Entitlements?

[Magic Man]

Paris is worth millions because her father owns hotels around the world. If not for her rich daddy, I would say Paris might just be a great candidate for a bag lady in light of her work ethic.

I know some elementary teachers who banded together and have a nice portfolio of rental properties collectively. I would say they are worth a little more than 40 grand.

Some folks have a hard time wrapping their minds around worth. You can go out and buy a 40 grand car and drive it around the block and it might bring you 31,000 if your lucky.

You could buy real estate in Florida for seven figures a few years back and be lucky to get half of that now.

I'm sure there are professional athletes who where used to making millions in the past who now might make half a teachers salary out there.

Things are worth what people are willing to pay for them plain and simple.

None of this has anything to do with my question, which was in response to your assertion "The top 1% is worth every penny where the 20,000 dollar guy is lucky to even have a job.". The top 1% is not worth every penny where the $20,000 guy is lucky to even have a job.

 

[Reverend Rick]

None of this has anything to do with my question, which was in response to your assertion "The top 1% is worth every penny where the 20,000 dollar guy is lucky to even have a job.". The top 1% is not worth every penny where the $20,000 guy is lucky to even have a job.

That is a matter of opinion and your certainly entitled to yours.

I stand by my statement that all things are only worth what folks are willing to pay for them. I could take up painting, but I doubt my painting would be worth as much as famous painters fetch. I may put forth more effort and they might even look better than some of these famous works, but in the end, worth is measured by what folks are willing to pay.

This is my opinion, it is no more valid than yours. :sorry1:

 

[Magic Man]

That is a matter of opinion and your certainly entitled to yours.

I stand by my statement that all things are only worth what folks are willing to pay for them. I could take up painting, but I doubt my painting would be worth as much as famous painters fetch. I may put forth more effort and they might even look better than some of these famous works, but in the end, worth is measured by what folks are willing to pay.

This is my opinion, it is no more valid than yours. :sorry1:

Paris Hilton is not worth the millions of dollars she's made outside of the fortune she will inherit. Most teachers are worth much more than their salaries. Looking at worth as whatever someone is willing to pay is wrong.

 

[Revoltingest]

Some should consider that there are different kinds of "worth".
In Rev Rick's context, it would be economic worth.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Paris Hilton is not worth the millions of dollars she's made outside of the fortune she will inherit. Most teachers are worth much more than their salaries. Looking at worth as whatever someone is willing to pay is wrong.

It is free market capitalism. Supply and demand. I would maintain that some teachers are worth a great deal more than they are paid while others should be let go. Such is life when you collectively bargain.

Real estate is a bargain right now, but the houses sell for what people are willing to pay.

When I said that the 20,000 dollar guy is lucky to have a job, I back that up because he is competing in a global economy where people much smarter than him are working for less.

Who ever said anyone was entitled to a middle class life style any more? The middle class will be extinct in short order if we keep these free trade agreements we currently have.

People are already calling some middle class folks rich as it is.

Do you at least understand why I say the 20,000 dollar guys are lucky? I did not mean it as an insult, it is a cold hard fact. Wake up and smell the coffee, Obama brewed it, Clinton signed the free trade agreements and we all buy the cheap imported stuff that eliminates jobs every year.

Everyone is responsible. You think this is bull? How long would Wallmart stay in business if everyone refused to shop there?

The younger generation could do better if they figured this out instead of urinating in parks holding some lame sign.

 

[Kathryn]

Actually, I'm having a bit of trouble. Can you give me a good source for, say, the 99% of Americans own a TV one? We'll start there and move to the other ones.

No, sorry - I am not going to post all those sources. It is ridiculously easy to find these stats. Just google "percentage of Americans who own a tv" or whatever. All these stats were from the first page of a google search. I aimed for the most objective source rather than inflammatory sites with a political or religious agenda.

 

[Kathryn]

Actually I'll humor you on this one, mball -

Television

Very first article of a Google search using the phrase "percentage of Americans who own a tv."

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Paris is worth millions because her father owns hotels around the world. If not for her rich daddy, I would say Paris might just be a great candidate for a bag lady in light of her work ethic.

