20 Million Felons, 47 Million on SNAP, 13 Million on Welfare, 15 Million Unemployed

onequestion
reply to post by DaytonaBeach

 

Interesting, i wonder where he got his numbers from?

I don't think unemployment is that much, it seems a bit high if you ask me.. I do think it is more along the lines of 25 to 30% however.. All you have to do is look at debtclock site and see..

We have about 317 million people in the US..
There are 144 mil taxpayers..

They say 92 million aren't working... which is why I say 37% is to high..

reply to post by onequestion


I'm not the one who suggests it:

"Share in suffering as a good soldier of Christ Jesus. 4 No soldier gets entangled in civilian pursuits, since his aim is to please the one who enlisted him. 5 An athlete is not crowned unless he competes according to the rules. 6 It is the hard-working farmer who ought to have the first share of the crops. 7 Think over what I say, for the Lord will give you understanding in everything."

"To the pure, all things are pure, but to those who are corrupted and do not believe, nothing is pure. In fact, both their minds and consciences are corrupted."

These passages are directly related. You live in Satan's world. Focus on purifying your mind, and leave civilian pursuits to civilians. It is not the flesh that you struggle against.

By entangling your mind in debates with corrupt minds, you risk the purity of your own mind. You have to focus if righteousness is your goal.

onequestion
reply to post by Sovaka

 

We have a really bad understanding of the the word felon means in America. Obviously we dont have 20 million people who truly deserve it.

Yes. Yes, we do. The fact that there are 20M felony records sorta-kinda stands in testament to that very fact.

onequestion
The people that deserve it are the lifers who are in and out of jail all the time not people like me who make mistakes and learn from them.

So ... because you feel you're a good boy now, we should move the goal posts for your 'personal' benefit? Hang on a sec ... I'll get right on that for you.

onequestion
Its a bad misnomer but your basic premise is very true. Its a very bad social underclass thats forming its ever growing more dangerous.

And on that note, we as a law-abiding body of citizens need to ensure people like you (reformed or not) need to serve the entirety of their sentences and create such an environment in prison that it is rare for a felon to even survive incarceration. Create an element of fear of jail ... that you won't be taken alive should you opt to transgress again ... if one is even fortunate enough to survive their initial felony sentence.

The truth of the matter is that a felon should be ready to accept their future. You made a bad choice ... granted, you were young ... but that is the future you created for yourself when you opted your criminal path. Who are you going to blame for that? Your parents? Your victim? There was a victim, right? Have you ever wondered how your victim feels? Have you ever really tried to make it right during this opportunity of freedom you've been blessed with?

I'll tell you this: I'm sick and tired of all the cries for 'special interest' status in this country. Sick of it, I tell you!!

Dwell on what I've said. Don't pop off. Let me know when you're ready to rationally discuss both sides of your OP. If you can't, just ignore this comment.

reply to post by FreeWillAnomaly

By entangling your mind in debates with corrupt minds, you risk the purity of your own mind. You have to focus if righteousness is your goal.

Wow, i am mind blown by your last post.

That has to be the deepest thing ive read in i dont know how long.

Is your name a reference to science not being able to prove free will?

Or something else?

reply to post by Snarl


Perfect example of why entangling yourself in civilian affairs is a fruitless endeavor that can only serve to corrupt your own mind and hinder purification.

Excellent timing.

ETA: Snarl, I don't expect you to understand this post. It wasn't meant for you.

reply to post by FreeWillAnomaly


Yeah lol. Its true. After reading a post like that i have to laugh. Whats the point?

reply to post by onequestion


No, my name is a reference to the anomalous nature of retaining and exercising your free will in this corrupt world.

reply to post by FreeWillAnomaly

You'd be surprised.

Second.

onequestion

What about the 50-100 million other americans who dont have the same opportunities you have had?

Why don't they have the same opportunities?

The image from page 1 by slayer69 truly puts things into perspective. We are still fortunate. However, for how long?

I know the OP did a post awhile back on things still being fairly even with income/expenses (ratio wise) - what the stats said. I didn't agree with those stats then and I don't now. When the minimum wage was 3.35 an hour (i was a kid but able to work), I recall a gallon of milk being .99 (where I was living). I could buy a candy bar for .35 and gas was about a dollar a gallon. That was 1981.

