Page 36 of 67 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... LastLast
Results 351 to 360 of 668

Thread: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

  1. #351
    Sage
    Luckyone's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    6,690

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by Eriech View Post
    Democrats are for sharing what others have earned. They are good at virtue signaling though.

    Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
    In a family not everyone is an earner. The mother may be taking care of the home, the daughters may be looking to get married and may not be working, the sons are in school being educated. One of the family members may be a drug addict and not working at all even though capable of working. Your post suggests that if the man who is the earner should not share his income with the others simply because he earned it himself and the others didn't?

    Sharing the wealth among the family is what all individual families do. Why should it be different with our American family (the entire United States)?
    My guiding principles in life are to be honest, genuine, thoughtful and caring. Money is important but secondary.

  2. #352
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    29,510

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tlrmln View Post
    What do conservatives do to value landlords over families?



    The median household income has increased by 20% (CPI-adjusted) since 1985. What are conservatives doing to value employers over "average families"?
    Oh, incomes are up 20% since 1985? Great! Now how much higher are home prices?

    I've shown you the data in the OP. What's your reaction?

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "To exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine." - Pope Leo XIII

  3. #353
    Professor
    Join Date
    Apr 2019
    Last Seen
    Today @ 03:28 AM
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    1,380

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    Oh, incomes are up 20% since 1985? Great! Now how much higher are home prices?

    I've shown you the data in the OP. What's your reaction?
    I don't know what you think the data in the OP shows (or even what it actually is, since you didn't provide a link with the background information).

    However, it appears to show about a 33% increase since about 1985 of the ratio of median house price to income for some segment of the population. Stack this against a 20% increase in median income, and assuming that people were following the 30% rule for housing in 1985, the increase in median income is more than enough to cover the increase in housing cost.

    Of course, this all ignores the fact that the increase in median home prices probably has little to do with there being an increase in the cost of entry-level homes (you can buy a 3 bedroom house near Dallas for under $100k), but rather more well-off people spending a larger portion of their incomes on their homes.

    More importantly, it doesn't answer my question: what that have to do with anything conservatives are doing, especially in light of the fact that the rise in median housing prices is most likely driven by huge increases in states that are run by Democrats?

  4. #354
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    29,510

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by Tlrmln View Post
    I don't know what you think the data in the OP shows (or even what it actually is, since you didn't provide a link with the background information).

    However, it appears to show about a 33% increase since about 1985 of the ratio of median house price to income for some segment of the population. Stack this against a 20% increase in median income, and assuming that people were following the 30% rule for housing in 1985, the increase in median income is more than enough to cover the increase in housing cost.

    Of course, this all ignores the fact that the increase in median home prices probably has little to do with there being an increase in the cost of entry-level homes, but rather more well-off people spending a larger portin of their income on their homes.

    More importantly, it doesn't answer my question: what that have to do with anything conservatives are doing, especially in light of the fact that the rise in median housing prices is most likely driven by huge increases in states that are run by Democrats?
    Lol, look again at my graph. We have 50 years of wage decreases.

    Go to the St. Louis Fed and take it up with them if you think the data are wrong.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "To exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine." - Pope Leo XIII

  5. #355
    Sage
    Gaius46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,980

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    You've never really explained why it's inappropriate. If two people in the desert find the dying man, are they now morally justified in demanding $500 for the water? After all there's competition now!
    I have but in case you missed it it’s an apples and oranges comparison.

    You have vastly more choices in housing than you do in this contrived example. The only way you’d die from lack of affordable housing is if you planted yourself non the middle of the road and said “**** it I’m not moving until I get what I want” and then hit hit by a bus.
    Don't be a grammar nazi - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 1 #7

  6. #356
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    29,510

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius46 View Post
    I have but in case you missed it it’s an apples and oranges comparison.

