What makes arguing with liberals so frustrating #1

what fantasy world do you live in where a house or apartment costs less then $750 a month?

Not everywhere is So. Cal.

You couldn't get an apartment in San Bernardino (Cheapest / crappiest city in Southern California) for that - but other parts of the country are apparently different.
 
this coming from the guy who claims i lie about everything...... whats to say you dont lie as well.
youre probably unemployed and on welfare
I continue to laugh at you, out loud.

You're a joke, son -- a lying, intellectually dishonest snot-nosed self-entitled child of upper-middle-class parents who only emerges from his basement bedroom once a week to take a shower - maybe.
again coming from the guy who backs up nothing of what he says on here. name your business? what do you sell?

you lie about everything and debate like a child... when you want to come back to the adult table let me know. until then spread your lies elsewhere.
Awww.....truth hurts, doesn't it? You arent going cry now, are you?

Sill laughing at you, son. Keep it up.

Tell me again about apartments under $750/mo existing only in fantasyland.
:lol:
 
Not if you're head of household and have kids in the house.
I have 2 kids, I pay about $130 in taxes each month.

Single, no kids..yeah, you're going to pay a LOT. But then your grocery bill won't be $400 either. And you don't need $750 a month digs.

:eusa_angel:

We live in VERY different worlds.

I don't walk out of Sam's Club without dropping $500. My mortgage is significantly more then $750. In my area, you couldn't get a bachelor pad for less than $1,200 a month.

So you don't live there unless you make a good income, right? It's as simple as that. When our daughter lived in Santa Cruz she wanted us to move out to California. (It's a good thing we didn't do that as she now lives in a D.C. suburb.) We quickly realized that we couldn't afford that. Her home there appraised at near $1 million. You could buy the same place here for $150k or so. And again the house here that appraises for say $200k, you can buy for under $100k where my son lives. It's all relative.

And that illustrates too why the federal government's one-size-fits-all programs are so unrealistic and so often ineffective.
 
And that illustrates too why the federal government's one-size-fits-all programs are so unrealistic and so often ineffective.

Which is why a smaller, more localized government approach to a lot of our most pressing issues like education reform and welfare reform would work a lot better, in my opinion.
 
I continue to laugh at you, out loud.

You're a joke, son -- a lying, intellectually dishonest snot-nosed self-entitled child of upper-middle-class parents who only emerges from his basement bedroom once a week to take a shower - maybe.
again coming from the guy who backs up nothing of what he says on here. name your business? what do you sell?

you lie about everything and debate like a child... when you want to come back to the adult table let me know. until then spread your lies elsewhere.
Awww.....truth hurts, doesn't it? You arent going cry now, are you?

Sill laughing at you, son. Keep it up.

Tell me again about apartments under $750/mo existing only in fantasyland.
:lol:
there were 15 apartment on the website, none of which were technically inside "Chicago". like i said again, the burbs is not Chicago. closest one was over a mile outside the city.


and when it says starting at $500 and going to $800, that doesnt mean the apt is actually $500. but then again someone with average intelligence would know that.

how far up your ass is that head of yours :fu:
 
So you don't live there unless you make a good income, right?

You have a good income, or you're Mexican with a half-dozen families in the same apartment.

It's as simple as that. When our daughter lived in Santa Cruz she wanted us to move out to California. (It's a good thing we didn't do that as she now lives in a D.C. suburb.) We quickly realized that we couldn't afford that. Her home there appraised at near $1 million. You could buy the same place here for $150k or so. And again the house here that appraises for say $200k, you can buy for under $100k where my son lives. It's all relative.

Good point.

Funny that Chicago was mentioned. I almost got moved to Bloomingdale, a suburb of Chicago, a decade ago. At that time, the houses were just as expensive there as in California. But things are relative, as you say. I have a third of an acre, which is a big yard for my area. Those Bloomingdale houses had about 2 acres on average.

And that illustrates too why the federal government's one-size-fits-all programs are so unrealistic and so often ineffective.

True.
 
Last edited:
again coming from the guy who backs up nothing of what he says on here. name your business? what do you sell?

you lie about everything and debate like a child... when you want to come back to the adult table let me know. until then spread your lies elsewhere.
Awww.....truth hurts, doesn't it? You arent going cry now, are you?

Sill laughing at you, son. Keep it up.

Tell me again about apartments under $750/mo existing only in fantasyland.
:lol:
there were 15 apartment on the website. none of which were technically inside "Chicago". like i said again, the burbs is not Chicago. closest one was over a mile outside the city.
You're a joke and a liar, son - and apparently have no intention of ever changing.
As such, you shall no longer waste my time.
 
Last edited:
And that illustrates too why the federal government's one-size-fits-all programs are so unrealistic and so often ineffective.

Which is why a smaller, more localized government approach to a lot of our most pressing issues like education reform and welfare reform would work a lot better, in my opinion.

Absolutely. For instance, the concept of Head Start is excellent. It addresses the cultural disadvantage for children born into poverty. But as a large one-size-fits-all government program, the evidence is now in. Within a year or two of participation in Head Start, there is no noticable difference between disadvantaged children who participate in Head Start and those who do not.

The program is eating up a lot of taxpayer dollars without providing much, if any, benefit for the dollars expended.

Contrast that to the days in which neither the federal government nor the state provided pre-school or kindergarten education for any children, but private kindergartens, Montesorri schools, and other educational opportunities were prevalent almost everywhere. When they started First Grade, the children who participated in those private programs were head and shoulders advanced over the kids who did not. No one-size-fits-all federal program can hold a candle to a locally based program in which gifted teachers can tailor their efforts according to the needs of the kids.

So wouldn't the sensible practical thing be to rethink Head Start and consider whether a different approach is the way to go?

After some prodding, yesterday the Obama administration released the long-overdue first grade evaluation of the federal Head Start program. As expected, the results show that the $7 billion per year program provides little benefit to children – and great expense to taxpayers.

The evaluation, which was mandated by Congress during the 1998 reauthorization of the program, found little impact on student well-being. After collecting data on more than 5,000 three and four-year-old children randomly assigned to either a Head Start or a non Head Start control group, the Department of Health and Human Services found “few sustained benefits”. From the report:

In sum, this report finds that providing access to Head Start has benefits for both 3-year-olds and 4-year-olds in the cognitive, health, and parenting domains, and for 3-year-olds in the social-emotional domain. However, the benefits of access to Head Start at age four are largely absent by 1st grade for the program population as a whole. For 3-year-olds, there are few sustained benefits, although access to the program may lead to improved parent-child relationships through 1st grade…
http://blog.heritage.org/2010/01/14...uation-shows-no-lasting-benefit-for-children/
 
Last edited:

Victorville is out in the High Desert. I suppose you could live cheap there. It would be pretty hard to commute to LA from there.

Life is hard.

This is where you have to consider your options and *make choices*. How important is it to live in a city where you can't afford to put a roof over your head, and where you apparently aren't in high enough demand to make enough money to pay for it?

Some locales are expensive. Generally poor people don't live in the middle of them.
 
Life is hard.

This is where you have to consider your options and *make choices*. How important is it to live in a city where you can't afford to put a roof over your head, and where you apparently aren't in high enough demand to make enough money to pay for it?

Some locales are expensive. Generally poor people don't live in the middle of them.

I understand. As I said, I live in a very different world.
 
I really have no idea - I just did a search and found apartments.
:dunno:

I haven't lived in an apartment in 30+ years, I'm no expert. But my daughter can't find one for less than $1,200 in the decent part of Riverside - single bedroom.
That's the thing, see...

You have basement-dwelling, snot-nosed, never-had-a-job dumbass kids like Syphon who defines ‘living wage’ as ‘that which would allow for my chosen standard of living’, when in fact the things people like him define as 'necessities' are, as you and I duscussed, luxuries.

