• 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!

Food-stamp use doubles

muciti said:
I honestly believe that until the consumers in this country and around the world stop supporting business who exploit labor it doesnt matter who we elect.
Click to expand...

There are workers who exploit employers as well.
 
Grant said:
That might have been a good idea when the country wasn't trillion of dollars in debt, and that debt growing every day. What's happening to all that money? What happened to all those 'shovel ready' jobs that were supposed to be there? Even Obama had to laugh at that joke.

You're talking as though you want good and responsible government that will balance budgets, maintain the infrastructure, and so on, and then elect a wastrel with no experience whatsoever. What can Americans actually expect from someone like Obama? If you don't vote in serious people you won't have serious government. Instead you wanted celebrity government and now complain about the lack of infrastructure.

It's hard to have any sympathy.



Again, the government is $17,000,000,000,000 in debt and that number is growing every day. What are you going to pay all these people with? When a company is broke is their response to hire more people? That only happened in Obamaworld. It's time to get real.

Where to get the money? Borrow it? Print it?


They are not used for that purpose but at least you have an idea, albeit a tad unrealistic.

Great

Perhaps but they may then be more expensive and further debts created.



You call them 'welfare subsidies' but, as you know, corporations are leaving, subsidies or no. At one time America was a great place to invest but today, not so much. Instead you should be asking yourself how to attract more business.



How about spending what they did during the Eisenhower years and diminishing the size of government as well, and returning to the habits of personal responsibilities of the Eisenhower years. The Americans of today are a shadow of what they were during those times so your suggestion is quite impossible. The American character has beome too diminished.



The conditions in America today are unique to America today. The family is dying out and personal responsibility along with it. People like Barrack Obama claim "Wall Street", "Rich Bankers" or "Corporations" are the villains when it is actually the American people themselves who are to blame. And that weakness is further demonstrated when they whine and complain, like juveniles, that it is all somebody else's fault.
Click to expand...


We're only getting out of debt two ways; raising taxes and creating jobs that will create private sector jobs.

Think of it like this. For over 35 years this nation has followed the failed economic policies of Reagan. Creating monopolies, getting rid of competition. Then we lowered taxes on the rich. Then we deleted taxes on corporations and cities and towns were giving TAX BREAKS to corporations because all the economic growth by having open market competition in our society stopped and was replaced with a few own it all. THEN we slashed jobs and more jobs and more jobs. And what do you we have? A collapsed economy. We need to get rid of this failed economic thinking and start creating a society FDR did after the LAST depression before we bring us down any further on the quality of life rankings in this world.
 
muciti said:
I would agree with that if we could ensure that people at least have an opportunity to find steady employment, which today, is not realistic.
Click to expand...

And why do you think it's not realistic today? Why should finding a good paying job that allows for a middle class life on longer be available in the US?
 
j-mac said:
A free man can only be "exploited" if he allows himself to be such.
Click to expand...

So conservatives are for increased spending to education beyond k-12? That's news to me. Correct me if I'm wrong by the Ryan budget slashes spending that would go to Pell Grants or other assistance individuals would use to improve their lives.
 
muciti said:
That opportunity is steady dwindling. People don't support small business. That makes it harder to succeed. Also the red tape in place of people trying to provide a service or sell something is rediculous.
Click to expand...

Well my business was quite simple, which was selling popcorn at the beach. It took very little to get started and got the money from a family member. Eventually the council shut me down after two years because I wasn't paying property taxes, and I didn't blame them at all.

Businesses then, as now, were paying ridiculous amounts in taxes and you really had to have a vast amount of entrepreneurial spirit to open your own business in a fixed location. I wouldn't want to start again under the conditions they are placing on small businesses these days. It's not only unfair, it is counterproductive.
 
Grant said:
Well my business was quite simple, which was selling popcorn at the beach. It took very little to get started and got the money from a family member. Eventually the council shut me down after two years because I wasn't paying property taxes, and I didn't blame them at all.

Businesses then, as now, were paying ridiculous amounts in taxes and you really had to have a vast amount of entrepreneurial spirit to open your own business in a fixed location. I wouldn't want to start again under the conditions they are placing on small businesses these days. It's not only unfair, it is counterproductive.
Click to expand...

What conditions are that?
 
j-mac said:
Better yet maybe some jobs are not worth $9 per hour...Take N. Dakota for example...My son who works at the Wal Mart around here, makes about $9.50 per hour, while in N. Dakota the same job is hiring at $15 per hour....Wages are fungible with what markets bear for the job. If a business is abusing their pay scale, they won't be in business for long because quality employees will not work for them.
Click to expand...

It's about supply and demand, isn't it? If the labor supply is more limited in ND, then wages will be higher.

So we could:

continue to import illegal aliens to take unskilled jobs and low wages, or
allow the labor supply to diminish to the point that people in those jobs make more money.
 
Muddy Creek said:
We're only getting out of debt two ways; raising taxes and creating jobs that will create private sector jobs.
Think of it like this. For over 35 years this nation has followed the failed economic policies of Reagan. Creating monopolies, getting rid of competition.
Click to expand...

In fact, under Reagan, the Dept of justice ended the AT&T monopoly.

Then we lowered taxes on the rich. Then we deleted taxes on corporations and cities and towns were giving TAX BREAKS to corporations because all the economic growth by having open market competition in our society stopped and was replaced with a few own it all. THEN we slashed jobs and more jobs and more jobs. And what do you we have? A collapsed economy. We need to get rid of this failed economic thinking and start creating a society FDR did after the LAST depression before we bring us down any further on the quality of life rankings in this world.
Click to expand...

FDR didn't create much after the Great Depression. He was President during most of it in fact. While a world war might create jobs there are probably better ways to go about it. If balancing a budget was at all possible it might have given the people enough confidence to hire and invest, but instead the government created more red tape and more anti business policies.

Getting people to invest in a country, or state, is very competitive, and the federal government has done all they can to discourage investment in America.
 
Grant said:
What's true is that some people don't have vision, or ambition, and allow their lives to drift. They will always be with us, and there is little anyone can do about it. In a free country you get to live your life your own way and we should not be condemned unless we behave immorally or illegally. I have poor people working for ma at this very moment, but they are certainly not unhappy. Quite the opposite in fact.

You don't have to be rich or poor to be happy but some people have allowed envy to take over their lives, and unhappiness inevitably follows.
Click to expand...

I see the problem as something completely different. I see a job market and economy where someone born 60-50-40 years ago could be a mediocre or average person and live a middle class life style.

Someone entering the market now is faced with a different reality where the difference between good and lower paid jobs is much more severe and the good paying jobs are much more competitive.

This is supported by trends like a gradual decrease in median wages, a disproporionate gain in low paying service sector jobs compared to decent paying jobs following the recession in 2002 and the most recent recession, as well as the obvious fact that more individuals are now eligible for services based on their income.

I guess I'm a sucker for explanations based on quantifiable data and trends over assumptions that the poor in this country are growing/worse off because of a lack of ambition/vision/allowing their lives to drift or whatever.
 
iliveonramen said:
So conservatives are for increased spending to education beyond k-12? That's news to me. Correct me if I'm wrong by the Ryan budget slashes spending that would go to Pell Grants or other assistance individuals would use to improve their lives.
Click to expand...

No. Seems to me that the rational way to approach the problem in post primary education would be first to reign in the out of control cost of the college system then look at other things.
 
j-mac said:
No. Seems to me that the rational way to approach the problem in post primary education would be first to reign in the out of control cost of the college system then look at other things.
Click to expand...

Hear, hear.

and a pay as you go plan would bring costs down, as the students (and parents) would look at costs far more closely than they do now.

It worked when I was in college, back in the dark ages.

It took just over 71 hours of (my) wages to pay a semester's tuition at a private college, back in '63. How do those numbers look today?
 
Dittohead not! said:
Hear, hear.

and a pay as you go plan would bring costs down, as the students (and parents) would look at costs far more closely than they do now.

It worked when I was in college, back in the dark ages.

It took just over 71 hours of (my) wages to pay a semester's tuition at a private college, back in '63. How do those numbers look today?
Click to expand...

A lot more than 71 hours of wages, I can tell ya that....I have two in right now....Outside of buying our house, I can't think of anything so expensive...
 
j-mac said:
No. Seems to me that the rational way to approach the problem in post primary education would be first to reign in the out of control cost of the college system then look at other things.
Click to expand...


I agree..they need to reign in a lot of the spending. A pretty interesting fact...as tuition has ballooned the ratio of administrators have grown compared to the number of actual professors employed. So a large chunk of that money is going to costly expansions, administrators, and other things that don't necessarily result in a better education experience for a tuition payer. So I agree with that.

But!

It's also a fact that states have been cutting back on the money they send to state universities so a larger share of the cost for running the university is being shouldered by individuals paying tuition. States as of 2013 are spending on average 28 percent less on state universities than they did in 2008.
 
iliveonramen said:
I see the problem as something completely different. I see a job market and economy where someone born 60-50-40 years ago could be a mediocre or average person and live a middle class life style.

Someone entering the market now is faced with a different reality where the difference between good and lower paid jobs is much more severe and the good paying jobs are much more competitive.

This is supported by trends like a gradual decrease in median wages, a disproporionate gain in low paying service sector jobs compared to decent paying jobs following the recession in 2002 and the most recent recession, as well as the obvious fact that more individuals are now eligible for services based on their income.

I guess I'm a sucker for explanations based on quantifiable data and trends over assumptions that the poor in this country are growing/worse off because of a lack of ambition/vision/allowing their lives to drift or whatever.
Click to expand...

Part of what we call 'success' in this world is just having more than your neighbor. That could apply to cows in some cultures, or more wives in another.

For generations Americans have been expecting, through a matter of birthright, to have more riches than other peoples. Now that is no longer the case and they don't seem very comfortable with the thought. The first response is, "Why can't the government do something about it?". But of course, despite their promises, there is nothing they can do. Borrowing and printing more money won't solve the problem, nor will more government programs. Barring trade won't do it either, nor will confiscatory polices on businesses. Many countries of the world, especially in Asia, are developing the initiative and entrepreneurial spirit that once put Americans head and shoulders over the rest of the world.

