Over 50% of US babies were born on Medicaid

[rightwinger]

When I get into debates with liberals about our social programs, it doesn't take long for a few to chime in and tell us about some unfortunate person who had children and then lost control over supporting them. Yeah, I'm sure that's the typical case.

On the right, we have asserted that this is not the typical case. The typical case is poor people having children knowing they can't afford them, but have them anyhow because we working people will have to support them.

That debate is now over. In over half of the states across the country, over 50% of babies are born using Medicaid, further proof that the so-called poor have more children than do the working on average. Either that, or half of the country is on Medicaid. Either way, something has to change.

In almost half of the United States, 50% or more babies born were on Medicaid

It is a nationwide shame that so many employers pay such low wages and do not provide health insurance

Thank God for Medicaid

Oh, so now it's still not their fault, it's the employers fault.

Employers don't control what you earn--you control what you earn. If your skill set (whatever that may be) doesn't pay the kind of money you want to earn, you have to find another line of work.

You're not going to be able to support yourself stocking shelves, flipping hamburgers, sweeping floors, or cleaning toilets, and you certainly won't be able to support children. You have to get into a line of work that not everybody can do.

Why do you continue to blame poor people for being poor? Why don't you try looking at the causes of poverty?

In the 1950's, you had a 20% chance of working yourself up from poverty to middle class. Today's you have a 2% chance. Why do you continue to blame those who don't succeed when the system has been totallly stacked against them?

While poverty and dependency has increased, more and more of the country's wealth and assets are being transferred to the top 5%, less and less money is going into public education in poor districts. It's like tossing the poor overboard with rocks tied to their feet and then criticizing them for not being able to swim to shore.

Used to be low skilled workers could support themselves and their families. A high school graduate could get a union job and support a family and eventually retire

But we sold out our working class. Gave employers huge tax cuts that did not make their way down to the workers.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When I get into debates with liberals about our social programs, it doesn't take long for a few to chime in and tell us about some unfortunate person who had children and then lost control over supporting them. Yeah, I'm sure that's the typical case.

On the right, we have asserted that this is not the typical case. The typical case is poor people having children knowing they can't afford them, but have them anyhow because we working people will have to support them.

That debate is now over. In over half of the states across the country, over 50% of babies are born using Medicaid, further proof that the so-called poor have more children than do the working on average. Either that, or half of the country is on Medicaid. Either way, something has to change.

In almost half of the United States, 50% or more babies born were on Medicaid

It is a nationwide shame that so many employers pay such low wages and do not provide health insurance

Thank God for Medicaid

Oh, so now it's still not their fault, it's the employers fault.

Employers don't control what you earn--you control what you earn. If your skill set (whatever that may be) doesn't pay the kind of money you want to earn, you have to find another line of work.

You're not going to be able to support yourself stocking shelves, flipping hamburgers, sweeping floors, or cleaning toilets, and you certainly won't be able to support children. You have to get into a line of work that not everybody can do.

Why do you continue to blame poor people for being poor? Why don't you try looking at the causes of poverty?

In the 1950's, you had a 20% chance of working yourself up from poverty to middle class. Today's you have a 2% chance. Why do you continue to blame those who don't succeed when the system has been totallly stacked against them?

While poverty and dependency has increased, more and more of the country's wealth and assets are being transferred to the top 5%, less and less money is going into public education in poor districts. It's like tossing the poor overboard with rocks tied to their feet and then criticizing them for not being able to swim to shore.

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Employers don't control what you earn--you control what you earn. If your skill set (whatever that may be) doesn't pay the kind of money you want to earn, you have to find another line of work.

Says the guy who can't get health coverage from his job.

Still didn't get that shrink for that obsessive disorder yet, did you Joe?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I just saw this post and I am not going to read every comments.

Many of these people who use Medicaid may make enough to not have to use the program.

I know people who make enough and have health insurance etc and when they find out the cost even with insurance it is still outrageously expensive. So what they do is the woman either quits their job or goes part time to qualify for Medicaid. Then after they qualify they go right back to where they were.

Oh yes, the scammers are out there. Some even go through the trouble of getting a divorce to qualify for government programs.

 

[deanrd]

When I get into debates with liberals about our social programs, it doesn't take long for a few to chime in and tell us about some unfortunate person who had children and then lost control over supporting them. Yeah, I'm sure that's the typical case.

