|
Post by osha on Apr 22, 2018 3:31:39 GMT -7
I get charged on this forum with being very persistent. And I am and I am glad I carry this title. We can all come up with a statistic about a relative that bucks the trend. I have an uncle who owns a couple semi trucks who earned about a quarter million dollars last year. But companies are even taking his own industry and created automated trucks that will diminish that possibility for future generations. I even worked in drywall when I was young on new construction. Started at 13 or so and learned how to hang and tape and finish. Had my own crew by the time I was 16. Talked to someone doing the same a couple months ago and they told me they are being squeezed to death and are very close to having to find something else as new construction has slowed and remodeling in my area is very rare as people are just trying to live. I talk a lot about new generations being screwed. Here is about our wage stagnation problem: www.epi.org/publication/charting-wage-stagnation/Here is about median wages since 1990: www.statista.com/statistics/200838/median-household-income-in-the-united-states/I could post about the cost of education rising since the 60s and I would be kicking a dead horse. Or, I could write about the cost of insurance rising since the 60s and I would be again kicking a dead horse. I could write about how Reagan really kicked the "middle class" in the face by instituting trickle down economics, but I again would be kicking a dead horse. I could write about the costs of everything rising since the 60s and I would still be kicking a dead horse. When are people going to understand that they enjoyed a hay day all while policy has shifted about all the income to the top 10 percent? When are we going to step back and say that we worry about future generations and care about the world we are leaving them? We can all complain about millennials and I even complain about their liberal ideas. But we cannot hide from the fact that as a generation they have it much harder then generations before them. And all the ignoring we do right now just passes the buck to my children who are not even benefiting from the economy the way these older generations did. This is a real problem and ignoring this problem because of few success stories does not make the broader problem vanish. EDIT: Also wanted to add this as I just saw this and it pertains to the issues: younginvincibles.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/Financial-Health-of-Young-America-update.pdf
|
|
|
Post by John Doe on Apr 22, 2018 7:23:24 GMT -7
Sure Trickle down shows short term gains but in the long run it doesn't work which is why they need to keep lowering taxes which keeps showing short term gains while creating huge deficits and debt and preventing us from servicing our debt load and doing necessary things such as infrastructure repair and upgrades.
|
|
|
Post by hoofie on Apr 22, 2018 10:30:10 GMT -7
The 60s were 50 years ago. Look at how technology has changed every day life. Imagine, when living in the 60s looking back 50 years to the 19-teens, World War I, Few motor vehicles, electricity was a luxury, especially in rural areas. Go back another 50 years to the 1860s. The American civil war, no cars, no electricity.
The 60s were 50 years ago. Let it go. Use the tools and knowledge that the current technology requires. We no longer need vacuum tubes or CRTs to make televisions. We no longer need as many buggy whips, candles, or oil lamps. Incandescent bulbs are now LEDs, granted, more expensive but last 10 times a long and consume 95% less energy.
Why do colleges provide student loans to English majors? Other than teaching, what use is this field to our economy? Why do we need art majors? Seems to me that if an artist has talent he doesn't need a $60,000 title to go with it. Look at what universities are turning out! The days of high pay for brainless work are long gone.
Embrace technology. It's a part of everything we do. We carry cell phones with more computing power than the Apollo ships that landed on the moon. Computers run traffic lights, hospitals, warehouse inventories, truck scheduling, nearly everything. Nearly every business has a software program to maximize their efficiency.
And yes, government must get itself under control. It's the largest legal Ponzi scheme ever.
|
|
|
Post by osha on Apr 22, 2018 12:12:40 GMT -7
Sure Trickle down shows short term gains but in the long run it doesn't work which is why they need to keep lowering taxes which keeps showing short term gains while creating huge deficits and debt and preventing us from servicing our debt load and doing necessary things such as infrastructure repair and upgrades. Very true. And the more tax breaks they give, the more they get to complain about shortages that "help" solve what the rich create. Take less from the top and give more to the top in the form of legislation that helps the top. All while the top creates a need for food stamps and such. Shift the blame for creating a need from the rich to personal failure, the right wing game.
|
|
|
Post by osha on Apr 22, 2018 12:18:36 GMT -7
The 60s were 50 years ago. Look at how technology has changed every day life. Imagine, when living in the 60s looking back 50 years to the 19-teens, World War I, Few motor vehicles, electricity was a luxury, especially in rural areas. Go back another 50 years to the 1860s. The American civil war, no cars, no electricity. The 60s were 50 years ago. Let it go. Use the tools and knowledge that the current technology requires. We no longer need vacuum tubes or CRTs to make televisions. We no longer need as many buggy whips, candles, or oil lamps. Incandescent bulbs are now LEDs, granted, more expensive but last 10 times a long and consume 95% less energy. Why do colleges provide student loans to English majors? Other than teaching, what use is this field to our economy? Why do we need art majors? Seems to me that if an artist has talent he doesn't need a $60,000 title to go with it. Look at what universities are turning out! The days of high pay for brainless work are long gone. Embrace technology. It's a part of everything we do. We carry cell phones with more computing power than the Apollo ships that landed on the moon. Computers run traffic lights, hospitals, warehouse inventories, truck scheduling, nearly everything. Nearly every business has a software program to maximize their efficiency. And yes, government must get itself under control. It's the largest legal Ponzi scheme ever. The 60s were a time of growth and this was just part of living. All while wages have remained stagnant since the 80s. We still need people to work crap jobs. Technology is not solving all the problems in the world and really, who is your generation of success telling younger generations to do what YOU want? You had all the choices in the world and now you want to dictate a life to younger people? It is very easy to sit on a throne and tell those below you how to act. And from all the statistics, that is what is going on. Choices bothers the right when they don't have the choice. This shows in many ways.
|
|
|
Post by hoofie on Apr 22, 2018 13:02:40 GMT -7
This is where I blame the unions for driving those high paying jobs overseas. That's exactly what happened. I was there. Greed topped by greed, the unions pushed management off a fiscal cliff.
Look at my post that you quoted. There is not an "I" or "me" anywhere to be seen, yet you state that it's all about me? Also, you like to blame "the right" for everything, yet I mentioned no political party in my post.
You are reading through a mind altering filter that hates success. If you never try to shoot the moon you will never hit it. That's what makes debating haters difficult. Some folks learn by the success of others. Bring us a viable solution, maybe we'll talk some more.
Ciao.
|
|
|
Post by osha on Apr 22, 2018 13:46:45 GMT -7
This is where I blame the unions for driving those high paying jobs overseas. That's exactly what happened. I was there. Greed topped by greed, the unions pushed management off a fiscal cliff. Look at my post that you quoted. There is not an "I" or "me" anywhere to be seen, yet you state that it's all about me? Also, you like to blame "the right" for everything, yet I mentioned no political party in my post. You are reading through a mind altering filter that hates success. If you never try to shoot the moon you will never hit it. That's what makes debating haters difficult. Some folks learn by the success of others. Bring us a viable solution, maybe we'll talk some more. Ciao. I don't hate the right per se. I do own guns and that makes me align with the right. I am also a centrist and I believe in self accountability to a point. When the right keeps pushing tax breaks and hurting a part of the people by using legislation and things like that, I don't agree. When the right does not see the cause of problems and blames the problems on the working poor, I don't agree. I don't agree with rising costs while hurting the working poor while wages are not near following inflation. I blame a generation or two where this world is now. Sadly, you and I both belong to these generations. I blame the boomers more then the Xers which I am. The boomers gave us Reagan which started many of the problems we have today. I blame the boomers for complaining about the millennials while the boomers grew up in a world with a job in every which way you looked. Not to even mention the boomers supporting the fact that income disparity is so high right now and believing in old ideas that promote such falsities. Look back in time when the rich only made 20 times what the average worker made. In that time it was easy for the average person to see the top and work towards that top. The media companies were owned by a bunch of people and things were growing and continued to grow. Now we have about all the income going to the top and what is left of the "true" old idea "middle class" shrinking. The rich are buying up everything and the "middle class" has no chance of taking on the types of things they do. The media companies, cable, compete with Jeff Bezos? these things are out of touch and retail as it was at one time is failing. My grand kids will never know what it is like to walk through a mall let alone know what it is like to get honest news from the MSM. Then we have the never ending world policing that the right mainly supports and placing that burden on my kids and what someday will be my grand kids. So yes, someone is to blame. And since my children were not of age to vote or even alive for most of it, why is the burden placed on them? I don't hate success and if you want to make a million, go right ahead. What I can't stand is someone owning a business and needing workers, paying these workers crap wages so they need government help, blaming the worker and the government rewarding the business owner by giving ever increasing tax breaks while the government hurts the poor by supporting resolutions that does such. Brainless worker or not, jobs need filled and the person filling that job should have a right to live. If a demand creates the need with low wages, then that is not the fault of the worker. Then we can talk about SS that is always in threat because the government wants to again help the rich. Placing the cap for SS tax on the people making over 124K (if memory serves me right) has not helped. And yet the poor pay a percentage and the rich could pay that percentage without issue but the burden is placed on the poor and "middle class"? So just threaten is the answer and that is the right wing of politics mainly who does this. Stop kissing the arse of the donors and SS would be fine. My post was in reply to the generation you belong to. Mine is guilty as I said but to a lesser extent. I wasn't even old enough to vote for Reagan (for example) as I am in my mid 40s. But these problems have come from somewhere and to overcome these issues we all should have a serious talk. But until we can get those with right wing thinking to understand that the world is no longer the same as it was 60 years ago, we will make no progress and all this will continue.