So what can be done?

Only going back to the basics will make America great again, something individual States appear prepared to do but they are being hampered by the sucking morass in Washington. Cut back Washington's influence, like the Founders designed, and there is a chance.

If not this generation of Americans are going to have to expect less and, in some cases, much less.
 
iliveonramen said:
I agree..they need to reign in a lot of the spending. A pretty interesting fact...as tuition has ballooned the ratio of administrators have grown compared to the number of actual professors employed. So a large chunk of that money is going to costly expansions, administrators, and other things that don't necessarily result in a better education experience for a tuition payer. So I agree with that.

But!

It's also a fact that states have been cutting back on the money they send to state universities so a larger share of the cost for running the university is being shouldered by individuals paying tuition. States as of 2013 are spending on average 28 percent less on state universities than they did in 2008.
Click to expand...

If they cut out athletics in college, what do you think they'd save? Should the professional sports teams pay for the athletic teams in colleges as they benefit from the training these young athletes get?
 
Muddy Creek said:
If they cut out athletics in college, what do you think they'd save? Should the professional sports teams pay for the athletic teams in colleges as they benefit from the training these young athletes get?
Click to expand...

Where did the OP mention athletics? He was posting about the administrative growth...
 
iliveonramen said:
I agree..they need to reign in a lot of the spending. A pretty interesting fact...as tuition has ballooned the ratio of administrators have grown compared to the number of actual professors employed. So a large chunk of that money is going to costly expansions, administrators, and other things that don't necessarily result in a better education experience for a tuition payer. So I agree with that.
Click to expand...

Isn't that always the way? It is that way in primary ed also...You have a shortage of teachers, but 16 asst superintendents....

But!
Click to expand...

Always a "but"....

It's also a fact that states have been cutting back on the money they send to state universities so a larger share of the cost for running the university is being shouldered by individuals paying tuition. States as of 2013 are spending on average 28 percent less on state universities than they did in 2008.
Click to expand...

I wonder how many of these State Universities constantly crying poor mouth have multi million dollar endowments that they just sit on.....
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Where did the OP mention athletics? He was posting about the administrative growth...
Click to expand...

I was commenting on his post. I wasn't doing anything but having a discussion with him.
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Athletics had nothing to do with his post... :confused:
Click to expand...

He was pondering where all the money went. I commented on cutting out athletics from the budget and how much that would save. Is he your sock?

Talking about college has nothing to do with the topix starter; food stamp use doubles. You want to discuss things with me, or are you just trying to prevent a discussion with anyone else but you?
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Athletics had nothing to do with his post... :confused:
Click to expand...

but costs do.

Athletics should be able to pay for themselves with ticket sales donations from supporters, and fund raisers.

Where does all the money go? If a high school can operate on ten grand per, which still is more than would be needed if all of the money got to the school btw, why does a university need thirty? It makes no sense.
 
Muddy Creek said:
He was pondering where all the money went. I commented on cutting out athletics from the budget and how much that would save. Is he your sock?

Talking about college has nothing to do with the topix starter; food stamp use doubles. You want to discuss things with me, or are you just trying to prevent a discussion with anyone else but you?
Click to expand...

Athletics at the University I support is self-funded so your argument has no merit in my book. Bringing athletics into the discussion was just a deflection...
 
Dittohead not! said:
but costs do.

Athletics should be able to pay for themselves with ticket sales donations from supporters, and fund raisers.

Where does all the money go? If a high school can operate on ten grand per, which still is more than would be needed if all of the money got to the school btw, why does a university need thirty? It makes no sense.
Click to expand...

Read post #373...
 
AlabamaPaul said:
Athletics at the University I support is self-funded so your argument has no merit in my book. Bringing athletics into the discussion was just a deflection...
Click to expand...

No, it was actually a response to cutting the cost of education.

Alabama coaching salaries increase 40 percent since winning titles | The Daily Bama Blog


Alabama football coaches can tell you that much. Salaries for the nine assistants and Nick Saban grew 40.1 percent from the since the Crimson Tide won two national titles in three seasons. The assistants alone will make 45.1 percent more this year compared to 2009 while Saban was bumped 36.3 percent.

These figures include just the base salaries for the 10 coaching positions that have change hands a few times in some cases.

In all, the 10 were paid $6.7 million in 2009. After yesterday’s contract amendments, the same 10 positions will earn $9.4 million in 2012.

Saban’s 36 percent base pay increase took the figure from $3.9 million to $5.3 million, but his raise wasn’t close to the largest over the same time frame. That title easily belongs to defensive coordinator Kirby Smart.

Smart’s salary jumped 163 percent since making $360,000 three seasons ago. Then Georgia came calling and his salary went to $750,000. Raises of a cool $100,000 came twice since then to make him a $950,000-man this fall.
Click to expand...

Who pays for these increases? Not the tickets of the games.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom