- 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
re: America's Underclass: the crucial issue in a more socialist society
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:10 am to Centinel
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:10 am to Centinel
Right. But if she has no money then we are paying.
If she is not paying for insurance (has free insurance) or is subsidized we are still paying.
The only chance for it to be cheaper is if she suddenly takes personal responsibility for her health and the health of her children by exercising and eating right.
Good luck with that.
If she is not paying for insurance (has free insurance) or is subsidized we are still paying.
The only chance for it to be cheaper is if she suddenly takes personal responsibility for her health and the health of her children by exercising and eating right.
Good luck with that.
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 10:18 am
0
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:11 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:This simply can't be said enough. Our top 15-20% is easily the best in the world. Now, we can argue the merits of the bottom 80% being underserved by our system or whatever. But any presumption of "China is beating us in math" is simply absurd...and doubly absurd if you include college/post-grad.
our shitty education rankings are only bad b/c of how much the underclass drags down the rankings
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:51 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.
Agree with this 100%. The farmers and big food companies and grocery store lobbyists would shut down any attempt to eliminate healthy food restrictions to Snap.
Imagine how much money all the Cokes Pepsi’s and Grocery stores / big Brands make from snap. They will fight tooth and nail to prevent it because they will lose money. They don’t care that they are helping killing poor people who buy their products. They are driving up healthcare costs too all around the country with their sugar filled foods.
Republicans would be smart to target this as a measure for reducing spending in entitlements. You could actually unite people because health food/organic nuts on the left who also hate big food corporations would actually be on board with it, and so would fiscal conservatives who hate the amount of money spent on things like snap. The only ones who would defend it would be stuck because they look like they are only defending big corporations who benefit at the expense of these people.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:53 am to Salmon
quote:
the people that provide that safety net gain more power/control
But not the people that fund it
Posted on 8/3/18 at 10:54 am to SlowFlowPro
quote:Wal Mart seems to explicitly locate new stores in areas where they can maximize food stamp/govt assistance client base. We can call it whatever we want, but it's a de facto subsidy for "free enterprise".
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
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:08 am to Big Scrub TX
quote:
Wal Mart seems to explicitly locate new stores in areas where they can maximize food stamp/govt assistance client base.
There’s a walmart on plank rd?
I thought these areas were plagued by “food deserts” where they had no where to buy food.
Now you’re saying that Walmart prays on welfare and specifically places stores to maximize revenue from welfare recipients. which if true, there would be no food deserts as every hood would have a Walmart
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 11:11 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:18 am to SlowFlowPro
John Maynard Keynes was one of the architects of the British Welfare State, along with a lot of old Fabian Society socialists.
Most of them believed the Welfare State wouldn't work without Eugenics (yeah, at one time you had a lot of Socialist Eugenicists, though you found "conservatives" as well who were into it).
Supposedly he said something to the effect (when the act was passed in postwar England establishing the Welfare State without any Eugenics policies) that it wasn't going to work.
I believe he was right, and you can apply it to the US. I don't know what the answer is, or what I'd like to see done, but it is a definite problem.
Thing is a lot of "upper" and middle class people are going to wind up in the underclass. You kind of see it now with millenials and younger waiting tables in their 30's, whereas in earlier periods they'd have had real jobs with potential, benefits, and better pay.
Automation and robotics is a freight train coming, and it is going to get a lot of people working jobs that were never touched before.
Most of them believed the Welfare State wouldn't work without Eugenics (yeah, at one time you had a lot of Socialist Eugenicists, though you found "conservatives" as well who were into it).
Supposedly he said something to the effect (when the act was passed in postwar England establishing the Welfare State without any Eugenics policies) that it wasn't going to work.
I believe he was right, and you can apply it to the US. I don't know what the answer is, or what I'd like to see done, but it is a definite problem.
Thing is a lot of "upper" and middle class people are going to wind up in the underclass. You kind of see it now with millenials and younger waiting tables in their 30's, whereas in earlier periods they'd have had real jobs with potential, benefits, and better pay.
Automation and robotics is a freight train coming, and it is going to get a lot of people working jobs that were never touched before.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:43 am to SlowFlowPro
Wouldn't you say that the better education, Medical Care, and general well-being of the underclass might make them rise a bit and need the service is less over time?
You keep saying leftist ideology this point of you like it's somehow flawed but the reality of the situation is conservative think very short-term and if it's not working immediately they don't see the benefit.
