US income inequality at record high

[Truktek2]

Just out of curiosity, how many of you more affluent types have their kids in public school?

I'm not sure how I feel about educating your kid. I might not even like him.

 

[Lonesomedave]

I disagree with your premise that this is:

a) a good book

b) provides a valuable insight into this topic.

of course you do...

how do you feel about "FREE TO CHOOSE" by milton friedman?

 

[Lonesomedave]

Just out of curiosity, how many of you more affluent types have their kids in public school?

I'm not sure how I feel about educating your kid. I might not even like him.

whereas, if they are in private school, they have the privilege of paying for their own kid's education AND your kid's education....or are you proposing a system where those in private school can somehow be excused from paying a portion of taxes/bonds etc on the basis that they don't use the schools?

see, what you are saying is "pay but don't use"....at least i THINK that is what you are saying...am i wrong?

they pay for the schools and therefore, if they choose, should get to use the schools

 

[fdeck]

There is a good book to read on this subject ...

Atlas Shrugged by Ann Rand

Did you get through John Galt's Speech? I was chatting with someone who teaches a college course and requires his students to read Atlas Shrugged. I asked him if he had ever read the Speech in its entirety, and he admitted that he hadn't.

I read it during the Reagan era, when it was reported that a number of his advisors were followers of Rand. I didn't get through the Speech.

For those of you who haven't read the book, here's a synopsis:

1. Heroine suffers in a dystopia.

2. Heroine suddenly finds herself in a utopia.

3. Leader of utopia gives a long Speech, which is optional.

 

[Unrepresented]

of course you do...

how do you feel about "FREE TO CHOOSE" by milton friedman?

I have not read it. Although a quick google search suggests that my current reading material:

EC Archives: Weird Science Vol. 2. is probably equally appropriate for understanding the nuance of global economics and how to effectively expand prosperity to a greater percentage of the population.

 

[Truktek2]

whereas, if they are in private school, they have the privilege of paying for their own kid's education AND your kid's education....or are you proposing a system where those in private school can somehow be excused from paying a portion of taxes/bonds etc on the basis that they don't use the schools?

see, what you are saying is "pay but don't use"....at least i THINK that is what you are saying...am i wrong?

they pay for the schools and therefore, if they choose, should get to use the schools

Nope. That's EXACTLY what I'm saying. It costs me 7k a year in tuition not including extra activities and fees. But I suppose that's one of my "poor choices" that leave me with less disposable income.

Meanwhile, the rich that CAN pay for their kids education are a as much a burden on the system as the people they claim should pull themselves up by their bootstraps.

Oh, and I CAN"T write it off.

 

[fdeck]

Just out of curiosity, how many of you more affluent types have their kids in public school?

I'm not sure how I feel about educating your kid. I might not even like him.

Well, I don't know if I'm a more affluent type -- depends on where you draw the line. There's actually relatively little demand for secular private schools in my locale. There are some sectarian private schools, and interestingly enough quite a few home-schooled kids.

You don't have to educate them. They'll educate you.

 

[fdeck]

of course you do...

how do you feel about "FREE TO CHOOSE" by milton friedman?

That would be the Milton Friedman who wrote that "the poor are poor because they don't have any money." He's the one who first advocated the idea that the best way to subsidize the poor was simply to give them money, rather than trying to tell them how to live their lives.

I'm not sure I agree with him, but it's an interesting viewpoint, and there are people experimenting with the idea in the third world.

 

[two fingers]

Just out of curiosity, how many of you more affluent types have their kids in public school?

I'm not sure how I feel about educating your kid. I might not even like him.

I will (when they are old enough). And I'm pretty sure that I pay enough taxes not only to educate my own, but add a wing to the gym and maybe put a computer in every classroom there. So you won't be educating mine. I'm probably educating yours.

 

[BawanaRik]

I just think with healthcare there should be a pretty decent minimal level provided to everyone for free at point of care.

