PLAYER57832 wrote:Phatscotty wrote:
Ever notice?
Many of the people promoting this message are spending $200-300-400-500 per month on cigarettes, and/or $100-200/month on pot, perhaps $100-300 dollars on cocaine, meth, prescription pills, possibly combined with/separately $100 on gas driving to a casino back n forth and probably dropping another $100-300 on average more into games tilted against them winning? Perhaps $50-100 a month on lottery tickets? Many of them go to restaurants at least once a day if not twice, and many of them don't even attempt to stretch the little money they have left by shopping smarter? Perhaps much more at strip club or throwing money at women who don't even like them?
The key is also to look at what people do with their money and understand that monetary irresponsibility/waste is just as much a factor if not more so than what the wage is. I constantly see people with little money in line ahead of me at the convenience store buying 2 packs of cigarettes and 5 lottery tickets. Less frequently but often enough I see people in line ahead of me at the grocery store paying for their steaks and 24 packs of soda and numerous bags of potato chips with food stamps/ebt. I notice a friend of mine who is easily considered to be in 'poverty' buys her kids each their own xbox 360 as well as each a playstation 4 'so they don't fight' and goes to the casino every single weekend for years, goes on cruise ships in the Bahamas every April when she gets that earned income credit 'to help her kids'...ever notice some people in poverty not only choose poverty, but focus much effort to
stay in 'poverty' by making sure they don't work over a certain amount of hours'?
I do. I notice it all the time!
I'm not trying to say poverty isn't real and that people don't ever need help, but I am saying these BS zombie repeat lines all too often and perhaps intentionally so avoid looking at the other side of the equation when it comes to why people are in poverty, besides wages. And the other side is personal responsibility/irresponsibility ie what people DO with their money. The zombie repeaters will go on and on about what the oppressive corporation does with their money, or what the investor does with their money, but will stop you dead in your tracks if you dare to question what an impoverished person does with their money.
Total bull.. and if you were REALLY watching, you would know it.
I won't even go with the minimum... take $8.00 an hour. You lose 20% right off the top for deductions (actually they say to use 25%, but I am underestimating on purpose). That leaves $6.00 an hour, $240 a week, $840 a month for EVERYTHING. If you get EMPLOYER-PROVIDED insurance, figure on a minimum of $95 a month, $170 or so for a family (note those are MINIMUMS). With the Affordable care act, that gets better... most of those people are now eligible for subsidies. Also, anyone with kids who have even minor disabilities has always gotten free Medicaid (but NOT for healthy kids or adults!)
Welcome Player, I have been expecting you
j/k I will be looking for you to point out somewhere as I go here what is total bull and why. We'll see
Beautiful opening, with you all the way. However, what about the idea perhaps someone who earns 8$ an hour should actually earn 8$ an hour?? radical, I know, but perhaps the reason nobody talks about why a wage just can't cover anything anymore is because nobody actually gets what they earn, you have to chop 25% of the wage right off the top that you will never see in your check. In fact I think everyone should stop calling their wage what is it pre-taxation, reduce 25% off your wage, and tell yourself that's how much you make. If we just go with what's easiest, and raise the wage to 15, that means you are losing even more $/hour as you only REALLY earn 10.75/hour. I know it's still statistically the same, but I do not want to give the government that was getting 2$.hour from the worker to now get 4.25$? Why does the government get more than 100% increase? And not to mention the conflict of interest in the government giving itself a raise, all for the poor, right? And another thing, someone who makes that little in earnings is going to get almost all if not more of that money back at the end of the year as you are easily in the bottom 47% of Americans that basically do not pay any significant income taxes. And about all the wonders of free shit/insurance, I just don't see it that way. Somebody else is paying for it, working for it, and also paying their own premium that is almost just as big a pickle for them as it is the lowest wage earners and with no subsidy. That does not sound like a fix, that sounds like transferring Peter's problems onto Paul's back, and Paul is already carrying a full load in the recession.