    You have vastly more choices in housing than you do in this contrived example. The only way you’d die from lack of affordable housing is if you planted yourself non the middle of the road and said “**** it I’m not moving until I get what I want” and then hit hit by a bus.
    It's not far off once you think through the reasons why selling the water for $500 is evil.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "To exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine." - Pope Leo XIII

  7. #357
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    11-03-19 @ 08:38 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    61,319

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by phattonez View Post
    And in swoops cpwill with the straw man! No one ever said landlords deserve no compensation. I'm saying that they should take into account the means of their tenants and show solidarity with the poorer members of the community.
    It's hardly a strawman. You wish to take from others the value of what they provide because it will benefit you, but are unwilling to live by the same set of rules yourself.

    After all, the wealth of the rich belongs more to the poor than to the rich. You are Christian, aren't you?
    Indeed I am, which is why I know that the first sentence in this is untrue. I also know that the labor theory of value is crap, which is why I also know it to be inaccurate in a secular sense.

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill
    If you don't like paying rent, move somewhere you can afford to own. If you want to live in a big city, and can't afford a big nice house with a big ole yard in that place, then accept that you are responsible for your own decisions, including the one where you decided to prioritize living in that city.
    The end result of this line of thinking is that only the rich can afford to have communities.
    That is.... very disconnected from reality; I can only assume you haven't seen much of the country. Non-wealthy people have communities all over. If you want to live in an expensive area, live in that area. If you want cheaper housing, live where housing is cheaper. But demanding to have one's cake and eat it too is silly and unhelpful.

    I faced exactly this choice in my career. I could move to a large city area, where the cost of housing is sky-high, taxes are bad, and the commute would suck... but it would have gotten me promoted, increased my earning potential, and accelerated my career. Or, I could choose to work in a lower-cost-of-living area where the taxes were... less bad...., and I could dictate my own commute, but my career would hit a ceiling pretty quickly.

    So, I gave up the heights of the career ladder to have a better life. I'm in my mid-30s and will (at best) receive only one more promotion for the rest of my working life (assuming that we stay here when the kids are grown, which we probably will - we love our church, our community, etc.), but I have a good-sized house, a decent back yard for my kids to play in, we are walking distance from both a public park and the downtown of my little town, and still within decent driving range of a medium-large sized city, if we ever want to go catch a play or something.

    Life in the U.S. is wonderful for many reasons, not least of which is that it offers you choices. But saying yes to some things means saying no to others - marrying Susy means you are no longer able to marry Sarah. Becoming a lawyer likely means giving up on your dreams of becoming an NFL player. Choosing to live in an expensive area means you don't get the lower cost of living of a less expensive area.

    Complaining that you have to make choices, that everything isn't simply handed you, isn't going to help you see a better life. It's just going to make you bitter, and lead you down a path of blaming others for the conditions in your life that you created. That's a toxic place to be.

    Once affordable suburbs are now selling homes that start at $1 million
    And once-well-off areas are selling housing cheaper. It's almost as if people move and areas and people and economies change over time.


    Look, man. If you don't like how much you are paying in rent, well, when your contract is up, move. If you are unwilling to move for other reasons, related to location, career, etc., then accept that you are prioritizing those things over how much you wish to pay in rent, and that therefore the amount you are paying is the result of no one's choice but your own.

  8. #358
    Sage
    Gaius46's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    New York
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    10,980

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by Luckyone View Post
    In a family not everyone is an earner. The mother may be taking care of the home, the daughters may be looking to get married and may not be working, the sons are in school being educated. One of the family members may be a drug addict and not working at all even though capable of working. Your post suggests that if the man who is the earner should not share his income with the others simply because he earned it himself and the others didn't?

    Sharing the wealth among the family is what all individual families do. Why should it be different with our American family (the entire United States)?
    Because the “American Family” and the nuclear/extended family are not analogous.

    Family ties are based on love and centuries old senses of obligation. Those can be extended to friends and others in your local community. It doesn’t work with someone 3,000 miles who you’ve never heard of. Especially when it is done at the expense, perceived or otherwise, of one’s actual family.
    Don't be a grammar nazi - Marcus Aurelius, Meditations, Book 1 #7

  9. #359
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    29,510

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by cpwill View Post
    It's hardly a strawman. You wish to take from others the value of what they provide because it will benefit you, but are unwilling to live by the same set of rules yourself.


    Indeed I am, which is why I know that the first sentence in this is untrue. I also know that the labor theory of value is crap, which is why I also know it to be inaccurate in a secular sense.



    That is.... very disconnected from reality; I can only assume you haven't seen much of the country. Non-wealthy people have communities all over. If you want to live in an expensive area, live in that area. If you want cheaper housing, live where housing is cheaper. But demanding to have one's cake and eat it too is silly and unhelpful.

    I faced exactly this choice in my career. I could move to a large city area, where the cost of housing is sky-high, taxes are bad, and the commute would suck... but it would have gotten me promoted, increased my earning potential, and accelerated my career. Or, I could choose to work in a lower-cost-of-living area where the taxes were... less bad...., and I could dictate my own commute, but my career would hit a ceiling pretty quickly.

    So, I gave up the heights of the career ladder to have a better life. I'm in my mid-30s and will (at best) receive only one more promotion for the rest of my working life (assuming that we stay here when the kids are grown, which we probably will - we love our church, our community, etc.), but I have a good-sized house, a decent back yard for my kids to play in, we are walking distance from both a public park and the downtown of my little town, and still within decent driving range of a medium-large sized city, if we ever want to go catch a play or something.

    Life in the U.S. is wonderful for many reasons, not least of which is that it offers you choices. But saying yes to some things means saying no to others - marrying Susy means you are no longer able to marry Sarah. Becoming a lawyer likely means giving up on your dreams of becoming an NFL player. Choosing to live in an expensive area means you don't get the lower cost of living of a less expensive area.

    Complaining that you have to make choices, that everything isn't simply handed you, isn't going to help you see a better life. It's just going to make you bitter, and lead you down a path of blaming others for the conditions in your life that you created. That's a toxic place to be.



    And once-well-off areas are selling housing cheaper. It's almost as if people move and areas and people and economies change over time.


    Look, man. If you don't like how much you are paying in rent, well, when your contract is up, move. If you are unwilling to move for other reasons, related to location, career, etc., then accept that you are prioritizing those things over how much you wish to pay in rent, and that therefore the amount you are paying is the result of no one's choice but your own.
    I looked for any line here where you respond to Chrysostom. I didn't find it, so I'll post the quote again.

    "Not to enable the poor to share in our goods is to steal from them and deprive them of life. The goods we possess are not ours, but theirs."

    If you don't want to respond to that, then perhaps you'd like to explain how your ideas fly with the parable of the rich man and Lazarus. Because you have plenty of justification from these libertarian principles, but you don't explain how any of this is in line with Christian morality.

    Do you serve God or mammon?

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "To exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine." - Pope Leo XIII

  10. #360
    Traditionalist
    phattonez's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 10:32 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    29,510

    Re: Why do conservatives value landlords and employers over families?

    Quote Originally Posted by Gaius46 View Post
    Because the “American Family” and the nuclear/extended family are not analogous.

    Family ties are based on love and centuries old senses of obligation. Those can be extended to friends and others in your local community. It doesn’t work with someone 3,000 miles who you’ve never heard of. Especially when it is done at the expense, perceived or otherwise, of one’s actual family.
    This is actually a good criticism. This is why I support subsidiarity.

    Who shall ascend the hill of the Lord? And who shall stand in his holy place? He who has clean hands and a pure heart, who does not lift up his soul to what is false, and does not swear deceitfully. Psalm 24
    "To exercise pressure upon the indigent and the destitute for the sake of gain, and to gather one's profit out of the need of another, is condemned by all laws, human and divine." - Pope Leo XIII

Page 36 of 67 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •