Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share #26 Posted June 20, 2016 I like your strong "populist" sentiment, but I still think too much blame is being placed on the poor, which still plays into the hands of the rich, even if you do include them in the blame (in contrast to the standard neo-con "corporatist" view which says they should have everything. This is one of the 3 dimensions of the political spectrum, https://erictb.wordpress.com/2016/01/17/political-matrix-is-actually-3d). They have created what I call a virtual "Ice Age" of psuedo-scarcity, where they tighten everything for everybody, and their philosophy says that everyone who suffers did it to themselves, (because they weren;'t as "diligent, creative, innovative, smart, delaying gratification, future oriented", ad nauseam, as the rich). That includes the middle class, in addition to the poor. So it's true that people get priorities mixed, but then that's everybody. In such a climate of "scarciy", not only do you have less to make "wiser" choices with, but the very stress of this tends to make us "dissociate" and end up spending on what's basically "escapism" or "distraction". So yes, that can be a problem, but to direct that much anger at the poor falls right into the rich's "divide and conquer" scheme. You're not interacting much with the rich, who are pulling the strings, but we do interact more with the poor, who are not pulling the strings, even if they do overspend. This ends up getting the most focus in political discourse, and then the most sought to be corrected, which still does not fix the problems. We're fighting each other, and that's probably what the rich are laughing at the most, as they remain virtually invisible and untouchable in the process! The plot going all the way back to slavery was always to manipulate the populists (in one way or another), who were their biggest threat, and it has seeming always been working for them! The problem is if we look at today's generation, there is a stark contrast in what they're doing and the generations before them, which in most cases isn't much. Most still live at home and not because of trying circumstances either. Just a lack of drive. New York City in particular has a handout mentality which is doing nothing more than drawing more people here who strive to mooch off of the system. Sure there are the rich who came from money, but plenty of people didn't. As a person who is currently homeless and trying to get government assistance, I can personally say it's not a handout. You have to earn the things you need. The issue is that a lot of people will earn their benefits, and then do nothing afterward. Me though, he he, naaaaaaah. I start working' next week. The bottom of societies ladder is not for moi. I do agree with all the posters who said that farebeaters are going to continue doing so regardless. Even if they have the money, they'll still try to get over. I've had that specific conversation with a lot of people I know. They do it even if they are walking distance from home and it's annoying. Here I am, a guy who has walked from Staten Island to Park Slope just to get to and from work (and more recently, from Bethpage to Jamaica because my pride blocked me from asking for the money I needed to get to and from my job that day) and some people have the audacity to try and skip on the fare when they actually have it? A shame. Really. I'd advocate for European style fines upwards of 500 dollars plus over a program to give low income residents discounts. I know it's hard but people need to work harder if they want to survive here. People always complain about how high our relatively and artificially low fares are, but don't want to work to afford it. I realize I sound repetitive, but that's just what's floating in my mind right now. The European style system is a joke. So many people take advantage and steal transit. I've been on plenty of train rides in Italy where I've seen people riding for one or two stops and get off without paying because they know they can get away with it. Mind you I would ride to Northern Italy from Florence where I lived (i.e. Milan, Turin, Bologna, Venice, Genoa, etc.), Southern Italy (i.e. Rome, Naples, etc.) and the like and pay 60€ round trip, which is very reasonable. The system is based heavily on honor (not just transit, but a lot of other things as well), and quite frankly, the French are probably the worst followed closely by the Italians, but Europeans pay enough in taxes, etc. so they feel a bit entitled in some cases. I have a problem however with people feeling entitled that barely pay into the system as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LTA1992 Posted June 20, 2016 Share #27 Posted June 20, 2016 The European style system is a joke. So many people take advantage and steal transit. I've been on plenty of train rides in Italy where I've seen people riding for one or two stops and get off without paying because they know they can get away with it. Mind you I would ride to Northern Italy from Florence where I lived (i.e. Milan, Turin, Bologna, Venice, Genoa, etc.), Southern Italy (i.e. Rome, Naples, etc.) and the like and pay 60€ round trip, which is very reasonable. The system is based heavily on honor (not just transit, but a lot of other things as well), and quite frankly, the French are probably the worst followed closely by the Italians, but Europeans pay enough in taxes, etc. so they feel a bit entitled in some cases. I have a problem however with people feeling entitled that barely pay into the system as it is. For once, I can agree with you. The one week I spent in Paris introduced me to an amount of farebeating I'd never dream to witness. You know people are really taking advantage when you are about to tap into the RER and some dude squeezes between the plexiglass doors of the fare array (Chatelet-Les Halles) to save a few Euros. I think it's just a matter of how does one effectively enforce this? One could easily say place an officer or two on every bus. But that's already a number anywhere around 4,000. Who is going to spare that kind of manpower? I just finished watching the June board meeting and they spent a lot of time on the possibility of expanding SBS payment to the entire system. Yet no one mentioned readers at the front and back of the bus. The new fare payment system provides many opportunities to speed up the bus network on the payment side of things. Proper enforcement is the only real issue there because I don't think there is a single means of deterring the issue, but a combination. This just got off topic on my end. Moderators, I apologize. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share #28 Posted June 20, 2016 For once, I can agree with you. The one week I spent in Paris introduced me to an amount of farebeating I'd never dream to witness. You know people are really taking advantage when you are about to tap into the RER and some dude squeezes between the plexiglass doors of the fare array (Chatelet-Les Halles) to save a few Euros. I think it's just a matter of how does one effectively enforce this? One could easily say place an officer or two on every bus. But that's already a number anywhere around 4,000. Who is going to spare that kind of manpower? I just finished watching the June board meeting and they spent a lot of time on the possibility of expanding SBS payment to the entire system. Yet no one mentioned readers at the front and back of the bus. The new fare payment system provides many opportunities to speed up the bus network on the payment side of things. Proper enforcement is the only real issue there because I don't think there is a single means of deterring the issue, but a combination. This just got off sonic on my end. Moderators, I apologize. You don't have to have readers at the front and back of buses like you do on most European buses. I think if you have enough fare inspectors, you can scare enough people that are on the fence (and have the means to pay) into paying. Your point about farebeating in France actually is very related to the topic of this thread. Many of the French believe that they should be able to ride for free given how much they pay in taxes, so the farebeating there is really them rebelling against the system. Getting freebies to some extent is ingrained in French society in part because of how generous France has been historically with social benefits. Farebeating in France is almost an unwritten rule, and there was a news story on this several months back that I watched on Deutsche Welle (a German TV channel). In some places in Europe, including parts of France, numerous bus lines are free to encourage usage. It's received mixed reviews, with some users in Finland for example arguing that having it last outside of a trial period will be too expensive to subsidize. Europe already invests heavily in transportation and infrastructure projects via high taxes in part to curb congestion and omissions. http://www.citylab.com/work/2012/10/what-really-happens-when-city-makes-its-transit-system-free/3708/ http://humantransit.org/2013/02/fare-free-transit-spreading-in-europe-can-cities-do-this-on-their-own.html My concern is that by having a program like the one this councilmember wants to implement, you'll have a situation similar to what is occurring in France, with more and more people feeling entitled and "helping themselves" to "free" transit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GojiMet86 Posted June 20, 2016 Share #29 Posted June 20, 2016 I remember my Italian teacher telling us that American tourists are unfortunate to pay for tickets when the Italians just ride 'em for free, with little to no repercussions from the conductors or crew. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share #30 Posted June 20, 2016 I remember my Italian teacher telling us that American tourists are unfortunate to pay for tickets when the Italians just ride 'em for free, with little to no repercussions from the conductors or crew. Tickets are rarely handed out. It's understood that you can ride for a few stops and not bother to stamp your ticket. The Italians ride regularly enough to know when checkers will check and where to get off. The fines are so small that even if you are caught it's peanuts. I was fined 5 € for not stamping my ticket on the train going from Pisa to Florence. At that time I had only used the train twice and had not been checked either time and didn't know, so I protested to the conductor in Italian, telling him I was Italian-American, and had just moved there a few days ago (which was true). Perhaps I should've feigned not speaking Italian because I know he didn't speak any English. He explained to me in Italian, that regardless, I was responsible for stamping my ticket, and noted where the machines could be found (on the train platforms as opposed to on the trains themselves like you find on the Italian buses). You have to look for them before boarding your train and stamp your ticket then, and while they are yellow and stand out, there are not many of them, nor are they exactly easy to find. In any event, the "trust" system in Italy is highly problematic and chaotic, and it exists for things outside of transit too. lol I hope that it doesn't become the norm here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted June 20, 2016 Share #31 Posted June 20, 2016 The problem is if we look at today's generation, there is a stark contrast in what they're doing and the generations before them, which in most cases isn't much. Most still live at home and not because of trying circumstances either. Just a lack of drive. New York City in particular has a handout mentality which is doing nothing more than drawing more people here who strive to mooch off of the system. Sure there are the rich who came from money, but plenty of people didn't. The question is why? Why do you think this generation is veering off course? Opposed to the generations before them? Somebody said culture? parental? Where did they learn this from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 20, 2016 Author Share #32 Posted June 20, 2016 The question is why? Why do you think this generation is veering off course? Opposed to the generations before them? Somebody said culture? parental? Where did they learn this from? It's a lot of things... Part of it is parenting. I have a few friends that are now parents and they spoil their kids rotten. I mean I am part of the millenial generation and I admit being spoiled myself, but today's parents cuddle their kids on another level. They get everything handed to them in most cases, and they expect instant gratification, so it's hard for them to understand what it's like to work for things and not have things given to them, so they develop this sense of entitlement. It started with my generation to a certain extent and it's just worsened as time has progressed. Look at how many people my age and younger are still living at home (for free nonetheless), and this is becoming the norm. That right there should tell you something. I had my first place at 23 when I was living in Italy, and lived off of my own money that I made myself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted June 20, 2016 Share #33 Posted June 20, 2016 It's a lot of things... Part of it is parenting. I have a few friends