[jstoesz]

CAR,

I was taught in school that when searching for clarity, one must go back to the most basic assumptions sifting through the layers until the initial disagreement about an assumption arises.

You cannot talk about calculus unless you agree that 1+1=2. Without that assumption, nothing else matters.

I think I have the root of our disagreement. You seem to be a post modern thinker, where one does not hold Truths to be Universal but instead relative to the pertinent situation.

At this point I am not sure that we can agree that 1+1=2, and that seems to be the rub.

[jstoesz]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jstoesz][quote=CA renter]
Have you ever been in a poor family’s house? Somehow, I doubt it.
[/quote]

For someone who claims to try and keep it civil, your comments reek of calling me ignorant. Have you forgotten that I have somewhat recently graduated College? Many of my friends graduated into a very awful job market. One lost his job 3 times in a year and a half. Another has been looking for work for 2 years. Both with a decent pile of student loan debt. They did not collect food stamps nor welfare, some didn’t qualify for unemployment insurance, because they had not yet been employed. One of my closest friends accidently got pregnant and had a kid (she is married), she was marginally unemployed and then unemployed and the other was in the middle of grad school, yet somehow they managed to stay of government assistance and buy health insurance. Currently my parents would qualify for food stamps and welfare after my dad’s last employer stopped paying him but did not lay him off, but they have enough assets to keep their pride.

I suspect though that this is not the kind of poor people you are referring too. You are referring to the type that have themselves on their heels with poor decisions and seem to constantly take steps back. Well I know a few of those people to, but to spell that out seems a bit unflattering.

In my view neither group of poor people needs free stuff, they need opportunity.

I wonder if you have ever been to a poor persons house.[/quote]

There’s a big difference between young people, fresh out of college, and families where both parents work and they still can’t afford to keep a stocked refrigerator.

I’ve been in these homes, and know how they run out of food every week because they have to juggle bills and can’t afford more groceries. They have to ration their food so they don’t completely run out before they can afford to go shopping again.

In your post above, you said that poor people in the US were overfed. They’re not overfed, but they often eat higher-calorie junk foods that tend to be cheaper, which can lead to obesity problems (if that’s what you were referring to).

An interesting article with insightful posts here:

http://news.change.org/stories/why-poor-people-dont-eat-nutritious-food%5B/quote%5D

Calories are calories. If you lived on 1000 cal of McDonalds you would be skinny, and not even malnourished if you stuck to their salads and grilled chicken. We should rejoice at the service McDonalds provides, I guess that is why it is the largest restaurant company in the world.

Furthermore, people don’t eat healthy because they don’t want to. Giving them more money will just divert their income to other appetites (cell phones, cable, etc). Why do you think there is a thriving black market for food stamps?

Its like housing. We made it possible for everyone in this country to “own” a home, because it was the “road to the middle class.” Problem was most people who obtained those mortgages were not financially mature enough to keep their homes, leaving them more destitute. Just because people have the means to be healthy does not mean they will take the opportunity. Obesity among the poor is not symptomatic of too few resources which is contradictory on its face, it is systematic of poor decision making.

Caveat, obesity is not a tell all of poor decision making. Churchill became quite obese…

Oh, one other note. With our safety nets in place, there are no families in america where both parents work, and they can not fill their refrigerator. If this were the case (and statistics are not on your side here), the issue is too many financial obligations/appetites for non food products.

[jstoesz]

Great article, thanks for the link.

[jstoesz]

100% agree. From my travels through south american and eastern Europe. The poor here are rich in comparison (that is a good thing).

[jstoesz]

What city/suburb did you guys move to? I may have some insider knowledge of things…

The quality of life is excellent. Even in winter, cross country skiing through the minneapolis on the parkway is still one of my favorite things in life, especially after a fresh snow.

[jstoesz]

I guess I was not the only one pining for MN. Although it sounds as though your choice was not completely voluntary. Once spring comes, you remember the beauty of seasons, and how precious a MN summer really is.

I will soon be moving there…as soon as I find solid employment that is. Congrats and say hello to the lakes for me.

