- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
America's Underclass: the crucial issue in a more socialist society
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:25 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:25 am
so as i was driving yesterday listening to liberal podcasts, i was thinking about the new argument relating to socialized medicine being a net saver. one of the key issues in this argument, with most leftist arguments, is that behavior will not change when you implement a new policy. in this case, that assumption is that by giving more access to the population, the population will not use the goods/services more. this assumption, especially in America, has been proven to be wrong over and over again, primarily due to our underclass
the US has an underclass with a lower class mentality/culture that smaller, developed countries with whom the US is compared simply do not have on this scale. in he US (Which has over 300M people, another distinction with our peers), we're talking about a population that may be a third of our entire society (more than the population of Germany, the largest Western European nation). also, this population is spread out over an area approximately the size of the entire continent of Europe (and with the urban areas being havens for the upper class, that means the US will have to effectively govern this large area to provide services to the underclass)
pretty much everything "Bad" with stats relating to the US are directly attributable to this population. our outlier violent crime is almost exclusively within the domain of the underclass. our shitty education rankings are only bad b/c of how much the underclass drags down the rankings. in terms of health/care, the underclass skew this, too. for 2 quick examples, our obese and smoking populations are primarily found in the underclass
here is the real conflict: will increasing government services decrease the underclass culture? that's the implicit argument of the leftist ideologies. this is a serious gamble, as anyone who lives in areas with the underclass (aka, the population center of this board) can attest, because our daily lives are inundated with a pervasive underclass culture that increases as government services increase. what happens if we expand our safety net and the underclass population share grows?
the US has an underclass with a lower class mentality/culture that smaller, developed countries with whom the US is compared simply do not have on this scale. in he US (Which has over 300M people, another distinction with our peers), we're talking about a population that may be a third of our entire society (more than the population of Germany, the largest Western European nation). also, this population is spread out over an area approximately the size of the entire continent of Europe (and with the urban areas being havens for the upper class, that means the US will have to effectively govern this large area to provide services to the underclass)
pretty much everything "Bad" with stats relating to the US are directly attributable to this population. our outlier violent crime is almost exclusively within the domain of the underclass. our shitty education rankings are only bad b/c of how much the underclass drags down the rankings. in terms of health/care, the underclass skew this, too. for 2 quick examples, our obese and smoking populations are primarily found in the underclass
here is the real conflict: will increasing government services decrease the underclass culture? that's the implicit argument of the leftist ideologies. this is a serious gamble, as anyone who lives in areas with the underclass (aka, the population center of this board) can attest, because our daily lives are inundated with a pervasive underclass culture that increases as government services increase. what happens if we expand our safety net and the underclass population share grows?
25
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:29 am to SlowFlowPro
When you cut through all of the BS our problems really boil down to one simple thing.
Too many people want shite and there are too few people willing to work to pay for it.
Too many people want shite and there are too few people willing to work to pay for it.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:29 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
will increasing government services decrease the underclass culture?
The more you give away, the more people that get in line for the free stuff...
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:31 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
what happens if we expand our safety net and the underclass population share grows?
the people that provide that safety net gain more power/control
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:31 am to SquatchDawg
quote:
Too many people want shite and there are too few people willing to work to pay for it.
it's a lot deeper than that
that's the economic side of the underclass and has always been the economic argument relating to the underclass
the social side is much scarier, especially now that the left has embraced a social philosophy of trying to eliminate criticism of the social aspects of the underclass.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:34 am to Salmon
quote:
the people that provide that safety net gain more power/control
a very small population will benefit from the economic gains associated with this cronyism, but the middle class will be devastated and the upper middle will suffer greatly. the costs of these programs (And the enrichment of the connected elite) will be paid for by these populations. they're also going to lose political power and their superior cultures will become a minority culture. it's a tyranny of the masses, like what we're seeing in LA today
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:43 am to SlowFlowPro
So many points to address. The problem for me is that we have also seen that throwing more money at the problem hasn’t worked, especially when it’s the government who is responsible for translating that money into outcomes.
And then there is personal responsibility. I’m in healthcare at the hospital level and i do find it more true than not that people lack self-accountability and self-responsibility for their own health. Health is overwhelmingly CUMULATIVE, so why should we be responsible for peoples shite health decisions if they aren’t? More money spent just means we will just end up paying even more for people’s shitty health decisions than we already do.
Additionally, I genuinely worry about unscrupulous actors(see Obama admin) politicizing, gritting, and who knows even somehow weaponizing it.
A large part of our population is not only ignorant, but worse doesn’t care to learn how to change. I don’t want to pay for that.
Edit: paragraphs
And then there is personal responsibility. I’m in healthcare at the hospital level and i do find it more true than not that people lack self-accountability and self-responsibility for their own health. Health is overwhelmingly CUMULATIVE, so why should we be responsible for peoples shite health decisions if they aren’t? More money spent just means we will just end up paying even more for people’s shitty health decisions than we already do.
Additionally, I genuinely worry about unscrupulous actors(see Obama admin) politicizing, gritting, and who knows even somehow weaponizing it.
A large part of our population is not only ignorant, but worse doesn’t care to learn how to change. I don’t want to pay for that.
Edit: paragraphs
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 7:45 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 7:50 am to SlowFlowPro
I’d be ok with broadening the safety net if they made it really restrictive. Completely different than it is now.
Snap or food stamps? Only good for meat, fruit and veggies in the produce section. You can’t buy snacks and sugary drinks BS with them at all. If you want to be dependent on government you will be forced to eat only healthy food. If you want unhealthy food, figure out a way to pay for it because it won’t be the taxpayers. I know there are some access issues with grocery stores in poor areas but that could easily be solved with food trucks.
This would solve the healthcare crisis pretty quickly too. My mom works as a pre-op nurse at a massive hospital that serves almost exclusively this crowd. She independently checks people who are about to go under anesthesia for issues and she said she thinks 60-70% of the people she sees wouldn’t be in there if they didn’t eat crap food and weigh 250+ pounds. All the expensive crap we waste money in healthcare on is all diet induced.
Snap or food stamps? Only good for meat, fruit and veggies in the produce section. You can’t buy snacks and sugary drinks BS with them at all. If you want to be dependent on government you will be forced to eat only healthy food. If you want unhealthy food, figure out a way to pay for it because it won’t be the taxpayers. I know there are some access issues with grocery stores in poor areas but that could easily be solved with food trucks.
This would solve the healthcare crisis pretty quickly too. My mom works as a pre-op nurse at a massive hospital that serves almost exclusively this crowd. She independently checks people who are about to go under anesthesia for issues and she said she thinks 60-70% of the people she sees wouldn’t be in there if they didn’t eat crap food and weigh 250+ pounds. All the expensive crap we waste money in healthcare on is all diet induced.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 8:06 am to RebelExpress38
figuring out ways to restrict government-redistributed spending to healthy food is something you'd imagine everyone would agree with
but, sadly, this isn't true. big companies and sugar farmers are living high on the hog by stealing our money to go to people who will over-spend on this shitty food. and many culturally-minded leftists may support healthier eating, but they would be aghast and restricting the choices of poor people b/c of some privilege/ism argument
it's sad b/c the underclass continues to use this indirect validation to justify its shitty choices and keeps growing as it becomes more accepted. as the population grows, the voting power of the population grows. then you run into situations like LA where it's basically impossible to save the state
but, sadly, this isn't true. big companies and sugar farmers are living high on the hog by stealing our money to go to people who will over-spend on this shitty food. and many culturally-minded leftists may support healthier eating, but they would be aghast and restricting the choices of poor people b/c of some privilege/ism argument
it's sad b/c the underclass continues to use this indirect validation to justify its shitty choices and keeps growing as it becomes more accepted. as the population grows, the voting power of the population grows. then you run into situations like LA where it's basically impossible to save the state
Posted on 8/3/18 at 8:10 am to SlowFlowPro
Let’s define underclass and the discuss this.
We need a battery of tests to determine who is who.
I’m good, me.
We need a battery of tests to determine who is who.
I’m good, me.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 8:11 am to RebelExpress38
quote:
Snap or food stamps? Only good for meat, fruit and veggies in the produce section
Way too many problems with these kind of restrictions. It would probably make a lot of cattle ranchers and dairy farmers rich
Posted on 8/3/18 at 8:22 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
will increasing government services decrease the underclass culture?
IMO you can only bring the top down with Gov't intervention, not vice versa.