The best schools do have pretty high tuition fees, and those best schools do carry reputations which matter in many professional fields. As for party schools, presumably the bit of paper the student ends up with isn't worth much. That's more a case of needing to be ontop of colleges so that they are providing a service that they can backup (ie - not a useless bit of paper).

Please show me anyplace on the planet, other than the US where someone can show up for "free" medical care. The US has many people showing at out Emergency rooms for free medical. And there is no requirement to show a NHS card BEFORE getting cared for.

It's my opinion that No one on the planet provides more free health care than the US.

Needing to on top of colleges? They offer a product, people buy it. It's my opinion that it's up to the consumer to be on top of it.

As far as the best schools being expensive perhaps Harvard may fit into that category but schools like Rutgers. North Carolina State, etc provide a reasonable fee schedule. And a great education.

Suny Purchase may be familiar to film fans. They used to have lines of potential students attempting to get into the school.

 

[Truktek2]

Well, I don't know if I'm a more affluent type -- depends on where you draw the line. There's actually relatively little demand for secular private schools in my locale. There are some sectarian private schools, and interestingly enough quite a few home-schooled kids.

You don't have to educate them. They'll educate you.

I gotcha. The point I was trying to make was that certain people here (not you, mind you) are complaining how people are a burden to the system, when they are just as guilty of it. Meanwhile, they get to write off a lot of their income while the middle class (which apparently isn't shrinking) are a bunch of lazy whiners.

 

[i_got_a_mohawk]

i don't exactly disagree with you....i will just point out that there is no such thing as FREE...unless God himself comes down and starts providing it...someone has to pay for it.

Very true, and I realise that, the tax on my payslip is a monthly reminder. It's why I had said at point of care. I just don't like the idea of it all being a profit driven enterprise (a very lucrative at that).

 

[Lonesomedave]

That would be the Milton Friedman who wrote that "the poor are poor because they don't have any money." He's the one who first advocated the idea that the best way to subsidize the poor was simply to give them money, rather than trying to tell them how to live their lives.

I'm not sure I agree with him, but it's an interesting viewpoint, and there are people experimenting with the idea in the third world.

this is the Milton Friedman i was referring too...the Nobel prize winning Milton Friedman...

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...bDgmOoCf5rcv-3g&bvm=bv.52164340,d.b2I&cad=rja

 

[Truktek2]

I will (when they are old enough). And I'm pretty sure that I pay enough taxes not only to educate my own, but add a wing to the gym and maybe put a computer in every classroom there. So you won't be educating mine. I'm probably educating yours.

I hope when you get out of school you get the success you so desire. I really mean that. But don't be surprised when you get out into the real world, life isn't exactly as it looks from behind your textbooks.

 

[two fingers]

Let me ask you this - would you loan 300k of your investor's money to a mariachi singer with no verifiable income?

THAT WAS MY POINT!!!!

If you were a mariachi singer with very little income, would you BORROW $300K?????? That's MY point. You can NOT legislate away STUPID. BOTH sides were idiots. However, it is more FUN to blame the one with bigger pockets. The "little guy" is always the VICTIM while the "fat cat" (God I hate that term) is the ENEMY.

My point all along is that MANY of the bottom percentage of wage earners/wealth owners in this country are that way because they either.....
1) Don't care about money and are of average or better intelligence and intentionally CHOSE to live that way (which is fine unless you want me to pick up the tab for your slack ^$$ lifestyle).
2) Are just STUPID and/or LAZY and either don't KNOW any better, or are UNWILLING to do what it takes to change their lives.

Sure, the banker was wrong. Does that make the IDIOT SINGER any LESS WRONG???? Does that put the FULL RESPONSIBILITY on the BANK? Why should the DIPSTICK who TOOK OUT the loan bare NOTHING on the back end????? Because he's STUPID? Well, there went half our legal system right there.

+++++++++Sorry. the gun control reference doesn't belong here. Edited to delete. It was a poor choice of example and not meant to sway the conversation in another direction.++++++++++++

Give.
Me.
A.
Break.