[jstoesz]

[quote=CA renter]
Have you ever been in a poor family’s house? Somehow, I doubt it.
[/quote]

For someone who claims to try and keep it civil, your comments reek of calling me ignorant. Have you forgotten that I have somewhat recently graduated College? Many of my friends graduated into a very awful job market. One lost his job 3 times in a year and a half. Another has been looking for work for 2 years. Both with a decent pile of student loan debt. They did not collect food stamps nor welfare, some didn’t qualify for unemployment insurance, because they had not yet been employed. One of my closest friends accidently got pregnant and had a kid (she is married), she was marginally unemployed and then unemployed and the other was in the middle of grad school, yet somehow they managed to stay of government assistance and buy health insurance. Currently my parents would qualify for food stamps and welfare after my dad’s last employer stopped paying him but did not lay him off, but they have enough assets to keep their pride.

I suspect though that this is not the kind of poor people you are referring too. You are referring to the type that have themselves on their heels with poor decisions and seem to constantly take steps back. Well I know a few of those people to, but to spell that out seems a bit unflattering.

In my view neither group of poor people needs free stuff, they need opportunity.

I wonder if you have ever been to a poor persons house.

[jstoesz]

I am not sure there is anyone in this country who goes hungry any more…”Poor” people in america are among the most overfed people in the world.

If the poor can’t pay taxes, they sure as heck shouldn’t be able to afford a TV, AC, Cell phone…etc.

[jstoesz]

Oh, duh… When you said masters and public safety, my brain thinking railings and signs…

We need to shrink the railings and sign department!

[jstoesz]

btw. I really don’t think the root of the problem here is teachers. It is all the midlevel people working in agencies that are not only expensive, but harmful to the state economy. Delta Smelt anyone? For some reason they are never threatened with pink slips…probably cause the citizens would call that bluff in a new york minute.

What does someone actually do in the public safety department, especially and 150k a year or whatever? Seriously, this is an honest question.

[jstoesz]

[quote=CA renter][quote=jstoesz]I have asked this before and I will ask it again, because so far I have gotten no answer from you. What is your affiliation with public-sector workers? Your answers are shallow and tiresome and they reek of self interest!

I just met up with an old friend who graduated with the civil engineering degree. He lost his job recently in the private sector, and just got a job in the public sector. Guess what he’s making more then he did in the private sector, a lot more. He rides around a few days a week in a large 40k 4 x 4 Ford that’s brand-new, thanks Katrina for your levee caused freak out And that’s just salary I’m not talking pension here! Wake up CAR we’re getting fleeced, at least my buddy knows that he is riding the gravy train. That’s all I ask of public sector employees, a little gratitude![/quote]

Quite frankly, it’s none of your business (and I don’t mean that in an unkind way). I always make a point of addressing the topic rather than making personal attacks. You can review my posts over many years and see that I never make a personal attack unless someone else initiates it. Even then, I try to refrain from doing so until the other person has so hopelessly gone off-topic and begun to rant emotionally that I sometimes end up in the gutter with him (so far, it’s never been a female poster).

Perhaps it would be more productive if you could explain why you think my points are “shallow” or “tiresome.” At least then we could have a more productive discussion instead of engaging in childish emotional rants and personal attacks.

The reason I’m defending (public AND private) unions is because I believe that unions protect workers from corporate/financial interests who constantly strive to take an ever-growing share of the value created by workers. If you don’t believe me, check out what happened in the private sector after the demise of the unions:

“A huge share of the nation’s economic growth over the past 30 years has gone to the top one-hundredth of one percent, who now make an average of $27 million per household. The average income for the bottom 90 percent of us? $31,244.”

It’s the Inequality, Stupid

I’ll say it again (and again, and again…because once we cross the line, there is no going back), the people who are behind the attacks on public unions are the very same ones who are behind this growing wealth disparity. They are NOT looking out for Joe Sixpack’s best interests, and they are NOT taxpayer advocates.

Do your research![/quote]

Although asking about a conflict of interest is considered argumentum ad hominem, it is a grey area in terms of whether is a fallacy depending on whether it is relevant. If I weren’t more lazy I would make a Venn diagram to show this. Granted I could have worded me statement much, much more cordially. For that I apologize. I try to keep my comments mostly civil, although it is fun to lob a bomb every once and a while. BTW,you know my conflict of interest (hint, my state tax bill is way too high).

Why are your posts are shallow and tiresome (I should have used kinder words)? It seems to me that your solutions deny gravity, shallow. You tend to label a problem and strong arm a solution with complete disregard for the unintended consequences, leaving the details for the central planners. I think an interaction between you, flu and pri was emblematic. They was asking you to name names of who should have their wealth taken from them directly. What gains were ill gotten and what weren’t. I think I read something to this point on another thread too about whether steve jobs came by his money honestly or through grift. To date I have not seen an answer… probably because it is unanswerable in the specifics, only in the aggregate witch hunt. I especially liked this post from pri…

[quote=pri_dk][quote=CA renter]I’d put Alan Greenspan at the very top of the list. [/quote]

You do know that Alan Greenspan was a public employee?

He almost certainly is drawing a pension.

And what is the Federal Reserve anyway? It’s primary function is to determine interest rates – the price of money.

A group of knowledgeable people deciding what things are worth to society. Where have we heard that idea before?

Lets take a look up-thread:

[quote=CA renter]I am not at all an adherent of the “Efficient Market Hypothesis” […]

Sometimes, we need rational people to monitor and regulate markets — people with the requisite knowledge and understanding of how things work and who fully understand what the consequences of certain actions will be. Call it what you will… [/quote]

So we should have “rational people monitoring and regulating markets,” but if anything goes wrong, we hold them accountable and make them personally compensate for the market losses?

Are you actually suggesting that we hold public employees accountable, and have them bear the cost of financial downturns, just like everyone else?

I think we may be starting to agree after all…[/quote]

Do you think the likes of Greenspan are gone. That government has wised up, or even can wise up? Do you actually think he was trying to actively harm the country (I think that is called treason)? Is Frank Dodd going to fix it for us? There were many bankers who did what they felt would maximize their returns, but do you think they were trying to bring down the banking system? They were just dancing while the music played. If you were a trader, would you ride the sinking ship down once the holes appeared for the good of the country? Or would you short that sucker and bid it adieu?

Assuming anything other than people will always act in their own interest (or the interest of their family/friends), and that we as people are really bad at telling the future (bureaucrats chief among us), will yield to some pretty suboptimum outcomes.

Nobody likes income inequality, but income equality is even more base. A world where everyone gets paid the same is not only an impossible utopian dream, it is evil. People are not born equally capable, efficient, hardworking, or crafty, to equate the outcomes of unequal abilities is a recipe for starvation (not talking metaphorically here).

Oh one more passing thought. Quoting Mother Jones and then imploring me to do my research strikes me a a bit…hmm (I guess I need to leave that alone before I really get into the ad hominem territory)

[jstoesz]

Man, you guys are fired up! Keep it up. Its good entertainment.

[quote=bearishgurl][quote=jstoesz] . . . . I just met up with an old friend who graduated with the civil engineering degree. He lost his job recently in the private sector, and just got a job in the public sector. Guess what he’s making more then he did in the private sector, a lot more. He rides around a few days a week in a large 40k 4 x 4 Ford that’s brand-new, thanks Katrina for your levee caused freak out And that’s just salary I’m not talking pension here! Wake up CAR we’re getting fleeced, at least my buddy knows that he is riding the gravy train. That’s all I ask of public sector employees, a little gratitude![/quote]

jstoesz, if your “buddy” just obtained a public position (in the state of LA?) he has yet to be “vested” and there is a chasm between his potential for a “fat pension” and his actually being in a position to begin collecting it.

jstoesz, aren’t YOU a “civil engineer?” The State of LA beckons and undoubtedly needs your help. Why haven’t YOU applied to any of those jobs? Perhaps the living conditions there may not be to you or your spouse’s liking or taste??

I’ll leave it at that …. ;=]

LA is the most political state in the country, IMO, especially NOW.[/quote]

No, he works in Sac.

Fun Fact: Sacramento’s risk of flooding is the greatest of any major city in the country.

I graduated with a Mechanical Degree, but I could probably go into some sort of civil field. I am just not real interested in the work, nor do I plan on staying in the state much longer. My next job is more likely to be in MN.

[jstoesz]

I have asked this before and I will ask it again, because so far I have gotten no answer from you. What is your affiliation with public-sector workers? Your answers are shallow and tiresome and they reek of self interest!

I just met up with an old friend who graduated with the civil engineering degree. He lost his job recently in the private sector, and just got a job in the public sector. Guess what he’s making more then he did in the private sector, a lot more. He rides around a few days a week in a large 40k 4 x 4 Ford that’s brand-new, thanks Katrina for your levee caused freak out And that’s just salary I’m not talking pension here! Wake up CAR we’re getting fleeced, at least my buddy knows that he is riding the gravy train. That’s all I ask of public sector employees, a little gratitude!

[jstoesz]

call me a socialist ( I have never been called that before), but I would rather have the government take over the home and rent it at a 4% interest rate for a basis of rent price. The moral hazard is too great!

[jstoesz]

Deleted

[Author]

Posts