This chuck schwan guy on the news?
-
PSiedTSi wrote:
thats cause i think he did say thatder...
-
anyone post up the vid?
-
Or everyone could just pay less taxes.
-
stephen bradley wrote:
Or everyone could just pay less taxes.Yep, now if we could just elect people who would actually vote for spending less to go along with the reduced taxes...
Chuck, I'd rather you kept your money and invested it in the private sector rather than pissing it away giving it to the government.
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
DaveH wrote:
Yep, now if we could just elect people who would actually vote for spending less to go along with the reduced taxes...Chuck, I'd rather you kept your money and invested it in the private sector rather than pissing it away giving it to the government.
I agree 100% there Dave. I have no problem with a graduated scale of taxes where the more fortunate pay slightly more than the less fortunate (say 10% to 15% depending on income levels for example) and then a severe cut in gov't spending. I'm not saying cut care from those who need it, just a reassessment over a 5 year period of everyone who is on welfare...the disabled/challenged get an increase, anyone caught abusing the system gets an immediate cease of benefits. Perhaps limits on how long you can be on and a system to help those that are on get off of it (realistically, those that grew up on the system don't have a shot at a decent job w/o a little help....both with education and a few courses on professional conduct/appearance) I know that in the short term this would make gov't even bigger, but ideally in the long term I think it could help this country if managed properly.
I'm going to quit typing before I forget that I'm a Democrat.......
-
Veritas Crew with Governor Hoeven (sorry it's blurry, I didn't take the pic)
-
Notice we all have our hands covered, while Chuck (dem.) is reaching for his wallet! J/K
-
He's a republican, he's spent it all already anyway......
-
tjamz wrote:
I agree 100% there Dave. I have no problem with a graduated scale of taxes where the people who bust their asses at work pay slightly more than the people who just do enough to get by(say 10% to 15% depending on income levels for example) and then a severe cut in gov't spending. <snip>I had to alter this to reflect reality...
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
there's exceptions to both sides of that Dave, but notice that if you read the rest of my post I qualify how I'd try and get more people to at least middle class and earning their way through life...
-
tjamz wrote:
there's exceptions to both sides of that Dave, but notice that if you read the rest of my post I qualify how I'd try and get more people to at least middle class and earning their way through life...Yep, not much I could disagree with you about in the middle section. I just don't like people who work hard and make good money being called fortunate, vs the people who make less money (for whatever reason) being called less fortunate. It makes it sound like people who make more money were just lucky, and people who don't make much money, well they just weren't on the lucky end of the deal. You get what you work for in most cases (unless you are in a union (that ought to open a can of worms).
DaveH
'94 Supra- 7.77 @ 176mph -
The really odd thing about what you said above dave, is that the harder my physical work has been at my jobs, the less I've been paid....the easier the physical labor the more I've been paid. My current sales position is the hardest mental job I've ever had though and the union guys (pipefitters/sprinkler fitters) where I work are among the hardest workers in our company and they get paid pretty well. But yes, some union workers just like some welfare people do just enough to meet the minimum qualifications.
-
It has been true for centuries that the less physical labor one does, the more they make.
Personally, I may just sit at a desk all day using a computer, but when it comes down to leaving at the end of the day I am DRAINED. Maybe not physically, but towards the end of a long day thinking even becomes tiring.
I would much rather have a job that was mentally challenging than physically challenging.
But I agree, for those of us with good jobs that we worked for and have a specific skillset that we have trained in, to be considered "lucky" is total BS. -
I agree Nick, however there is a certain amount of luck in getting hired anywhere. Not everyone has the charisma, sense of business and mindset to get the jobs necessary to get hired into a corporate/office type job. Some people made some stupid mistakes when they were younger and/or have qualities about them that turn off to a prospective employer. Some of this is how they were brought up (be it welfare, immigrant, whatever) and how they were taught (or not taught) to act when in a place of business. I was fortunate to have been brought up fairly decently by my parents and was told right from wrong and was brought up to be respectful of others regardless of their social class. I think this has helped me in the long run.
What I'm trying to get at here, is that a lot of how you are brought up affects how you will be when you get into the working world. How often do you hear of kids growing up in low income families that make it in the real world? There are a few, no doubt, a lot fall back into poverty, just like their parents. Now, how many kids raised in middle-upper income families do you see make it in the real world? Quite a few, and very seldom do you see them dive deep into poverty. For that reason I feel I am fortunate to have been raised the way I was. Unfortunately we'll never end poverty completely (even if we do cut the welfare system completely) and there will always be an upperclass, middle class, and poor class financially in this country and around the world. All I want to see is some sort of training and/or opportunity development for those who grew up poor.
-
Training/opportunity development for the poor = PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
They have to be willing to learn in order to excel.
-
Yes and no. Many kids that go to the schools end up graduating, but still work dead end jobs because they have no social skills and/or no parents pushing them to excel. Ever think back to highschool about the kid who looked like he wouldn't make it? He probably didn't make it. If you and I can see that, then why isn't the school system doing more to try and work with these kids at a young age? Maybe set up a mentorship program with local businesses for these kids so they can learn what is going to be required of them whene they are on their own. The problem is that noone gives a crap about these kids until they become a burden and start living off the system.
So my question is this, what do you do to get the people off the system? Cutting welfare may help a little, but not without a plan to bring them to the work force. Whats the plan for the kid who grew up with his parents smoking weed around him? Or the kid with the drunken abusive father/mother. Thats the life he knows. Thats what he thinks is normal. You can give them all the education you want, but you can't control the environment in which they live. Yet they get written off by the general public as fuckups and losers. The public fucked up by looking the other way a lot of the time when they could have made a difference.
As for the not willing to learn part, some are willing, some aren't. I had a lower GPA than a few kids I knew but I managed to get a better job. If it were as simple as getting good grades there wouldn't be the problem there is now. You know as well as anyone that academics only get you so far in life, if I'm not mistaken you have zero college and yet have a good job in an IT department.
-
Correct on the zero college. Honestly it depends on how each individual person handles themselves. I had a good GPA, college scholarships, and opted to not go because to me going to school for Physics/Computer Science/Math/Whatever wasn't what I wanted. I had the skills to step into a high level job straight out of HS however. That also wasn't taught to me in HS, it was self iniative that got me to where I am today.
The thing about a lot of people that don't care about school is that they wont care about mentorships either. it's really a lose lose situation as a whole. If the government or someone extends a large amount of new programs to help people or students who are poor, we are stuck paying for it, and the odds are that the bulk of the students wont care to have anything to do with it anyways. For the few number of people that would be helped, I don't know if the overall outcome could justify the changes that are made.
One thing that I do believe would be benificial would be readily available vouchers to allow those students that WANT to learn and are WILLING to work hard to get somewhere and become a valuable member of society, to attend a better school.
-
integra_gsr98 wrote:
One thing that I do believe would be benificial would be readily available vouchers to allow those students that WANT to learn and are WILLING to work hard to get somewhere and become a valuable member of society, to attend a better school.I agree that it would have to be voluntary as well.
As for the mentor thing not working, I think if the kid was told that there might be a chance of getting a job (summer job or whatever) at the place that mentors him that they might take it seriously.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login