 

[Tony Flow MMMM]

If you were a mariachi singer with very little income, would you BORROW $300K?????? That's MY point. You can NOT legislate away STUPID. BOTH sides were idiots. However, it is more FUN to blame the one with bigger pockets. The "little guy" is always the VICTIM while the "fat cat" (God I hate that term) is the ENEMY.

My point all along is that MANY of the bottom percentage of wage earners/wealth owners in this country are that way because they either.....
1) Don't care about money and are of average or better intelligence and intentionally CHOSE to live that way (which is fine unless you want me to pick up the tab for your slack ^$$ lifestyle).
2) Are just STUPID and/or LAZY and either don't KNOW any better, or are UNWILLING to do what it takes to change their lives.

Sure, the banker was wrong. Does that make the IDIOT SINGER any LESS WRONG???? Does that put the FULL RESPONSIBILITY on the BANK? Why should the DIPSTICK who TOOK OUT the loan bare NOTHING on the back end?????

What does the singer have to lose? Credit score? Woop de doo

The banker? Only hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Don't pull out the gun control stuff in this thread please

 

[BawanaRik]

Very true, and I realise that, the tax on my payslip is a monthly reminder. It's why I had said at point of care. I just don't like the idea of it all being a profit driven enterprise (a very lucrative at that).

Thanks for clearing that up. Many support this non free type of health care essentially putting it into the category of Roads, Sewers etc. Services provided.

The reason the US has difficulty with this is due to the fact that many very powerful special interest groups receive Platinum Level Health either free or close to and are reluctant to share with the rest of US.

 

[fdeck]

this is the Milton Friedman i was referring too...the Nobel prize winning Milton Friedman...

I'm not sure I'd trust the Nobel Committee to tell me which economists to believe... or which peace-makers.

 

[Unrepresented]

What does the singer have to lose? Credit score? Woop de doo

The banker? Only hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Don't pull out the gun control stuff in this thread please

+1 on both parts.

Call me naive, but I hold higher expectations on a lending institution to determine an appropriate ability to repay more than on a mariachi musician.

Check back in with me when the lending institutions are butchering "Guantanamera" after having been cleared for guitarron duty by the mariachi musician.

 

[two fingers]

Uh oh. As for the rest of your post I don't even care to address others have clearly pointed out the flaws in your theory.

I'm married to a doctor who is a partner in a private practice. They are in meetings now to decide whether or not they will continue to take on new government assisted patients because the amount that the government thinks is "enough" for a doctor visit is a mere $25. That isn't enough per visit to pay the staff, maintain all the equipment to government standards, maintain all the records and paperwork to government standards (especially for those very same patients), do continuing ed and training, pay the bills, and bring some home for the family. Many of the practices in our area are not accepting new Medicaid patients, and finding creative ways to "fire" the ones they already have (although my wife's practice won't go that far). Those patients are then forced to go to doctors who work for public and/or university hospitals that get outside funding (usually from that same government) to make up the difference. And then the government will sit back and act as though their plan works beautifully. "Clearly that must be enough money per visit because those places are making it work. Never mind the big checks we send them on a regular basis as funding that has nothing whatsoever to do with making up the difference in what we pay them per visit and what it takes to stay afloat."

Any questions?

Tell you what. Let's go to government funded HVAC repair and see how the guys running those businesses do with government mandated $25 service call fees. Every body deserves to have a functioning heating and air system, right?

You ever met a mechanic that will have a look under the hood, an electrician that will take a look at your house then diagnose and fix the problem, or even a VET that will have a look at your DOG for TWENTY FIVE BUCKS???? Of course you haven't. But my wife isn't allowed to turn a profit without being seen as "evil" by many.

Never mind the fact that is takes another act of congress to even get the government to PAY those bills tiny little fees in less than six months (most of the time it's more). How many businesses you know that can afford to run six months or more behind on paid accounts?

Just more stuff that you are only allowed to consider if you are a "rich elitist fat cat hater of the poor". It is strange being married to an evil woman who wants everybody to die in the streets. She seemed nice when I met her.