• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Rich get richer, poor get poorer

I think what people are responding to, Harry, is the tone of personal opinion in your writing. Try not to take too much offense.


I think the disparity in opinions here is probably due to differences in personal opinion. One side, some have seen the wealth of opportunities available to the poor, impoverished, low income, whatever. And how an otherwise unobstructed individual might take advantage of those to achieve success. Others have more knowledge/experience of the difficulties someone in a low income situation might have. A 20-year old mother in a bad neighborhood for example might be 'technically able' to move ahead in life by walking through her gang infested neighborhood after her part time job to attend a community college courses, for which she was unprepared due to her poor low-income High School education, before picking up her kids, cashing an assistance check, feeding them, dealing with her abusive boyfriend, and crying into a pillow while he watches TV. But it might be a little hard.

That was a little overkill, but the point is the reason financial opportunities are extended to the poor is because it can be quite difficult for them to take advantage of them.

Obviously we shouldn't just say "Damn rich people, Lets take their money!" but there are factors in this system that prevent class mobility based simply on effort, and if we can eliminate those by shaving a little off the top, the rich will have to at least continue to provide value to the system to stay rich. Fairness aside, I think making our economic system more competitive is whats best for everyone, and "some" redistribution of wealth might be the best way to do that.

A couple of things. First, it is no doubt harder for some Americans than others to achieve. Everyone has different talents and levels of talent. There is discrimination for a lot of different things, race, religion, tall/short, fat/thin etc.

So some have obstacles while others ( Bush elder was once descibed as being born on third base and thought he hit a triple) have built in advantages. Those may limit most people from attaining the highest levels of financial sucess but does not stop people from moving up the ladder. Immigrant groups for generations have had to start at the lowest rung of the financial ladder and each generation worked to move up the food chain.

Your example of the wal mart worker is a good one. That person through hard work may get to be a gloor supervisor, a better but still low paying job. His/her son or daughter hopefully will work hard in school, get a better education and move up the financial food chain.

I am by not rich but feel I have lived the American dream. Two generations removed from European pogroms we worked into the middle class and hopefully our child will do better than that. The American dream in my view the the chance to suceed not a promise to suceed.
 
It isn't a vendetta against poor people, most of them aren't helpless.
If that were true we should just institutionalize them and be done with it.

I'm have submitted proof that the biggest thing that makes a difference between "poor" and "rich" is whether or not you save or spend your money.
As of yet, all you have brought forward is false information.

I am rich, in wisdom, forethought and determination.
That is what it takes to become monetarily wealthy.

Brainwashed?
Seriously, I have lived my whole life (albeit a short life) making less than $30k a year, at one point being so broke I couldn't afford to eat anything but plain rice.
That was because I spent my money like a fool.

we were saving 10% and tithing 10% when we rated (though did not take) WIC, food stamps, etc; with a bouncing baby boy and a second on the way.

we achieved this (rick might have you believe) impossibility by using a form of black magic called a "budget" to "spend less than we earned".

it's pretty high level stuff; but if anyone wants, i will pm them and walk them through it. anyone that hasn't had the higher level math (you know, the addition, the subtraction, the multiplication tables), though, might be in over their head.
 
Last edited:
I guess I shouldnt have expected you too :)

yeah I don't do psychobabble very well.

you claim that some people cannot make it on their own

no one denies that-what we disagree on is why I or someone else has a duty to support such people unless their "invalidity" is due to our actions. You seem to think that income redistribution is good-to most rational conservatives it is a necessary evil that should be held to the absolute minimum rather than expanding sloth and dependency
 
Last edited:
Lets be realistic, most successful people were either born into success or were in a better position to become successful, able to pay for college, living in a better environment. This thing about the american dream and everyone can attain it, is directly aimed at becoming middle class and owning a home a car etc.
Lets all be honest, not everyone can be rich in america and not everyone can own a business and not everyone is going to make enough money to do all things some of my conservative friends believe all americans should do...
When someone can SHOW me how a person working for the countries largest employer can pay rent, pay for transportation, pay for food for themselves and their kids, pay for insurance and lifes necessities then pay for their own healthcare and then on top of all that save for their own retirement all on a walmart salary.

They can't.

Tough.

If they wanted more, they should have taken the time to learn skills that would earn them more money.

America is the land of opportunity. No one ever said America was the land of guaranteed success.

Not everyone can be der first violiner, someone has to push der vind trough der tuba.
 
Lets be realistic, most successful people were either born into success or were in a better position to become successful, able to pay for college, living in a better environment. This thing about the american dream and everyone can attain it, is directly aimed at becoming middle class and owning a home a car etc.
Lets all be honest, not everyone can be rich in america and not everyone can own a business and not everyone is going to make enough money to do all things some of my conservative friends believe all americans should do...
When someone can SHOW me how a person working for the countries largest employer can pay rent, pay for transportation, pay for food for themselves and their kids, pay for insurance and lifes necessities then pay for their own healthcare and then on top of all that save for their own retirement all on a walmart salary.
When one of the personal responsiblity hawkers can show me a person does that Ill agree with everything you say.
Can you imagine a country where EVERYONEs successful. WOW everyone would have to cut their own grass and wipe their own behind and fix their own car and when you call 911 hope your lawyer is available to come save your arse.

Ive been a staunch republican for 42 yrs but that does not mean I have to run around and spout what amounts to me as total nonsense...sorry guys...not everyone can do it all on their own no matter how much political rhetoric comes out of the teaparty
I know I dont embrace some very conservative tenets, hence my slightly conservative tag...and I know some of my positions are distateful to very conservative folks but I will always calls it like I sees it...of course I could be dead wrong

lpast, I think that's the first post you've made on this forum that I agree with.
 
I think what people are responding to, Harry, is the tone of personal opinion in your writing. Try not to take too much offense.


I think the disparity in opinions here is probably due to differences in personal opinion. One side, some have seen the wealth of opportunities available to the poor, impoverished, low income, whatever. And how an otherwise unobstructed individual might take advantage of those to achieve success. Others have more knowledge/experience of the difficulties someone in a low income situation might have. A 20-year old mother in a bad neighborhood for example might be 'technically able' to move ahead in life by walking through her gang infested neighborhood after her part time job to attend a community college courses, for which she was unprepared due to her poor low-income High School education, before picking up her kids, cashing an assistance check, feeding them, dealing with her abusive boyfriend, and crying into a pillow while he watches TV. But it might be a little hard.

That was a little overkill, but the point is the reason financial opportunities are extended to the poor is because it can be quite difficult for them to take advantage of them.

Obviously we shouldn't just say "Damn rich people, Lets take their money!" but there are factors in this system that prevent class mobility based simply on effort, and if we can eliminate those by shaving a little off the top, the rich will have to at least continue to provide value to the system to stay rich. Fairness aside, I think making our economic system more competitive is whats best for everyone, and "some" redistribution of wealth might be the best way to do that.

But they already provide this, we already have a very progressive tax rate and a very generous social welfare system.
I can't see how taking more will do any good for anyone.
It hasn't worked yet.
 
But they already provide this, we already have a very progressive tax rate and a very generous social welfare system.
I can't see how taking more will do any good for anyone.
It hasn't worked yet.

what is it that social welfare has not achieved that you think should have been accomplished with those public expenditures
 
what is it that social welfare has not achieved that you think should have been accomplished with those public expenditures

There is nothing that can be achieved through the use of social welfare.
It keeps people at that level, it doesn't push them up.

Only individual will is the motivator for a person to move forward.
One of those things that helps nudge a person is discomfort.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom