incentive in a collective, or at least a communist system, which may be true. But the idea in an economy run by the people, a democratic socialist state whatever you call it, the incentive to work is more compelling than what we have now...to be honest I guess I just don't have that selfish gene that drives some peeople to amass large amounts of money.
Ideally this drive isinstilled from birth but not as a selfish idea. And it is not something tought but instilled, allowed to grow, whatever...the idea is that idividuals actually give a shit about something and someone other than themselves and so strive for the better of the community as a whole, knowing that what benefits others will also benefit them. But they get also gain a certain satisfaction knowing they have helped the community, and maybe celebrities are born this way.
And knowing the human race won't destroy its environment allowing future generations to survive might bring a certain satisfaction as well, who knows.
the name is misleading.
I am no longer in any way affiliated with the communist party.
I wish he gave 10%.
But your question is misleading, because it implies that there is no incentive in a collective, or at least a communist system, which may be true. But the idea in an economy run by the people, a democratic socialist state whatever you call it, the incentive to work is more compelling than what we have now...to be honest I guess I just don't have that selfish gene that drives some peeople to amass large amounts of money.
Ideally this drive isinstilled from birth but not as a selfish idea. And it is not something tought but instilled, allowed to grow, whatever...the idea is that idividuals actually give a shit about something and someone other than themselves and so strive for the better of the community as a whole, knowing that what benefits others will also benefit them. But they get also gain a certain satisfaction knowing they have helped the community, and maybe celebrities are born this way.
And knowing the human race won't destroy its environment allowing future generations to survive might bring a certain satisfaction as well, who knows.
that wasn't my quote but i like the question.
i'm only speaking for myself here. i say that in case i mention other names. i'm only speaking for myself.
the inspiration comes from having to eat potatoes for a month. people like reagan born dirt poor have to fight harder to get out of poverty. polish families are tight so my family worked together. we got a few lucky breaks but we all worked more than one job. when we finally MADE IT; i donated everything i didn't need. at that time money flowed like water. there'd always be more. i mostly donated land for wildlife habitat because i'm not a people person. don't get me wrong; i have lots of people that call me friend; but they're not what i'd call friends. a friend has unconditional loyalty and i only know a few of those. but i would help these people when they couldn't make the rent or car payment and maybe they'd help set up the stage or be my designated driver. but for the most part they took advantage of me and some stole from me under the guise of friendship.
then an aneurysm broke in my head and i became the plague. nobody but 2 friends were there when i needed them. it was during this time i realized how people really were. i've had more people do me wrong in the last 45 years then most people get to know. it was then; as i lay bedridden with my wife out conceiving a child with my sisters husband; that i vowed to get even with every one of them. yes; i know that's sick but i was sick at the time. i ended up getting even with all but 1. my ex. her time is now and she's facing at least 5 years in federal prison. it's taken me years but all is well. then a few months ago i started being harassed here on this board. prior to that i worked with abused children and donated time where it was needed to help my community. but when i got banned for something i didn't do; that and the harassment brought back all those feelings that people were worthless. so i stopped everything except what benefited me. i want you to know i have some dear friends on the board. i love them dearly and would do anything for them. but the basic "people in general" thing sticks with me. why do people have to be mean? if i mistyped something; simply ask for an explaination. don't attack me because YOU don't understand. during my ban i visited other boards and people are the same all over. so now i'm concerned about my little grand babies and making sure they have a good future. as to my attitude; if a 36 year stoner like me can work 2 or 3 jobs to get ahead; anyone can.
i'm sorry if i offended anyone. i didn't mean to. my ban was a dagger to my heart.
do you think bill gates still would have invented windows if he didn't have an incentive? because if he still would have; then he wouldn't be worth billions now. he gives a bloody 10% to charity and everyone oooohhhs and aaahhhsss.
It's my belief that without billions of dollars as incentive, someone may have invented a more sound product than windows. And certainly in a more responsible and ethical manner. But maybe it would be someone who couldn't push their product in Microsoft fashion. I know I'm not the majority here but I don't believe socialism stifles innovation like most people believe. I think it encourages responsible innovation (which may actually take a little longer and be a little slower, but more responsible) because the people that are innovating don't catch the green disease.
If money weren't the sole motivator then those people that are innovating would be doing what they do for better reasons, hence they'd be more responsible about it. No need to fuck the environment or outsource to sweat shops because they're not trying to squeeze every penny out of everyone they possibly can. Isn't it obvious that capitalism has all but ruined this planet? People are too greedy and too anxious to get their hands on every little cent they can and they don't care who or what it's hurting in the process.
i just posted something relevent to this on my thread but i'll give you the short version.
when someone with money dies and leaves money to a family member; the recipient has to pay inheritence tax. yes; they pay tax on money grandad already paid taxes on. i don't know if there's a sliding scale because i'm not an accountant but i paid 65% more or less. so when family works hard to build a good future for their family members; they're penalized. let's say you save up a million dollars to give to your children. will you willingly give up $650,000 and leave only $350,000 for your children? a million dollars is nothing. you can't even live decently off the interest. so what you perceive as greed; is simply putting back money the government is going to take in the future.
"Only about 2% of all estates are subject to the estate tax."
"Most relatively simple estates (cash, publicly traded securities, small amounts of other, easily valued assets and no special deductions or elections or jointly held property) with a total value under $1,000,000 and a date of death in 2002 or 2003, under $1,500,000 and a date of death in 2004 or 2005, and under $2,000,000 and a date of death in 2006 or 2007 do not require the filing of an estate tax return."
Comments
that question isn't rigged at all ... :rolleyes:
sure ... life isn't about material things ... but opportunity is subjective ... what people need to realize is opportunity and privilege is not an all available thing ... having choice is not necessarily always available ...
there is a fine line between just reward and exploitation ...
ps. edit - social activists believe in a "better world" for all ... everyone has contradictions in their lives ... it takes true compassion to fight for others and not just yourself ...
I think what surferdude meant with his statement is that the poor are getting richer at a slower pace than the rich. So, if this is the case, in relative terms (comparing poor vs. rich) the richer are richer, while the poor are poorer. Anyway if the poorer's income is also increasing (but a slower rate), you could have less people below poverty line and yet more income inequality. This is happening in Chile: between 1990 and 2006 poverty has decreased from 38% to 13.6%, nevertheless income inequality has remained practically unaltered.
Anyway, this statement is correct: "slower speed of getting richer" indicates that they are going up slower than inflation. If so, then they are really getting poorer. If their income is growing slower than the inflation rate, their income would decrease in real terms, 'cause your spending power would diminish
I'm an economist but I could be mistaken (I graduated a long time ago
being born dirt poor; i feel i have an opinion that goes both ways. my happiest times were when we were lower and lower middle class. when one has money they worry about how to hang on to it. how to keep the government from getting it. how to put it to work. where to invest. when to invest and when to pull out.
i like a simple normal life. i have 1 tele; my neighbour gave me a dvd player because i didn't have one but i haven't used it yet. i got dvds for christmas i haven't broken the seal on yet. i enjoy being outside. i'll talk to the buffalo like someone else will talk to their dog.
a simple life and working hard is the way to get ahead. when you spend your money on teles and things not necessary; you can't really complain about not having money.
i hear what you are saying ... but everyone has different realities - we can't judge all the people that have not with one stroke ... if everyone truly had the opportunities that you and i have had - then they only have themselves and such to blame ... but that simply isn't the case in this world ...
what do you say to the guy who has to work in poor factory conditions making a buck a day so we can enjoy cheap cups? ... life isn't fair - no need to whine about it but at the same time - there is no need to say otherwise ...
In that respect just about anybody that gets a job now will be more productive than they would have been in the past.
The reason that low-skilled workers don't get higher wages, even though they are more productive than before, is because there are lots of other unskilled workers that can replace them. Their wages will only increase when the demand for unskilled labor increases.
If you want more pie (the pie is basically unlimited), you need to get some skill.
i agree. when i was 10 my dad was that factory worker making $2.50/hour. at that time it was well above minimum wage. i got a job there sweeping floors on saturdays for 50 cents/hour cash. i also cut lawns.
there's a line from the song "lovers in a dangerous time" that i keep repeating to myself whenever i'm trying to do something and it's going bad or slow:
GOTTA KICK AT THE DARKNESS TILL IT BLEEDS DAYLIGHT.
i wanted to buy my daughter and son in law a small ranch in indiana. for some reason that's where they want to live and they've done good there for several years. she said "daddy; you've done so much; we want to do this on our own." i cried because that's what i told my dad when i was 16. they have 2 small babies and they're struggling but doing it themselves makes it mean so much more than being handed something. i guess that's what i was trying to say.
i understand what you're saying and i agree; but technology replaces workers too. for example; my dad and i bought a small machine shop. it had 3 employees but each one was a skilled machinist and we paid good wages. then we bought a cnc lathe and realized i could program it and a monkey could open the collet; put a piece of metal in it; and hit the start button. we noticed our production went up and so did profits. 6 months later we bought another. when the recession of the 70's hit; we saw that the employee was sitting idle while the machine did the work. so we turned the machines face to face and 1 employee ran both machines. we kept the skilled machinists for prototype work and because they were loyal to us; but they're dead now and the entire workforce is kids out of high school. a couple run 3 machines. i retired from that but my dad has 1 person who programs but the rest of the employees don't know a monkey wrench from a monkey's arse.
our nations booming economy has nothing to do with our governments ability or inability to pay for social programs.
our economy IS booming. unemployment is low, capital spending is rising, the stock market is at record highs, our economy is strong enough to shake off a slump in home prices and record high gas prices.
but since you arent getting free handouts such as "free" health care, you conclude our economy is NOT booming?
there is no correlation.
A country is supposed to work for the benefit of it's people not just it's corporations. The country's booming economy means nothing if it's society isn't showing any reflection of it.
The good ole US of A....willing to pull out all the stops to guarantee it's citizens have the best possible life and live in prosperity. Oh wait...that only goes for the ones lucky enough to buy the golden ticket. The rest might as well be from somewhere else.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I agree. if they say they cant afford it, thats bullshit. we spend alot of money and what seems like nothing.
but I disagree that its somehow our moral right to have our government pay for all these social programs you want.
personally, I hate government involvement in anything, and I dont want my government taking 60% of my pay and hand it over to someone who is too lazy to work.
I see the good ol US of A as the people. not the government. I dont expect the government to guarantee me anything. i'm quite capable of doing it on my own. I and came from having nothing.
what is a golden ticket?
As an outisder where I see the problem is that the poor want to keep their material/consumption wealth while gaining a shitload of expensive social programs. It's all what can my country and the rich do for me, and no what can I do in return. There's no thought of asking for reduced income tax deductions in return for socialized healthcare. It's all gimme, gimme, gimme while offering nothing in return and then blaming the rich. The threshold for paying taxes is higher than ever, resulting in more people than ever before not paying taxes and all it has resulted in is people yelling louder for services they know they'll never pay a dime for. Meanwhile all blame is put on the evil rich people. I'd love for some of these people to get a mirror and take a good long look in it.
when it hits you, you feel to pain.
So brutalize me with music.”
~ Bob Marley
What is hard work to you? What do you think manual labor is?
Anything? Good then lets drop this military bullshit. You can defend yourself.
The lucky ones who can buy their way through life will have to clue you in on that one.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
i'm all for cutting military spending. a government does have a few roles. one of them defending its people. (police, fire dept, military to protect our borders)
sorry I still dont follow you. why do you despise people with money? people who earn their money should be free to do whatever they want with it.
So people with bad fortune or a lower IQ are just SOL? Wake up and smell the circumstances that are life. People who want to be lazy and live off the government are already doing it.
So you get to decide what the govt's roles should be and include? How about the the war on poverty or the war on no health coverage, the war on pollution, the war on eroding rights....we need defense from these. This is supposed to be a democracy, right? Let's let the people decide what roles the govt should have instead this bullshit we see now of the rich buying out the govt and using it to only benefit their selfish interests....which aren't reflecting the needs of our society as a whole
I don't despise people with money. I despise people with greed and no concern about how their actions create huge problems for the rest of us.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
i just posted something relevent to this on my thread but i'll give you the short version.
when someone with money dies and leaves money to a family member; the recipient has to pay inheritence tax. yes; they pay tax on money grandad already paid taxes on. i don't know if there's a sliding scale because i'm not an accountant but i paid 65% more or less. so when family works hard to build a good future for their family members; they're penalized. let's say you save up a million dollars to give to your children. will you willingly give up $650,000 and leave only $350,000 for your children? a million dollars is nothing. you can't even live decently off the interest. so what you perceive as greed; is simply putting back money the government is going to take in the future.
and you see this as ok? and condone more of it?
no I didnt decide. the founding fathers did. I just live here.
its nice to be free isnt it? bitch all you want, i'm sure someone will listen. but i'd be more happy with less government involvemnent. like I said, I can take care of myself.
fine, hate greed. but the rest of this statement makes no sense at all. stop blaming successful people for your problems.
Considering the less fortunate tend to give up about that much to mostly the well-off, it seems only fair.
Givin a choice between two parties that have the same platform-similar ideas regarding the economy and war, the country can more accurately be described as fascist than free. I hate country music.
And less gov't is fine with me, as it sits now. But you realize this is supposed to be a democracy, so the less involvment by gov't amounts to less involvement by the people, insofar as the country is democratic.
That always makes me laugh, the cons claiming they need gov't out of their lives and out of the economy...but like I said, to take gov't out of the picture removes the public from the situation, and that kind of goes againt the ideas of democracy.
fine, hate greed. but the rest of this statement makes no sense at all. stop blaming successful people for your problems.[/quote]
When one makes 20 million, ten thousand people lose.
For every well-off individual in this 'free' society, there are many individuals that are paying for that 'success'. Just how it goes in a class based society.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
dude; did you work for me in the 70's or 80's at a machine shop on pulaski near pederson? i swear you're an old friend of mine.
When one makes 20 million, ten thousand people lose.
For every well-off individual in this 'free' society, there are many individuals that are paying for that 'success'. Just how it goes in a class based society.[/quote]
i had a reply prepared but then i noticed your name. you support communism. you must be against free enterprise. so let me ask a question; do you think bill gates still would have invented windows if he didn't have an incentive? because if he still would have; then he wouldn't be worth billions now. he gives a bloody 10% to charity and everyone oooohhhs and aaahhhsss.
Since you really didn't bother to address the points I was making other than to reply with sound byte style generalizations...I guess I'll just leave it at this.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Always nice to see your name pop up around these parts.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
the name is misleading.
I am no longer in any way affiliated with the communist party.
I wish he gave 10%.
But your question is misleading, because it implies that there is no incentive in a collective, or at least a communist system, which may be true. But the idea in an economy run by the people, a democratic socialist state whatever you call it, the incentive to work is more compelling than what we have now...to be honest I guess I just don't have that selfish gene that drives some peeople to amass large amounts of money.
Ideally this drive isinstilled from birth but not as a selfish idea. And it is not something tought but instilled, allowed to grow, whatever...the idea is that idividuals actually give a shit about something and someone other than themselves and so strive for the better of the community as a whole, knowing that what benefits others will also benefit them. But they get also gain a certain satisfaction knowing they have helped the community, and maybe celebrities are born this way.
And knowing the human race won't destroy its environment allowing future generations to survive might bring a certain satisfaction as well, who knows.
that wasn't my quote but i like the question.
i'm only speaking for myself here. i say that in case i mention other names. i'm only speaking for myself.
the inspiration comes from having to eat potatoes for a month. people like reagan born dirt poor have to fight harder to get out of poverty. polish families are tight so my family worked together. we got a few lucky breaks but we all worked more than one job. when we finally MADE IT; i donated everything i didn't need. at that time money flowed like water. there'd always be more. i mostly donated land for wildlife habitat because i'm not a people person. don't get me wrong; i have lots of people that call me friend; but they're not what i'd call friends. a friend has unconditional loyalty and i only know a few of those. but i would help these people when they couldn't make the rent or car payment and maybe they'd help set up the stage or be my designated driver. but for the most part they took advantage of me and some stole from me under the guise of friendship.
then an aneurysm broke in my head and i became the plague. nobody but 2 friends were there when i needed them. it was during this time i realized how people really were. i've had more people do me wrong in the last 45 years then most people get to know. it was then; as i lay bedridden with my wife out conceiving a child with my sisters husband; that i vowed to get even with every one of them. yes; i know that's sick but i was sick at the time. i ended up getting even with all but 1. my ex. her time is now and she's facing at least 5 years in federal prison. it's taken me years but all is well. then a few months ago i started being harassed here on this board. prior to that i worked with abused children and donated time where it was needed to help my community. but when i got banned for something i didn't do; that and the harassment brought back all those feelings that people were worthless. so i stopped everything except what benefited me. i want you to know i have some dear friends on the board. i love them dearly and would do anything for them. but the basic "people in general" thing sticks with me. why do people have to be mean? if i mistyped something; simply ask for an explaination. don't attack me because YOU don't understand. during my ban i visited other boards and people are the same all over. so now i'm concerned about my little grand babies and making sure they have a good future. as to my attitude; if a 36 year stoner like me can work 2 or 3 jobs to get ahead; anyone can.
i'm sorry if i offended anyone. i didn't mean to. my ban was a dagger to my heart.
If money weren't the sole motivator then those people that are innovating would be doing what they do for better reasons, hence they'd be more responsible about it. No need to fuck the environment or outsource to sweat shops because they're not trying to squeeze every penny out of everyone they possibly can. Isn't it obvious that capitalism has all but ruined this planet? People are too greedy and too anxious to get their hands on every little cent they can and they don't care who or what it's hurting in the process.
"Most relatively simple estates (cash, publicly traded securities, small amounts of other, easily valued assets and no special deductions or elections or jointly held property) with a total value under $1,000,000 and a date of death in 2002 or 2003, under $1,500,000 and a date of death in 2004 or 2005, and under $2,000,000 and a date of death in 2006 or 2007 do not require the filing of an estate tax return."
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/article/0,,id=98968,00.html