So 3.35 could buy me 3 gallons of milk and a candy bar.
7.25 (if earning federal minimum) can buy a person 2 gallons of milk and "maybe" a candy bar.

The federal poverty level is where we ultimately place it so I agree with the OP in this thread. Prices keep going up and people lose hope. They have to attain higher standards to survive - yet not everyone can earn top wages (nor wants to). Not everyone wants to be a doctor or politician. Money isn't the most valued prize to many - some people value time with their families or happiness above the dollar. Most simply want to work in a job they enjoy and not go for the big bucks (if the job they enjoy is low paying). We are seeing people being forced onto assistance or into poverty if they don't attain higher monetary achievement. Why? Look at 1962 below to see why I ask this.

Looking at taxes - basing all on minimum wage since cost of living should match that.

1981
The median house price back in 1981 was 70,000.00. Let's say pymt over 30 years (taxes/ins thrown in with 4.127% int to keep it even). 533.00 payment.

All taxes for biweekly single claiming 1.

1981
3.35 x 160 hours a month - 536.00 gross. SS rate - 5.35% = 22.51; MC - 1.3% = 6.97. Federal tax - unsure but estimate high - at 50.00.
Net pay 456.52

1981
The national median rent in 1981 was 350.00 so you would have 106.52 left over at minimum wage in 1981.
www.thepeoplehistory.com...

So in 1981 a person could work at the lowest paying wage job and still find an affordable place to live. They would need to earn about 22% more to afford a mortgage payment but there is hope.


2011
The median home price in 2011 was 212,300.00. = 1,482.00 per month (4.127% interest).
The minimum wage in 2011 was 7.25.
7.25 x 160 hours a month - 1,160.00 gross. SS in 2011 - 4.2% = 48.72; MC = 1.45% = 16.82 and fed withholdings = 74.30.
**Net pay - 1,020.16

The national median rent was 871.67 so if earning min wage would have 148.49 left over if you rented at the average cost and are making minimum wage.
www.census.gov...

You still can't buy a house at minimum wage and would need to earn about 46% more to be able to make the mortgage payment.

2013/2014

If you earn the same gross wage in 2013/2014 you will have less net pay due to social security increases.

1,160.00 gross. SS 71.92. Medicare 16.82, and federal is 68.22.
**Net pay 1.003.54 less than 2011

2013 moving into 2014 - "Rent prices across the country average about $1,231 each month." You won't be able to afford the median rent. Will have to search for below that.
www.cbsnews.com...

Let's assume the average home price is the same for 2014 as it was for the end of 2013 - 270,000.00. 1,866.00 per month (4.127% interest).
In 2014 the minimum wage "federally" is still 7.25 I believe.

You still can't buy a house and you need to earn about 88% more to even pay the mortgage. Of course they would take more taxes so really you would need to earn about 100% more to pay the mortgage.


Moving back even further to 1962
About 1.15 per hour was minimum wage - and all except state and federal was 3.125% so take .04 cents plus take off another .04 for the Fed and State tax per hour. Truly earning 1.07 per hour.
171.20 per month. The average rent was 110.00. The average home price was 12,500.00 (payment would be about 150.00 a month at 4.127% int and insurance rates as they are today).

In 1962 you could make a dollar an hour and afford to rent or to buy with money left to spare. It sounds like hope could survive in this scenario. I bet the poverty level looks different in 1962.

Here is a look at inflation between 1962 - 1998. It also explains the consumer price index, and challenges one to figure out whose fault it might be - when inflation is worse (democratic/republican). I see it happening regardless of either - something else is causing this and I just want someone to turn back time.

Of course - these numbers are far higher in 2014.

Averages 1962 to 1998.
1962 Price Hershey bar $0.05 and 1998 - $0.64. 1180% increase.

1962 New York Times $0.05 and 1998 - $0.60. 1100% increase

1962 First class postage $0.04 and 1998 $0.32. 700% increase

1962 Gasoline (gallon) $0.31 and 1998 - $1.19. 284% increase.

1962 Hamburger (McDonald's double) $0.28a and 1998 - $2.69 861% increase

1962 Chevrolet (full size) $2,529.00 and 1998 - $22,500.00. 790% increase.

1962 Refrigerator freezer $470.00 and 1998 - $750.00. 60% increase.

qrc.depaul.edu...

macman
reply to post by onequestion

 

Want people to get out of poverty??? make it uncomfortable to be there. It is amazing how fast people will move when a fire is lit under their butt.

It's not a matter of motivation, it's a matter of opportunity.

We have a system that mirrors the Hunger Games movie:

People work for years in a corporate environment where they compete against their peers for the glimmer of light at the end of the tunnel (promotion out of the front line workforce, into management). Most people in low level management these days will have a hard time making enough to sustain a family on their own. So even making it to that stage isn't as great as everyone thinks.

Once you are there you instantly become fixated on the next step, because you suddenly realize, the work is more and the pay isn't very much more impressive.

Most companies promote a few people per 100 a few times throughout the year, depending how business is going. While at the same time it lays off, and fires a much larger group of workers. So most people spend their careers waiting for the chance to win the promotion lottery so that they can pretend to sustain themselves in the economy that is tearing them down.

As you climb the ladder you see the rewards are far less than you expected, and the higher you go, the less likely you are too get promoted again. We barely maintain raises to sustain us against inflation.

So motivation is a problem because there is no opportunity. Or at least the hope of opportunity is such a faint glimmer that people are giving up hope. The system is breaking because it is corrupted by those on top.

Why do we have these people scrambling for scraps at the bottom while the executives of these corporations literally hoard trillions!!!!!!!!!!!!

They have us fighting with each other, and arguing that people are being lazy, and we need to help the poor, or they need to get to work, or just fighting and arguing, while they collect.

It's not a secret, the corporations that we work for make money - just look at the salaries of the executives.....

THESE people are not gods, I know this from experience... Yet they have the power to make wages and salaries, so of course we have been trained to think oh well he is the CEO of course he makes millions or billions.....NO, that is not right.

If a corporation is making billions the wealth of that company should be distributed FAIRLY among the workers.

The means based on responsibility and skill as you go up the chain of positions, the workers should be making more - but it should be an even move up the chain.

It should not be - front line workers make .5%, managers make .6%, upper management makes .7%, then executives make 20%.....

Wages should be based on the performance of the company in addition to the position, not just the position.

So in addition to removing parabolic increases in wages as you reach upper management, I would say for example a janitor working for Apple, should make way more than janitor working for a going out of business gas station (because the company makes more money, thus if you work for them you should be part of that)....

The final thing - the idea of making a blanket increase in minimum wage is nothing more than an attempt to make things harder for new private businesses... Like I said, it's insane to think that a small private business should have the same minimum wage requirement as a huge company like Apple or something... So the government raises minimum wages because it will not affect the big guys (they already know they are paying their workers pennies) it affects their competition, so the big guys win.

It's time people start looking at what is happening. It is the biggest joke I have ever seen, and less that 1% of us will ever hear the punch line.....

reply to post by calstorm

but what if everyone got the same k-12 education regardless of neighborhood or income? Right there would be a huge step in leveling the playing field.

There is an effort to do that now. Common Core - which is demonized and misrepresented by those who can't wrap their brains around "the greater good."



The OP was good, very informative, and I do get what he's talking about.

One thing missing, which has only recently been brought to my attention while connecting all those "dots", though - is this:
While I understand thinking "too much government" is the problem, and I can understand not wanting to enable those who are moochers, we have to also understand how much things have changed in the last 5 years, as well as the last 20.

I think that along with Common Core to level the playing field, we need to insist that Corporations who are out-sourcing and off-shoring are not getting away with tax havens, loopholes, and paying nothing in. If anything, we all know now - and that wasn't always the case.

When giant corps (I'll use McDonald's as an example as I have before) pay less than a living wage to people who are full-timers and can't find anything else (and yes, it's real - more on that later) and the TAXPAYERS (that's US, guys and gals) are subsidizing these people's lives (SNAP, medicaid, etc) - BECAUSE corps don't pay enough, don't offer insurance, and don't any longer provide "pensions" - it is us being jabbed twice.

