Time to rebuild the structure that allowed for mom's to raise their kid's at home again ?

[LoneLaugher]

Before Reagan, a single income held families together in most cases. What happened?

Actually the single family household was having trouble making ends meet well before Reagan. In the 60s and 70s we see women entering the workforce more and more and as we know, that shifts the supply/demand curve. More workers vying for the same jobs slows wage growth and that is a large part of the reason for the stagnation of pay for the last 40-50 years.

. OK, so what is the solution for the kids being brainwashed and raised outside of the family these days ? How does it all get fixed ? How do we bring back choice in which the left and right has since destroyed with the strong arm of government ?

In Japan...a place where we all agree raises educated and civic minded children...the school ( and therefore the government ) plays a major role in child rearing.

The idea that our kids are brainwashed is fucking ridiculous. Figure some shit out, will ya?

Dallas High School Teacher Posts Video "Shooting" Trump With Squirt Gun In Classroom

Middle School Teacher Equates Student's Trump Shirt To A Swastika

'Trump and Hitler Are One in the Same': High School Teacher Draws the President As Nazi Leader

That's opinion. Not brainwashing. Learn something.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Before Reagan, a single income held families together in most cases. What happened?

Actually the single family household was having trouble making ends meet well before Reagan. In the 60s and 70s we see women entering the workforce more and more and as we know, that shifts the supply/demand curve. More workers vying for the same jobs slows wage growth and that is a large part of the reason for the stagnation of pay for the last 40-50 years.

. OK, so what is the solution for the kids being brainwashed and raised outside of the family these days ? How does it all get fixed ? How do we bring back choice in which the left and right has since destroyed with the strong arm of government ?

In Japan...a place where we all agree raises educated and civic minded children...the school ( and therefore the government ) plays a major role in child rearing.

The idea that our kids are brainwashed is fucking ridiculous. Figure some shit out, will ya?

Dallas High School Teacher Posts Video "Shooting" Trump With Squirt Gun In Classroom

Middle School Teacher Equates Student's Trump Shirt To A Swastika

'Trump and Hitler Are One in the Same': High School Teacher Draws the President As Nazi Leader

That's opinion. Not brainwashing. Learn something.

Shooting at the President of the United States is an opinion? Try telling that to the SS.

Sharing your opinion AS A TEACHER is indoctrination.

 

[LoneLaugher]

Actually the single family household was having trouble making ends meet well before Reagan. In the 60s and 70s we see women entering the workforce more and more and as we know, that shifts the supply/demand curve. More workers vying for the same jobs slows wage growth and that is a large part of the reason for the stagnation of pay for the last 40-50 years.

. OK, so what is the solution for the kids being brainwashed and raised outside of the family these days ? How does it all get fixed ? How do we bring back choice in which the left and right has since destroyed with the strong arm of government ?

In Japan...a place where we all agree raises educated and civic minded children...the school ( and therefore the government ) plays a major role in child rearing.

The idea that our kids are brainwashed is fucking ridiculous. Figure some shit out, will ya?

Dallas High School Teacher Posts Video "Shooting" Trump With Squirt Gun In Classroom

Middle School Teacher Equates Student's Trump Shirt To A Swastika

'Trump and Hitler Are One in the Same': High School Teacher Draws the President As Nazi Leader

That's opinion. Not brainwashing. Learn something.

Shooting at the President of the United States is an opinion? Try telling that to the SS.

Sharing your opinion AS A TEACHER is indoctrination.

Nope. You are a snowflake.

 

[beagle9]

We need a FAMILY FRIENDLY structure. Not just a structure that allows women to stay at home to raise kids.

That means we need to encourage policies that allow workplace flexibility for both mothers and fathers, so neither has to make a choice between children and career. Other additional ideas would be a cooperative day care AT the workplace, so parents are not so seperated from kids. These are doable - companies, like SAS do it and have as a bonus very dedicated employees with low turnover. Of course, SAS is not a public company.

The other thing..."it takes a village to raise a kid"...no, it's not "leftist indoctrination" it's a reality. We, humans, are communal social animals who evolved with an extended system of family and community to help with child raising. When I grew up, most mother's did not work. Our community, was a mix of young families, older families, and seniors. There were people around all the time, everyone knew who you were, and kept an eye on things. There was an older couple a few doors down we could go to and talk, there was neighbor with a dog who let us play with the dog. There was community involvement. That's what "it takes a village" means. Raising kids is not meant to be a family in isolation but a family within a community.