On the right, we have asserted that this is not the typical case. The typical case is poor people having children knowing they can't afford them, but have them anyhow because we working people will have to support them.

That debate is now over. In over half of the states across the country, over 50% of babies are born using Medicaid, further proof that the so-called poor have more children than do the working on average. Either that, or half of the country is on Medicaid. Either way, something has to change.

In almost half of the United States, 50% or more babies born were on Medicaid

You think poor people don't work?

Can you feel "TARD" or is it just a state of mind?

 

[deanrd]

When I get into debates with liberals about our social programs, it doesn't take long for a few to chime in and tell us about some unfortunate person who had children and then lost control over supporting them. Yeah, I'm sure that's the typical case.

On the right, we have asserted that this is not the typical case. The typical case is poor people having children knowing they can't afford them, but have them anyhow because we working people will have to support them.

That debate is now over. In over half of the states across the country, over 50% of babies are born using Medicaid, further proof that the so-called poor have more children than do the working on average. Either that, or half of the country is on Medicaid. Either way, something has to change.

In almost half of the United States, 50% or more babies born were on Medicaid

Well, repugs are opposed to abortion, birth control, planned parenthood, and sex education. You expected a different outcome?

It's OK. They love the fetus. Babies can die. They don't care about those. But the fetus is everything.

 

[rightwinger]

When I get into debates with liberals about our social programs, it doesn't take long for a few to chime in and tell us about some unfortunate person who had children and then lost control over supporting them. Yeah, I'm sure that's the typical case.

On the right, we have asserted that this is not the typical case. The typical case is poor people having children knowing they can't afford them, but have them anyhow because we working people will have to support them.

That debate is now over. In over half of the states across the country, over 50% of babies are born using Medicaid, further proof that the so-called poor have more children than do the working on average. Either that, or half of the country is on Medicaid. Either way, something has to change.

In almost half of the United States, 50% or more babies born were on Medicaid

It is a nationwide shame that so many employers pay such low wages and do not provide health insurance

Thank God for Medicaid

Oh, so now it's still not their fault, it's the employers fault.

Employers don't control what you earn--you control what you earn. If your skill set (whatever that may be) doesn't pay the kind of money you want to earn, you have to find another line of work.

You're not going to be able to support yourself stocking shelves, flipping hamburgers, sweeping floors, or cleaning toilets, and you certainly won't be able to support children. You have to get into a line of work that not everybody can do.

Why do you continue to blame poor people for being poor? Why don't you try looking at the causes of poverty?

In the 1950's, you had a 20% chance of working yourself up from poverty to middle class. Today's you have a 2% chance. Why do you continue to blame those who don't succeed when the system has been totallly stacked against them?

While poverty and dependency has increased, more and more of the country's wealth and assets are being transferred to the top 5%, less and less money is going into public education in poor districts. It's like tossing the poor overboard with rocks tied to their feet and then criticizing them for not being able to swim to shore.

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

A sensible solution when there were ample good paying jobs

Used to be, you lived in the city, got a job at the manufacturing plant or steel mill. You never got rich, but you could support a family, buy a home, send your kids to college

Those jobs are gone. The people were left behind and nothing came in to replace those jobs

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How ridiculous--even for you.

No middle-class family has children for a couple lousy tax deductions. That's much different than the government totally or mostly supporting your family instead of you.

'Lousy' tax deductions? For one kid, for starters, you get a $1000 per year child tax credit, for 17 years. That alone can be one of the reasons many moderate income families with a couple kids pay NO federal income taxes.

So lets see, 1K a year for 17 years.........why that would be 17K, is that right?

I have bad news for you, lowlifes who have government pay for their family will spend over 17K for that one child in less than six months.

So you were saying....................

The exemption is $4000 a child for up to 24 years
That is almost $100,000 for every child

That does not include what your state allows you

24 years? When did that start and by which party?

Paying less in taxes is different than paying nothing and getting tax money on top of it. That's the difference between parents who work and parents that don't. Working parents are not getting anything from government, they are just paying less to government.

24 years as long as they are still in college

Paying less in taxes is still a gift for having children. So is your mortgage deduction....free money

Everyone complains about the benefits others receive.......as long as their own is off limits

Free money? How is something you worked for free?

The problem with you leftists is how you look at income. You believe all money belongs to government, and what money of yours they allow you to keep is a gift.

If we had a federal law where you could only own two television sets, but you had four when the law was passed, and government came and took two of your television sets away to give to others who had no television set, does that mean government gave you two television sets since they allowed you to keep two of them?

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

When I get into debates with liberals about our social programs, it doesn't take long for a few to chime in and tell us about some unfortunate person who had children and then lost control over supporting them. Yeah, I'm sure that's the typical case.

On the right, we have asserted that this is not the typical case. The typical case is poor people having children knowing they can't afford them, but have them anyhow because we working people will have to support them.

That debate is now over. In over half of the states across the country, over 50% of babies are born using Medicaid, further proof that the so-called poor have more children than do the working on average. Either that, or half of the country is on Medicaid. Either way, something has to change.

In almost half of the United States, 50% or more babies born were on Medicaid

It is a nationwide shame that so many employers pay such low wages and do not provide health insurance

Thank God for Medicaid

Oh, so now it's still not their fault, it's the employers fault.

Employers don't control what you earn--you control what you earn. If your skill set (whatever that may be) doesn't pay the kind of money you want to earn, you have to find another line of work.

You're not going to be able to support yourself stocking shelves, flipping hamburgers, sweeping floors, or cleaning toilets, and you certainly won't be able to support children. You have to get into a line of work that not everybody can do.

Why do you continue to blame poor people for being poor? Why don't you try looking at the causes of poverty?

In the 1950's, you had a 20% chance of working yourself up from poverty to middle class. Today's you have a 2% chance. Why do you continue to blame those who don't succeed when the system has been totallly stacked against them?

While poverty and dependency has increased, more and more of the country's wealth and assets are being transferred to the top 5%, less and less money is going into public education in poor districts. It's like tossing the poor overboard with rocks tied to their feet and then criticizing them for not being able to swim to shore.

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

A sensible solution when there were ample good paying jobs

Used to be, you lived in the city, got a job at the manufacturing plant or steel mill. You never got rich, but you could support a family, buy a home, send your kids to college

Those jobs are gone. The people were left behind and nothing came in to replace those jobs

And they are not going to be replaced. That's why you can't follow that strategy anymore. The American consumer will not support high paying monkey jobs like we used to. The American consumer is obsessed with cheap--not where the product is made, who they put out of a job, or even the quality of the product. Just sell us the cheapest product you can.

 

[rightwinger]

'Lousy' tax deductions? For one kid, for starters, you get a $1000 per year child tax credit, for 17 years. That alone can be one of the reasons many moderate income families with a couple kids pay NO federal income taxes.

So lets see, 1K a year for 17 years.........why that would be 17K, is that right?

I have bad news for you, lowlifes who have government pay for their family will spend over 17K for that one child in less than six months.

So you were saying....................

The exemption is $4000 a child for up to 24 years
That is almost $100,000 for every child

That does not include what your state allows you

24 years? When did that start and by which party?

Paying less in taxes is different than paying nothing and getting tax money on top of it. That's the difference between parents who work and parents that don't. Working parents are not getting anything from government, they are just paying less to government.

24 years as long as they are still in college

Paying less in taxes is still a gift for having children. So is your mortgage deduction....free money

Everyone complains about the benefits others receive.......as long as their own is off limits

Free money? How is something you worked for free?

The problem with you leftists is how you look at income. You believe all money belongs to government, and what money of yours they allow you to keep is a gift.

If we had a federal law where you could only own two television sets, but you had four when the law was passed, and government came and took two of your television sets away to give to others who had no television set, does that mean government gave you two television sets since they allowed you to keep two of them?

You have three kids. You make $50,000 a year. At the end of the year, you have $12,000 more spending money than someone who has no kids and makes the same $50,000 a year

Free money

 

[rightwinger]

It is a nationwide shame that so many employers pay such low wages and do not provide health insurance

Thank God for Medicaid

Oh, so now it's still not their fault, it's the employers fault.

Employers don't control what you earn--you control what you earn. If your skill set (whatever that may be) doesn't pay the kind of money you want to earn, you have to find another line of work.

You're not going to be able to support yourself stocking shelves, flipping hamburgers, sweeping floors, or cleaning toilets, and you certainly won't be able to support children. You have to get into a line of work that not everybody can do.