We pay the taxes we owe - and those go to help feed the working poor. It should be the corporations who pay for the food needed - but they are more concerned about their "shareholders". How many working poor people are "shareholders"??

Also - AMERICAN corps who decide to off-shore should have to pay the AMERICAN minimum wage to their employees wherever in the world they are. If you're working for an American company in Bangladesh, you get paid THE SAME AMOUNT in American wages, not Bangladeshi wages. Stop the tax havens and hoarding - the Wall Street "shareholders are God" game, and begin working toward everyone being able to eat, sleep in a bed, and feel safe.

Up until 5 years ago, I was able to get a job whenever I needed/wanted to, usually the same day I applied. In late 2008 I had to leave my full-time $12/hour job as a supervisor to help care for my elderly father. The job wouldn't allow me to do so while employed there because the first 'call of duty' was over the Christmas/New Year holiday. The company policy was "everyone works on NYE" - no exceptions. I couldn't work NYE because I needed to be there for my dad. So, I had to leave the job.

Bad timing? Maybe. But since then, I have been UNABLE to find a job - I have an advanced degree, I've worked at everything from washing dishes to professional clinician, to retail, to hospitality, to photography, to office admin, to bilingual customer service, typist, editor, child care, etc. - but since 2008, it's next to impossible to even get an INTERVIEW.

No longer can one walk into a shop on Main Street and ask if they need help, or a company's HR office. Not even with a resume in hand - they tell you you "have to apply online" - first hurdle. Then, no one is actually READING the resumes sent it - a computer scans for keywords before HR-lady ever even SEES your name. If you miss the keywords, you're deleted - second hurdle. Gaps in employment history? Third hurdle (makes it hard for empty-nesters or survivors of their elderly parents to get back into the workforce, eh?). Stayed too long at your last job? Fourth hurdle. (Used to be if you switched every 3 years you were a bad risk - now they EXPECT it, and think you're a 'slacker' if you don't job-hop).

I'll stop there - as if anyone has read even this far.
Just my musings.

I don't know if I want to live around a bunch of starving felons.

reply to post by wildtimes


I love your avatar.

Also your reference to Common Core is excellent!

This is a good thread with meaningful insight...I can only add an observation or two.

It's true that "hiring practices" are MUCH different than they used to be. I grew up "poor" and remember fibbing about my age from 16 on to get a job just by walking in a door and asking to waitress or counter-help.I am one of those with "few opportunities" who carved out a wonderful life and acquired wealth simply by hard work and saving and I know I'm a rarity these days.

My sister is HR for a huge corporation with international holdings (yes, it's a great job, she's earned it and works like a dog for great pay!) and her perspective is also "interesting": she interviews "young people" for entry-positions and is SHOCKED by the expectations and demands for salaries, benefits, time-off, perks,and all the other ingredients that make up a "good job" these days.

Shocked. She says maybe one in 20 candidates are willing to "work" as defined in the job descriptions, everyone else thinks it's all up for discussion and negotiation,LOL!

Entry level.Fresh out of school.EXTREMELY unrealistic according to her and she interviews literally hundreds of people a month.

My personal "bugaboo" is this: It's becoming VERY hard to get anyone to "work" ie physical labor in a rural setting. Used to be "tradespeople" and people with skills in carpentry, stone/brick laying, repairing fences/building simple structures, welding, painting etc. etc. It's like pulling teeth to get anyone to "work" now.

Have tried to hire people for a good wage to do such things and they simply do NOT "show up" or do horrible work! It's as if it's "not worthy" of them or something,or they just want "big jobs". I dont know anymore.

No one wants to get their hands dirty! Tried to hire some "labor" last Summer for a few days of fruit-picking in a beautiful setting: all the food and beverages you'd want included, jump in the pool if you got hot, pay was $15.00 an hour cash, plus lots of fun!

Finally had to gather up a bunch of friends to help. High school kids were "busy" and no day labor interested.Was told they'd need 20-25 dollars an hour. To pick fruit off vines? Wow.

