I can answer the question of how to improve it. If you receive any types of federal benefits you must show active participation in looking for work, you must attend any workshops or job fairs put on by your state's job commission. You must make every attempt to better your situation. There needs to be repercussions for not following the rules. If you need government assistance past five years because you are not making any attempt to improve your life you lose your benefits. If that means you can no longer feed your children then your children become the custody of the state where they will at least be taken care of.
Facebook prepares for Trump to dispute the election results, considers political ad "kill...
- Thread starter midian182
- Start date
- Status
actually its you who are confused as the North had more rural area with the whole west and midwest but hey facts are not a trump supporters ally
This won't be like the previous Civil War read up on it. It's not North versus South you can look at the map of the 2016 election to kind of get an idea. You'll notice blue dots in a sea of red. That's the divide in the country that's rural America versus Urban America. If there is a civil war that's also how the war is going to be fought and urban America is at a distinct disadvantage.
dotnon
Posts: 41 +53
Agree with this (minus the compliment as that would be conceited - but thank you).
I would err fairly strongly on the side of expansion though, as I think an abrupt end would be a humanitarian catastrophe, but yeah, neither solution is great.
As the saying goes, prevention is better than a cure, and welfare is analogous to medicine. We will always need medicine, but treating the cause would be far better.
Fundamentally I believe that cause is income inequality - I.e. a small percentage taking too large a proportion of the spoils of labor. How to even this out in a fair way is a difficult question, but I believe the left has more constructive answers than the right.
If you accept the premise that income inequality is a large contributor to our current problems (not a given, I'll accept), I find a lot of right-wing solutions come down to deregulation and "trickle-down" solutions, on the basis that removing regulatory barriers to productivity increases total output, thus resulting in a larger pie to divide (this is likely to be true).
Unfortunately such deregulation often involves eroding worker rights and ignoring environmental concerns, thus reducing worker bargaining power and worsening their living conditions. End result is worse outcomes for those at the bottom, I.E. almost all the gains from deregulation go to those at the top, thus widening inequality and not closing it.
The typical left-wing solutions of expanding public services such as health care (currently a common way that people to end up in poverty), improving worker rights, raising minimum wage, properly funding education and prioritizing environmental concerns would seem to me to be more sustainable solutions. The problem is that it can take a whole generation before the benefits of these policies become apparent, and voter attention spans are short.
dotnon
Posts: 41 +53
Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. I think, given the choice, most environmentalists would take pumping water uphill over burning coal, but I can see the problems.
Wind though is actually very quick to react on a shutdown basis - all you need to do is rotate the wings and they stop driving the generator, but obviously you have no control over the wind blowing if you're in a demand > supply situation. Luckily wind farms can be spread far and wide, and it becomes more of a transmission problem. Obviously I have no research or experience to back this up, but intuitively it would seem that over-provisioned wind can go a long way to evening out the peaks and troughs, and it's less dependent on time of day than solar. Which, by the way, conveniently produces during the day, when demand is highest.
Storage will still have to be part of the solution though, there's no getting around the fact that you have less control than gas or coal-fired turbines.
dotnon
Posts: 41 +53
Emotively, I can see the logic. Don't give money to lazy f**kers that don't want to work.
In practice?
I genuinely believe people are driven by a desire for survival -> economic security -> status -> self fulfillment, in approximately that order. Poor people, or those perceived as lazy are no different - it's only when you can't see a path to the next tier that you'd lose motivation and sit where you are.
If we accept that survival is easy to meet, and largely being met in America today, a lot of the poorest are at the point of surviving, but lacking security.
Example: I have a choice between welfare or working in an Amazon warehouse, which I think helps illustrate the predicament that most people at the level of manual jobs face. That warehouse has virtually no chance of career progression. Status? Zilch. Security? It pays just enough to survive - so no more than being on welfare, arguably worse as I have to spend 8 hours working hard. Saving for a better future is an impossibility.
In order to be motivated, I need to see a path to the next tier. These sorts of jobs don't provide it.
Get educated and find a better job you say. Yes, let's fund education properly. But let's also acknowledge that learning gets more difficult as you get older. It's a solution for the young (assuming they have economically-secure parents that can support their lives while they study) less so the old.
So I'd ask, what would harsh welfare rules achieve?
Well, given the intrinsic motivations of humans, one would probably stay on welfare until the time limit was up, then go work for Amazon or Uber. Now, Uberzon benefits from the labour, but the situation of our worker is just as precarious and their lifestyle is worse. What's more, they no longer have time to look after children or further themselves in any way, so it's possible the state would have to step in in other areas, like childcare, like taking them in to the custody of the state. Which, by the way, is enormously expensive!
Taking a child into the custody of the state would be no cheaper than paying benefits to their parents. In fact, parents are always going to be the cheapest way to care for children - they normally do it for free. Once you factor in all the court hearings, custody battles, abuse scandals, and emotional damage to children resulting in worse outcomes for them as adults, I'd expect this policy to be orders of magnitude worse in the long run than just paying benefits. Far from reducing inequality, this would entrench it for generation after generation.