Why do you continue to blame poor people for being poor? Why don't you try looking at the causes of poverty?

In the 1950's, you had a 20% chance of working yourself up from poverty to middle class. Today's you have a 2% chance. Why do you continue to blame those who don't succeed when the system has been totallly stacked against them?

While poverty and dependency has increased, more and more of the country's wealth and assets are being transferred to the top 5%, less and less money is going into public education in poor districts. It's like tossing the poor overboard with rocks tied to their feet and then criticizing them for not being able to swim to shore.

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

A sensible solution when there were ample good paying jobs

Used to be, you lived in the city, got a job at the manufacturing plant or steel mill. You never got rich, but you could support a family, buy a home, send your kids to college

Those jobs are gone. The people were left behind and nothing came in to replace those jobs

And they are not going to be replaced. That's why you can't follow that strategy anymore. The American consumer will not support high paying monkey jobs like we used to. The American consumer is obsessed with cheap--not where the product is made, who they put out of a job, or even the quality of the product. Just sell us the cheapest product you can.

Then don't blame the worker when they can't find those imaginary jobs of yours

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So lets see, 1K a year for 17 years.........why that would be 17K, is that right?

I have bad news for you, lowlifes who have government pay for their family will spend over 17K for that one child in less than six months.

So you were saying....................

The exemption is $4000 a child for up to 24 years
That is almost $100,000 for every child

That does not include what your state allows you

24 years? When did that start and by which party?

Paying less in taxes is different than paying nothing and getting tax money on top of it. That's the difference between parents who work and parents that don't. Working parents are not getting anything from government, they are just paying less to government.

24 years as long as they are still in college

Paying less in taxes is still a gift for having children. So is your mortgage deduction....free money

Everyone complains about the benefits others receive.......as long as their own is off limits

Free money? How is something you worked for free?

The problem with you leftists is how you look at income. You believe all money belongs to government, and what money of yours they allow you to keep is a gift.

If we had a federal law where you could only own two television sets, but you had four when the law was passed, and government came and took two of your television sets away to give to others who had no television set, does that mean government gave you two television sets since they allowed you to keep two of them?

You have three kids. You make $50,000 a year. At the end of the year, you have $12,000 more spending money than someone who has no kids and makes the same $50,000 a year

Free money

Oh, I see the problem now. You don't understand tax deductions

I deal with tax deductions every year. It's not what you think. If I write-off $10,000 in deductions for my apartments, that does not mean that the government will give me that $10,000. What it means is I still had to pay that 10K, it's just that I don't have to pay taxes on that money when I earned it.

So let's say in one month I collect $2,000 in rent, but I spend that $2,000 on the property or apartments. That does not mean government will reimburse me that 2 grand. What it means is that it's income, just not subject to being taxed.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Oh, so now it's still not their fault, it's the employers fault.

Employers don't control what you earn--you control what you earn. If your skill set (whatever that may be) doesn't pay the kind of money you want to earn, you have to find another line of work.

You're not going to be able to support yourself stocking shelves, flipping hamburgers, sweeping floors, or cleaning toilets, and you certainly won't be able to support children. You have to get into a line of work that not everybody can do.

Why do you continue to blame poor people for being poor? Why don't you try looking at the causes of poverty?

In the 1950's, you had a 20% chance of working yourself up from poverty to middle class. Today's you have a 2% chance. Why do you continue to blame those who don't succeed when the system has been totallly stacked against them?

While poverty and dependency has increased, more and more of the country's wealth and assets are being transferred to the top 5%, less and less money is going into public education in poor districts. It's like tossing the poor overboard with rocks tied to their feet and then criticizing them for not being able to swim to shore.

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

A sensible solution when there were ample good paying jobs

Used to be, you lived in the city, got a job at the manufacturing plant or steel mill. You never got rich, but you could support a family, buy a home, send your kids to college

Those jobs are gone. The people were left behind and nothing came in to replace those jobs

And they are not going to be replaced. That's why you can't follow that strategy anymore. The American consumer will not support high paying monkey jobs like we used to. The American consumer is obsessed with cheap--not where the product is made, who they put out of a job, or even the quality of the product. Just sell us the cheapest product you can.

Then don't blame the worker when they can't find those imaginary jobs of yours

Imaginary? Would you like me to link some want ads with those imaginary jobs? Would you like me to make you a video of all the industrial areas I go to that are littered with HELP WANTED signs week after week? Maybe a letter from my employer telling you how difficult it is to find workers that can pass a drug test?