So...my bottom line is kind of this: is it a "lack of opportunity" that people don't even try to learn a "trade" or work at/for someone who might offer an option for a "job" or is it that as a collective society it's become "okay" to basically be lazy? Are expectations too high as to what doing a "job" is worth?

A wise man told me once when I was about 18,"You can always find "work", a job you are probably going to have to work for..." I believe it now!

I use that word "lazy"loosely, I know some cannot do physical work but damn...find a niche, figure it out, and get out there and see what you can do!

Not that much has really "changed in that respect,sorry.I don't buy the "lack of opportunity..."

irishchic
Entry level.Fresh out of school.EXTREMELY unrealistic according to her and she interviews literally hundreds of people a month.

This is something I fully understand and just shake my head when I see it.

The sense of entitlement that many people under the age of 30 have just blows me away. Along the lines of you seeing some 18 year old kid getting mad because someone "disrespected him". I find that to be a joke. I don't expect anyone to respect me until I have earned their respect, it goes the other way also.

reply to post by irishchic


Hi ya, irish...

I used to want to be an HR person - but then I discovered how shackled they are by the 'corporate bottom line' and 'docmenting' every little thing people do, and decided against it.

As for getting dirty - just before Christmas I had to have my chimney fixed - the kid who came to do the work said they needed more 'help' - so I applied.

It was on-the-job training, and I'm willing to do just about ANYTHING that my middle-aged, small, easily tired frame can manage. But even they, a small mom/pop shop, didn't call me back. !!!!

When I was a kid in college - we used to take summer jobs "detassling corn". Sometimes there'd be a heavy machine that we could ride on to pull them - but other times you had to walk through the stalks and reach up to do it - talk about bugs and sunburn and heat and heavy, hard labor!!!

After that experience (and prior to that I had worked as a dishwasher in the Student Union cafeteria - so yeah, I've been in the trenches) I thought EVERY KID should have to do some farm labor. Not just make a little veggie garden in their backyard - but work on a working farm - clearing brush - putting up/fixin' fence - planting pasture - mucking out stalls - putting up hay -

(I've done all of those things mutliple times; I had a small acreage and we kept horses - that was by choice, and I loved it, but have 'aged out' of it strength-wise)

Each American kid should have that happen - as a 'summer school field-trip course' or something.

reply to post by irishchic

My personal "bugaboo" is this: It's becoming VERY hard to get anyone to "work" ie physical labor in a rural setting. Used to be "tradespeople" and people with skills in carpentry, stone/brick laying, repairing fences/building simple structures, welding, painting etc. etc. It's like pulling teeth to get anyone to "work" now.

This is not true at all. Do you know how hard it is to get into a trade these days? The trade industry is dieing.

You guys really think people not wanting to work hard is the problem with our economy?

Its not even worth debating that perspective.

*If you work you help fund social programs, the gov., etc. If your not working your being told to work so they can redistribute the money to themselves and others.
*The more working - the better (right?).
*Prices continue to go up so those who are making an effort may need government assistance.
*Which creates a demand for more people to be working.
*They give as many of our jobs away as possible.
*When we have no jobs we have no money to give.

Then what happens?

When we have no money to give the government takes care of people with money it is making from deals they have cooking?
The government controls us entirely if we continue at this pace for another 100 years? Maybe I'm on the wrong track but America seems to be heading in the direction of being the poorest Country on earth. Is that their goal or are they just inept.


People lose motivation because they don't have hope and they have lost their sense of competence to deal with what's in front of them. It's all too damn complicated and there is too much competition with fewer opportunities. It feels like we're no more than a filtering system that is failing - while they will get as much use out of it as they can before replacing.

reply to post by onequestion


Success is a balance of work, intelligence, and luck. Some people have it, others don't. You don't. Tough luck.

I promise if I was struggling I wouldn't have 6,000 posts on abovetopsecret.

reply to post by slunteri


Your post is an affirmation to me the total lack of empathy and "intelligence" thats consuming us. For fun lets interchange the word intelligence with the word perspective and lets change empathy to ego but instead of lack of ego its too much.