Thread: 1 in 2 Americans Now Poor or Low Income

Originally Posted by CharlesDavenport

I agree. Just more bogus fuel to the class warfare fire.

I agree

Democrats began the "War on Poverty."

Republicans began the "War on the Poor."

Both sides of the aisle are equally invested in the class warfare struggle.

Of course this all makes perfect sense when one recalls that this great nation of ours was founded as a result of class warfare.

Originally Posted by ArmyCowboy

I agree

Democrats began the "War on Poverty."

And failed and made matters worse for those in poverty.

Republicans began the "War on the Poor."

False baseless bullshit.

Both sides of the aisle are equally invested in the class warfare struggle.

:rolleyes: Garbage. Repubs and conservatives pointing out the failure of Democrat-Progressives "war on poverty" is not continuing the class warfare struggle. It is pointing out the failure and the damage caused by Democrat-Progressive policies and programs allegedly intended to "solve" poverty.

Of course this all makes perfect sense when one recalls that this great nation of ours was founded as a result of class warfare.

Please example the logic that supports that assertion.

The reason more Americans are poor is Obamanomics and the liberal-Progressive elites controlling the Democrat Party.

tashi deleks,

M

Originally Posted by Mahasattva

And failed and made matters worse for those in poverty.



False baseless bullshit.



:rolleyes: Garbage. Repubs and conservatives pointing out the failure of Democrat-Progressives "war on poverty" is not continuing the class warfare struggle. It is pointing out the failure and the damage caused by Democrat-Progressive policies and programs allegedly intended to "solve" poverty.



Please example the logic that supports that assertion.

The reason more Americans are poor is Obamanomics and the liberal-Progressive elites controlling the Democrat Party.

tashi deleks,

M

Thank you for that intellectually stimulating post. How can anyone disagree with such great points like "bullshit."

As for the American Revolution, the Founding Fathers were considered so radical at the time because while the were waging a war against England, they were also waging war against the aristocrisy, the idea of "Divine Right of Kings and the very social heirarchy of the time.

There are numerous ways to sustain yourself in the US, especially with the amount of charity and welfare available. I can only conclude then that people are poor because they choose to be, and the rest of us are poorer because of them. The Federal govt alone spends almost one trillion dollars a year on income security, health (medicaid) and social services.

Originally Posted by jviehe

There are numerous ways to sustain yourself in the US, especially with the amount of charity and welfare available. I can only conclude then that people are poor because they choose to be, and the rest of us are poorer because of them. The Federal govt alone spends almost one trillion dollars a year on income security, health (medicaid) and social services.

Let's see...
Your career is off-offshored after the last crash, your can't get a loan to start a business and you're over 30, maybe, 40.
Oh yeah, you're poor because you want to be.

People are poor because Romney wants to be wealthier.

Originally Posted by USCitizen

Let's see...
Your career is off-offshored after the last crash, your can't get a loan to start a business and you're over 30, maybe, 40.
Oh yeah, you're poor because you want to be.

People are poor because Romney wants to be wealthier.

I have often been without money... I have never been poor.

Until you understand that simple line, you will never understand America is all about, or what jviehe or I are talking about.

Originally Posted by tsquare

I have often been without money... I have never been poor.

Until you understand that simple line, you will never understand America is all about, or what jviehe or I are talking about.

I get the Waltons mentality but that doesn't excuse other peoples manipulation of our lives.
And I have no intention of being one of those manipulative bastards...ever.

Originally Posted by USCitizen

I get the Waltons mentality...

Old-fashioned... I get it. It's sad that many feel that way.

Originally Posted by USCitizen

I get the Waltons mentality but that doesn't excuse other peoples manipulation of our lives.
And I have no intention of being one of those manipulative bastards...ever.

If you can make it through your whole life time without being manipulated by someone or something at some point in time. Then you will be the first. I hate to break it to you but we are all manipulated to a certain degrees by something.

Originally Posted by ArmyCowboy

Thank you for that intellectually stimulating post. How can anyone disagree with such great points like "bullshit."

You received an appropriate response to your sound bite talking points.

As for the American Revolution, the Founding Fathers were considered so radical at the time because while the were waging a war against England, they were also waging war against the aristocrisy, the idea of "Divine Right of Kings and the very social heirarchy of the time.

Hmm, not really, but you do have a point. The American Revolution was about separating ourselves from the rule of King George. Most of the Founding Fathers and colonists would have rather been treated as Englishmen, but eventually felt things had gone too far and so, fought. It was with the establishment of the United States of America under the U.S. Constitution that America really rejected the ideals of a landed aristocracy, and we can thank George Washington for establishing the cultural tradition of presidents only serving two terms. Many wanted Washington to be an American king and he could have run and been elected president until his death if he so chose. The fact that he didn’t set a precedent which no one was willing to challenge until FDR, and FDR was the only one who would challenge that tradition, since the American people shortly after FDR’s death made Washington’s two terms tradition law.

The ideal or legitimacy of “the Divine Right of Kings” was, for English royalty at least, a moot point since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215 (granted that was an agreement between King John and the aristocracy). Regardless “the Divine Right of Kings” was pretty much put to death with the beheading of Charles I in 1649. Only the continental royalty continued the propaganda for the ideal, since the continent had fully embraced Roman law along with the Roman ideals of Cesar -- but it along with a landed aristocracy ended with the French Revolution. Napoleon anyone?

Interestingly it was the atheist Soviet Union which brought back the ideal of the Divine Right of Kings in a secularized form with its cult of personality. Both Stalin and Mao milked it for all its worth. Though Mao, as a good Chinese (Han) would call it, the “Mandate of Heaven.” While Stalin doesn’t get the hero worship he once did, Mao’s picture is still everywhere.

But this is all beside the point. America is not a society ordered on class, like England is still. Those who throw the terms rich and poor around do so out of ignorance or for ideological reasons. Much has been posted about the so-called income gap, that its widening or that its proof of America’s inherent inequality. Rich and poor are used as if they are static ridged class distinctions here in America. They aren’t. The statistics that are used about the poor or even the top 1% do not represent actual living and breathing individual people -- they are statistical categories. What is hidden within those statistics is the fact that those counted among the poor, will be counted among the middle class or even the upper 20% ten years later. Every single study that follows real flesh and blood people over time shows that nearly all will rise in the level of income they receive and the wealth they have accumulated ten years later. There is only 3% of the “poor” who remain poor ten years later. If you count only the poor who remain poor for ten or twenty years and you count only the rich who remain rich (I'm talking great inherited wealth -- never having to work kind of money) for ten or twenty years, you are only counting barely 7% of the total population. The rest of us move up and down the income scale never remaining within a specific quintile for more than ten or so years, yet all the while our wealth (not income) will increase. The eldery and retired make little to no income, but they hold most of the wealth in the nation.

But this doesn’t fit the Progressive ideology so it is ignored. Neither does it lend itself to easy sound bites that are used for their emotional impact.

tashi deleks,

M

50% of the people pay taxes.
50% of the people receive tax money.

It may be oversimplistic, but it's not too far from the truth.

Originally Posted by Texan

50% of the people pay taxes.
50% of the people receive tax money.

It may be oversimplistic, but it's not too far from the truth.

If it's overly-simplistic, that kinda makes it worthless.

Originally Posted by buck84

If you can make it through your whole life time without being manipulated by someone or something at some point in time. Then you will be the first. I hate to break it to you but we are all manipulated to a certain degrees by something.

You totally reversed my statement.
I have been manipulated many time but I will not manipulate others.