The Non-Existent Poor in Both Campaigns. - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Blog articles about news and current events.

Moderator: PoFo Today's News Mods

Forum rules: Blogosphere Rules.
#14050002
Barack Obama has been totally focused on the middle class vote, while Mitt Romney has already made it clear what his stand on the poor is when he told America he’s not worried about the poor. I also remember something about a social safety net that is in my view in tatters.
If no one wants to even acknowledge the poor by even mentioning they exist, our political system in America will focus even more on telling people only what they want to hear, ensuring four more years of broken and unfulfilled campaign promises.
With no working safety net who will be there to help those in need when they fall?
To see more articles and social topics like this one, visit The Social Hysteria Blog at http://thesocialhysteriablog.blogspot.com

:*(
#14050244
oppose_obama wrote:Dude who gives a shit about the poor? Yea I get it, it's cool to look all compassionate and stuff but come on. How will you affect my life? Fuck the poor.

That's basically the point of view of 85 percent of the voters.


Which is funny, because the poor is something like 50% of Americans. :hmm: Did I say funny? I meant depressing and disturbing.
#14050253
I guess its a bit like how colluding oligopolies work in the marketplace. If all the available choices are offering an equally shitty product, then no one seller has any advantage or disadvantage over the others.

Basically the poor can be shat on to no end - as long as its all sides of politics shitting on them equally.
#14050283
mikema63 wrote:Since poverty is relative this is impossible. :hmm:


I suppose this is a fair point. How about this: "The government considers 50% of the people to be too poor to be worth taxing on income"? Because let's face it, if you're making that little money in this country, you are almost certainly poor. You're certainly not able to conform to the American middle-class idea, at any rate. But do you reject my overarching point that a large number of people who hold that "fuck the poor" attitude are, themselves, poor? This is part of why I reject GandalfTheGray's idea that this is solely due to lousy options. I think that the vast majority of the working poor don't see themselves as such, and often at the same time, they don't want government patronization. Remember the "we're not a nation of haves and have-nots, we're a nation of haves and soon-to-haves" line from a year or so ago? Yeah... :hmm:
#14050297
I make less than 10,000 a year and I still pay plenty in tax, I pay taxes on income, payroll taxes come out of my paycheck, I pay sales tax, and property tax.

The entire myth that 50% don't even pay taxes is usually a republican talking point and is not true. I end up paying about 20% of my income in taxes, 10% in payroll taxes.
#14050301
mikema63 wrote:I make less than 10,000 a year and I still pay plenty in tax, I pay taxes on income, payroll taxes come out of my paycheck, I pay sales tax, and property tax.

The entire myth that 50% don't even pay taxes is usually a republican talking point and is not true. I end up paying about 20% of my income in taxes, 10% in payroll taxes.


Stagnant wrote:"The government considers 50% of the people to be too poor to be worth taxing on income"?


I meant income tax. Probably should've stated it more clearly. I know that it's bullshit that they pay no taxes. I still feel that the bottom income bracket is a very reasonable line to say "you are poor". In America, anyways.
#14052446
Why are you surprised? Both parties are there to rule the nation in the interests of the rich. They help the rich and they pretend to help the middle class.Why would they help the poor? They aren't socialists.
#14052618
Stagnant wrote:Which is funny, because the poor is something like 50% of Americans. :hmm: Did I say funny? I meant depressing and disturbing.


If you describe 50% of Americans as the poor, then we don't have to worry about the poor.

If however you described homeless people with no jobs, no homes and no money as the poor instead, we would have to start worrying about the poor again.


Poorer is not to be confused with poor and needy.
50% of Americans do not need charity. So no one needs to waste time worrying about that.


If 50% of Americans were poor, then "the poor" would not be ignored by any political party in America but instead as the largest demographic of a democracy, this would be the centre ground all elections were fought on. They aren't, so it isn't.


I think the key to this one is the too loose a definition of the word poor.
#14052750
mikema63 wrote:Since poverty is relative this is impossible. :hmm:


So right.

And even more relative in the past three decades, as real income has steadily declined. The poor now are worse off in real terms than they were in the Nixon era.
#14052779
Baff wrote:If you describe 50% of Americans as the poor, then we don't have to worry about the poor.

If however you described homeless people with no jobs, no homes and no money as the poor instead, we would have to start worrying about the poor again.


Poorer is not to be confused with poor and needy.
50% of Americans do not need charity. So no one needs to waste time worrying about that.


If 50% of Americans were poor, then "the poor" would not be ignored by any political party in America but instead as the largest demographic of a democracy, this would be the centre ground all elections were fought on. They aren't, so it isn't.


I think the key to this one is the too loose a definition of the word poor.


45.8 million Americans are on food stamps.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/0 ... 74344.html

58 percent of all jobs created during the past two years paid $13.83 an hour or less while just 22 percent were in the "midwage" class of $13.84 to $21.13 an hour, even though that group lost 60 percent of the jobs during the recession.
http://bottomline.nbcnews.com/_news/201 ... ood-stamps

"The unemployment data is not really telling us the true story of how many people are underemployed," said Peter Cardillo, chief market economist at Rockwell Global Capital in New York. Food stamps are "a good indication of how the income of the work force has stagnated and more and more people are applying for food stamps." If unemployment were calculated the same way as it was in 1930 the figure would be 19%

Job creation is lagging new entries into the workforce, and wages of newly created jobs will add to downward pressure on overall spending.

Unused industrial capacity is at record highs, both in the US and globally. New capital investment won't be a major factor until investors see people ready to start spending again - the last thing they need are new factories sitting idle.

It all comes down to private debt, not government debt. The middle class and small business has been deleveraging for half a decade. The amount they spend on all forms of debt service will preclude spending on consumption (other than the minimal basics).

According to Steve Keen, the deleveraging process will take another decade (at current rates). There won't be any significant job growth until
one of two things occurs: a) another financial crash wipes out the current debt and creditors are forced to write down, or b) the current snail's pace of private debt paydown reaches some kind of reasonable level that allows people some breathing room.

Want to bet on which of these alternatives will pan out? Hint: I wouldn't be betting too heavily on b).
#14052891
Talking about the poor does not affect my life and a vast majority of the people. It's like when politicians spend time working about manufacturing. Alright it makes like 20 percent of the economy. How about talking about the service based economy which makes up 77 percent of our economy?
#14052899
oppose_obama wrote:Talking about the poor does not affect my life and a vast majority of the people. It's like when politicians spend time working about manufacturing. Alright it makes like 20 percent of the economy. How about talking about the service based economy which makes up 77 percent of our economy?


Manufacturing jobs are far more resilient and meaningful for export. Service is incredibly fragile, by comparison. At least, I think that's the reasoning behind it...
#14052914
Really? The modern economy is based around service. OUR economy is 77 percent service. Services are not going anywhere. America's manufacturing base produces things like airplanes, cars etc. There is absolutely no chance of manufacturing even getting to 30 percent of the economy. It's just a bullshit thing to talk about. What's that song glory days? I believe it's just a ploy for politicians to get the votes of the 40-60 crowd, the old farts whose day has come and past. Young professionals will soon be middle age professionals and maybe politicians will focus on the things that really matter. At any rate I don't care, I'll be a lawyer making big bucks :)
#14053239
oppose_obama wrote:Talking about the poor does not affect my life and a vast majority of the people. It's like when politicians spend time working about manufacturing. Alright it makes like 20 percent of the economy. How about talking about the service based economy which makes up 77 percent of our economy?


It all depends on the trend line. Even a service economy must find a way to achieve something approaching full employment.

Here's what I mean by trend line:

Image

The falling labor participation rate has been going on for more than a decade. This is profoundly scary for anyone with half a brain. The remnants of the social safety net is the only thing standing in the way of massive social unrest - and even that won't work if the above trend is not turned around quickly.

The wise man will be aware that it's not only the blue collar manufacturing workers that are being obsoleted. Paper shufflers of all types are being severely pressed by expert systems. The legal industry has been hit hard, and law school graduates with a 100 grand in debt are finding a really really tough market.

"...As they enter the worst job market in decades, many young would-be lawyers are turning on their alma maters, blaming their quandary on high tuitions, lax accreditation standards and misleading job placement figures. Unless students graduate from schools like Harvard or Yale, they “might as well be busing tables..."

No knock on you or the legal profession, but if you think you can fully insulate yourself from the escalation in poverty, it may not be as easy as you think.
#14053363
mikema63 wrote:I make less than 10,000 a year and I still pay plenty in tax, I pay taxes on income, payroll taxes come out of my paycheck, I pay sales tax, and property tax.

The entire myth that 50% don't even pay taxes is usually a republican talking point and is not true. I end up paying about 20% of my income in taxes, 10% in payroll taxes.


If you're that poor, then why on earth are you a libertarian? :P
#14140500
oppose_obama wrote:Dude who gives a shit about the poor? Yea I get it, it's cool to look all compassionate and stuff but come on. How will you affect my life? Fuck the poor.

That's basically the point of view of 85 percent of the voters.

Allow me to reiterate...just so we're all clear on one prevailing opinion...

oppose_obama wrote:Dude who gives a shit about the poor? Yea I get it, it's cool to look all compassionate and stuff but come on. How will you affect my life? Fuck the poor.

That's basically the point of view of 85 percent of the voters.


America...I know you are proponents of "free speech", but freedom is EARNED...

The American dream? https://i.redd.i[…]

I hope you are not saying that voting for Biden i[…]

Zionists complaining about expansionism. :lol: […]

@jimjam Congratulations on winning the first a[…]