that are now parents and they spoil their kids rotten. I mean I am part of the millenial generation and I admit being spoiled myself, but today's parents cuddle their kids on another level. They get everything handed to them in most cases, and they expect instant gratification, so it's hard for them to understand what it's like to work for things and not have things given to them, so they develop this sense of entitlement. It started with my generation to a certain extent and it's just worsened as time has progressed. Look at how many people my age and younger are still living at home (for free nonetheless), and this is becoming the norm. That right there should tell you something. I had my first place at 23 when I was living in Italy, and lived off of my own money that I made myself. Indeed.. Can't say your wrong. If you look at it that way you shouldn't have issues with success among your contemporaries. Silver lining I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CenSin Posted June 21, 2016 Share #34 Posted June 21, 2016 The question is why? Why do you think this generation is veering off course? Opposed to the generations before them? Somebody said culture? parental? Where did they learn this from? Consumerism. Luxuries are the new basic necessities. And the basic necessities of yesteryear have somehow become public goods. You breathe air for free, so why not public transportation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted June 21, 2016 Share #35 Posted June 21, 2016 I like your strong "populist" sentiment, but I still think too much blame is being placed on the poor, which still plays into the hands of the rich, even if you do include them in the blame (in contrast to the standard neo-con "corporatist" view which says they should have everything. This is one of the 3 dimensions of the political spectrum, https://erictb.wordpress.com/2016/01/17/political-matrix-is-actually-3d). They have created what I call a virtual "Ice Age" of psuedo-scarcity, where they tighten everything for everybody, and their philosophy says that everyone who suffers did it to themselves, (because they weren;'t as "diligent, creative, innovative, smart, delaying gratification, future oriented", ad nauseam, as the rich). That includes the middle class, in addition to the poor. So it's true that people get priorities mixed, but then that's everybody. In such a climate of "scarciy", not only do you have less to make "wiser" choices with, but the very stress of this tends to make us "dissociate" and end up spending on what's basically "escapism" or "distraction". So yes, that can be a problem, but to direct that much anger at the poor falls right into the rich's "divide and conquer" scheme. You're not interacting much with the rich, who are pulling the strings, but we do interact more with the poor, who are not pulling the strings, even if they do overspend. This ends up getting the most focus in political discourse, and then the most sought to be corrected, which still does not fix the problems. We're fighting each other, and that's probably what the rich are laughing at the most, as they remain virtually invisible and untouchable in the process! The plot going all the way back to slavery was always to manipulate the populists (in one way or another), who were their biggest threat, and it has seeming always been working for them! I place blame at the feet of many. I blame people for BEING stereotypes, and I blame system-beaters for constantly trying to get over. I blame the rich for rigging the system and the politicians for being their butt buddies that enable the shenanigans. I blame the corrupt judges and their corrupt verdicts that legally reinforce such nonsense as "corporate personhood" and "money as speech". I am not going to give someone a free pass just because they were conditioned to be that way. My parents both grew up working poor and did damn well for themselves, and built a steady life. They literally made 2 financial mistakes ever, and the rest were great successes, and they will always be just a little bit uncomfortable in retirement because of it. They were raised NOT to look for handouts, to always attempt to do for yourself, to take care of your family even if you have limited means, etc. There are literally millions of people who are by today's definition poor who meet the same critieria and you will never see them out in the streets of NY because if you did, you would not know they were poor. That gorgeous 20 something year old sitting opposite you in the subway car with the beautiful face, the well manicured nails, and the pretty flowing hair? Good chance she's paying for an apartment she shares with 2-3 other people, she does her hair and nails herself, and she's wearing old ass clothes because she doesn't have money for new ones since she's still paying off her student loans from her liberal arts degree society told her to get while working 2 jobs, and you won't find her at the club. But she doesn't "look" poor since thankfully society has made ratty looking clothes acceptable! And there are millions of these people busting their ass throughout our entire nation...black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Indian, Middle Eastern, Native American...and they literally have no chance in life for real upward mobility but they aren't sitting around trying to figure out how to game the system. I see shit every day on the job and in this city that makes me sick. A mother standing with a young daughter outside a subway turnstile begging everyone for a swipe. What does that little girl learn about life and taking care of yourself from that? But the daughter has new shoes, a large stuffed minion toy... She learns how to be a system beater. How there is a sucker born every minute who will give you a swipe for free, or how Mom says it's OK to walk through the emergency exist when someone leaves a station. How about those who beg on the train with their children? They learn this is a legitimate way to get money. And now these kids are growing up. When I hear about waitresses who don't like their jobs talking about on the train how they plan to get fired from their job and claim it's not their fault to collect unemployment cuz "that job is BS and if I quit I won't get unemployment", there you go. This behavior is not OK, and there are plenty of people throughout this country of all races and colors and genders that do it. It is a slap in the face to the poor who do work, and it does need to be addressed. A baby is not a tax deduction, hooking a man into child support and alimony is not a way of generating income for yourself, and our society allows this. It is high time a long look is taken at a lot of things in this country. And yes, the rich get the lion's share of the blame. The corporations and the real owners of this country get the lion's share of the blame. But that does not excuse the poor. This whole "parent culture" is nonsense. Look around you. Kids aren't allowed to play in many places anymore. "Play" consists of structured activities organized by adults with adults mediating disputes. Kids don't learn how to fistfight and get over it. Fistights are dangerous. So when there are real disputes, it's with guns and knives as teens or adults because you have to pre-empt your opponent. Everything is activities. You play basketball with refs and coaches and rules, not pickup ball where you develop and agree on your own rules, and self enforce. Winning is more important than fair play, which is no surprise then, that cheating on tests, and fraud are so rampant in today's educational and business cultures respectively. Never mind that you are fighting for scraps, we must win or not try at all! If you don't try and win state champs, you'll never succeed in life because you'll need that tenaciousness in your first job as a waiter at Friday's! This is the message our kids are getting. No such thing as "good game" sportsmanship. Rivalry and trash talk are exalted over sportsmanship and grace, even for children. Parent culture forces them to compete for travel teams, to get into the best schools, to get the best grades, to be selected for honor band, to win a science prize, to travel to boost their college application packet and no other reason, and to volunteer because "it looks good." Children never learn the innate values of these activities or experiences, the valuable life lessons they can be used to teach, or how to appreciate the things they've been given in life because it is a check the box kind of existence, and they are shutted between so many activities their head is spinning and they are fatigued. Numerous psychological studies point to American kids being overstimulated, under-rested, and the brain not being given the opportunity to develop the right connections. No one just ever puts their kids in a room with Legos and lets them play for a couple hours unsupervised anymore. Heaven knows they're so dumb they'll just start eating them, so mommy and daddy must watch, and why watch when you can participate too! And they must work two jobs each to pay for the biggest, fanciest toys so their kids can keep up, so they'll never have time for themselves, and they must save for college so Junior with a D average can go anyway, since "a degree is necessary" even though the one from the sham school of hard knocks at Everest isn't worth the paper it's printed on, but costs Junior's weight in gold. And the impact on middle and working class quality of life is staggering. As for all the generational complaints about young people, this time it really IS different, but not for the reasons you think. Look at what is going on in our country. The young have always been more crime prone, because being a criminal is not an old person's game, and the worst offenders usually land long sentences where they are kept off the streets, preventing them from committing crimes as an older person. But that is not the issue here. There's way more to this than just "millenials obsession with social media" or "nontraditional office spaces" and all the other frivolous bullshit you read about in print media and online. How about the fact that ISIS, the Taliban, and other terrorist groups are recruiting young people so easily? Does that not speak volumes about people's own beliefs in their own society, and people's own faith in their ability to carve out a decent life for themselves? Do you think a young person who feels a real connection to their community, who has friends and family, owns or is working towards owning their house, attends community meetings, has hobbies and time for them, and feels respected and as though they are earning a comfortable life, would choose to join a terrorist organization and throw all that away for a lifetime of violence based on some phony promise of 72 virgins? Do you think young black boys would rush off to join Somali pirates to rob ships if they felt that this society offered them anymore legal options than the promise of big riches as a musician, actor, or athlete? Do black boys join gangs because they are completely confident in law enforcement's ability to keep them safe in bad neighborhoods, and comfortable with their ability to earn a decent living without getting involved in drug trade? More importantly, why dont' black men in good colleges drop out of 4 year degree programs to be Somali pirates or gang members if so many do? Our problem with "young people" isn't that old people don't get young people, or that young people are just so much different now than before. Our problem with young people is that society no longer has created buy in for them - they don't feel there is anything here for them, that this is truly a place for them, or anything other than a big scam. And you know what that makes them? ANGRY. Like a lot of people. Look around you. Sitting in traffic, everyone is ANGRY. No one knows exactly why, they're just ANGRY. He cut me off, she didn't use a turn signal, he made an illegal right turn from the left lane. On the subway. Why does this jackass have to try to fit on the train, this bitch keeps holding the doors for her friend who's not even through the turnstile yet, this bum smells like ass, that lady is taking up 2 seats, why'd you bring a bike on the train when you can just ride the bike? Look at the impact this has on our quality of life as a whole. Things that should be fun...aren't. In my previous post I talked about going to a picnic. Why is that not fun? Because people are literally all over your space with no respect. No one has any respect anymore. Everyone is angry, and no one can even direct it at the right place. But race is the reason why, right? Blacks are mad at whites for being racist against them, because society tends to "keep them down" based on wealth, not merely race. Whites are mad at blacks for benefitting from social programs they "pay for", even though this is largely a middle class taxes paying for programs for the poor problem, not a racial one. Both are mad at Hispanics for "supporting illegal immigration" even though many don't, and "taking all the jobs" even though most are below minimum wage illegal jobs that whites and blacks weren't taking anyway (and this is an issue, but it's not "Hispanics" fault). All are mad at Asians for making them look bad by doing well in school against all odds, and for "refusal to assimilate" even though many do, because of stereotypes perpetuated in media and the entertainment industry of Asians as insular and un-hip, even though many are quite Americanized, and actually pretty cool to hang out with. In other colossally stupid misattributions of blame: -The subway sucks. Blame the MTA rather than the politicians who have hogtied it and left it to fend for itself. -I pay too much in taxes. Blame the social programs (like social security) that will take care of you when you're old when everything else literally won't for why my taxes are so high. -Social security is underfunded. They need to stop paying so much in benefits rather than refund the money government stole from it, which is why it is underfunded. -Healthcare is too expensive. Blame old people and scamming doctors, not a for profit industry that adds to the total cost of healthcare and adds a bureaucratic nightmare to the entire process that is expensive to maintain. Or the classic rebuttal of "that's because we have the best healthcare in the world! We should pay more for it!" -Banks are structural risks to the economy. Blame the government for failure to regulate them, they were just doing what they thought was right. And while we're at it, don't regulate them. Business can't succeed with the stranglehold of government regulation. -This nation is morally bankrupt. It's the fault of people turning away from god. We need more religion, and less gay people. The gays have corrupted everything. If we were more religious, god would fix everything. -We have too many people living in poverty. Ban birth control. A life is a life at contraception. And cut welfare. Because what we need right now, is more babies, most of them poor, sucking on the public tit since Mother's Mammaries and Money have run dry. All this outrage, and it can't be directed at the uber wealthy and the owners of this country for what is cleary their fault. Because the rich-produced print media has had people blaming violent video games and other frivolous bullshit for a cultural catastrophe 35 years in the making. The outrage directed at ALL the poor, should only be directed at SOME of them, and for very specific things. But it can't be glossed over. Just like young people's diminished opportunity is why so many are acting out. Because if you have nothing to lose, then you literally don't give a damn anymore, and people are getting to that point. Trouble is, they're misdirecting their anger. Omar Mateen was so pissed off about gays, what does he do? Shoots up a bunch of people at a nightclub, including women who were just hanging out with gay friends. I'm not saying he's right (of COURSE he's wrong), but that's every bit as stupid as being pissed off that a cop killed an unarmed black man, and therefore you're going to kill two cops who did NOTHING wrong and weren't disturbing anyone (Officers Liu and Ramos). I'm furious about what's going on in this country, as should all of you, but just because I rightly lay blame at the feet of the rich does not make it OK to walk down the street and punch a random guy with a fancy watch and a suit in the face for no reason. Or to go into the offices of a Chase Bank and shoot a bunch of tellers and account reps. And this misguided anger only affects the middle class and poor, since the 1% don't travel in these circles. They don't picnic in the park, they picnic on a private island, or by a private lake. But the reality is the vast majority of people are too STUPID to place blame properly, to take time to become educated on issues and history, and too LAZY to learn things that will save them a fortune. Why do you think there is no financial literacy in this country? They want you dumb, and paying interest out the ass forever for shit you never needed, and probably already used up or threw away. And, for the most part, most of you (speaking generally, not to anyone in this forum necessarily), ARE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted June 21, 2016 Share #36 Posted June 21, 2016 When you get to the uber wealthy, that's where tax treatment gets unfair because of loopholes that allow them to circumvent the progressive taxation scale and claim things as capital gains, or deduct "business expenses" and "rental properties". Tax deductions benefit the wealthy more than the poor because they pay a higher marginal tax rate. A $100 tax deduction for a person with a marginal tax rate of 35% saves them $35. For a person with a marginal tax rate of 15%, it saves them $15. This is regressive, not progressive. Defeats the purpose of the tax code being progressive in the first place. Just like minimum bank balance fees are regressive. And so to bring this back to the original post, people who work hard for a living and already come out behind in the tax code, SHOULD NOT pay to subsidize discount cards for the poor because THEY ALREADY DO. Subway riders already pay higher fares as a result of farebeats, half price cards for seniors, free student Metrocards, etc. (which is really a program the Dept. of Ed. should pay for, not Transit). Remember, the uber rich don't ride subways. A politician calling for reduced fares for poor is just another person blowing smoke out their ass to look good because if you were really trying to solve the issue of affordability in the city, you wouldn't be talking about a smidgen of a person's monthly budget. And how do you pay for someone to go through what amounts to a glorified "financial aid application" to prove a person's discountworthiness? Why, with taxpayer funds of course, I'm sure. Instead, you'd be talking about rent regulation, you'd be talking about holding landlords very liable for the hundreds of thousands of aggregious illegal violations committed every year, about improving the quality of the housing stock for working and middle class people WITHOUT throwing around the stigma and creating the headache of "low income" housing for which only certain people qualify, that is artificially depressed as a price point in a luxury building where a developer (who is a profiteer, of course, as they all are) must accessorize and glam up the building so much as to justify charging exorbitant rents everywhere else to milk as much money out as they can, of which providing low income is a part, since government enables them to claim generous tax credits by doing so (no taxes for the first 10 years! YAY!) Or how about properly funding the MTA so chronic fare increases aren't necessary. How about properly funding real improvements to the system (not frivolous ones like replacing Metrocard with RFID tech which does nothing to improve the quality of someone's commute...only "convenience" of not having to pull something out of a wallet) so the increasing fares at least feel like they are leading to better service? How about reducing income inequality so these people, many of whom do work hard, feel like they have a shot in life? How about cracking down on farebeaters, fining them, and withholding the money from their tax refunds...and then dedicated those funds to Transit? How about preventing the state from stealing "dedicated transit funding" provided through a "dedicated MTA payroll tax" for the purpose of plugging state budget holes in areas that have nothing to do with transit? How about trying to treat the cause of the symptom, instead of the symptom itself, or throwing money at the symptom and hope it goes away? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted June 21, 2016 Share #37 Posted June 21, 2016 When you get to the uber wealthy, that's where tax treatment gets unfair because of loopholes that allow them to circumvent the progressive taxation scale and claim things as capital gains, or deduct "business expenses" and "rental properties". Tax deductions benefit the wealthy more than the poor because they pay a higher marginal tax rate. A $100 tax deduction for a person with a marginal tax rate of 35% saves them $35. For a person with a marginal tax rate of 15%, it saves them $15. This is regressive, not progressive. Defeats the purpose of the tax code being progressive in the first place. Just like minimum bank balance fees are regressive. And so to bring this back to the original post, people who work hard for a living and already come out behind in the tax code, SHOULD NOT pay to subsidize discount cards for the poor because THEY ALREADY DO. Subway riders already pay higher fares as a result of farebeats, half price cards for seniors, free student Metrocards, etc. (which is really a program the Dept. of Ed. should pay for, not Transit). Remember, the uber rich don't ride subways. A politician calling for reduced fares for poor is just another person blowing smoke out their ass to look good because if you were really trying to solve the issue of affordability in the city, you wouldn't be talking about a smidgen of a person's monthly budget. And how do you pay for someone to go through what amounts to a glorified "financial aid application" to prove a person's discountworthiness? Why, with taxpayer funds of course, I'm sure. Instead, you'd be talking about rent regulation, you'd be talking about holding landlords very liable for the hundreds of thousands of aggregious illegal violations committed every year, about improving the quality of the housing stock for working and middle class people WITHOUT throwing around the stigma and creating the headache of "low income" housing for which only certain people qualify, that is artificially depressed as a price point in a luxury building where a developer (who is a profiteer, of course, as they all are) must accessorize and glam up the building so much as to justify charging exorbitant rents everywhere else to milk as much money out as they can, of which providing low income is a part, since government enables them to claim generous tax credits by doing so (no taxes for the first 10 years! YAY!) Or how about properly funding the MTA so chronic fare increases aren't necessary. How about properly funding real improvements to the system (not frivolous ones like replacing Metrocard with RFID tech which does nothing to improve the quality of someone's commute...only "convenience" of not having to pull something out of a wallet) so the increasing fares at least feel like they are leading to better service? How about reducing income inequality so these people, many of whom do work hard, feel like they have a shot in life? How about cracking down on farebeaters, fining them, and withholding the money from their tax refunds...and then dedicated those funds to Transit? How about preventing the state from stealing "dedicated transit funding" provided through a "dedicated MTA payroll tax" for the purpose of plugging state budget holes in areas that have nothing to do with transit? How about trying to treat the cause of the symptom, instead of the symptom itself, or throwing money at the symptom and hope it goes away? Well said my friend well said !! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2016 Author Share #38 Posted June 21, 2016 When you get to the uber wealthy, that's where tax treatment gets unfair because of loopholes that allow them to circumvent the progressive taxation scale and claim things as capital gains, or deduct "business expenses" and "rental properties". Tax deductions benefit the wealthy more than the poor because they pay a higher marginal tax rate. A $100 tax deduction for a person with a marginal tax rate of 35% saves them $35. For a person with a marginal tax rate of 15%, it saves them $15. This is regressive, not progressive. Defeats the purpose of the tax code being progressive in the first place. Just like minimum bank balance fees are regressive. And so to bring this back to the original post, people who work hard for a living and already come out behind in the tax code, SHOULD NOT pay to subsidize discount cards for the poor because THEY ALREADY DO. Subway riders already pay higher fares as a result of farebeats, half price cards for seniors, free student Metrocards, etc. (which is really a program the Dept. of Ed. should pay for, not Transit). Remember, the uber rich don't ride subways. A politician calling for reduced fares for poor is just another person blowing smoke out their ass to look good because if you were really trying to solve the issue of affordability in the city, you wouldn't be talking about a smidgen of a person's monthly budget. And how do you pay for someone to go through what amounts to a glorified "financial aid application" to prove a person's discountworthiness? Why, with taxpayer funds of course, I'm sure. Instead, you'd be talking about rent regulation, you'd be talking about holding landlords very liable for the hundreds of thousands of aggregious illegal violations committed every year, about improving the quality of the housing stock for working and middle class people WITHOUT throwing around the stigma and creating the headache of "low income" housing for which only certain people qualify, that is artificially depressed as a price point in a luxury building where a developer (who is a profiteer, of course, as they all are) must accessorize and glam up the building so much as to justify charging exorbitant rents everywhere else to milk as much money out as they can, of which providing low income is a part, since government enables them to claim generous