I guess what I'd say is, what if you grew up in that situation? What would you do? If you think harsh rules would improve the outcome for you and society at large, fair play, but I don't think it would for me or anyone I know. It's not just the worker, but their family that needs to be considered, and the long term impacts, not just the short.
I grew up in that situation. I found computersin dumpsters, taught myself how to repair them.
You don't need a college degree to make a good wage. at most State sponsor job fairs you will see numerous companies looking to bring people into their apprenticeship programs. and apprentice plumber or electrician may not make much more than an Amazon warehouse worker but in 10 years they can make $40 an hour. the lie that you want to believe is that you need a college education when you don't
I'm a high school dropout minimal tech school that I went to after already having a good job, and yesterday I just got offered a position for 150 a year. So there is no excuse.
Want to know the difference between me and a friend of mine that grew up in the same situation, I had motivation, I wanted a better life for myself, and I understood while my father was a horrible father he would not be the reason of my own failure.
My friend on the other hand blames others, they are also mid 30's but still blame their family. I looked up to people like Micheal Dell he looked up to Micheal Moore.
Your situation should never define you, the only limit you face is yourself, you can talk yourself down, I did until I was 24 and just stuck to making burgers and loading boxes, then one day I said I'm going to try. That's the key, people are to stuck blaming the world when the biggest enemy is their own fear and doubt. If I can come from a house with a drug addict drunk father, a high school drop out, and make it in this world, I don't see any damn excuse.
Last edited:
dotnon
Posts: 41 +53
Not going to argue your experience, that's to be applauded.
I don't believe that. Education encompasses schools and university yes, but also vocational training, apprenticeships, any kind of training or mentorship really, sorry I wasn't more clear.
This education doesn't happen automatically, you have to have support for your education or be intrinsically motivated to do something of economic value (repairing computers in your case). So I dunno, it seems a bit of a leap to expect everyone to be able to find a similar path without support. I still think this falls under my argument for getting educated - it's a solution more for the young worker without kids than a mother or father that has to provide for a child.
I would ask though -
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
Yeah no joke. I'm in southern AR and have kinfolks all through LA.
dotnon
Posts: 41 +53
I don't know your friend but it sounds like he has a motivation problem. I'm not a therapist, but his blaming of others sounds like a natural coping mechanism - to accept fault on your own part can be difficult to handle if you're not emotionally strong enough to do so.
But also, there's often some truth to it. In reality, his circumstances are influenced by things that have happened to him, and things that he's done (or not done) in response to them. Sometimes we don't handle things well and they can set our life on a completely different path - a downward spiral.
What defines us is how we deal with what life throws at us.
There's some truth to this but some people do face limits that aren't their own. It's not really a black or white "you can do anything", because no matter how motivated you were, the chances of you becoming president would be vanishingly small. And that's really what it's about - probability. Sometimes the deck is stacked against you.
If we accept that no one would choose to live in poverty, what are the chances of a random person being able to get themselves out of poverty and into a secure job?
I'd argue that at present those odds are too low. We should be working towards creating an environment where the odds of a given person getting to financial security are as close to 100% as possible. Harsh welfare rules might feel good, and might even get more people to work in the short term, but I don't think they'd improve the outcome long term across generations.
cliffordcooley
Posts: 13,141 +6,441
You can't even see which side is racist. I can tell by that comment alone. You don't even realize it is the racist democrats that are stirring up BS all through this country.
BadThad
Posts: 1,356 +1,633
100% the social media moguls are flaming liberals who desire to keep their power and wealth. The best chance of keeping it is to suppress conservative speech and sway voters to vote for their buddies in the democratic party since they are corrupt and weak-minded and can easily be bought and controlled.
I wasn't interested when I started, I started playing with them because I knew people made good money doing it. I started messing around at about 14/15 with dumpster finds. When I got a job at 18 I worked full time for Walmart unloading trucks, then went to work for Whataburger, quickly gained 40hours and a raise because I made myself available, I was in training in only 6 months to be an assistant manager which pissed off several coworkers because they'd been their for a few years. I overheard my boss explain to them, when someone calls out Candle volunteers to work a double Everytime, when we needed him he worked 4 shifts back to back to cover call out. When the fryer needed to be emptied you said not my job, he said show me how and I'll handle it. My promotion got stopped though because my co-workers saw an opportunity and took it. I ended up with a shake thrown on me in the drive thru. I got sent home for the rest of the night as the rush was almost over for Saturday night. I found out I was fired on Monday morning because my drawer was short $40, my boss knew I didn't take it, but the regional manager didn't care and I was fired. It made me jaded for a few months but I picked myself up and got another job unloading trucks at a warehouse.
During this time I decided I wanted something better, and I went into a local shop and asked to take their tech test. My words I remember to this day.
"I see your looking to hire someone, I don't have a degree or prior experience, but if you've got a tech test please let me take it. If I don't get the best score you've seen then don't hire me."
I barely passed it, but I got the job because in his own words I had confidence and ambition. That's all it takes, confidence and ambition. Wallowing in self pity and blaming others gets you no where. By my own upbringing and early experience I should be a socalists, I should be demanding the government to make my life better and at one point I did. But I changed, I realized I didn't need someone to scrap me off the floor, I didn't need a hand out. Will I say it was all uphill, nope I struggled still, I started off at 10hr, was stuck at 17hr for 4 years, but I presevered. I stand right now as a GED holding high school drop out from the ghetto with a job offer in my inbox for 150k a year, and it's because I didn't give up, I didn't blame someone else, and I didn't ask for a handout. My success is my own, and the sense of accomplishment is my own.
You bring up the KKK and proud boys, let me counter with BLM, Antifa, Black Panthers, Nation of Islam, NFCA
Go ahead and tell us all the hate groups are on the right again. Want to know the difference you Don't see the Republicans or the right holding up the KKK or the proud boys as models to follow. We call them ignorant fools because that's what they are. You guys on the other hand put yours on a pedestal.
Beerfloat
Posts: 847 +1,572
Trump and his brood are pretty popular though, and what a nasty piece of work he is. The GOP used to be polite enough to dog whistle but phew that ship has sailed.
Also, BLM is a hate group now?
Last I checked they're burning cities. Have a hard time telling apart BLM and Al Qaeda right now
Beerfloat
Posts: 847 +1,572
Almost all of BLM is engaged in strictly peaceful protesting.
Sadly, a bunch of cops and rabid right wing militia seem to be having the same problem as you. It’s Americans they’re killing, though.
yea peacful, Kenosha is so peacful, portland is so peaceful, chicago is so peaceful, tell me again about the peaceful protests.
Endymio
Posts: 2,661 +2,682
If you're going to label phrases like the "Kung Flu" a "dog whistle for racism", then you can find it wherever you look.
By the way, the phrase "Kung Flu" was first used by the Obama Administration. No one found it racist at the time.
You saying they love the police?
You remind me the reporter, who, standing in front of a burning building set on fire by BLM rioters, called them "peaceful protestors".
Beerfloat
Posts: 847 +1,572
Hmm not exactly but I reckon that once the pattern of dark skinned people getting shot or strangled to death by cops - or vigilante Trumpjugend shock troops for that matter - becomes less of a thing they'll be a lot more likely to get all misty-eyed over the incovenience they are causing to law officers.
Endymio
Posts: 2,661 +2,682
From the Washington Examiner:
-----------------------------------------------
Elder, who is black, noted that statistics show that more unarmed white people were shot and killed in 2019 than unarmed black people.
“How many unarmed blacks were killed by cops last year? 9. How many unarmed whites were killed by cops last year? 19,” he tweeted Tuesday. “More officers are killed every year than are unarmed blacks. When do the #BlueLivesMatter protests begin?”
-----------------------------------------------
As for the silliness about "Trumpjugend shock troops" killing "dark-skinned peoples", if you are posing as a liberal to make them look foolish-- mission successful. The original "Arbeiterjugend" -- the Hitler Youth -- was a LEFT-wing socialist organization which began by violently attacking churches and capitalist icons.[/QUOTE]
Beerfloat
Posts: 847 +1,572
Blacks make up only 13.4% of the population so if you or anyone thinks that stat looks impressive somehow, I'm not sure what to say.
As for #BlueLivesMatter, 3 shot and 2 kills isn't a promising start of their protests. Give it time, I guess.
BTW, Washington Examiner? Like, lol.
Were more reputable tabloids like the NY Post and Washington Times too busy with other right wing hysteria?
Why yes, it's a well established fact that they just loved socialists and communists. I mean, in some circles. I guess? Also, bravo on the 'capitalist icons' euphemism.
Last edited:
Endymio
Posts: 2,661 +2,682
You are attempting to highlight the disparity between blacks making up 13% of the population, but comprising 27% of the officer-involved fatalities But the proper statistic is that blacks make up 31% of police interactions, yet only 27% of the fatalities. If you are stopped by the police, you are actually less likely to be killed if you are black than if you are white.
As for the myth that George Floyd was killed "by four white officers because he was black", of the four officers involved, one was black, and one was Asian.
Here is a study published by the National Academy of Sciences, which demonstrates that the strongest predictor of being shot by the police isn’t a person’s race, but whether the person is engaging in violent criminal behavior:
MSU Research Study
Not communists, no. But Socialists, yes. There was a reason, after all, the Nazi Party named itself National Socialism.
Endymio
Posts: 2,661 +2,682
dirtyferret
Posts: 899 +1,274
Washington examiner is not a legit new source simple a propaganda tool for dimwitted trump supports who are afraid of facts.
Endymio
Posts: 2,661 +2,682
Asserting a statement does not make it fact. Can you point to a story they've gotten wrong? CNN, for example, has gotten dozens of stories entirely backwards in the past year alone, been sued successfully for printing falsehoods, and had to discipline reporters for constructing stories without sources.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