 

[rightwinger]

The exemption is $4000 a child for up to 24 years
That is almost $100,000 for every child

That does not include what your state allows you

24 years? When did that start and by which party?

Paying less in taxes is different than paying nothing and getting tax money on top of it. That's the difference between parents who work and parents that don't. Working parents are not getting anything from government, they are just paying less to government.

24 years as long as they are still in college

Paying less in taxes is still a gift for having children. So is your mortgage deduction....free money

Everyone complains about the benefits others receive.......as long as their own is off limits

Free money? How is something you worked for free?

The problem with you leftists is how you look at income. You believe all money belongs to government, and what money of yours they allow you to keep is a gift.

If we had a federal law where you could only own two television sets, but you had four when the law was passed, and government came and took two of your television sets away to give to others who had no television set, does that mean government gave you two television sets since they allowed you to keep two of them?

You have three kids. You make $50,000 a year. At the end of the year, you have $12,000 more spending money than someone who has no kids and makes the same $50,000 a year

Free money

Oh, I see the problem now. You don't understand tax deductions

I deal with tax deductions every year. It's not what you think. If I write-off $10,000 in deductions for my apartments, that does not mean that the government will give me that $10,000. What it means is I still had to pay that 10K, it's just that I don't have to pay taxes on that money when I earned it.

So let's say in one month I collect $2,000 in rent, but I spend that $2,000 on the property or apartments. That does not mean government will reimburse me that 2 grand. What it means is that it's income, just not subject to being taxed.

Total fail on your part.... You are talking about net profit

What I am talking about is you getting $4000 at the end of the year for every rug rat you have while you bitch about the poor getting reimbursed for their rug rats

 

[rightwinger]

Why do you continue to blame poor people for being poor? Why don't you try looking at the causes of poverty?

In the 1950's, you had a 20% chance of working yourself up from poverty to middle class. Today's you have a 2% chance. Why do you continue to blame those who don't succeed when the system has been totallly stacked against them?

While poverty and dependency has increased, more and more of the country's wealth and assets are being transferred to the top 5%, less and less money is going into public education in poor districts. It's like tossing the poor overboard with rocks tied to their feet and then criticizing them for not being able to swim to shore.

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

A sensible solution when there were ample good paying jobs

Used to be, you lived in the city, got a job at the manufacturing plant or steel mill. You never got rich, but you could support a family, buy a home, send your kids to college

Those jobs are gone. The people were left behind and nothing came in to replace those jobs

And they are not going to be replaced. That's why you can't follow that strategy anymore. The American consumer will not support high paying monkey jobs like we used to. The American consumer is obsessed with cheap--not where the product is made, who they put out of a job, or even the quality of the product. Just sell us the cheapest product you can.

Then don't blame the worker when they can't find those imaginary jobs of yours

Imaginary? Would you like me to link some want ads with those imaginary jobs? Would you like me to make you a video of all the industrial areas I go to that are littered with HELP WANTED signs week after week? Maybe a letter from my employer telling you how difficult it is to find workers that can pass a drug test?

Why don't you do that
Link to 30 million want ads for every family that receives government assistance

 

[Dragonlady]

Why do you continue to blame poor people for being poor? Why don't you try looking at the causes of poverty?

In the 1950's, you had a 20% chance of working yourself up from poverty to middle class. Today's you have a 2% chance. Why do you continue to blame those who don't succeed when the system has been totallly stacked against them?

While poverty and dependency has increased, more and more of the country's wealth and assets are being transferred to the top 5%, less and less money is going into public education in poor districts. It's like tossing the poor overboard with rocks tied to their feet and then criticizing them for not being able to swim to shore.

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

A sensible solution when there were ample good paying jobs

Used to be, you lived in the city, got a job at the manufacturing plant or steel mill. You never got rich, but you could support a family, buy a home, send your kids to college

Those jobs are gone. The people were left behind and nothing came in to replace those jobs

And they are not going to be replaced. That's why you can't follow that strategy anymore. The American consumer will not support high paying monkey jobs like we used to. The American consumer is obsessed with cheap--not where the product is made, who they put out of a job, or even the quality of the product. Just sell us the cheapest product you can.

Then don't blame the worker when they can't find those imaginary jobs of yours

Imaginary? Would you like me to link some want ads with those imaginary jobs? Would you like me to make you a video of all the industrial areas I go to that are littered with HELP WANTED signs week after week? Maybe a letter from my employer telling you how difficult it is to find workers that can pass a drug test?

Why is it necessary for every single worker in the US to pass a drug test? That's insane, unless you're operating heavy equipment or driving. What does it matter if your waiter smoked a joint with his friends last night?

Americans keep putting the emPHAsis on the wrong sylLAblesand wonder why their country is going to hell in a hand basket.

 

[deanrd]

The exemption is $4000 a child for up to 24 years
That is almost $100,000 for every child

That does not include what your state allows you

24 years? When did that start and by which party?

Paying less in taxes is different than paying nothing and getting tax money on top of it. That's the difference between parents who work and parents that don't. Working parents are not getting anything from government, they are just paying less to government.

24 years as long as they are still in college

Paying less in taxes is still a gift for having children. So is your mortgage deduction....free money

Everyone complains about the benefits others receive.......as long as their own is off limits

Free money? How is something you worked for free?

The problem with you leftists is how you look at income. You believe all money belongs to government, and what money of yours they allow you to keep is a gift.

If we had a federal law where you could only own two television sets, but you had four when the law was passed, and government came and took two of your television sets away to give to others who had no television set, does that mean government gave you two television sets since they allowed you to keep two of them?

You have three kids. You make $50,000 a year. At the end of the year, you have $12,000 more spending money than someone who has no kids and makes the same $50,000 a year

Free money

Oh, I see the problem now. You don't understand tax deductions

I deal with tax deductions every year. It's not what you think. If I write-off $10,000 in deductions for my apartments, that does not mean that the government will give me that $10,000. What it means is I still had to pay that 10K, it's just that I don't have to pay taxes on that money when I earned it.

So let's say in one month I collect $2,000 in rent, but I spend that $2,000 on the property or apartments. That does not mean government will reimburse me that 2 grand. What it means is that it's income, just not subject to being taxed.

I don't see how you work. You come across as way too stupid. I mean, you could clear tables or wash dishes, but anything more complicated? I don't see how.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

A sensible solution when there were ample good paying jobs

Used to be, you lived in the city, got a job at the manufacturing plant or steel mill. You never got rich, but you could support a family, buy a home, send your kids to college

Those jobs are gone. The people were left behind and nothing came in to replace those jobs

And they are not going to be replaced. That's why you can't follow that strategy anymore. The American consumer will not support high paying monkey jobs like we used to. The American consumer is obsessed with cheap--not where the product is made, who they put out of a job, or even the quality of the product. Just sell us the cheapest product you can.

Then don't blame the worker when they can't find those imaginary jobs of yours

Imaginary? Would you like me to link some want ads with those imaginary jobs? Would you like me to make you a video of all the industrial areas I go to that are littered with HELP WANTED signs week after week? Maybe a letter from my employer telling you how difficult it is to find workers that can pass a drug test?

Why is it necessary for every single worker in the US to pass a drug test? That's insane, unless you're operating heavy equipment or driving, what does it matter if your waiter smoked a joint with his friends last night?

Americans keep putting the emPHAsis on the wrong sylLABLES and wonder why their country is going to hell in a hand basket.

Not really. To a point I agree with you. In my case, it's the government that forces us to drug test. With other companies, drug testing is needed to get better Workman's compensation rates. With larger companies, that's savings into the hundreds of thousands of dollars. So who can blame them?

Lower paying jobs don't use drug testing as much, so many of the druggies do flock to those jobs, but they don't pay very well.

I was renting an apartment to a young couple. Both worked fast food places. Their car was falling apart, they didn't have money for the extras, and they were always late with rent, but were still good people and good tenants.

So why didn't they try to get out of working fast food jobs? Because they loved their pot, and smoking pot was more important to them then securing their future financially.

They moved a little over a year ago the same way they moved in--not doing very well financially. It was my hope (and still is) that they mature a bit more, realize they are wasting their lives away because of pot, quit the stuff and open themselves up for better opportunities.

It still may happen if it has not already. The only thing that may throw a monkey wrench into my hopes if if our state or federal government mandates a 15 dollar per hour minimum wage. If that would ever happen, I believe those two will remain working fast food restaurants until it's too late in their lives to start a career at something.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

24 years? When did that start and by which party?