PLAYER57832 wrote:Food... figure about $80 for a single, if you really push it, but up that to $150-200 for a family of 4. Clothing... garage sales still mean about $120 a year, and that is IF you are lucky enough to get shoes. If you have to buy shoes, figure a MINIMUM of $40 each. (you might luck out and get a bargain, I often find shoes for my youngest at Ross's for $30, but my older guy is now a size 12... and I am lucky to get anything that will last for less than $60). Realistically, its hard to by on less than $20 a month for clothes, unless you are getting free stuff from someone. (either hand me downs or gifts). Many low wage workers have to buy uniforms. My shirts run me $30 each. (I got 2 when I first started, but I have to buy new ones now that they are changing the type -- yep, right at CHRISTMAS time!)
Here is exactly where I have no problem with my tax dollars helping others with some aid. I will challenge the hell out of your shoes prices tho, as I just bought a pair of work boots for chopping and stacking wood for 6$ at the thrift store. oh i see, IF you can find them, well, still, at my old job during the summer when we traveled a lot and did warehouse stuff, i bought the wal-mart tennis shoes, I think they were 10$? either way no biggie let's continue. Again, with all these valid issues you have here, I can't help but think 'if only the 8$ earner actually got 8$'....
PLAYER57832 wrote:Total so far, for a single -- $220, for a family, up that to $420 or so with a family.
now, the biggie.... See, that leaves just 420 for rent for a single person and only 220 for a family.
Note several missing items? Water, electricity, etc...... I ALSO omitted gasoline/transportation (in metropolitan areas, you can walk or bike, but our area doesn't even have bike lanes --- and forget bikes in the winter, just not safe, though in Europe I rode all the time). Toys/educational stuff for kids.
Geez, you are starting to sound like me! I somewhere made this exact same post, but as I was on salary at around $170/day at the time, needless to say I was way above 8$, and it still didn't add up, even with my frugality. Then again, when I look at how much money was taken from me on a monthly basis, I couldn't help but wonder why I was renting paying money to another person rather than getting a mortgage/paying myself/building equity. Hey, there's a great way to build up your monetary wealth and hopefully move out of poverty! I guess things just don't work like that anymore.
PLAYER57832 wrote:Cable is often included with apartment rent, but you pretty much have to pay for internet. Only some areas offer subsidies for low income people. If you have kids OR are just looking for work, internet connection
IN other words, why don't you actually THINK before you sound off again!
uh, what? As if all these bills and expenses are not the same bills and expenses I have? Why don't you think to add in food stamps for this family, okay, do that, problem solves hopefully with a little to save. Sounds like some other kinds of aid both public and private are called for in your scenario and likely to be received. No problems from me here. Done thinking
PLAYER57832 wrote:The TRUTH is that for every person who abuses the system.. and note, abuse happens at ALL levels of the economic ladder, ironically enough the IMPACT to the rest of us is far less at the lower ends than the higher ends. I mean, sure, its obnoxious to see someone in the food pantry line who smells of smoke, but when a CEO takes tax breaks for years, then decides to just move a company overseas because he can boost his stock profits by a few dollars.. that impacts ALL of us. When Walmart goes out of its way to undersell all competitors specifically to drive them out of business, meaning a lower tax base (Walmart, many of these larger retailers often arranges deal with communities to not pay various taxes) and lower general incomes (even if wages are about the same, far more of local retail money stays in place.. Walmart money goes to feed its corporation and stockholders)
AND.. let's forget the "single mom" sob story, though I know I am going to get a lot of flack for that. I DO understand what it is to raise a kid alone. It IS tough, but here is the irony... most aid is based on very strict income limits that are very low. Essentially, if you are married and both parties are working, its impossible to get most aid. My single neighbors got aid for food, toys for Christmas, clothing for their kids and free childcare, (beginning when they were just looking for work). Since my family was across the country and my in-laws were almost always not available (long term illnesses), I could not even LOOK for work most of the time when my kids were young. (and, in my case, I had a child when everyone else did, so there weren't even any day cares available). I wound up doing childcare at home, but I also owned my own home (with the bank) and had skills that others don't always have. Even so, my kids got used birthday and Christmas presents, did not get to swim at the Y except on free days (2-3 times a year). They were not "deprived". I know how to stretch a dollar, but we were also living on FAR more than minimum!