. Well your definition of the village I accept, but the leftist idea of the definition of a village I don't accept. You're recollection of the past is what most had, and it was great, but somehow it was destroyed, and we all must learn why that happened, and we should work together to fix it... Making retirement a better deal in order to help the lower rungs do better about climbing the ladders of success could also help. The idea that people are having to work until they fall into the grave is killing the very community in which you described. Retirement in America has become a huge rip off where as millions of average working class citizens paid into social security all their working lives, only to get screwed over in the end. Retirement should be optional at 55 years old, and not at 65 years old where it is hoped that the person dies before drawing or doesn't draw for any length of time before dying after 65 years old. Talk about a screw job it all is, and it is causing our youth on the beginner end to still be living in their mommy's basement at 26 or beyond, putting off marriage and a family, and ending up mad as hell themselves about it all. It's partly why we are seeing anarchy in the streets on a daily basis now. The people have been duped, and they are fed up with it all. If we are going to get serious about making America great again, then let's do the things that reinstates the very fabric and values that made America great again. Strengthen the dollar, create great opportunities in jobs, reform the retirement system, healthcare system, and bring down the cost of living in America to facilitate it all. Are we serious now or just blowing smoke ?

The thing with retirement though, is people are living longer and healthier - far longer then they did when SS was first set up. Pensions and SS were never meant to sustain people for that long. Raising the retirement age is something I think is a good idea with a few exceptions - there are some careers that are so hard on a person, they are physically incapable of continuing.

So what's the solution, only make people in certain careers applicable for later retirement?

I've said it once and I'll say it again. If we want these social programs, we have to fund them. If we want to retire at the age of 55, then we need to double our employee contributions to Social Security during our working years.

. Many would be willing to double their contributions for such a thing, just as long as it isn't robbed. The other thing is why haven't the people been involved about what they want as a program or was it all just a dam huge scam to begin with ? How come the issue isn't brought before a committee representing the people, and an open discussion begin, and the government do it's job for the people as it should be ?? Why are the people kept out of the issue, and only given the options that they are given ?

If government kept increasing taxes for things like SS and Medicare, the public would revolt and probably want to do away with those programs. That's what the politicians are really afraid of.

So they keep letting these programs get further and further in the hole, and trying to figure out ways to keep their promisee to the people. You can stall it, but you can't avoid the inevitable.

That's why they are proposing an age limitation increase on collecting SS. Medical and Medicaid typically only pay about 2/3 of the bill for their patients. Then hospitals and doctors have to increase their fees on everybody to make up for the loss, and then our health insurance has to take huge premium increases.

. You say if government were to keep raising taxes as if they would do it without the citizens blessings, and that is exactly what the problem has been. We have a disconnect with our government, where as they have been doing to us as they choose, instead of working side by side with us to solve the issues as should be. Are you one who thinks our government should not be transparent, and to work side by side with us ?? I would happily give up say $40.00 dollars a week out my weekly income if it helped to reform the retirement system, and make it what it should be in this country. The sad thing is that you have corruption in government, and then you have the enablers of the corruption in government, and then you have those who say "hey I got mine, and to hell with you", and then you have the poor working class who have no voice, yet are actually paying for most of the bull crap that goes on.

 

[beagle9]

Should we as a nation work harder to support the mother's who want to stay at home in order to raise their kid's again ? I am seeing children shuffled off to this place and/or to that place (or) they are being handed off to this person or that person while the dad goes off to his full time job, and the mother tries to balance going to school for her wanted career choice, and then she tries to work a full time job, and then comes home for a few hours to try and be the mom for her children ?

The kids are losing big time in these situations I feel, but the parents can't seem to get out of the situation no matter what they try or don't try these days.. It is affecting millions of up and coming American families & their children now.

The children sadly in many of the cases could be set up for abuse, brainwashing, and other bad situations as a result of it all. It is exactly why we had commentators like what we have seen on MSNBC when it was suggested that America's kids are no longer to be raised by the parents, but instead they are to be raised by the government or leftist run systems in which they were claiming as being a good thing. They even made statements like your kids are no longer your kids anymore, and that they belong to the community to be raised now. Then you had Hillary saying it takes a village to raise these kids now, and that was just more code talk that the kids will now be brainwashed as the agenda of the globalist left.

In order to truly make America great again, I say restore the ability for mom's to choose to stay at home if they want to with their children or to work if they want to, but not have it where they absolutely have to. If the working mom works part time, then she should have it to where her full income is a huge help to her family, and not an income that is keeping their heads just above water. If going to make America strong and great again, we need to fix this problem big time in this country. The kids are absolutely worth it.

We need a FAMILY FRIENDLY structure. Not just a structure that allows women to stay at home to raise kids.

That means we need to encourage policies that allow workplace flexibility for both mothers and fathers, so neither has to make a choice between children and career. Other additional ideas would be a cooperative day care AT the workplace, so parents are not so seperated from kids. These are doable - companies, like SAS do it and have as a bonus very dedicated employees with low turnover. Of course, SAS is not a public company.