The Gov't can successfully implement laws and regulations (basically theft) to move the upper class down closer to the lower class. That's basically what Socialism does. The proportion of socio-economic mobility is skewed far more downward than upward with Socialist policies.
You can't make people rich. That takes too much self determination, responsibility, and incentive. But you can certainly make the rich poor. That's pretty easy and history is a testament to that.
But the left is ok with that. It's actually what they want. They despise the rich and would rather make the rich poor rather than the poor rich in order to obtain their mythical equality.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 8:45 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
especially now that the left has embraced a social philosophy of trying to eliminate criticism of the social aspects of the underclass.
I would go further to say that they actively celebrate/incentivize it.
Teen Mom, Real Housewives, Honey Boo Boo. MTV (I know I only cited one MTV show) really is one of the worst offenders at actively corrupting the youth of America and pushing this agenda.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 8:47 am to SlowFlowPro
One must ask the question: looking past all the rhetoric and actually looking at the evidence, how does the state of the underclass change according to how much assistance they receive from their neighbors via the government?
Posted on 8/3/18 at 8:57 am to bamafan1001
quote:
how does the state of the underclass change according to how much assistance they receive from their neighbors via the government?
In absolute terms it can be significant, but that's assuming they do not have the ability to achieve that on their own. If it's between them living on the street versus them having an apartment, food, etc, I'd say that's a big improvement, and it actually puts them in the top percentile worldwide.
Problem is, the Left doesn't look at it this way. They look at it in relative terms. Relative to the rich that is. And they hate the idea of rich people being so far ahead, even if the "poor" have it pretty damn good.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 9:01 am to SlowFlowPro
I agree with what you said, but what is the solution?
Posted on 8/3/18 at 9:06 am to SlowFlowPro
Hasn't killing off the underclass and dissenters been part and parcel of socialism everywhere it has taken root? I think that is why the Marxist/socialists generally ignore that aspect. They just kill off the non-hackers once socialism has a grip on government.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 9:07 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:
big companies and sugar farmers are living high on the hog by stealing our money to go to people who will over-spend on this shitty food. and many culturally-minded leftists may support healthier eating, but they would be aghast and restricting the choices of poor people b/c of some privilege/ism argument
And here is where you have hit the nail on the head.
The "Swamp" has become dependent on these big companies/etc. for their own personal gain for far too long. When someone like Donald Trump comes along, a person who does not need self-enrichment from his government position, that foundation of their scheme starts to shake.
quote:
ways to restrict government-redistributed spending to healthy food
that would upset the big companies, which would upset the "swamp" So the "swamp" will never go down that path.
But guess what, Trump doesn't give a frick about upsetting the big companies (he is a big company). So he enacts policies detrimental to the "swamp"
the result?: The "swamp" wants Donald Trump impeached, thrown in jail, killed, etc. It has nothing to do with the effects of his policies on American culture, and everything to do with the effects of his policies upsetting their golden goose.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 9:07 am to rintintin
quote:
IMO you can only bring the top down with Gov't intervention, not vice versa.
While I know this will not be popular, the "underclass" will continue to grow, expand, and get worse. Eventually, "we" will come to the realization that our limited resources should not be wasted on such a "underclass" that is unwilling to fend for themselves. When enough people come to that realization, you will probably see some very drastic steps taken, which I am not advocating for.
The sooner "we" come to the realization that the "underclass" problem cannot be solved with "benefits" and "hand outs", the less drastic the steps that will have to be taken to address the problem. The sad fact is, we have bred a class of people that would rather live in poverty than even entertain working, regardless of the affect it has on anyone else.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 9:08 am to SlowFlowPro
This just confirms what we all know. The radicals have a real disdain for the middle class. The know the only way to get control of them is making them totally dependent on Govt services.
Obamacare was the shining star of the Left. It made healthcare less affordable, less accessible and forced the population to rely on the Feds to fix it and/or provide more services.
There is a civil war going on that has actually been taking place for a number of years. Trump has blown this war out for everyone to see. And its pretty apparent what the patriots are up against.
Obamacare was the shining star of the Left. It made healthcare less affordable, less accessible and forced the population to rely on the Feds to fix it and/or provide more services.
There is a civil war going on that has actually been taking place for a number of years. Trump has blown this war out for everyone to see. And its pretty apparent what the patriots are up against.
Page 1 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News