I know some elementary teachers who banded together and have a nice portfolio of rental properties collectively. I would say they are worth a little more than 40 grand.

Paris Hilton has money only because of her dad, but yet a teacher who is charged with guiding and teaching the next generation is, as there main job, is only about $40,000. Yes many do go into real estate to supplement their income, but the job of a teacher itself is what is being discussed.

Very first article of a Google search using the phrase "percentage of Americans who own a tv."

So what? I have six TVs, but I only payed for one that cost 40 dollars from Goodwill. Two I found in a dumpster, one my dad gave to me, and the other two me and my girlfriend had before we moved out of our parents. One of my friends even acquired a flat panel HDTV that she found sitting in someones trash pile one night. I even have several video game systems, but I had them before I moved out of my parents. And you can usually find newer ones pretty cheap if you look hard enough and find someone who is looking to make some fast cash. And not too mention older systems aren't that expensive.
As for other studies that show how the poor have refrigerators, microwaves, coffee pots, and other things, they don't consider that many people buy used things, places like Big Lots and especially Goodwill have things for cheap. I have a closet full of two dollar shirts from Goodwill, have gotten several pots and pans, movies, books, and some furniture for very cheap from Goodwill. And dumpster diving can produce TVs, leather chairs, printers, lamps, game systems, and many other things for free. Some apartment complexes provide things like ceiling fans and refrigerators at no charge.
Actually I have a couple friends that you would think have alot of money, but they are actually very poor but they dumpster dive and look through people's trash when it looks like they might find something. One of my friends even found a pair of Carheart overalls, several Guitar Hero guitars and drums, and even stereo systems. Myself I have a pretty nice printer that I climbed in a dumpster to get. The luckiest person I know found a 1976 Fender Jazz Bass in the trash. It needed some work, but it's otherwise in a very good condition. And not too mention you can sometimes find large appliances, like dish washers, clothes washers and dryers, and refrigerators sitting along side the road, or very cheap on discount at places like Menard because they have some flaw in them, or from a place that sells them used. And garage sells also help poor people get things they need or want for cheap.

 

[Magic Man]

When I said that the 20,000 dollar guy is lucky to have a job, I back that up because he is competing in a global economy where people much smarter than him are working for less.

And the guy making $10 million is lucky because there are people much smarter than him working for less.

Who ever said anyone was entitled to a middle class life style any more?

Who said anyone was entitled to anything? Someone is as entitled to a middle class lifestyle as they are to a rich lifestyle.

Do you at least understand why I say the 20,000 dollar guys are lucky? I did not mean it as an insult, it is a cold hard fact. Wake up and smell the coffee, Obama brewed it, Clinton signed the free trade agreements and we all buy the cheap imported stuff that eliminates jobs every year.

They're still not lucky, and the point is, if they're lucky, then so is the guy making $10 million.

The younger generation could do better if they figured this out instead of urinating in parks holding some lame sign.

I'm sorry, what? As is typical of one of your rants, this made no sense and wandered around to several different areas. The Occupy movement isn't young people. It's all kinds of people, and what they understand is they need the government to stop working for the top 1% and start working for the 99%. That's why they're out there getting their message out. The sad part is people like you who dismiss them and insult them when they're trying to help you as much as anyone.

 

[Magic Man]

Actually I'll humor you on this one, mball -

Television

Very first article of a Google search using the phrase "percentage of Americans who own a tv."

Was that so hard?

Now, let's look at that stat. What does that stat tell you? It tells me a lot of households have at some point had $100 to spend on one of the most basic luxuries there is.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Now, let's look at that stat. What does that stat tell you? It tells me a lot of households have at some point had $100 to spend on one of the most basic luxuries there is.

If they weren't shopping smart. I know some people who shopped dumb and got a TV from a rent-to-own place and payed more than double what they should have, while some people get them for little-to-no costs. The only thing the stat tells me is that people have TVs. Now if it went deeper and examined people's shopping habits, and how they acquired their TV, we would have a much better picture.

 

[work in progress]

No, sorry - I am not going to post all those sources. It is ridiculously easy to find these stats. Just google "percentage of Americans who own a tv" or whatever. All these stats were from the first page of a google search. I aimed for the most objective source rather than inflammatory sites with a political or religious agenda.