|
|
|
Post by ranger06 on Apr 22, 2018 18:41:03 GMT -7
Then we can talk about SS that is always in threat because the government wants to again help the rich. Placing the cap for SS tax on the people making over 124K (if memory serves me right) has not helped. And yet the poor pay a percentage and the rich could pay that percentage without issue but the burden is placed on the poor and "middle class"? So just threaten is the answer and that is the right wing of politics mainly who does this. Stop kissing the arse of the donors and SS would be fine. Dropping the cap is not the pannacea you seek. It is a double edged sword. From the AARP 2012 article "Argument Against". www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/public_policy_institute/econ_sec/2012/option-eliminate-the-payroll-tax-cap-AARP-ppi-econ-sec.pdf"Today, a retiree’s benefits are based only on the income on which he or she pays Social Security payroll taxes. Because of this, in 2012 the maximum Social Security benefit that even the wealthiest American can receive is just over $30,000 a year. If millionaires pay Social Security taxes on all of their salary income, the maximum annual benefit payment could reach over $150,000 a year. This development would not bankrupt the program, but it would change its nature. Social Security was not intended to provide such large benefits. Average benefits could remain at roughly the current level if wealthier Americans paid taxes on their entire salaries, but their benefits remain the same as they are now. Essentially, they would be getting nothing in return for the additional taxes that they would pay. Such a move has been proposed in the past." I make well over the current cap of $128,000. tnewsbackupforum.boards.net/post/11695/quote/921 However, should I claim my SS benefits this year it would be at the income of $128,400, not what I'm actually making. And these 8 reasons give even more cause to pause. www.nationalreview.com/2015/02/eight-reasons-we-shouldnt-raise-cap-social-security-taxes-andrew-biggs/
|
|
|
Post by osha on Apr 22, 2018 19:03:51 GMT -7
Then we can talk about SS that is always in threat because the government wants to again help the rich. Placing the cap for SS tax on the people making over 124K (if memory serves me right) has not helped. And yet the poor pay a percentage and the rich could pay that percentage without issue but the burden is placed on the poor and "middle class"? So just threaten is the answer and that is the right wing of politics mainly who does this. Stop kissing the arse of the donors and SS would be fine. Dropping the cap is not the pannacea you seek. It is a double edged sword. From the AARP 2012 article "Argument Against". www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/public_policy_institute/econ_sec/2012/option-eliminate-the-payroll-tax-cap-AARP-ppi-econ-sec.pdf"Today, a retiree’s benefits are based only on the income on which he or she pays Social Security payroll taxes. Because of this, in 2012 the maximum Social Security benefit that even the wealthiest American can receive is just over $30,000 a year. If millionaires pay Social Security taxes on all of their salary income, the maximum annual benefit payment could reach over $150,000 a year. This development would not bankrupt the program, but it would change its nature. Social Security was not intended to provide such large benefits. Average benefits could remain at roughly the current level if wealthier Americans paid taxes on their entire salaries, but their benefits remain the same as they are now. Essentially, they would be getting nothing in return for the additional taxes that they would pay. Such a move has been proposed in the past." I make well over the current cap of $128,000. tnewsbackupforum.boards.net/post/11695/quote/921 However, should I claim my SS benefits this year it would be at the income of $128,400, not what I'm actually making. And these 8 reasons give even more cause to pause. www.nationalreview.com/2015/02/eight-reasons-we-shouldnt-raise-cap-social-security-taxes-andrew-biggs/Good articles and thanks for posting them. I see what they mean about raising the cap and that would be true. But somehow the system needs fixed. Whether that will mean rolling over some sort other money into the fund, I don't really know.
|
|