The other thing..."it takes a village to raise a kid"...no, it's not "leftist indoctrination" it's a reality. We, humans, are communal social animals who evolved with an extended system of family and community to help with child raising. When I grew up, most mother's did not work. Our community, was a mix of young families, older families, and seniors. There were people around all the time, everyone knew who you were, and kept an eye on things. There was an older couple a few doors down we could go to and talk, there was neighbor with a dog who let us play with the dog. There was community involvement. That's what "it takes a village" means. Raising kids is not meant to be a family in isolation but a family within a community.

What you are talking about is (once again) placing the burden of raising kids on the employer. The employer didn't open up a business so you can work and keep an eye on your kids.

I presented this idea in several other topics, so I'll introduce it again:

The solution to this problem is to provide the female of the family with income while staying at home to raise her children. How do we do that? We pay them.

Mothers can home school, but again, she has to give up her job in order to do that. I believe the average cost to educate children in America today is something like 13K per year per student. So why not let the home school mother educate other kids in the neighborhood?

If we pay that parent 9K per student she takes in, she can educate them while at the same time educating her own children and still maintaining a secondary family income. The taxpayers save 4K per student every year, and everybody wins..........well except the teachers unions which is why we will never have a system like that.

You're talking about the government paying for the female of the family to stay home and raise children?

Downside:
women give up their career - assuming 2 children per family, several years apart at least, 20 years out of the workforce raising and - "home schooling".

SHE is the one who HAS TO give up her job.

Homeschooling is not always the best way to educate kids. In fact, homeschooling is all over the board in terms of success.

$9,000 a year does not replace a career earning $100,000 a year.

You're talking about taxpapers paying for it in addition to paying for schooling for kids in public schools and private schools.

Companies like SAS chose to do it and it's benefited greatly. Why not inact legislation that makes those choices easier and more profitable for companies to do?

. Raising your children is a great trade off for giving up your job. Well most mother's think that way I would imagine. If follow the feminazi's lead, they would have none of this motherhood or raising children anymore.

 

[beagle9]

Should we as a nation work harder to support the mother's who want to stay at home in order to raise their kid's again ? I am seeing children shuffled off to this place and/or to that place (or) they are being handed off to this person or that person while the dad goes off to his full time job, and the mother tries to balance going to school for her wanted career choice, and then she tries to work a full time job, and then comes home for a few hours to try and be the mom for her children ?

The kids are losing big time in these situations I feel, but the parents can't seem to get out of the situation no matter what they try or don't try these days.. It is affecting millions of up and coming American families & their children now.

The children sadly in many of the cases could be set up for abuse, brainwashing, and other bad situations as a result of it all. It is exactly why we had commentators like what we have seen on MSNBC when it was suggested that America's kids are no longer to be raised by the parents, but instead they are to be raised by the government or leftist run systems in which they were claiming as being a good thing. They even made statements like your kids are no longer your kids anymore, and that they belong to the community to be raised now. Then you had Hillary saying it takes a village to raise these kids now, and that was just more code talk that the kids will now be brainwashed as the agenda of the globalist left.

In order to truly make America great again, I say restore the ability for mom's to choose to stay at home if they want to with their children or to work if they want to, but not have it where they absolutely have to. If the working mom works part time, then she should have it to where her full income is a huge help to her family, and not an income that is keeping their heads just above water. If going to make America strong and great again, we need to fix this problem big time in this country. The kids are absolutely worth it.

We need a FAMILY FRIENDLY structure. Not just a structure that allows women to stay at home to raise kids.

That means we need to encourage policies that allow workplace flexibility for both mothers and fathers, so neither has to make a choice between children and career. Other additional ideas would be a cooperative day care AT the workplace, so parents are not so seperated from kids. These are doable - companies, like SAS do it and have as a bonus very dedicated employees with low turnover. Of course, SAS is not a public company.

The other thing..."it takes a village to raise a kid"...no, it's not "leftist indoctrination" it's a reality. We, humans, are communal social animals who evolved with an extended system of family and community to help with child raising. When I grew up, most mother's did not work. Our community, was a mix of young families, older families, and seniors. There were people around all the time, everyone knew who you were, and kept an eye on things. There was an older couple a few doors down we could go to and talk, there was neighbor with a dog who let us play with the dog. There was community involvement. That's what "it takes a village" means. Raising kids is not meant to be a family in isolation but a family within a community.

What you are talking about is (once again) placing the burden of raising kids on the employer. The employer didn't open up a business so you can work and keep an eye on your kids.

I presented this idea in several other topics, so I'll introduce it again:

The solution to this problem is to provide the female of the family with income while staying at home to raise her children. How do we do that? We pay them.

Mothers can home school, but again, she has to give up her job in order to do that. I believe the average cost to educate children in America today is something like 13K per year per student. So why not let the home school mother educate other kids in the neighborhood?

