Romney Fundraiser - Secret Taping

[franklin]

What's a realistic possibility that goes too far, in your mind? I'm willing to be educated, but so far you're just playing devil's advocate. What would a system that goes too far look like, and has one ever been implemented?

For example, an estate tax of 100% would probably be going to far, but seems unrealistic, as well.

To preface, black graduation rates are probably the largest contributing factor limiting income mobility in America. Any policy discussion should start there.

We could put in a reward system to get grad rates up, but this could be gamed and produce the opposite result. Putting policies in that lower the hurdle rate so potential can be realized but effect no change go too far.

It's certainly possible they have unique circumstancdes behind their mobility, not applicable here.

It's also possible that greater mobility will be a short lived phenomenon. As far as I am concerned, American mobility begins and ends with education availability. Tax policy, safety nets, all the other rhetoric is a distraction to the economic changes underlying the allegedly widening wealth divide. We transitioned from an industrial society where our Lewis Turning Point demanded high wages & on the job training to a surplus of manual labor & more intellectually oriented workforce. That environment benefits the wealthy who have the insight to figure out what changes to make & have the means to fund higher education. Poor people often don't have the first clue about industry & fail to see the benefits of education.


This is my greatest criticism of Obama. He failed miserably at helping the jobless poor transition into modern professions in a time when they needed help the most. Why he and his democratically controlled legislature chose to cut higher education funding while bumping military spending enormously will forever be a mystery to me.

We have not achieved perfect potential. It seems to me we are not even close to optimal potential for mobility.

I could agreed we have not realized our existing perfect potential, but the potential is there. Agreed on the second sentence over the last few decades.

 

[NAOS]

It's also possible that greater mobility will be a short lived phenomenon. As far as I am concerned, American mobility begins and ends with education availability.

I like the emphasis on education here, but this parsimonious statement is only totally true (as you claim it to be) if the economy is rising at a rate of at least 5% annually -- always -- and that there are no other cultural barriers to getting loans, etc., etc. In other words, in this one statement you assume constant growth and a fully impersonal economy. <-- those could very well be the engines of serious problems themselves which are limiting the wealth and happiness of people.

 

[franklin]

A couple of things:
You speak of "dole" here as if you are imagining a population

You built way too much into my use of "dole". I didn't add the political connotations to it as you have. Dole, charity, whatever. I expect those receiving a handout to give it their best. Many already do.

I was born to a single mother (aged 20) and we scraped by until she married a fairly successful second-generation salesman whose official spoken doctrine was hard work, no excuses and think positively but strategically (i.e. always calculate). Punishment would be doled out upon deviation from this plan. I had to save money to buy my own bicycles, video game systems, etc. by mowing laws, shoveling driveways in the winter, and, like you, working for a local nursery/orchard for $2/hr. This message of hard work has helped me in some ways, but I was never taught the value of WHY WE WORK AS WE DO. That caused all kinds of confusion when I got old enough to see that my step-dad was, despite the official mottos, pretty depressed and getting **** on by his fading industry (no hard work or positive thinking could get him out of that). Basically, this is just my way of asking the same question as above: Why should we work? What is "work"?

Agreed. Working like a dog for the rich baron is ******** and will backfire on the owners anyway. Workers may not get the wages they deserve for destroying their bodies all to scrape buy, but they will get theirs one way or another. Doing right by your employees happens to be the cheaper thing to do.

The point I was making is I can't sympathize with the poor can't do it mantra. It's repulsive how the left drags out and dehumanizes the worst situation they can find in the most demoralizing, patronizing way possible. I don't need a sob story to put my support behind an initiative. In fact, they tend to push me away out of disgust.

 

[NAOS]

You built way too much into my use of "dole". I didn't add the political connotations to it as you have. Dole, charity, whatever. I expect those receiving a handout to give it their best. Many already do.


Agreed. Working like a dog for the rich baron is ******** and will backfire on the owners anyway. Workers may not get the wages they deserve for destroying their bodies all to scrape buy, but they will get theirs one way or another. Doing right by your employees happens to be the cheaper thing to do.

The point I was making is I can't sympathize with the poor can't do it mantra. It's repulsive how the left drags out and dehumanizes the worst situation they can find in the most demoralizing, patronizing way possible. I don't need a sob story to put my support behind an initiative. In fact, they tend to push me away out of disgust.

You and I probably have a lot more in common than not, and I hope you see I'm not repeating a Democrat mantra here, but I really do think the bootstraps ideology is just as broken. It's very easy to work hard and get nowhere.

 

[PearlWatson]

Hey Pearl, why the sock puppet? Just continue posting as Babe. Everyone knows it's you anyway.

That's the best compliment I've ever had from a liberal.

 

[NAOS]

You built way too much into my use of "dole". I didn't add the political connotations to it as you have. Dole, charity, whatever. I expect those receiving a handout to give it their best. Many already do.

If I was making too much out of something, it wasn't out of "dole" specifically; I would have said the same thing about charity or other synonymous terms. I don't find the US to be an innately charitable place. Historical record backs me up pretty soundly. It could also be argued that it's becoming less charitable. I'm trying to stand in the way of the evaluation of "doing their best"... such a statement is pregnant with the values of what it means to work, and what kind of progress we are supposed to be making.

 

[NAOS]

That's the best compliment I've ever had from a liberal.

I like your sig. It proves you are either a troll (which you are) and/or you can't read (which is likely). I guess the only conclusion from my question you've quoted is that I was baiting everybody into a discussion about why we shouldn't work, rather than into a more nuanced discussion of the values of work, etc.

 

[NUMBERICA]

The point I was making is I can't sympathize with the poor can't do it mantra.

What about the idea (and fact) that there is a finite amount of money, and that not everyone can be rich? Or the idea that mechanisms in play for several decades clearly demonstrate rich getting richer with the middle-class getting gutted and the poor getting poorer? Understanding these things, how can a society (and government is a function of society, at least theoretically) be led to any other conclusion than that the gap needs to be closed and that means must be explored?

 

[PearlWatson]

I like your sig. It proves you are either a troll (which you are) and/or you can't read (which is likely). I guess the only conclusion from my question you've quoted is that I was baiting everybody into a discussion about why we shouldn't work, rather than into a more nuanced discussion of the values of work, etc.

I can't read or type.

 

[NUMBERICA]

PearlWatson:

You don't expect anyone to take you or your views seriously, right? I'm just trying to get a grasp on your reality, and it keeps coming back to that of a puerile fool, but that commonly lends itself to a lack of seriousness or an attempt at yucks. So I just want to know which it is.

 

[NAOS]

PearlWatson:

You don't expect anyone to take you or your views seriously, right? I'm just trying to get a grasp on your reality, and it keeps coming back to that of a puerile fool, but that commonly lends itself to a lack of seriousness or an attempt at yucks. So I just want to know which it is.

alt account. He's using a proxy server that locates him somewhere in Amercian Fork, UT.
Also, he is claiming to be a "she"... it's part of "her" shtick.

 

[Dr. Jones]

That would be a nice sentiment except for the reality that those who are the biggest economic drains on the economy live disproportionately in Red states and vote Republican.

So really, you, or others, don't have a problem with Romney saying that 47% of the population "who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe the government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing?" Not only is this an incredibly demeaning claim, essentially saying that 47% of a nation of over 300 million are deadbeat losers (who for this reason won't vote for him), but it's also factually inaccurate. Regardless of anything Obama has said or done in the past (which is irrelevant--we can talk about those separately), you really have no problem with this claim and what it implies? Really?

Speaking only for me, YES, I do think that people in the richest country in the history of the world ARE entitled to basic needs of life, including food (who would really argue that), shelter (I mean, who really thinks that it's ok for people to be homeless), healthcare (yes, I really do think this, so does every other developed country in the world--the US is the outlier in this case, not the norm). It's a wonder Romney didn't add education to this list. Damned deadbeat entitlement losers, what with all the government subsidized education.

I just can't agree. No one, no matter the country of privilege, is enititled to housing, food, and healthcare. I am ONLY referring to lazy, self-entitled people here (no one leave this part out, thank you). No one is entitled to any of this simply because of where they were born. Look at the opposite.. if you're born in a very poor country, should you, because of geography, have to be artificially held back?

I hate the word entitled, with a passion.
Replace it with compassion for, charitable giving, etc.. but I'm just not buying the entitlement thing.