It is an irrelevant point anyway! Since it was thrown into the discussion by the propagandists at Foxnews, to try to demonstrate that the poor don't realllllly have it so bad! All it proves is that some consumer products are cheaper than food, shelter and other necessities of life.

And, it doesn't even prove that the people on welfare bought their TV's and other items themselves. Most of our old TV's, stereos, furniture etc., have gone to in-laws that are on welfare or disability over the years. Same thing happens with many other on the system, who get free stuff from parents or other family members. The numbers conservative propagandists won't mention, are the ones that show much lower life spans and poorer health for people on welfare, than the general population. Even in my city, the difference in lifespan between some affluent neighbourhoods and older neighbourhoods with high welfare, are more than 20 years.

The Fox propaganda also doesn't take account of the fact that the problem is "relative" inequality, not income levels. So, a family with per capita income of $3000 per year in a poorer, but egalitarian country like Costa Rica, will have better health and wellbeing numbers than the equivalent in the U.S.

 

[Alceste]

So what? I have six TVs, but I only payed for one that cost 40 dollars from Goodwill. Two I found in a dumpster, one my dad gave to me, and the other two me and my girlfriend had before we moved out of our parents. One of my friends even acquired a flat panel HDTV that she found sitting in someones trash pile one night. I even have several video game systems, but I had them before I moved out of my parents. And you can usually find newer ones pretty cheap if you look hard enough and find someone who is looking to make some fast cash. And not too mention older systems aren't that expensive.
As for other studies that show how the poor have refrigerators, microwaves, coffee pots, and other things, they don't consider that many people buy used things, places like Big Lots and especially Goodwill have things for cheap. I have a closet full of two dollar shirts from Goodwill, have gotten several pots and pans, movies, books, and some furniture for very cheap from Goodwill. And dumpster diving can produce TVs, leather chairs, printers, lamps, game systems, and many other things for free. Some apartment complexes provide things like ceiling fans and refrigerators at no charge.
Actually I have a couple friends that you would think have alot of money, but they are actually very poor but they dumpster dive and look through people's trash when it looks like they might find something. One of my friends even found a pair of Carheart overalls, several Guitar Hero guitars and drums, and even stereo systems. Myself I have a pretty nice printer that I climbed in a dumpster to get. The luckiest person I know found a 1976 Fender Jazz Bass in the trash. It needed some work, but it's otherwise in a very good condition. And not too mention you can sometimes find large appliances, like dish washers, clothes washers and dryers, and refrigerators sitting along side the road, or very cheap on discount at places like Menard because they have some flaw in them, or from a place that sells them used. And garage sells also help poor people get things they need or want for cheap.

We "have" three tvs in the house. Two are sitting in storage, given to my grandmother when two of her sisters went into nursing homes. The remaining one was state-of-the-art in about 1980. It takes about a minute for the picture to warm up to full brightness and only has 12 channels. I shop at a massive thrift store where I can get an entirely new wardrobe for about $30 bucks. All three of us, including my 92 year old grandmother, regularly scoop free furniture from the roadside. My phone is top of the line, but was free with my plan, which is a smoking deal - competitive even for a land line. I have a car, but without a car it would not be possible for me to get to work, ANYWHERE. This is a pretty rural area with little to no public transit.

IMO, you can't measure what a person can afford to pay in tax by the amount of stuff you think they have. In our consumer culture, stuff is abundant and can often be found for free. Income (from all sources) weighed against the average local cost of living is the best measure.

 

[Magic Man]

We "have" three tvs in the house. Two are sitting in storage, given to my grandmother when two of her sisters went into nursing homes. The remaining one was state-of-the-art in about 1980. It takes about a minute for the picture to warm up to full brightness and only has 12 channels. I shop at a massive thrift store where I can get an entirely new wardrobe for about $30 bucks. All three of us, including my 92 year old grandmother, regularly scoop free furniture from the roadside. My phone is top of the line, but was free with my plan, which is a smoking deal - competitive even for a land line. I have a car, but without a car it would not be possible for me to get to work, ANYWHERE. This is a pretty rural area with little to no public transit.