If we pay that parent 9K per student she takes in, she can educate them while at the same time educating her own children and still maintaining a secondary family income. The taxpayers save 4K per student every year, and everybody wins..........well except the teachers unions which is why we will never have a system like that.

You're talking about the government paying for the female of the family to stay home and raise children?

Downside:
women give up their career - assuming 2 children per family, several years apart at least, 20 years out of the workforce raising and - "home schooling".

SHE is the one who HAS TO give up her job.

Homeschooling is not always the best way to educate kids. In fact, homeschooling is all over the board in terms of success.

$9,000 a year does not replace a career earning $100,000 a year.

You're talking about taxpapers paying for it in addition to paying for schooling for kids in public schools and private schools.

Companies like SAS chose to do it and it's benefited greatly. Why not inact legislation that makes those choices easier and more profitable for companies to do?

I think most women that can't afford to leave work to raise kids are not six figure income earners. They are probably in the 40K a year range. Taking in four students along with her own children would get her close to that missing income.

Where would the money come from? Take it out of public education. Less students means less classes, less teachers, much less administration, and smaller school buildings.

Before we do anything to promote companies providing daycare, we should first look for ways to make it better for them to provide health insurance to their employees once again. Nobody has to have children; it's optional. Everybody has to get healthcare at some point in their lives.

There is something else to consider. What does she do after 20 or more years out of the work force? Out of her career? This was a reality for many women.

She should enjoy her life no matter what she does after raising her children (an honorable thing to do, and good in the Lord's eyes for that which she had made a commitment to do). If decides to get a job doing what ever she wants after that, then who is to stop her or belittle her for it ??

 

[beagle9]

Actually the single family household was having trouble making ends meet well before Reagan. In the 60s and 70s we see women entering the workforce more and more and as we know, that shifts the supply/demand curve. More workers vying for the same jobs slows wage growth and that is a large part of the reason for the stagnation of pay for the last 40-50 years.

. OK, so what is the solution for the kids being brainwashed and raised outside of the family these days ? How does it all get fixed ? How do we bring back choice in which the left and right has since destroyed with the strong arm of government ?

In Japan...a place where we all agree raises educated and civic minded children...the school ( and therefore the government ) plays a major role in child rearing.

The idea that our kids are brainwashed is fucking ridiculous. Figure some shit out, will ya?

Dallas High School Teacher Posts Video "Shooting" Trump With Squirt Gun In Classroom

Middle School Teacher Equates Student's Trump Shirt To A Swastika

'Trump and Hitler Are One in the Same': High School Teacher Draws the President As Nazi Leader

That's opinion. Not brainwashing. Learn something.

Shooting at the President of the United States is an opinion? Try telling that to the SS.

Sharing your opinion AS A TEACHER is indoctrination.

. It sure can be indoctrination, especially in what we are seeing these days. It got so bad that our former idiot and chief tried to force men or boy's into the women's or little girls restrooms, and if the schools didn't comply ? Pathetic.

 

[jasonnfree]

Just adding a thought or two to this thread. We have way more goodies and expectations then in the past. I'm 72, and when I was a kid, not everybody had a phone even. You could actually get by without a home phone, and there were phone booths on every street corner then anyway. Try finding one of those now. Inflation had something to do with more women working, but also, purchases of things not necessary became the rule. You didn't miss what you didn't have. I'm raising a grandkid now, and the goodies I see his friends have, amazes me, since I'm the original cheapskate. I heard that people are not going to Starbucks now because of the ceo saying he will hire only refugees. They ought to do what I do. A Folgers crystals jar gives me 240 six ounce cups for under ten dollars and they can keep their ambiance, or whatever it is that has people making Starbucks so famous. It sure ain't the coffee that does it. At least my opinion for the one or two times I tried Starbucks when I was in a hurry and far from home.

 

[beagle9]

For all who think we are hopeless in making America great again, well just think again because most don't know what the word hopeless really means. This is what hopeless looks like -

 

[beagle9]

After watching that series, then tell me again how we can't do or how we can't afford this and/or how we can't fix things. I'm all ears.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just adding a thought or two to this thread. We have way more goodies and expectations then in the past. I'm 72, and when I was a kid, not everybody had a phone even. You could actually get by without a home phone, and there were phone booths on every street corner then anyway. Try finding one of those now. Inflation had something to do with more women working, but also, purchases of things not necessary became the rule. You didn't miss what you didn't have. I'm raising a grandkid now, and the goodies I see his friends have, amazes me, since I'm the original cheapskate. I heard that people are not going to Starbucks now because of the ceo saying he will hire only refugees. They ought to do what I do. A Folgers crystals jar gives me 240 six ounce cups for under ten dollars and they can keep their ambiance, or whatever it is that has people making Starbucks so famous. It sure ain't the coffee that does it. At least my opinion for the one or two times I tried Starbucks when I was in a hurry and far from home.

That is much of it. What did people have years ago? We had a television set, a radio/ tape player, we were all one-car families, and maybe went out to eat once or twice a year. Vacation? Maybe Dad could afford a camping trip or perhaps a visit to an amusement park once a year.

Today many families eat out three or more times a week. Every person in the family has a cell phone and every adult has a car; nice if you want to see a movie at a drive-in, but they don't have those anymore either and it's not a treat. We have pay-per-view at home for that and watch a dozen or so movies every month.

When you add up all the things we have today, of course it takes two incomes to afford all this stuff. Don't get me wrong, I'm caught up in it as well. If my cable or internet goes down for a day, I think it's the end of the Fn world. I love my 80" HD television set. I love the idea I can start my car from my cell phone anywhere in the country. I love being able to talk to somebody face to face over the internet. That came in real handy at Christmas.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

You say if government were to keep raising taxes as if they would do it without the citizens blessings, and that is exactly what the problem has been. We have a disconnect with our government, where as they have been doing to us as they choose, instead of working side by side with us to solve the issues as should be. Are you one who thinks our government should not be transparent, and to work side by side with us ?? I would happily give up say $40.00 dollars a week out my weekly income if it helped to reform the retirement system, and make it what it should be in this country. The sad thing is that you have corruption in government, and then you have the enablers of the corruption in government, and then you have those who say "hey I got mine, and to hell with you", and then you have the poor working class who have no voice, yet are actually paying for most of the bull crap that goes on.

Well...... people are funny. We all don't think alike. It's like when Commie Care started and my employer wanted to drop our insurance because the cost sky rocketed. I told him I would rather work for a dollar an hour less and keep our insurance than to lose it, and in the future, give up any pay raises to keep up with cost increases. My coworkers felt differently, so I've been without coverage over two years now.

On one hand, Americans complain we don't have good paying monkey jobs. On the other hand, those are the very same people that do their shopping at Walmart and buy mostly foreign made goods. We will complain about the profits some companies make while at the same time, have our retirement plans invested in those (or similar) companies because we want the best return for our money.

So it wouldn't surprise me if people demanded we get out of providing these social programs if government kept taking more from our paychecks.......especially younger people. We as a country are consumed with keeping as much of our money as possible, even if it means harder times later for us or our fellow American down the road.

 

[Divine Wind]

So your excuse is to use the wrecklace actions of a few in order to justify ignoring a huge problem in the nation ?? Then you refuse to address the real problems of promoting family and family values again by way of your cherry picking ? It's an old tactic, but one that is seen through out now. What it comes down to, is that we are dealing with institutionalized greed, the dollar not being worth anything much anymore (cost of living way to high), and if anyone seeks to challenge the greed and immoralism that has created it all, then there is enough cherry picking to put down the conversation in which the conversation should be used to fix the problems, and not to hide the problems by way of this cherry picking used.

No. I'm saying there is a problem as verified by the slow degradation of the Middle Class over the past 35+ years. Millennials cannot expect to command the same pay levels as their parents. It's one reason why many are still living at home even up to age 25.

OTOH, it's not unusual to see a young Texas couple living in a rental trailer home with a $60,000 late model pickup truck parked out front. The maxim of "living within one's means" still applies even in the post-Obama year of 2017.

 

[Divine Wind]

In Japan...a place where we all agree raises educated and civic minded children...the school ( and therefore the government ) plays a major role in child rearing.

The idea that our kids are brainwashed is fucking ridiculous. Figure some shit out, will ya?

It's okay to compare the US to other nations, but you should also make sure you compare all the apples to the apples, not just cherry pick what looks good to you.

American prisons are country clubs compared to Japanese prisons.

Example: Major Differences Between the Japanese and American Legal Systems - Blog | @WashULaw
....
Role of a Lawyer

Compared to the United States, Japan has far fewer lawyers per person (approximately 1 in 4,000versus 1 in 250). These lawyers are joined by large numbers of other functionaries, however. These include:

• Judicial scriveners, who assist with real estate and litigation documentation;

• Administrative scriveners, who are tasked with legal document drafting;

• In-house legal professionals, who may have specialized in legal topics during their undergraduate education and who assist with contract drafting; and

• Civil law notaries, who prepare official documentation or “notarial deeds” which authenticate private documents..

The role of a lawyer in each country is different, although the amount of overlap is increasing. In Japan, lawyers primarily serve as litigators, assisting with court cases, although not having as prominent a role in the proceedings as American lawyers. In addition, in Japan emphasis is placed on written briefs, as opposed to oral argument. In contrast, in the U.S., lawyers take the lead with oral presentations, witness examination and other tasks that may be allocated to judges or others in Japan.

In Japan, lawsuits are generally avoided for cultural reasons (but certain disputes such as patent suits are on the rise), while the United States is known for having an especially litigious populace. In another point of difference for lawyers, bar passage rates in Japan are quite low — as low as 25 percent in recent years — far below those of certain majority-pass jurisdictions in the United States.....

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So your excuse is to use the wrecklace actions of a few in order to justify ignoring a huge problem in the nation ?? Then you refuse to address the real problems of promoting family and family values again by way of your cherry picking ? It's an old tactic, but one that is seen through out now. What it comes down to, is that we are dealing with institutionalized greed, the dollar not being worth anything much anymore (cost of living way to high), and if anyone seeks to challenge the greed and immoralism that has created it all, then there is enough cherry picking to put down the conversation in which the conversation should be used to fix the problems, and not to hide the problems by way of this cherry picking used.

No. I'm saying there is a problem as verified by the slow degradation of the Middle Class over the past 35+ years. Millennials cannot expect to command the same pay levels as their parents. It's one reason why many are still living at home even up to age 25.

OTOH, it's not unusual to see a young Texas couple living in a rental trailer home with a $60,000 late model pickup truck parked out front. The maxim of "living within one's means" still applies even in the post-Obama year of 2017.

My employer hired his son to work with us. We were on dead time a few weeks ago and had a conversation about people his age. He told me he was embarrassed by his fellow millennials. He said he loved his friends and former classmates, but they are lazy as all hell. They don't want to work, and if they do, it has to be a job they approve of that has perfect hours, first shift only, and pays really well. Outside of that, they will just be happy living with their parents forever.

People don't have enough money! Our middle-class is shrinking! Who do we blame???

Not ourselves of course. But how can we maintain a middle-class and income when over one-third of our working age population are not working or looking for a job????

 

[beagle9]

Just adding a thought or two to this thread. We have way more goodies and expectations then in the past. I'm 72, and when I was a kid, not everybody had a phone even. You could actually get by without a home phone, and there were phone booths on every street corner then anyway. Try finding one of those now. Inflation had something to do with more women working, but also, purchases of things not necessary became the rule. You didn't miss what you didn't have. I'm raising a grandkid now, and the goodies I see his friends have, amazes me, since I'm the original cheapskate. I heard that people are not going to Starbucks now because of the ceo saying he will hire only refugees. They ought to do what I do. A Folgers crystals jar gives me 240 six ounce cups for under ten dollars and they can keep their ambiance, or whatever it is that has people making Starbucks so famous. It sure ain't the coffee that does it. At least my opinion for the one or two times I tried Starbucks when I was in a hurry and far from home.

That is much of it. What did people have years ago? We had a television set, a radio/ tape player, we were all one-car families, and maybe went out to eat once or twice a year. Vacation? Maybe Dad could afford a camping trip or perhaps a visit to an amusement park once a year.

Today many families eat out three or more times a week. Every person in the family has a cell phone and every adult has a car; nice if you want to see a movie at a drive-in, but they don't have those anymore either and it's not a treat. We have pay-per-view at home for that and watch a dozen or so movies every month.

When you add up all the things we have today, of course it takes two incomes to afford all this stuff. Don't get me wrong, I'm caught up in it as well. If my cable or internet goes down for a day, I think it's the end of the Fn world. I love my 80" HD television set. I love the idea I can start my car from my cell phone anywhere in the country. I love being able to talk to somebody face to face over the internet. That came in real handy at Christmas.

. We aren't talking about you or those who you describe here Ray. We are talking about the thousands of young married couples who are working two common jobs, and then having to rely upon the nessesities in life, even after all is paid at the end of the month they sometimes still fall short. Their children end up as casualties caught up in a system in which they have no way out of for several years or more, and this even if these young parents would want the best options for their children that are available, but yet they can't afford even the nessesities sometimes or even the prescriptions that they had to get for a sickness that may have struck the children or maybe the repair on the one car they share together or the super high light bills they were surprised with due to a very cold winter, or gas jumping like it did up to $2.50 a gallon causing the fill up to then cost $75.00 dollars every 4 days instead of the $40.00 dollars it was costing them before.

Also what about the dog that has to go to the vet where the neighbors dog fought with him, and almost kills him without you knowing exactly what happened or what about Obama Care forcing young couples to pay a fine for something they can't afford or what about the kid getting sick, and the wife has to miss work because he or she is not allowed to go to the school or day care as long as the kid is sick ? Farther and farther behind it all goes until people finally realize that starting families the old fashion way is no longer American friendly anymore in America.

There are many more situations that young people struggle with until they finally get seniority at their jobs, and the money gets better over time. Meanwhile the wolves lay in wait in public schools to brainwash the vulnerable children coming from struggling households, and are poised to start telling them how their way is the better way, and if they follow along things will be so much better as according to them.

