Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<Of course, unless these young people are living off of outrageous trust funds -- then it makes sense to vote for McCain. Paris Hilton should be voting for John McCain.>> One of my kids would save an extra $5.40 per week with the Obama tax plan; the other would save $14.98 per week. Somehow I think they both would survive without it. <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/story/2008/06/09/ST2008060900950.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/...950.html</a>
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << One of my kids would save an extra $5.40 per week with the Obama tax plan; the other would save $14.98 per week. Somehow I think they both would survive without it. >> I suspect your kids aren't poor. What about the families that are far less off? Do we no longer concern ourselves with the segment of our society that is just getting by? Do we just say, "Tough, they need to work harder?" And tax policy shouldn't be the only metric to judge future economic condition. What about inflation? Overall economic stagnation? Access to health care? Protection of pensions? Long term viability of our government's financial condition to continue function? All of these things will contribute to your children's economic future moreso than a percent here or there on their income taxes.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I suspect your kids aren't poor.>> They aren't. They work. Even the one with no education beyond High School knows how to make a decent living.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy So, I'll sign you up in the camp for "Tough, they need to work harder!"
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<So, I'll sign you up in the camp for "Tough, they need to work harder!">> I believe there are many people out there who don't know how to work because they were raised in an environment where almost no one on their block worked. They had no role models. That is why I believe it is essential to find ways to get people off of welfare. I would propose providing subsidized childcare and subsidized health care for the working poor, while limiting welfare to 6 months following the birth of a child. The underclass would disappear inside of 20 years. I don't know if that is a liberal plan or a conservative plan. It would be an effective plan.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy You need to have jobs that pay living wages for that plan to work. We are losing those rapidly in the U.S.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip Even $8.00 is a living wage if you have housing, childcare and healthcare subsidized on a sliding scale. Get people into a job and as their income increases (which it does at ANY job over time) their subsidy goes down until they get to a living wage (about $12 I figure). That would still be much cheaper than generation after generation of welfare and the attendant drug and crime problems. I don't mind helping people get started... IF they work!!
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy I'm also curious how the whole welfare issue came into play here? We've had relatively low measures of unemployment the past several years (even though I dispute the official government figures). Workforce participation has been relatively high in comparison to other times. How is welfare a hot button issue for you? It just sounds like conservative talking points to me -- we need to point the blame at the people on welfare when our economy isn't doing well. I wonder what sort of welfare the bankers at Lehman Bros. were on?
Originally Posted By mawnck >>Get people into a job and as their income increases (which it does at ANY job over time)<< You've. Got. To. Be. Kidding. Talk about "out of touch."
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<I'm also curious how the whole welfare issue came into play here? We've had relatively low measures of unemployment the past several years (even though I dispute the official government figures).>> Getting people off of welfare was a component of the plan. The more major points were subsidized childcare, healthcare and housing for the working poor.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip <<>>Get people into a job and as their income increases (which it does at ANY job over time)<< You've. Got. To. Be. Kidding. Talk about "out of touch.">> Tell me a job where you don't? Even McDonalds gives salary increases. Sure, some years there are salary freezes. We've had them at the University. But over time salaries go up (unless you were in a union job that paid substantially over market value in the first place). There is also a little something know as a promotion. No one ever got rich holding on to the same entry level job all of their life.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << No one ever got rich holding on to the same entry level job all of their life. >> What bubble are you living in? I work with people everyday who are perfectly nice folks. They work hard. They pay their dues. But they just didn't get rewarded a whole lot in terms of cognitive ability or physical talent from the gene pool. They have a terminal paygrade that remains awfully close to that entry level. There is only so far that they will ever be able to advance. On top of that, you can't have a population of chiefs without indians. That's not the way organizations work. You will always have a very broad swath of society that toils daily without a great deal of monetary reward. They are not getting promotions. They are not getting pay increases. I interact with these people everyday, and I respect the work that they do accomplish. It's really insulting to tell 70% of the population of America that is not getting promotions or pay raises at a rapid clip that it's all their fault and they just aren't working hard enough. Get out and interact with the world sometime, your eyes might be opened by what you seen in comparison to the idyllic life on a university campus.
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy << Even McDonalds gives salary increases. >> What's the top salary paid at a McDonald's?
Originally Posted By Sport Goofy By the way, I looked it up. The median hourly wage for a McDonald's manager with 20 years experience is $10.38 and hour. Not anywhere close to $50K a year at 40 hours a week.
Originally Posted By Skellington88 Mccain will do so much damage to this country its not even funny. He has no economic experince no substantial ideas and if something happens to him (highly likely due to his deterorating health condition) sarah palin will become president and she is NOT QUALIFIED!
Originally Posted By Skellington88 Roadtrip please reconsider voting for mccain at least watch the debates. Obama will work hard to create hundreds of new jobs in green energy field and get our economy back on track he has also inspiried and motivated millions of young people all over the country to start engaging in civic service and getting involved with politicsn and will continue to do so. Please vote for Obama do it for the young people please!