In society it benefits everyone to have the person next to you more educated and better taken care of. Happiness begets happiness when basic needs are taken care of.
Eventually because of Automation and various other technological advances, there will be a significant portion of the populace that is no longer needed for employment. We should start working on that safety-net now and perfect it by then.
You keep saying leftist ideology this point of you like it's somehow flawed but the reality of the situation is conservative think very short-term and if it's not working immediately they don't see the benefit.
In society it benefits everyone to have the person next to you more educated and better taken care of. Happiness begets happiness when basic needs are taken care of.
Eventually because of Automation and various other technological advances, there will be a significant portion of the populace that is no longer needed for employment. We should start working on that safety-net now and perfect it by then.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:45 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
conservative think very short-term and if it's not working immediately they don't see the benefit.
Laughably false.
Per par for you.
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 11:46 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:47 am to TbirdSpur2010
quote:
Laughably false.
Per par for you.
You're certainly entitled to your opinion but you guys tend to think and quarterly gains and I tend to think in the long term of humanity.
These kind of response is always make me feel a little more Vindicated because you don't offer any substance. You know deep down that I am correct
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 11:48 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:48 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
Eventually because of Automation and various other technological advances, there will be a significant portion of the populace that is no longer needed for employment. We should start working on that safety-net now and perfect it by then.
I'm definitely a futurist and believe somewhat in these types of things, but it is by no means a certainty.
And perhaps we should attempt to decrease the underclass. Not necessarily by eugenics or anything sinister, but by stopping the process of encouraging and even rewarding reproduction by the poorest of the poor.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:48 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
In society it benefits everyone to have the person next to you more educated and better taken care of. Happiness begets happiness when basic needs are taken care of.
More people go to college than ever. More people have access to books, online resourses and instruction. We spend tons on education in this country, yet more and more people grow up uneducated. What is your solution to getting people more educated?
And as far as health, what is a government to do if free people decide to eat unhealthy, smoke, not exercise, etc.?
I'll wait for your solutions.
This post was edited on 8/3/18 at 11:50 am
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:49 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
I tend to think in the long term of humanity.
The policies you support, no you don't.
We've developed a permanent underclass thanks to those kinds of policies.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:50 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
You know deep down that I am correct
Is it nice in "your world"? Holy shite, it must be all unicorn rainbow farts...
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:50 am to Ebbandflow
quote:
might make them rise a bit and need the service is less over time?
There's really no proof of this in the USA.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:51 am to Lakeboy7
quote:
. A medicare type of coverage for the underclass would prove less expensive to the non underclass.
No. It wouldn’t. It would be more expensive just from the virtue that Medicare reimburses at a significantly higher rate than Medicaid.
Uninsured people pay an actually higher percentage of billed charges than Medicaid does as well.
So your claim has some sort of “common knowledge” backing behind it. But no numbers.
Your claim also assumes that people use Medical care when they need it. That is also not true.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:55 am to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
The policies you support, no you don't.
We've developed a permanent underclass thanks to those kinds of policies.
You are vaguely generalizing. I was being incredibly broad and general and now you are a zeroing in on specific things that you think tie in with the way that I think which is a false correlation.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:56 am to SlowFlowPro
Rich people have access to any and all medical.
Of course the poor will use services they don't now.
The system is skewed to money, not service.
Not enough mds. M.D. Ama Union makes sure there are too few M.D.s.
Of course the poor will use services they don't now.
The system is skewed to money, not service.
Not enough mds. M.D. Ama Union makes sure there are too few M.D.s.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 11:59 am to Bjorn Cyborg
quote:
And perhaps we should attempt to decrease the underclass. Not necessarily by eugenics or anything sinister, but by stopping the process of encouraging and even rewarding reproduction by the poorest of the poor.
We should do that with every socioeconomic group.
quote:
I'm definitely a futurist and believe somewhat in these types of things, but it is by no means a certainty.
The only way it doesn't happen is because we destroy ourselves or alien invasion. Lol.
Posted on 8/3/18 at 12:00 pm to Ebbandflow
You are an admitted asshat and socialist but I'm going to ask a question that I hope you'll have some of your traditional awesome insight...
If robotics is going to take most low skill, lower wage jobs, where does the money come from to pay those people not to work?
If robotics is going to take most low skill, lower wage jobs, where does the money come from to pay those people not to work?
Page 3 of 4
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News