Then you have time periods where MTV and all the deplorables are bombarding them while the parents fight to make ends meet, and don't actually know what their kids are being exposed to anymore. The latest craziness going on after this election is proof of what the liberal agenda had accomplished over a long period of time now on the youth. Then they talk about how people just aren't working enough ??? Good grief. Where does the stay at home mom wanting to raise her kids fit in to the equation anymore ?

 

[beagle9]

You say if government were to keep raising taxes as if they would do it without the citizens blessings, and that is exactly what the problem has been. We have a disconnect with our government, where as they have been doing to us as they choose, instead of working side by side with us to solve the issues as should be. Are you one who thinks our government should not be transparent, and to work side by side with us ?? I would happily give up say $40.00 dollars a week out my weekly income if it helped to reform the retirement system, and make it what it should be in this country. The sad thing is that you have corruption in government, and then you have the enablers of the corruption in government, and then you have those who say "hey I got mine, and to hell with you", and then you have the poor working class who have no voice, yet are actually paying for most of the bull crap that goes on.

Well...... people are funny. We all don't think alike. It's like when Commie Care started and my employer wanted to drop our insurance because the cost sky rocketed. I told him I would rather work for a dollar an hour less and keep our insurance than to lose it, and in the future, give up any pay raises to keep up with cost increases. My coworkers felt differently, so I've been without coverage over two years now.

On one hand, Americans complain we don't have good paying monkey jobs. On the other hand, those are the very same people that do their shopping at Walmart and buy mostly foreign made goods. We will complain about the profits some companies make while at the same time, have our retirement plans invested in those (or similar) companies because we want the best return for our money.

So it wouldn't surprise me if people demanded we get out of providing these social programs if government kept taking more from our paychecks.......especially younger people. We as a country are consumed with keeping as much of our money as possible, even if it means harder times later for us or our fellow American down the road.

. So you are actually blaming your co-workers for you not having insurance ?? Really Ray ? Do you realize that the plan you would have gotten only pays around a 60/40 or 70/30 ratio, and the deductable would have been out of this world Ray ?? You might be glad that they led you in the right direction on that one Ray. Now why haven't you purchased a plan on the ACA Ray ?? Oh wait, it's because the plans aren't any good on that one either are they Ray ? So you pay your fine and pray huh Ray ? You satisfied with that Ray ? No you aren't, but you work to kill people's causes on here, and protect the elite class with your rehtoric ?? How does that work ??

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So you are actually blaming your co-workers for you not having insurance ?? Really Ray ? Do you realize that the plan you would have gotten only pays around a 60/40 or 70/30 ratio, and the deductable would have been out of this world Ray ?? You might be glad that they led you in the right direction on that one Ray. Now why haven't you purchased a plan on the ACA Ray ?? Oh wait, it's because the plans aren't any good on that one either are they Ray ? So you pay your fine and pray huh Ray ? You satisfied with that Ray ? No you aren't, but you work to kill people's causes on here, and protect the elite class with your rehtoric ?? How does that work ??

Simple, the Commie Care plans are worthless and unaffordable.

I just got done wrangling with those half-wits at Commie Care. To keep my doctors and clinic that I've been going to my entire life, the best plan they could offer me would cost me over 20% of my net pay. It came with a $7,000 deductible and a $7,100 out of pocket. It didn't include prescriptions, eye care or dental. It came with a $50.00 doctor copay.

They had a plan that was a bit cheaper, but I would have to change all my doctors and go to a less than standard hospital, and again, with the same deductibles and out of pocket.

The plan we had at work wasn't great, but it didn't cost us anything either. Since it was a benefit, we didn't have to pay taxes on it. It had a $3,000 deductible, but also had some minor prescription coverage. No matter what, in comparison to Commie Care, it was a dream come true. At least I was able to go to my doctor and hospital of choice.

I don't blame my coworkers, I blame Commie Care, because without it, my employer would have been virtually forced to keep our coverage. After all, until Commie Care came along, I had coverage my entire life.

Bottom line: I would have to pay out of my nose to have an insurance plan I would likely never use, and still try to keep up with my prescriptions and medial payments. I can't work simply to pay all my medical costs. I have to eat you know, and my prescriptions cost me around $250.00 a month. What else could I do????

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Just adding a thought or two to this thread. We have way more goodies and expectations then in the past. I'm 72, and when I was a kid, not everybody had a phone even. You could actually get by without a home phone, and there were phone booths on every street corner then anyway. Try finding one of those now. Inflation had something to do with more women working, but also, purchases of things not necessary became the rule. You didn't miss what you didn't have. I'm raising a grandkid now, and the goodies I see his friends have, amazes me, since I'm the original cheapskate. I heard that people are not going to Starbucks now because of the ceo saying he will hire only refugees. They ought to do what I do. A Folgers crystals jar gives me 240 six ounce cups for under ten dollars and they can keep their ambiance, or whatever it is that has people making Starbucks so famous. It sure ain't the coffee that does it. At least my opinion for the one or two times I tried Starbucks when I was in a hurry and far from home.