tax credits by doing so (no taxes for the first 10 years! YAY!) Or how about properly funding the MTA so chronic fare increases aren't necessary. How about properly funding real improvements to the system (not frivolous ones like replacing Metrocard with RFID tech which does nothing to improve the quality of someone's commute...only "convenience" of not having to pull something out of a wallet) so the increasing fares at least feel like they are leading to better service? How about reducing income inequality so these people, many of whom do work hard, feel like they have a shot in life? How about cracking down on farebeaters, fining them, and withholding the money from their tax refunds...and then dedicated those funds to Transit? How about preventing the state from stealing "dedicated transit funding" provided through a "dedicated MTA payroll tax" for the purpose of plugging state budget holes in areas that have nothing to do with transit? How about trying to treat the cause of the symptom, instead of the symptom itself, or throwing money at the symptom and hope it goes away? I place blame at the feet of many. I blame people for BEING stereotypes, and I blame system-beaters for constantly trying to get over. I blame the rich for rigging the system and the politicians for being their butt buddies that enable the shenanigans. I blame the corrupt judges and their corrupt verdicts that legally reinforce such nonsense as "corporate personhood" and "money as speech". I am not going to give someone a free pass just because they were conditioned to be that way. My parents both grew up working poor and did damn well for themselves, and built a steady life. They literally made 2 financial mistakes ever, and the rest were great successes, and they will always be just a little bit uncomfortable in retirement because of it. They were raised NOT to look for handouts, to always attempt to do for yourself, to take care of your family even if you have limited means, etc. There are literally millions of people who are by today's definition poor who meet the same critieria and you will never see them out in the streets of NY because if you did, you would not know they were poor. That gorgeous 20 something year old sitting opposite you in the subway car with the beautiful face, the well manicured nails, and the pretty flowing hair? Good chance she's paying for an apartment she shares with 2-3 other people, she does her hair and nails herself, and she's wearing old ass clothes because she doesn't have money for new ones since she's still paying off her student loans from her liberal arts degree society told her to get while working 2 jobs, and you won't find her at the club. But she doesn't "look" poor since thankfully society has made ratty looking clothes acceptable! And there are millions of these people busting their ass throughout our entire nation...black, white, Hispanic, Asian, Indian, Middle Eastern, Native American...and they literally have no chance in life for real upward mobility but they aren't sitting around trying to figure out how to game the system. I see shit every day on the job and in this city that makes me sick. A mother standing with a young daughter outside a subway turnstile begging everyone for a swipe. What does that little girl learn about life and taking care of yourself from that? But the daughter has new shoes, a large stuffed minion toy... She learns how to be a system beater. How there is a sucker born every minute who will give you a swipe for free, or how Mom says it's OK to walk through the emergency exist when someone leaves a station. How about those who beg on the train with their children? They learn this is a legitimate way to get money. And now these kids are growing up. When I hear about waitresses who don't like their jobs talking about on the train how they plan to get fired from their job and claim it's not their fault to collect unemployment cuz "that job is BS and if I quit I won't get unemployment", there you go. This behavior is not OK, and there are plenty of people throughout this country of all races and colors and genders that do it. It is a slap in the face to the poor who do work, and it does need to be addressed. A baby is not a tax deduction, hooking a man into child support and alimony is not a way of generating income for yourself, and our society allows this. It is high time a long look is taken at a lot of things in this country. And yes, the rich get the lion's share of the blame. The corporations and the real owners of this country get the lion's share of the blame. But that does not excuse the poor. This whole "parent culture" is nonsense. Look around you. Kids aren't allowed to play in many places anymore. "Play" consists of structured activities organized by adults with adults mediating disputes. Kids don't learn how to fistfight and get over it. Fistights are dangerous. So when there are real disputes, it's with guns and knives as teens or adults because you have to pre-empt your opponent. Everything is activities. You play basketball with refs and coaches and rules, not pickup ball where you develop and agree on your own rules, and self enforce. Winning is more important than fair play, which is no surprise then, that cheating on tests, and fraud are so rampant in today's educational and business cultures respectively. Never mind that you are fighting for scraps, we must win or not try at all! If you don't try and win state champs, you'll never succeed in life because you'll need that tenaciousness in your first job as a waiter at Friday's! This is the message our kids are getting. No such thing as "good game" sportsmanship. Rivalry and trash talk are exalted over sportsmanship and grace, even for children. Parent culture forces them to compete for travel teams, to get into the best schools, to get the best grades, to be selected for honor band, to win a science prize, to travel to boost their college application packet and no other reason, and to volunteer because "it looks good." Children never learn the innate values of these activities or experiences, the valuable life lessons they can be used to teach, or how to appreciate the things they've been given in life because it is a check the box kind of existence, and they are shutted between so many activities their head is spinning and they are fatigued. Numerous psychological studies point to American kids being overstimulated, under-rested, and the brain not being given the opportunity to develop the right connections. No one just ever puts their kids in a room with Legos and lets them play for a couple hours unsupervised anymore. Heaven knows they're so dumb they'll just start eating them, so mommy and daddy must watch, and why watch when you can participate too! And they must work two jobs each to pay for the biggest, fanciest toys so their kids can keep up, so they'll never have time for themselves, and they must save for college so Junior with a D average can go anyway, since "a degree is necessary" even though the one from the sham school of hard knocks at Everest isn't worth the paper it's printed on, but costs Junior's weight in gold. And the impact on middle and working class quality of life is staggering. As for all the generational complaints about young people, this time it really IS different, but not for the reasons you think. Look at what is going on in our country. The young have always been more crime prone, because being a criminal is not an old person's game, and the worst offenders usually land long sentences where they are kept off the streets, preventing them from committing crimes as an older person. But that is not the issue here. There's way more to this than just "millenials obsession with social media" or "nontraditional office spaces" and all the other frivolous bullshit you read about in print media and online. How about the fact that ISIS, the Taliban, and other terrorist groups are recruiting young people so easily? Does that not speak volumes about people's own beliefs in their own society, and people's own faith in their ability to carve out a decent life for themselves? Do you think a young person who feels a real connection to their community, who has friends and family, owns or is working towards owning their house, attends community meetings, has hobbies and time for them, and feels respected and as though they are earning a comfortable life, would choose to join a terrorist organization and throw all that away for a lifetime of violence based on some phony promise of 72 virgins? Do you think young black boys would rush off to join Somali pirates to rob ships if they felt that this society offered them anymore legal options than the promise of big riches as a musician, actor, or athlete? Do black boys join gangs because they are completely confident in law enforcement's ability to keep them safe in bad neighborhoods, and comfortable with their ability to earn a decent living without getting involved in drug trade? More importantly, why dont' black men in good colleges drop out of 4 year degree programs to be Somali pirates or gang members if so many do? Our problem with "young people" isn't that old people don't get young people, or that young people are just so much different now than before. Our problem with young people is that society no longer has created buy in for them - they don't feel there is anything here for them, that this is truly a place for them, or anything other than a big scam. And you know what that makes them? ANGRY. Like a lot of people. Look around you. Sitting in traffic, everyone is ANGRY. No one knows exactly why, they're just ANGRY. He cut me off, she didn't use a turn signal, he made an illegal right turn from the left lane. On the subway. Why does this jackass have to try to fit on the train, this bitch keeps holding the doors for her friend who's not even through the turnstile yet, this bum smells like ass, that lady is taking up 2 seats, why'd you bring a bike on the train when you can just ride the bike? Look at the impact this has on our quality of life as a whole. Things that should be fun...aren't. In my previous post I talked about going to a picnic. Why is that not fun? Because people are literally all over your space with no respect. No one has any respect anymore. Everyone is angry, and no one can even direct it at the right place. But race is the reason why, right? Blacks are mad at whites for being racist against them, because society tends to "keep them down" based on wealth, not merely race. Whites are mad at blacks for benefitting from social programs they "pay for", even though this is largely a middle class taxes paying for programs for the poor problem, not a racial one. Both are mad at Hispanics for "supporting illegal immigration" even though many don't, and "taking all the jobs" even though most are below minimum wage illegal jobs that whites and blacks weren't taking anyway (and this is an issue, but it's not "Hispanics" fault). All are mad at Asians for making them look bad by doing well in school against all odds, and for "refusal to assimilate" even though many do, because of stereotypes perpetuated in media and the entertainment industry of Asians as insular and un-hip, even though many are quite Americanized, and actually pretty cool to hang out with. In other colossally stupid misattributions of blame: -The subway sucks. Blame the MTA rather than the politicians who have hogtied it and left it to fend for itself. -I pay too much in taxes. Blame the social programs (like social security) that will take care of you when you're old when everything else literally won't for why my taxes are so high. -Social security is underfunded. They need to stop paying so much in benefits rather than refund the money government stole from it, which is why it is underfunded. -Healthcare is too expensive. Blame old people and scamming doctors, not a for profit industry that adds to the total cost of healthcare and adds a bureaucratic nightmare to the entire process that is expensive to maintain. Or the classic rebuttal of "that's because we have the best healthcare in the world! We should pay more for it!" -Banks are structural risks to the economy. Blame the government for failure to regulate them, they were just doing what they thought was right. And while we're at it, don't regulate them. Business can't succeed with the stranglehold of government regulation. -This nation is morally bankrupt. It's the fault of people turning away from god. We need more religion, and less gay people. The gays have corrupted everything. If we were more religious, god would fix everything. -We have too many people living in poverty. Ban birth control. A life is a life at contraception. And cut welfare. Because what we need right now, is more babies, most of them poor, sucking on the public tit since Mother's Mammaries and Money have run dry. All this outrage, and it can't be directed at the uber wealthy and the owners of this country for what is cleary their fault. Because the rich-produced print media has had people blaming violent video games and other frivolous bullshit for a cultural catastrophe 35 years in the making. The outrage directed at ALL the poor, should only be directed at SOME of them, and for very specific things. But it can't be glossed over. Just like young people's diminished opportunity is why so many are