Worse, let's look at second marriages. If a woman marries, she generally gets to count 2 separate families. If she stays at home, the new spouse's income is generally not counted toward family income (note..this varies by state and may have changes in the past 2 years). The new spouse is not obligated to support these older kids unless he adopts them, just any new children. If a man with kids marries, though, he still has to pay child support (OF COURSE!!!!) BUT... he doesn't get to deduct his child support payments OR to count those other kids as part of his household. Just as an example, we were typically about $50-100 from getting all the various subsidies available, BEFORE paying out child support for my stepsons. We could not count one penny paid in child support, so we had much less money to live on than most people getting all kinds of subsidies for their kids. No question the step kids got their money (and more.. we had to pay for sports fees and other assorted items), THAT is not the issue, its that we were not "counted" as being below the poverty line, though we had less money to use than many who were!
My single neighbors, either divorced or never married, to contrast, WERE counted as being "poor", but had far more money to spend... AND got all kinds of subsidies.
Again, we did OK, but ONLY because we had land to grow a garden, live in an area with low housing prices, and I am very, very good at bargain hunting. And, I did childcare in my home, bringing in additional income. But, an income at a time when I probably would have been financially better off just sitting at home. (My usual profit after all expenses was about $40 a week, because I actually paid all the legal taxes and deductions) "Better yet" -- I should have just left my husband and then I would have gotten a second degree for free, plus all kinds of other assistance!
[/quote]
your valid 'anecdotes' notwithstanding, that still is no excuse for us to shrug off someone getting food aid and not using it for food. And we've already talked about the corporation thingy, and I told you, by all means, while arguing against building a wall to keep non-Americans from entering America illegally, in the same breathe go ahead and build that wall to keep American corporations from leaving and paying up whatever % you say you need for an ever growing list of 'needs' My attitude on the corporations is that we should encourage a strong growth environment that does not interfere/over-regulate with a business becoming profitable especially early on. Ya know, each employee of that company pays probably more taxes each money than does earn your initial example of 8$/hour family, and the products/services sold and resold and perhaps resold again also create all kinds of other jobs, also paying a lot in taxes. We should be thankful for the steady revenue stream the corporation already generates, and only tax them competitively, so they would never really want to leave because of taxes, I say 8-10-12% seems fair, II have a fair amount of knowledge to show how that's competitive and realistic and what it's based on but I'm not an expert and my reasoning is much more valid than 'because we need it'. And honestly, this attitude that is so prevalent amongst so many today that corporations are the bitches only here to serve the poor people and get no credit for the millions and billions they already generate not only in taxes but in wages and benefits as well.
And I do know one other thing that helps guide me in all this, and that is 100 years ago people had the highest standard of living in the world, and they were relatively happy to live in a Free country where at least you deal with your own problems rather than have everyone else's problems chained to you regardless of your own problems. We did not have electric heaters, we did not have running water, we did not have automobiles, we had to hunt or grow our own food ourselves, there were no public safety nets, there was no tax on income, there was hardly such a thing as vacation, and there was little to no time to sit on our buts and watch TV. The people made it, starvation was not common and mostly only if in secluded areas and snowed in for a winter, because ya know why? When people are free and cannot be forced to take care of everyone else and their problems, they were also free to understand that their life was on the line and that meant they were independent people and there was no other choice but to do what one needed to do when they needed to do it, that their decisions had to be planned as best as possible, that there was no 'Meh, I'll do that later, my favorite show is on now' and there was no 'that's too hard, I don't wanna do that' people understood that life was not fair, and it never will be, no matter what, but they knew they were truly Free, and that is what made America a special place. And that is what made people charitable and to help their neighbors and for businesses and organizations to help each other because they knew it was up to them. Now, everyone just turns to government for the answers, and we have lost the spirit and the will to do all the things that made us great and made life much simpler. and really, I think that's all we want today.
