Harder for Americans to Rise From Lower Rungs

The United States has been going backwards since Bush got elected into office. But even then the US wasn't that great at people rising. Plenty of countries are better at that aspect.

 

If you even get the chance. In that large numbers its clear its the system.

So? Its millions we are talking about, large enough for comparison.

LMAO complete BS, europe footed the bill and suffered during and after WW2 several decades of europe buying USA weapons have more then repayd anything the USA ever spent in europe.

 

LOL!!!!!

US troops and a nuclear umbrella are what kept Europe free. Europe kept her own arms industry.

 

The heavily propagandized "wealth gap problem" is an oft parroted narrative advanced by book cooking progressive elites...

The US Census Bureau ignores approximately 96% of the rapidly approaching $Trillion per year in federal and state welfare transfers to the "poor". If the entire amount were configured into their income calculations, this "dangerous disparity in wealth" would narrow significantly.

Know this...if a modern "Democrat" (collectivist) is discussing any aspect of the economy, you can be rest assured they're one of two things....completely ignorant on the subject... or lying through their teeth to elicit sympathy and support for their authoritarian, social and economic "justice" agenda.

 

What really amazing me is it took 'researchers' to figure out that climbing the rungs during a recession is hard. Our education system is an utter failure, that should be common sense...

 

I don't think youve actually met anyone on welfare. There is exactly one group of people for whom the incentive structure benefits welfare rather than work... Uneducated single parents with no extended family support. In their case, working makes way less sense than welfare during their child's early years. Everyone else--literally, everyone else--has good reason to want to work.

Uless you're just so cynical that you admit that for the poor, experience and hard work won't help them into the next quintle. I mean, there is an argument that there is such low social mobility that the incentive to work at these entry level jobs is reduced. But to blame that on welfare is crazy.

 

I'm a volunteer for UnitedWay in my area and I put on 40 hrs of my time to do free income tax services for low income families every year. You don't know me, please refrain from making any reference.

And to think the society as a whole has to be constantly responsible for individual problems is ridiculous. There is no FREE lunch. Welfare program is a burden for the society, it's a form of redistrubution of wealth from one group to the other. It promotes unproductive & laziness. In the long run, it creates a massive of population that totally depends on the government.

Just look at forever extended unemployment benefit as an example, it makes no sense to work for McDonald and earn $8/hr = $320/wk while you can just pick up a check of $400/wk from the goverment. If that's not an incentive NOT to work, I don't know what is...

 

Whine, whine, whine. Petty first world problems. Nobody today has any sense of perspective. They have no appreciation for all of the things they do have because society teaches them to only focus on what they don't have. The richest people in America didn't have cell phones 50 years ago. Now countless people on welfare have them. The standard of living in America has consistently gone up as the decades have gone by. And yet none of the "have nots" want to acknowledge this because they have been lulled into the comfortable delusion that life is supposed to be easy. There are still places in the world today where people do not even know where their next meal is coming from. They have primitive housing, no air conditioning, and no running water. If your biggest problem is climbing up the socio-economic ladder, you should be grateful everyday that your problems are so petty.

So cry all you want about a widening wealth gap, but you only sound like a spoiled rich kid who is ungrateful for what he has and always wants more.

 

I'll vouch for this. I was on unemployment at one point, and the longer you're on it, the more you lose your drive to get off of it. After awhile, you get settled into a groove and you lose your ambition. It's human nature to only exert as much energy as your environment demands. So even if you don't totally quit looking for work, the intensity with which you continue looking does diminish over time. Most people will fall into this trap unless an outside force lights a fire under their ass. Anyone that thinks people will stay motivated when they don't have to is lying to themselves.

 

Progressive/liberal don't want to work for anything.

They want FREE meal
They want FREE housing
They want FREE healthcare
They want FREE education

And now they want FREE social advancement. Life is wonderful!

 

None of this makes welfare wrong.

No, it doesn't. That's why most people who receive welfare get off it fairly quickly.

Welfare does not create a dependency. People only get on welfare when they are dependent on others anyway. All it does is provide an opportunity for dependent people to become independent.

That only makes sense if you ignore long-term hopes. If you think that taking a minimum wage job can lead to higher than minimum wage jobs in the future, it makes sense to work rather than live on welfare. The only way your argument makes sense is if the person believes that, even through experience and hard work, they cannot better their lives. Maybe that's true, and they can't, but that suggests a deeper social problem that isn't caused by welfare.

And, I would point out, this is just an argument to increase the minimum wage.

 

Of course it does not. If I can get it for FREE, why wouldn't I want it.

As of today, there are 47,500,000 folks are on foodstamp and counting, that represents 15% of US population. Tell me how many of them will get off it quickly?

You're somebody else dependent the moment you ask for help. To think otherwise is hopelessly naive. But by liberal logic, there are always someone else is responsible for your problem.

Over extended unemployment benefits is a backdoor bailout for banks. Most if not all of benefits are used to be paid toward home mortgage. That's the only reason why the government is so reluctantly cut it off. Government and its Wall Street buddies go hand in hand.

How much you boss decides to pay you based on your skills and capabilities, NOT by government intervention. If government increases minimum wage, more businesses will outsource their operations to low cost producing oversea countries. It's very simple concept.

 

I know people who have moved up, some to multimillionaires. There was one catch that libeals don't wish to deal with. They all had to work.

 

They assume Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, Mark Zuckerberg all born billionaire ya know.

Maybe my progressive/liberal friends can learn something from our founding fathers

"I am for doing good to the poor, but I differ in opinion of the means. I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it. In my youth I travelled much, and I observed in different countries, that the more public provisions were made for the poor, the less they provided for themselves, and of course became poorer. And, on the contrary, the less was done for them, the more they did for themselves, and became richer."

Benjamin Franklin

 

I agree with you by what we are taught is to want more and morw in this materialistic society but that's how our corporations make their vast sums of money, we need to be a consumer society for the system to continue and if adverts continue to focus on what we don't have and why we need the latest smartphone when the last one was perfectly fine nothing will change. I don't see politicians from either side messing with it.

 

How does one raise children on flipping burgers? Skilled jobs used to be taught in high schools, then corporations got to charge an arm and a leg after high school graduation to do it.

Why is it all right to have our skills jobs overseas? There went the income that bought the goods that drove up our GDP and made us a wealthy nation.

 

The government should inact a program, that in 2 years, you get a $25k bonus (untaxable) check from the government if you in fact made more than $30k and less than $250k in taxable income.

That will get some bums off their butts.

 

Do you complain when TOYOTA and HONDA opens shop in the US and hire hundred thousand of American?

And oh, US exporters are selling products and service worth $1.8T annually, maybe they should stop provide goods and services for their trading partners in oversea countries, wondering how many people will get layoff if that happens, my guess is they could handout as many as 1 million pink slips for folks in the US. But by liberal logic, that's patriotism and it is a good thing.

 

What if we simply quit paying them to not work?

 

First, let me ask you where do you get $25 thousand from?

Second, there are already welfare program incorporate in income tax law, it's called EIC, refundable child tax credit, retirement savings credit...just name a few. Any filers meet certain criteria, they get "welfare" credit from the IRS.

How much progressive/liberal think enough is enough? Or would they always ask for more? and more? and more?

 

You can't raise a family flipping hamburgers.

Mad Conservative never said you could.

It's mean't to be a low-paying job for teenagers and adults who are down on their luck and just passing through.

The point we were discussing is the poor quality of the lib public schools that under-educates so many American kids and allows foreign countries to overtake us.

 

BS, millions of european troops kept ussr at bay, just look at the numbers.

And the european defense industry was large bombed to bits after ww2 it never recovered, europe bough massivly USA weaponry on wich the USA made trillions.