acting out. Because if you have nothing to lose, then you literally don't give a damn anymore, and people are getting to that point. Trouble is, they're misdirecting their anger. Omar Mateen was so pissed off about gays, what does he do? Shoots up a bunch of people at a nightclub, including women who were just hanging out with gay friends. I'm not saying he's right (of COURSE he's wrong), but that's every bit as stupid as being pissed off that a cop killed an unarmed black man, and therefore you're going to kill two cops who did NOTHING wrong and weren't disturbing anyone (Officers Liu and Ramos). I'm furious about what's going on in this country, as should all of you, but just because I rightly lay blame at the feet of the rich does not make it OK to walk down the street and punch a random guy with a fancy watch and a suit in the face for no reason. Or to go into the offices of a Chase Bank and shoot a bunch of tellers and account reps. And this misguided anger only affects the middle class and poor, since the 1% don't travel in these circles. They don't picnic in the park, they picnic on a private island, or by a private lake. But the reality is the vast majority of people are too STUPID to place blame properly, to take time to become educated on issues and history, and too LAZY to learn things that will save them a fortune. Why do you think there is no financial literacy in this country? They want you dumb, and paying interest out the ass forever for shit you never needed, and probably already used up or threw away. And, for the most part, most of you (speaking generally, not to anyone in this forum necessarily), ARE. I think your blame is misplaced when talking about the rich. You talk as if they shouldn't take advantage of the loopholes that they are given in terms of taxes. EVERYBODY takes advantages of tax breaks, which includes the two of us. That's one of the reasons I work independently from time to time because regardless of how small your business is, you can take advantage of tax breaks, and I sure as hell take advantage of them. I do agree with the notion of people being taught how to look for handouts though. Very true, and that angers me because as you said, you have people that will look for that sucker that will get them what they need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted June 21, 2016 Share #39 Posted June 21, 2016 I think your blame is misplaced when talking about the rich. You talk as if they shouldn't take advantage of the loopholes that they are given in terms of taxes. EVERYBODY takes advantages of tax breaks, which includes the two of us. That's one of the reasons I work independently from time to time because regardless of how small your business is, you can take advantage of tax breaks, and I sure as hell take advantage of them. I do agree with the notion of people being taught how to look for handouts though. Very true, and that angers me because as you said, you have people that will look for that sucker that will get them what they need. I blame the rich because they possess and use the means to manipulate the system to rig it in their favor which is why legislation that mostly benefits them is able to get passed despite public opposition to most of it. Why do you think super PACs are a thing? It's a way of getting around contribution limits and laundering money/bribes to get their will passed, to silence the voice of the many without money in favor of those few who possess it in spades...because "money is speech" apparently now, even though "free speech" also means you shouldn't have to pay for it. If you're talking about blaming a family of 4 with a combined income of $250,000 that takes advantage of a "loophole" letting them deduct their internet service because the husband requires an internet connection for his second job at home, no, I don't care about that. Because that person is not rich. That person is middle class, despite what the statistics will say. When wealth is so stratospheric that there are enormous dropoffs from the very top to the next level, you have a problem, and that's what we have in today's society. But rather than place the blame where it really lies, the media has manipulated the message so that the average idiot American thinks that a suburban family of a doctor, a schoolteacher, and their 2 kids living in suburbia with a mortgage half paid off and two cars, is "rich." The reality is, that's a standard of living the MAJORITY of this country should be enjoying, and it's what USED TO BE middle class. Now middle class is a couple with a kid crammed into a 1 or 2 bedroom apartment they pay through the nose for, not owning a car, but just being "thankful to be employed" in a job that doesn't involve flipping burgers or "do you want fries with that?" My how times have changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2016 Author Share #40 Posted June 21, 2016 I blame the rich because they possess and use the means to manipulate the system to rig it in their favor which is why legislation that mostly benefits them is able to get passed despite public opposition to most of it. Why do you think super PACs are a thing? It's a way of getting around contribution limits and laundering money/bribes to get their will passed, to silence the voice of the many without money in favor of those few who possess it in spades...because "money is speech" apparently now, even though "free speech" also means you shouldn't have to pay for it. If you're talking about blaming a family of 4 with a combined income of $250,000 that takes advantage of a "loophole" letting them deduct their internet service because the husband requires an internet connection for his second job at home, no, I don't care about that. Because that person is not rich. That person is middle class, despite what the statistics will say. When wealth is so stratospheric that there are enormous dropoffs from the very top to the next level, you have a problem, and that's what we have in today's society. But rather than place the blame where it really lies, the media has manipulated the message so that the average idiot American thinks that a suburban family of a doctor, a schoolteacher, and their 2 kids living in suburbia with a mortgage half paid off and two cars, is "rich." The reality is, that's a standard of living the MAJORITY of this country should be enjoying, and it's what USED TO BE middle class. Now middle class is a couple with a kid crammed into a 1 or 2 bedroom apartment they pay through the nose for, not owning a car, but just being "thankful to be employed" in a job that doesn't involve flipping burgers or "do you want fries with that?" My how times have changed. I think the blame should be placed with the politicians and the poor, not the rich. The rich are simply doing what anyone else would do with money... Protecting it. You really can't blame them. Everyone that can do it does it. The only difference is that they have more of it and more pull. At the end of the day we still live in a capitalist society, and I would prefer that over communism or socialism any day. The rich have money because they don't waste it. They watch every penny and get the best deals. The poor, many of them look for everyone else to support them, and this proposal is a prime example of that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
checkmatechamp13 Posted June 21, 2016 Share #41 Posted June 21, 2016 The rich have money because they don't waste it. They watch every penny and get the best deals. Yeah right. My boss was telling us about how he used to work as a caddy, and made more money from tips there than he did at his full-time job. Good for him, but at the same time, you can't sit there and pretend that dumping a few thousand dollars in tips on somebody over the course of a weekend is somebody being frugal and looking for the best deals. Another coworker talked about a woman whose kids he tutors who added a whole bunch of rooms to her mansion just because she felt like it. Again, I don't think that counts as watching your pennies. The only thing is when you're rich, you have a lot more leeway in how much money you can waste, because the money is working for you. A million dollars sitting in the bank at 1% interest per year is $10,000 right there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2016 Author Share #42 Posted June 21, 2016 Yeah right. My boss was telling us about how he used to work as a caddy, and made more money from tips there than he did at his full-time job. Good for him, but at the same time, you can't sit there and pretend that dumping a few thousand dollars in tips on somebody over the course of a weekend is somebody being frugal and looking for the best deals. Another coworker talked about a woman whose kids he tutors who added a whole bunch of rooms to her mansion just because she felt like it. Again, I don't think that counts as watching your pennies. The only thing is when you're rich, you have a lot more leeway in how much money you can waste, because the money is working for you. A million dollars sitting in the bank at 1% interest per year is $10,000 right there. lol... I buy treats for the kids that I tutor. Some of these kids I have been working with for about three years and get referrals as a result that are paid in cash which I pocket, and also charge more per session just about each year. On average, I make about $45-60 per session now. It's called an investment. Yeah they're good kids, but I know that for those little treats, the thousands of dollars I've made (and will make) for a few hours here and there is a good investment because that's money that I can do whatever with and certainly don't need. My mentality has always been to always work and make as much money as possible regardless of how much I have coming in. The more the better in my book. That guy that was working as a caddy was smart, and the people giving him the tips did so with an angle. The woman that added a bunch of rooms to her mansion... That's also an investment. When she decides to resell she can do so at an added value, so while she may not get all of her investment back, she'll get some of it back. Yes, the rich don't always penny pinch (particularly the ones that come into money and were previously poor, and that's because they were never used to money to begin with), but we all splurge to some degree, and overall, most of the decisions that they make are done from an angle of keeping what they have and getting more of it. The ones that have had money know how to keep it and look for ways to make more of it. There are the rich folks and then there are the rich folks. My boss has money but constantly cries broke. A penthouse on the Upper East Side, a large house and a third property elsewhere with a housekeeper and grounds keeper, but you wouldn't know it. Watches every dime like a hawk. It's all about the mentality that one has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eric B Posted June 21, 2016 Share #43 Posted June 21, 2016 I think your blame is misplaced when talking about the rich. You talk as if they shouldn't take advantage of the loopholes that they are given in terms of taxes. EVERYBODY takes advantages of tax breaks, which includes the two of us. That's one of the reasons I work independently from time to time because regardless of how small your business is, you can take advantage of tax breaks, and I sure as hell take advantage of them. I do agree with the notion of people being taught how to look for handouts though. Very true, and that angers me because as you said, you have people that will look for that sucker that will get them what they need. I think the blame should be placed with the politicians and the poor, not the rich. The rich are simply doing what anyone else would do with money... Protecting it. You really can't blame them. Everyone that can do it does it. The only difference is that they have more of it and more pull. At the end of the day we still live in a capitalist society, and I would prefer that over communism or socialism any day. The rich have money because they don't waste it. They watch every penny and get the best deals. The poor, many of them look for everyone else to support them, and this proposal is a prime example of that. Well in that case, the poor are doing the same thing, when they take programs offered to them. But it seems only the rich have the right to be excused by "nature", basically, while everyone else is held up to this higher standard, which the rich are then said to have passed on, just because they knew how to amass the weath. (Tim Wise, Under the Affluence, even points out how the rhetoric of the right often dehumanizes the poor). People are all doing the same things, in different ways, according to what they have at their disposal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 21, 2016 Author Share #44 Posted June 21, 2016 Well in that case, the poor are doing the same thing, when they take programs offered to them. But it seems only the rich have the right to be excused by "nature", basically, while everyone else is held up to this higher standard, which the rich are then said to have passed on, just because they knew how to amass the weath. (Tim Wise, Under the Affluence, even points out how the rhetoric of the right often dehumanizes the poor). People are all doing the same things, in different ways, according to what they have at their disposal. I'll admit that I side with the rich, but I think that's because I believe in the idea that through hard work you can obtain what you want in life and we have to make the best of what we are given and take whatever advantages we have and run with it. Yes, some people are born at a disadvantage, but that's life. You can sulk and be resentful or take what you have and make the best of it. You have a lot of young people out here that are angry with themselves and with society overall because they see others doing well while they work at dead end jobs (if at all), and I look at them and say, it's your fault because some of these people had opportunities and squandered them. When you look at how many immigrants come to this country poor, but work hard and obtain an education and become successful, that to me says that those who are poor here create their own circumstances in most cases and look for ways to excuse themselves of accepting responsibility. On the other hand, I also don't have pity for those with money or who become successful but piss it away. It works both ways. It takes smarts to amass wealth and keep it and I have a lot of respect for that those that do because you have a lot more people trying to take what you have. The poor have it easier because if they can milk the system, people may look down on them, but they won't have as many people looking to take what they do have, since the thinking is that they don't have much to begin with. In short it's a lot harder to get to the top in life and stay there and A LOT easier to fall to the bottom or remain at the bottom. There are some that start off with money, but plenty of people don't and make it to the top. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted June 22, 2016 Share #45 Posted June 22, 2016 I'll admit that I side with the rich, but I think that's because I believe in the idea that through hard work you can obtain what you want in life and we have to make the best of what we are given and take whatever advantages we have and run with it. Yes, some people are born at a disadvantage, but that's life. You can sulk and be resentful or take what you have and make the best of it. You have a lot of young people out here that are angry with themselves and with society overall because they see others doing well while they work at dead end jobs (if at all), and I look at them and say, it's your fault because some of these people had opportunities and squandered them. When you look at how many immigrants come to this country poor, but work hard and obtain an education and become successful, that to me says that those who are poor here create their own circumstances in most cases and look for ways to excuse themselves of accepting responsibility. On the other hand, I also don't have pity for those with money or who become successful but piss it away. It works both ways. It takes smarts to amass wealth and keep it and I have a lot of respect for that those that do because you have a lot more people trying to take what you have. The poor have it easier because if they can milk the system, people may look down on them, but they won't have as many people looking to take what they do have, since the thinking is that they don't have much to begin with. In short it's a lot harder to get to the top in life and stay there and A LOT easier to fall to the bottom or remain at the bottom. There are some that start off with money, but plenty of people don't and make it to the top. You still have to be taught ethics and principles. You still have to learn how to prioritize set goals and execute. You have to be taught and learn critical thinking and how to apply knowledge. True a lot of people didn't start a lot of money but they more than likely had someone show, teach or learned all the values just described which is more valuable than any amount of money teaching a person how to fish. If everyone had the same information given to them and to add to that we all processed and applied that information exactly the same then we could hold people to the same standard. Then we could say without a shadow of the doubt this person knows better but has decided the other road and should be held accountable. But we all know that's not the case. A lot of people's views on the subject is emotional and what we feel from our perspective from our views. There's nothing in the physical world to the back any of this up. Subway Guy pretty much summed it up and his earlier post. There's much bigger plays going on there always has been. I'd much rather use this energy to lead by example. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Via Garibaldi 8 Posted June 22, 2016 Author Share #46 Posted June 22, 2016 You still have to be taught ethics and principles. You still have to learn how to prioritize set goals and execute. You have to be taught and learn critical thinking and how to apply knowledge. True a lot of people didn't start a lot of money but they more than likely had someone show, teach or learned all the values just described which is more valuable than any amount of money teaching a person how to fish. If everyone had the same information given to them and to add to that we all processed and applied that information exactly the same then we could hold people to the same standard. Then we could say without a shadow of the doubt this person knows better but has decided the other road and should be held accountable. But we all know that's not the case. A lot of people's views on the subject is emotional and what we feel from our perspective from our views. There's nothing in the physical world to the back any of this up. Subway Guy pretty much summed it up and his earlier post. There's much bigger plays going on there always has been. I'd much rather use this energy to lead by example. Leading by example and teaching doesn't always garner results either. It ultimately comes down to what the individual wants to achieve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted June 22, 2016 Share #47 Posted June 22, 2016 Leading by example and teaching doesn't always garner results either. It ultimately comes down to what the individual wants to achieve. You say that but you're coming from A higher level of consciousness and information. Education is a long-term investment that happens over a generation it's kinda silly to think just because you're giving someone information that they know what to do with it ! We can both read exactly the same book and take two totally different things away from it .That person has to go to through the steps on there own. And equate knowledge to power in society once a person gets a taste of success that they earned on their own accord there's no going back . PS : Im working on that breakdown 130,000 people in the Rockway's on a 10 plus mile barrier Island.. just let me run the numbers... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted June 22, 2016 Share #48 Posted June 22, 2016 I think the blame should be placed with the politicians and the poor, not the rich. The rich are simply doing what anyone else would do with money... Protecting it. You really can't blame them. Everyone that can do it does it. The only difference is that they have more of it and more pull. At the end of the day we still live in a capitalist society, and I would prefer that over communism or socialism any day. The rich have money because they don't waste it. They watch every penny and get the best deals. The poor, many of them look for everyone else to support them, and this proposal is a prime example of that. They are not protecting it. They are hoarding it. It's bad policy, it's unfair, and it's also really really shitty economics. The constant focus on shareholers and Wall Street drives companies to prioritize products over quality and reinvesting in their communities to improve the American standard of living. It forces them to outsource, gut the labor and middle class (and therefore the real spending power of this nation) instead in favor of a constant casino or crash credit based model, that is driven towards ever more speculative behavior during periods of growth as it tries to frivolously out-do itself, before the thing inevitably crashes down and resets, and the entire cycle can repeat. The rich have money because they inherit it, rig the system, and the richest among them literally have so much they can't waste it. What you are describing, is literally the upper middle class. And the penny pinching that is necessary by them when they are middle class to reach upper middle class, with a little bit of luck factored in too. That's what the middle class and lower middle class used to do, but in our rat race to the bottom, we are applying the ethos of a lower class to the upper one, till we get to the rich, and then we apply the ethos of royalty...as we celebrate them in mass media funded articles celebrating their "business acumen" and "visionary leadership" and "jurisprudent consideration of all alternatives". Meanwhile, to our working poor, we are progressively working towards applying the ethos of Calcutta, India to them. A capitalist society means each earns commensurate with their skills and level of effort. A CEO is not worth 500 times an hourly employee. They are not 500 times smarter (hell, some of the WORST CEO's are the highest compensated), and they do not work 500 times harder. Sure, they are "on call" and make a lot of personal sacrifices for the company, but so do workers, and not to a degree that merits 500x pay. You deliberately have executive compensation in the form of stock options that is designed to obscure real compensation packages, and it works....because the average idiot American thinks CEO's make less than they do, but still somehow thinks that's too much anyway. Fixing income inequality will literally fix the economy. It will never grow the way it is now. This is third world, banana republic, backwards level BS going on right now. In every point in human history income inequality has grown beyond this point it has ended very badly for a lot of people...ESPECIALLY the rich. A bunch of dead French aristocrats from the 1700s might like to have a word with the idiots rigging the game now about the possible consequences...why do you think they have private security forces and want to disarm ordinary Americans, for example??? Not to mention, economies have never been sustainable with this much wealth concentrated in the hands of the few who literally do nothing with it except "invest in companies" which sounds good on paper until you realize that the majority of "jobs" created by those companies are incredibly low income, or overseas. It's bad business, it's bad economy, it's bad policy. Yeah right. My boss was telling us about how he used to work as a caddy, and made more money from tips there than he did at his full-time job. Good for him, but at the same time, you can't sit there and pretend that dumping a few thousand dollars in tips on somebody over the course of a weekend is somebody being frugal and looking for the best deals. Another coworker talked about a woman whose kids he tutors who added a whole bunch of rooms to her mansion just because she felt like it. Again, I don't think that counts as watching your pennies. The only thing is when you're rich, you have a lot more leeway in how much money you can waste, because the money is working for you. A million dollars sitting in the bank at 1% interest per year is $10,000 right there. Poor kids don't get to be caddies. How do you think you get into a country club in the first place? Connections. Plus who wants a caddy that doesn't know golf, make recommendations, etc.? Poor kids don't have easy access to golf courses to learn ettiquette, the game, etc. Plus a member's kid will always get hired as a caddy first. I don't take this post to be about how rich people waste their money (and they do, as you said they just have more to burn without feeling real consequences), rather I take it to be about the opportunities for jobs and careers the rich enjoy that poor kids don't, and how that disadvantages them far more than race, sexuality, and all the other BS distractions the media has the lemmings in this country focused on instead of parental wealth and lineage. Amazing that all these years later we're back to such a bullshit concept as birthright. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SubwayGuy Posted June 22, 2016 Share #49 Posted June 22, 2016 Rich people and poor people do not at all have a level playing field, and judging them according to the same sliding scale is not legit because the rich face significantly fewer challenges. "Life in the 21st century in America" Rich kid (childhood) -Parents can afford to live in a decent neighborhood. Rich's kids will go to a good school because the decent neighborhoods tend to have good schools. Poor kid (childhood) -Cannot afford to live in a decent neighborhood. Therefore has to live above means to get into a good neighborhood, or live in a worse one. Poor's kids, therefore, will either go to a good school in a good neighborhood, but will not be able to take advantage of it since his parents have to really rub sticks together to pay for tuition, and socially the kid will be hurt when he can't do activities the other rich kids can. Plus his parents will feel compelled by society, in order to give him a decent childhood, to provide him with some of the gadgets, toys, and entertainment his peers have so that he can fit in, enjoy the same experiences, have some fun, and relate with his peers. Also setting them back further financially. Or, they can send him to the neighborhood school in the bad neighborhood where he will get a terrible education, probably be subjected to bullying if he's actually trying to make something of himself intellectually, be given the least experienced or worst performing teachers in the classroom to learn from, and have little to no good counseling of any kind available at the school either to him or his parents. Because of the school's reputation, even good grades are looked at with a heavy grain of salt. ========================= Rich kid (teenager) -Begins building his resume for the college application process. Activities, travel, and volunteer activities are easy to finance...and programs like study abroad in high school, etc. are viable for the family to afford. Also begins meeting friends of the family, and being exposed to options for jobs and careers. Can even begin working at a decent paying job around this time. Jobs like golf caddy, tennis club pro, teaching assistant or tutor at a respected learning institution, or interns at respected companies, even while still in high school, can be had with the right connections. Poor kid (teenager) -May be able to focus on one or two activities, but will have to help the family out at times which may mean working at age 16 to help pay bills, often at whatever jobs are available. Even if they don't have to help the family out, they may have to start working to start saving towards college. Will not be able to afford travel, and lacks the connections to get a good paying job. Working in food service, retail, a laundry, or another high labor low wage job, is common. If the kid isn't asked or chooses not to work, he will have to take on added chores at home since there is more to be done and with both parents likely working by this point (sometimes two jobs, if need be), less person-hours for the parents to complete tasks, so they will need help. ====================== Rich kid (college) -Will apply to and get into more schools. The experiences he's had put him at an advantage, and make him more sophisticated. Colleges do somewhat favor students who pay full freight (even though they "officially" say they don't), so their application acceptance rates are higher based on income alone. They benefit from "legacy" if they apply to a school one of their parents or relatives went, which a poor kid would never benefit from since their parents are likely at best, high school grads. Since their parents have money and aren't drowning in debt, they can co-sign for a credit card with their kid at this point, and teach him how to use it, how to use the rewards it earns, how to avoid interest, and otherwise be responsible with it. If their kid is irresponsible one month, they can cancel the card, lesson learned as punishment, and they can afford the one month hit. But more than likely, the kid will learn the lessons from the parents, and have yet another advantage on his poor counterpart. The rich kid also will be able to find decent wage employment during summers, etc. if not traveling or doing other "life altering experiences" that look good on a job or grad school application, and has access to more internships and things of that nature due to familial connections. Poor kid (college) -Will not get into as many schools as the rich kid, partly due to having fewer "world class" experiences to rant and rave about in an essay, not benefitting from legacy or paying full ride. Will be dependent on scholarships and student loans (which of course is a big expense post graduation). They will not be surrounded by friends and family who can advise them through college as the rich kid will, because colleges are notorious for giving their own students HORRENDOUS academic and career advice, and will likely suffer from some disillusionment and sensory overload as they try to pick a major and a career and navigate the college experience as their richer counterparts splurge on spring break in Cancun, while they just go home. Their grades will suffer somewhat, since they will have to work to put themselves through school in some shape or form, and this limits time for studying or fun (fun is necessary for everyone...you HAVE to unwind every once in a while or you will go stir crazy). This puts them in a less competitive position for jobs now. Also won't get to learn much with credit unless they venture out on their own, and their parents won't steer them away from the pitfalls of it since they may not understand it themselves. Unless the poor kid picks a business major at a school with a good business dept. with teachers who are personally interested in making sure their students understand personal finance, they will never receive good advice about managing money, avoiding (not evading) taxes, using credit, saving money, budgeting, and investment options. ========================= Rich kid (post college) -Parents can help with renting first apartment, networking for first job, buying amenities. Internships and other experiences in college give them a leg up for good jobs...they know the game when they get there vs. the poor kid who is always still learning. They will have built up some credit, or have their parents to co-sign for a first apartment, so that application process is easier. If they don't want to work, going to grad school isn't really a big deal. Poor kid (post college) -Has to start repaying student loans now, and therefore must find work immediately. May not be able to find work in desired field, so has to take a job in whatever in the meantime, probably below skill level and at lower pay. Must continue to work to pay student loans while trying to land a better job. Income from that job may be so low, they may have to work 2 jobs. Probably will be limited in locations he can work because he must stay close to home to take care of parents. Thus limiting the number of jobs to choose from, where the rich kid can relocate. Can't just bail on them, after all, since their sacrifice to pay the cost of living in a better neighborhood was the only reason he got the chance to go to college in the first place, instead of all those poor kids who grew up in the ghetto and were out of the education system at or before high school. May get into credit card debt due to no/bad advice on such, limited income, and combination of student loans and high cost of living "where the jobs are". May have difficulty getting approved for a place to live, or may move back home to save on money. If living at home, this further stunts their life growth as women don't want to date men who live at home. ========================= Rich kid (young adult) -Can date easily, has money to pay for things on dates and a good job, no problem. Appears an ideal mate barring any terrible personal habits or physical characteristics. The money also provides them the opportunities to continue to do exciting things that are then conversation fodder for women that make them interested. If he is interested in settling down, can pick and choose his mate easily. Then the two of them can move in together, pool their income, save on living expenses by sharing a roof, and grow their wealth further. If interested in homeownership, they have 2 incomes to put towards that goal, which will allow them to build the wealth a renter never could, while still continuing to grow their savings. Poor kid (young adult) -Will have a hard time dating since many women aren't interested in someone who lives with mom and dad. Largely, the women who aren't put off by this will be sympathetic to it, but only because they themselves are also poor. Which closes out many opportunities of "marrying up." Personal finance will continue to be a struggle, as the young adult will now be bombarded with scams and offers, an alliteratively literal littered landscape of land mines they need to avoid, but may not know how to. ESCO scam, when they pay their first energy bill. "Work at home" scams if they try to supplement their income...things like Amway, pyramid schemes, or others that force you to sell things to others at financial risk to yourself, but convincing you that you'll succeed so that it's no problem even though statistics say otherwise. Identity theft, when they mistakenly trust someone on the other end of an official sounding phone call they've never been taught to avoid. In order to better their job prospects, they are likely to waste money on useless "services" that aren't necessary and don't usually add value - resume writers, headhunters (headhunters who work for companies trying to fill positions are legit, but ones who work for a person seeking work are almost always not). They may waste money on lottery tickets, figuring, what the hell, it's worth a shot to be rich, even though they'll never win, and those small amounts can add up to tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars over a lifetime. ===================== Rich kid (fully adult) -Settled, married, has a house, and an inheritance coming from his rich parents when they finally bite the bullet. Building wealth more every day, and earns enough by this point to save more. Poor kid (fully adult) -Still struggling, living paycheck to paycheck. Eventually moves out, maybe eventually marries, but the two pooled incomes don't happen until later (time value of money) and they don't have big money saved for a down payment on a house, so they rent long term or if they do buy, take an ARM (DON'T DO IT!). Cost of living constantly goes up as a result of either decision, whereas the rich person enjoys a fixed 30 year rate since they qualified for that by putting at least 20% down when they bought their house. The poor person can't get a 30 year fixed rate mortgage by putting down 3% on FHA if they buy, and rent goes up every year if they rent. When the poor person's parents die, there is no inheritance...only funeral home bills in excess of whatever little is left behind. ========================== To say that based on what these two start out with and end up with, that the poor person's fate is "strictly" the fault of their work ethic or intelligence is downright stupid and unfair. The stereotype of the stupid poor person who is broke, borderline illiterate, but sporting new Jordans and Beats by Dre is specifically put out in front of you by the media to piss you off. No one likes that person. People who were raised in ghetto neighborhoods hate those people. People who live in them now hate those people. They're the reason no one wants to live in their neighborhood, that they fear for their safety at night, that they can't sleep when music is blasting, and that these idiots zipping around in their leased cars are why they're scared to cross a street or drive around themselves. But the average poor person is not this, they are very hard working, and if you really keep your eyes peeled, you will see them all around you. And they bust their ass because it's the right thing to do, because they were taught this, but they literally don't possess the means nor the knowledge to ever get out of that cycle, and it's not because of their hard work...it's because of who their parents were. Not everyone is going to be a businessman or famous inventor, so you can't hold one exception out there, and say this is what you can be. If everyone is Steve Jobs or Daymond John, no one is Steve Jobs or Daymond John. The system is failing the majority of people who aren't rich, and it's time to take a look at why. Casting the blame at poor people based on a stereotype that is probably true in around 20% of all cases at most, is an irresponsible and stupid way of dismissing a problem that is a lot more serious than the people in power would have you believe. Because they know, if you (as a society) do, the gig is up...and it's off with their heads like France in the 1700s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RailRunRob Posted June 22, 2016 Share #50 Posted June 22, 2016 Rich people and poor people do not at all have a level playing field, and judging them according to the same sliding scale is not legit because the rich face significantly fewer challenges. "Life in the 21st century in America" Rich kid (childhood) -Parents can afford to live in a decent neighborhood. Rich's kids will go to a good school because the decent neighborhoods tend to have good schools. Poor kid (childhood) -Cannot afford to live in a decent neighborhood. Therefore has to live above means to get into a good neighborhood, or live in a worse one. Poor's kids, therefore, will either go to a good school in a good neighborhood, but will not be able to take advantage of it since his parents have to really rub sticks together to pay for tuition, and socially the kid will be hurt when he can't do activities the other rich kids can. Plus his parents will feel compelled by society, in order to give him a decent childhood, to provide him with some of the gadgets, toys, and entertainment his peers have so that he can fit in, enjoy the same experiences, have some fun, and relate with his peers. Also setting