Point being that inexpensive housng exists, and so 'living wage' need not be indexed to that $1200/mo apartment in the nice part of Riverside.
 
Last edited:
I really have no idea - I just did a search and found apartments.
:dunno:

I haven't lived in an apartment in 30+ years, I'm no expert. But my daughter can't find one for less than $1,200 in the decent part of Riverside - single bedroom.

Ditto for my daughter who lived in Palo Alto when she was in college. A tiny, and I do mean tiny, one bedroom unfurnished and not all that nice walk up with no amenities other than basic heat and plumbing was $1,100. She could have lived out away from Palo Alto for a lot less, but she was within walking or bicycle distance of work and school in that apartment so toughed it out with a regular day job plus whatever odd jobs she could get (she is a great blues bass player and also hired out as a tutor and taught some college classes) to make ends meet. Fortunately she is a smart gal and had earned a full scholarship to get her Masters and PhD or her education wouldn't have been possible for her on top of the other expenses.
 
I really have no idea - I just did a search and found apartments.
:dunno:

I haven't lived in an apartment in 30+ years, I'm no expert. But my daughter can't find one for less than $1,200 in the decent part of Riverside - single bedroom.
That's the thing, see...

You have basement-dwelling, snot-nosed, never-had-a-job dumbass kids like Syphon who defines ‘living wage’ as ‘that which would allow for my chosen standard of living’, when in fact the things people like him define as 'necessities' are, as you and I duscussed, luxuries.

Point being that inexpensive housng exists, and so 'living wage' need not be indexed to that $1200/mo apartment in the nice part of Riverside.
this coming from a stuck up douche bags like yourself who leeches off welfare and food stamps because your lack of education prohibits you from holding a real job.

hey i hear mcdonalds is hiring, maybe youll qualify to mop the floors.
 
I really have no idea - I just did a search and found apartments.
:dunno:

I haven't lived in an apartment in 30+ years, I'm no expert. But my daughter can't find one for less than $1,200 in the decent part of Riverside - single bedroom.

Ditto for my daughter who lived in Palo Alto when she was in college. A tiny, and I do mean tiny, one bedroom unfurnished and not all that nice walk up with no amenities other than basic heat and plumbing was $1,100. She could have lived out away from Palo Alto for a lot less, but she was within walking or bicycle distance of work and school in that apartment so toughed it out with a regular day job plus whatever odd jobs she could get (she is a great blues bass player and also hired out as a tutor and taught some college classes) to make ends meet. Fortunately she is a smart gal and had earned a full scholarship to get her Masters and PhD or her education wouldn't have been possible for her on top of the other expenses.
according to M14 she should have lived in the slums and sacrificed until the made "real money"
 
I haven't lived in an apartment in 30+ years, I'm no expert. But my daughter can't find one for less than $1,200 in the decent part of Riverside - single bedroom.

Ditto for my daughter who lived in Palo Alto when she was in college. A tiny, and I do mean tiny, one bedroom unfurnished and not all that nice walk up with no amenities other than basic heat and plumbing was $1,100. She could have lived out away from Palo Alto for a lot less, but she was within walking or bicycle distance of work and school in that apartment so toughed it out with a regular day job plus whatever odd jobs she could get (she is a great blues bass player and also hired out as a tutor and taught some college classes) to make ends meet. Fortunately she is a smart gal and had earned a full scholarship to get her Masters and PhD or her education wouldn't have been possible for her on top of the other expenses.
according to M14 she should have lived in the slums and sacrificed until the made "real money"

No shit.

That's called "paying your dues". This is what real people in the real world do. You start at the bottom and work your way up.

If somehow you are born up and upon adulthood find you cannot support yourself in the manner to which you are apparently accustomed, guess what? DOWNSIZE. Just because you've been supported by someone else all your life doesn't mean we OWE it to you to support you.

What a little punk.
 

Forum List

Back
Top