IMO, you can't measure what a person can afford to pay in tax by the amount of stuff you think they have. In our consumer culture, stuff is abundant and can often be found for free. Income (from all sources) weighed against the average local cost of living is the best measure.

Good points by you, Shadow Wolf and work in progress. The smartphone one gets me most of all. I hear it from Rick and other conservatives a lot, as if it means the person is spending a lot. I got my Android phone in February. It was free with my new 2-year contract, and since I'm on my parents' plan, I pay $5 a month for the line, $10 a month for unlimited texting and $15 a month for the minimum data plan, which is plenty for me. That's $30 a month for the phone, or $360 a year.

It is important to remember that things like phones, computers, TVs and other "luxurious" pieces of technology these days are pretty cheap relative to housing, food, clothing and transportation costs. I spend more on gas per month than I do on my phone, internet and TV bill.

 

[Alceste]

Good points by you, Shadow Wolf and work in progress. The smartphone one gets me most of all. I hear it from Rick and other conservatives a lot, as if it means the person is spending a lot. I got my Android phone in February. It was free with my new 2-year contract, and since I'm on my parents' plan, I pay $5 a month for the line, $10 a month for unlimited texting and $15 a month for the minimum data plan, which is plenty for me. That's $30 a month for the phone, or $360 a year.

It is important to remember that things like phones, computers, TVs and other "luxurious" pieces of technology these days are pretty cheap relative to housing, food, clothing and transportation costs. I spend more on gas per month than I do on my phone, internet and TV bill.

Me too - I spend about $300 a month just on the car (insurance and gas), without which I couldn't get to work. If we were renting in this area - unless we found a major bargain - the rent and car expenses would wipe out about 75% of my entire income and groceries would wipe out the rest. If I got rid of my phone and put only the money I spend on that 'luxury' away towards a 20% down payment on the cheapest sort of shack available in this area it would take me 60 years to do it. I just did the math.

With those odds stacked against me, why bother to sock it away? I like my phone. Obviously there will be no house until either the housing price situation or our income situation dramatically changes and we're working on the latter, so I might as well just use my money to enjoy my life.

 

[Kathryn]

It is an irrelevant point anyway! Since it was thrown into the discussion by the propagandists at Foxnews, to try to demonstrate that the poor don't realllllly have it so bad! All it proves is that some consumer products are cheaper than food, shelter and other necessities of life.


The Fox propaganda also doesn't take account of the fact that the problem is "relative" inequality, not income levels. So, a family with per capita income of $3000 per year in a poorer, but egalitarian country like Costa Rica, will have better health and wellbeing numbers than the equivalent in the U.S.

What on earth are you rambling on about? I didn't even GET any of the stats I posted from Fox News sources. I didn't even know Fox used any of these very readily available stats - and why would that be? Because I watch very little Fox News.

 

[Kathryn]

Me too - I spend about $300 a month just on the car (insurance and gas), without which I couldn't get to work. If we were renting in this area - unless we found a major bargain - the rent and car expenses would wipe out about 75% of my entire income and groceries would wipe out the rest. If I got rid of my phone and put only the money I spend on that 'luxury' away towards a 20% down payment on the cheapest sort of shack available in this area it would take me 60 years to do it. I just did the math.

With those odds stacked against me, why bother to sock it away? I like my phone. Obviously there will be no house until either the housing price situation or our income situation dramatically changes and we're working on the latter, so I might as well just use my money to enjoy my life.

Move.

 

[Revoltingest]

...I watch very little Fox News.

Apparently, he closely monitors it for you.
(I'm thankful he does...so that I don't have to.)

 

[Reverend Rick]

I guess it boils down to perception. When I think of poverty, I think of uneducated people cold and hungry with no roof over their head, not someone who does not have a down payment for their dream home or the new i-phone 4gs.

These poor folks don't have voice recognition or parent's cell phone plans they can join.

What floors me the most is people who spend an additional 180 dollars a year to text message when they could just call each other and actually talk.

I know I have an attitude, but it kills me when these folks in "poverty" have it better than I had it growing up in a middle class home.

 

[Magic Man]

Move.

And what exactly is that supposed to solve?