them back further financially. Or, they can send him to the neighborhood school in the bad neighborhood where he will get a terrible education, probably be subjected to bullying if he's actually trying to make something of himself intellectually, be given the least experienced or worst performing teachers in the classroom to learn from, and have little to no good counseling of any kind available at the school either to him or his parents. Because of the school's reputation, even good grades are looked at with a heavy grain of salt. ========================= Rich kid (teenager) -Begins building his resume for the college application process. Activities, travel, and volunteer activities are easy to finance...and programs like study abroad in high school, etc. are viable for the family to afford. Also begins meeting friends of the family, and being exposed to options for jobs and careers. Can even begin working at a decent paying job around this time. Jobs like golf caddy, tennis club pro, teaching assistant or tutor at a respected learning institution, or interns at respected companies, even while still in high school, can be had with the right connections. Poor kid (teenager) -May be able to focus on one or two activities, but will have to help the family out at times which may mean working at age 16 to help pay bills, often at whatever jobs are available. Even if they don't have to help the family out, they may have to start working to start saving towards college. Will not be able to afford travel, and lacks the connections to get a good paying job. Working in food service, retail, a laundry, or another high labor low wage job, is common. If the kid isn't asked or chooses not to work, he will have to take on added chores at home since there is more to be done and with both parents likely working by this point (sometimes two jobs, if need be), less person-hours for the parents to complete tasks, so they will need help. ====================== Rich kid (college) -Will apply to and get into more schools. The experiences he's had put him at an advantage, and make him more sophisticated. Colleges do somewhat favor students who pay full freight (even though they "officially" say they don't), so their application acceptance rates are higher based on income alone. They benefit from "legacy" if they apply to a school one of their parents or relatives went, which a poor kid would never benefit from since their parents are likely at best, high school grads. Since their parents have money and aren't drowning in debt, they can co-sign for a credit card with their kid at this point, and teach him how to use it, how to use the rewards it earns, how to avoid interest, and otherwise be responsible with it. If their kid is irresponsible one month, they can cancel the card, lesson learned as punishment, and they can afford the one month hit. But more than likely, the kid will learn the lessons from the parents, and have yet another advantage on his poor counterpart. The rich kid also will be able to find decent wage employment during summers, etc. if not traveling or doing other "life altering experiences" that look good on a job or grad school application, and has access to more internships and things of that nature due to familial connections. Poor kid (college) -Will not get into as many schools as the rich kid, partly due to having fewer "world class" experiences to rant and rave about in an essay, not benefitting from legacy or paying full ride. Will be dependent on scholarships and student loans (which of course is a big expense post graduation). They will not be surrounded by friends and family who can advise them through college as the rich kid will, because colleges are notorious for giving their own students HORRENDOUS academic and career advice, and will likely suffer from some disillusionment and sensory overload as they try to pick a major and a career and navigate the college experience as their richer counterparts splurge on spring break in Cancun, while they just go home. Their grades will suffer somewhat, since they will have to work to put themselves through school in some shape or form, and this limits time for studying or fun (fun is necessary for everyone...you HAVE to unwind every once in a while or you will go stir crazy). This puts them in a less competitive position for jobs now. Also won't get to learn much with credit unless they venture out on their own, and their parents won't steer them away from the pitfalls of it since they may not understand it themselves. Unless the poor kid picks a business major at a school with a good business dept. with teachers who are personally interested in making sure their students understand personal finance, they will never receive good advice about managing money, avoiding (not evading) taxes, using credit, saving money, budgeting, and investment options. ========================= Rich kid (post college) -Parents can help with renting first apartment, networking for first job, buying amenities. Internships and other experiences in college give them a leg up for good jobs...they know the game when they get there vs. the poor kid who is always still learning. They will have built up some credit, or have their parents to co-sign for a first apartment, so that application process is easier. If they don't want to work, going to grad school isn't really a big deal. Poor kid (post college) -Has to start repaying student loans now, and therefore must find work immediately. May not be able to find work in desired field, so has to take a job in whatever in the meantime, probably below skill level and at lower pay. Must continue to work to pay student loans while trying to land a better job. Income from that job may be so low, they may have to work 2 jobs. Probably will be limited in locations he can work because he must stay close to home to take care of parents. Thus limiting the number of jobs to choose from, where the rich kid can relocate. Can't just bail on them, after all, since their sacrifice to pay the cost of living in a better neighborhood was the only reason he got the chance to go to college in the first place, instead of all those poor kids who grew up in the ghetto and were out of the education system at or before high school. May get into credit card debt due to no/bad advice on such, limited income, and combination of student loans and high cost of living "where the jobs are". May have difficulty getting approved for a place to live, or may move back home to save on money. If living at home, this further stunts their life growth as women don't want to date men who live at home. ========================= Rich kid (young adult) -Can date easily, has money to pay for things on dates and a good job, no problem. Appears an ideal mate barring any terrible personal habits or physical characteristics. The money also provides them the opportunities to continue to do exciting things that are then conversation fodder for women that make them interested. If he is interested in settling down, can pick and choose his mate easily. Then the two of them can move in together, pool their income, save on living expenses by sharing a roof, and grow their wealth further. If interested in homeownership, they have 2 incomes to put towards that goal, which will allow them to build the wealth a renter never could, while still continuing to grow their savings. Poor kid (young adult) -Will have a hard time dating since many women aren't interested in someone who lives with mom and dad. Largely, the women who aren't put off by this will be sympathetic to it, but only because they themselves are also poor. Which closes out many opportunities of "marrying up." Personal finance will continue to be a struggle, as the young adult will now be bombarded with scams and offers, an alliteratively literal littered landscape of land mines they need to avoid, but may not know how to. ESCO scam, when they pay their first energy bill. "Work at home" scams if they try to supplement their income...things like Amway, pyramid schemes, or others that force you to sell things to others at financial risk to yourself, but convincing you that you'll succeed so that it's no problem even though statistics say otherwise. Identity theft, when they mistakenly trust someone on the other end of an official sounding phone call they've never been taught to avoid. In order to better their job prospects, they are likely to waste money on useless "services" that aren't necessary and don't usually add value - resume writers, headhunters (headhunters who work for companies trying to fill positions are legit, but ones who work for a person seeking work are almost always not). They may waste money on lottery tickets, figuring, what the hell, it's worth a shot to be rich, even though they'll never win, and those small amounts can add up to tens and hundreds of thousands of dollars over a lifetime. ===================== Rich kid (fully adult) -Settled, married, has a house, and an inheritance coming from his rich parents when they finally bite the bullet. Building wealth more every day, and earns enough by this point to save more. Poor kid (fully adult) -Still struggling, living paycheck to paycheck. Eventually moves out, maybe eventually marries, but the two pooled incomes don't happen until later (time value of money) and they don't have big money saved for a down payment on a house, so they rent long term or if they do buy, take an ARM (DON'T DO IT!). Cost of living constantly goes up as a result of either decision, whereas the rich person enjoys a fixed 30 year rate since they qualified for that by putting at least 20% down when they bought their house. The poor person can't get a 30 year fixed rate mortgage by putting down 3% on FHA if they buy, and rent goes up every year if they rent. When the poor person's parents die, there is no inheritance...only funeral home bills in excess of whatever little is left behind. ========================== To say that based on what these two start out with and end up with, that the poor person's fate is "strictly" the fault of their work ethic or intelligence is downright stupid and unfair. The stereotype of the stupid poor person who is broke, borderline illiterate, but sporting new Jordans and Beats by Dre is specifically put out in front of you by the media to piss you off. No one likes that person. People who were raised in ghetto neighborhoods hate those people. People who live in them now hate those people. They're the reason no one wants to live in their neighborhood, that they fear for their safety at night, that they can't sleep when music is blasting, and that these idiots zipping around in their leased cars are why they're scared to cross a street or drive around themselves. But the average poor person is not this, they are very hard working, and if you really keep your eyes peeled, you will see them all around you. And they bust their ass because it's the right thing to do, because they were taught this, but they literally don't possess the means nor the knowledge to ever get out of that cycle, and it's not because of their hard work...it's because of who their parents were. Not everyone is going to be a businessman or famous inventor, so you can't hold one exception out there, and say this is what you can be. If everyone is Steve Jobs or Daymond John, no one is Steve Jobs or Daymond John. The system is failing the majority of people who aren't rich, and it's time to take a look at why. Casting the blame at poor people based on a stereotype that is probably true in around 20% of all cases at most, is an irresponsible and stupid way of dismissing a problem that is a lot more serious than the people in power would have you believe. Because they know, if you (as a society) do, the gig is up...and it's off with their heads like France in the 1700s. Don't even know how to follow this up I wholeheartedly agree. The blame is being put way too much on that side. I've never met a person yet that didn't want to do better for themselves with a clear path an opportunity to excel. This country has always been about wealth since day one. And the division of people keeps that wealth concentrated. Race is been the weapon to do that for many a generations. Basic principles of human nature we process in patterns. Hey pal you may not own any land or have any power but we look the same we're on the same team although your on the bench just work hard and the dream will be yours. It quickly becomes umm the reason you're not able to get success is because other people are cheating and taking from the system our jobs our opportunity.We see now how that worked for us! Pure theater and distraction. History will show you what a organized populace will get you just look at Bacon’s Rebellion that might have been the starting point to our current state of affairs. It's funny to the uber rich race is a nonfactor for the most part it's always been and always will be about money. We do have to take a serious look at the system and really understand why things are the way they are. I wish people would stop peddling this notion that everybody starts off on an even keel myth and make-believe we know it. We have to start having this conversation no matter how uncomfortable it may be for all of our futures sake. Point’s taken Subway Guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.