Paying less in taxes is different than paying nothing and getting tax money on top of it. That's the difference between parents who work and parents that don't. Working parents are not getting anything from government, they are just paying less to government.

24 years as long as they are still in college

Paying less in taxes is still a gift for having children. So is your mortgage deduction....free money

Everyone complains about the benefits others receive.......as long as their own is off limits

Free money? How is something you worked for free?

The problem with you leftists is how you look at income. You believe all money belongs to government, and what money of yours they allow you to keep is a gift.

If we had a federal law where you could only own two television sets, but you had four when the law was passed, and government came and took two of your television sets away to give to others who had no television set, does that mean government gave you two television sets since they allowed you to keep two of them?

You have three kids. You make $50,000 a year. At the end of the year, you have $12,000 more spending money than someone who has no kids and makes the same $50,000 a year

Free money

Oh, I see the problem now. You don't understand tax deductions

I deal with tax deductions every year. It's not what you think. If I write-off $10,000 in deductions for my apartments, that does not mean that the government will give me that $10,000. What it means is I still had to pay that 10K, it's just that I don't have to pay taxes on that money when I earned it.

So let's say in one month I collect $2,000 in rent, but I spend that $2,000 on the property or apartments. That does not mean government will reimburse me that 2 grand. What it means is that it's income, just not subject to being taxed.

I don't see how you work. You come across as way too stupid. I mean, you could clear tables or wash dishes, but anything more complicated? I don't see how.

I may come across stupid to you because you are a liberal, and liberals generally have little to no common sense. So I'll tell you all about myself so you don't have to guess.

I'm 57 years old and my trade is driving. I drive tractor-trailers locally here in Cleveland and across our state. I'm also a landlord and have been for over two decades. I went to an all Catholic school most of my education years, and toward the end in high school, attended public school. I used to deliver and repair home medical equipment. I was raised by a construction father who taught me much about work in my early to late teen years. I was raised in a two-parent middle-class household and my mother was (and still is) very religious.

In high school I went to vocational school to learn Data Processing. As a young adult, I attended electronics school but found that to be a dead end career. I chose driving because I wanted to be in demand no matter what the economic environment, plus I can't stand working inside for very long.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Poverty is a very simple problem with very simple solutions. Poverty is the state of not having enough money to live on if any money at all. The solution to poverty is money. To obtain money, you need to get a job.

There, poverty is now solved. But wait! There is more........

Once you have a job, save the money you make. Get an apartment with others in your situation or answer some ads of people looking for roommates to share expenses with. DO NOT HAVE ANY CHILDREN until you have a secure job and career. If you cannot get a good job or secure a career, don't have any children. Avoid going into debt and buying things you cannot reasonably afford. Instead of taking your money to buy the newest I-phone, put that money in your savings account.

If your savings account starts to accumulate into the thousands or tens of thousands, it's time to start thinking about investments. You have an array of investments to choose from. You can use your money to start your own business like lawn care. You can use that money for a trade school. You can invest that money in the stock market, commodities market, real estate, treasury bonds.....

There. Now tell me why anybody cannot do what I just wrote.

A sensible solution when there were ample good paying jobs

Used to be, you lived in the city, got a job at the manufacturing plant or steel mill. You never got rich, but you could support a family, buy a home, send your kids to college

Those jobs are gone. The people were left behind and nothing came in to replace those jobs

And they are not going to be replaced. That's why you can't follow that strategy anymore. The American consumer will not support high paying monkey jobs like we used to. The American consumer is obsessed with cheap--not where the product is made, who they put out of a job, or even the quality of the product. Just sell us the cheapest product you can.

Then don't blame the worker when they can't find those imaginary jobs of yours

Imaginary? Would you like me to link some want ads with those imaginary jobs? Would you like me to make you a video of all the industrial areas I go to that are littered with HELP WANTED signs week after week? Maybe a letter from my employer telling you how difficult it is to find workers that can pass a drug test?

Why don't you do that
Link to 30 million want ads for every family that receives government assistance

I have a job. Why would I go get another one? I never said there were 30 million jobs. What I said is that there are plenty of jobs for those who actually want to work. Most of the people on those programs don't want to work. That's the problem.