That is much of it. What did people have years ago? We had a television set, a radio/ tape player, we were all one-car families, and maybe went out to eat once or twice a year. Vacation? Maybe Dad could afford a camping trip or perhaps a visit to an amusement park once a year.

Today many families eat out three or more times a week. Every person in the family has a cell phone and every adult has a car; nice if you want to see a movie at a drive-in, but they don't have those anymore either and it's not a treat. We have pay-per-view at home for that and watch a dozen or so movies every month.

When you add up all the things we have today, of course it takes two incomes to afford all this stuff. Don't get me wrong, I'm caught up in it as well. If my cable or internet goes down for a day, I think it's the end of the Fn world. I love my 80" HD television set. I love the idea I can start my car from my cell phone anywhere in the country. I love being able to talk to somebody face to face over the internet. That came in real handy at Christmas.

. We aren't talking about you or those who you describe here Ray. We are talking about the thousands of young married couples who are working two common jobs, and then having to rely upon the nessesities in life, even after all is paid at the end of the month they sometimes still fall short. Their children end up as casualties caught up in a system in which they have no way out of for several years or more, and this even if these young parents would want the best options for their children that are available, but yet they can't afford even the nessesities sometimes or even the prescriptions that they had to get for a sickness that may have struck the children or maybe the repair on the one car they share together or the super high light bills they were surprised with due to a very cold winter, or gas jumping like it did up to $2.50 a gallon causing the fill up to then cost $75.00 dollars every 4 days instead of the $40.00 dollars it was costing them before.

Also what about the dog that has to go to the vet where the neighbors dog fought with him, and almost kills him without you knowing exactly what happened or what about Obama Care forcing young couples to pay a fine for something they can't afford or what about the kid getting sick, and the wife has to miss work because he or she is not allowed to go to the school or day care as long as the kid is sick ? Farther and farther behind it all goes until people finally realize that starting families the old fashion way is no longer American friendly anymore in America.

There are many more situations that young people struggle with until they finally get seniority at their jobs, and the money gets better over time. Meanwhile the wolves lay in wait in public schools to brainwash the vulnerable children coming from struggling households, and are poised to start telling them how their way is the better way, and if they follow along things will be so much better as according to them.

Then you have time periods where MTV and all the deplorables are bombarding them while the parents fight to make ends meet, and don't actually know what their kids are being exposed to anymore. The latest craziness going on after this election is proof of what the liberal agenda had accomplished over a long period of time now on the youth. Then they talk about how people just aren't working enough ??? Good grief. Where does the stay at home mom wanting to raise her kids fit in to the equation anymore ?

As I stated before, children are an option and not a necessity. I never had children mostly for that reason. I didn't want the expense and responsibility. I'm in no way blessed, everybody has the same options that I did when I was younger.

 

[Divine Wind]

So your excuse is to use the wrecklace actions of a few in order to justify ignoring a huge problem in the nation ?? Then you refuse to address the real problems of promoting family and family values again by way of your cherry picking ? It's an old tactic, but one that is seen through out now. What it comes down to, is that we are dealing with institutionalized greed, the dollar not being worth anything much anymore (cost of living way to high), and if anyone seeks to challenge the greed and immoralism that has created it all, then there is enough cherry picking to put down the conversation in which the conversation should be used to fix the problems, and not to hide the problems by way of this cherry picking used.

No. I'm saying there is a problem as verified by the slow degradation of the Middle Class over the past 35+ years. Millennials cannot expect to command the same pay levels as their parents. It's one reason why many are still living at home even up to age 25.

OTOH, it's not unusual to see a young Texas couple living in a rental trailer home with a $60,000 late model pickup truck parked out front. The maxim of "living within one's means" still applies even in the post-Obama year of 2017.

My employer hired his son to work with us. We were on dead time a few weeks ago and had a conversation about people his age. He told me he was embarrassed by his fellow millennials. He said he loved his friends and former classmates, but they are lazy as all hell. They don't want to work, and if they do, it has to be a job they approve of that has perfect hours, first shift only, and pays really well. Outside of that, they will just be happy living with their parents forever.

People don't have enough money! Our middle-class is shrinking! Who do we blame???

Not ourselves of course. But how can we maintain a middle-class and income when over one-third of our working age population are not working or looking for a job????

All part of the problem. While the Middle Class has degraded, moving us closer to the lower income class, we're also victims of our own success.

Not to derail the topic, but the fact remains I support abortion because we have too many "lazy as all hell" citizens.