Entitlements?

[Magic Man]

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.

Good, because no one is including someone who has all they need, but just doesn't have a down payment for a really nice house or the newest iPhone.

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

Who doesn't?

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.

First, who does that? Why not just spend $10 a month like I do? That would be $120 a year. Second, really? You're floored at spending .5% of a very low income on a very useful feature like texting? Until this past February I didn't have a texting plan. I don't do a lot of texting now that I have one, but it's very useful. Is it that you don't have a texting plan, and therefore don't understand the value?

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.

OK, so which folks have it better than you did? Give me an example of someone we all consider poor that has it better than you did. Because we're not talking about people with the newest iPhone or a nice place to live, but not their dream home. Those are exaggerations by you. They are exaggerations because if you just stick to reality, it doesn't support your wild accusations.

 

[Reverend Rick]

First, who does that? Why not just spend $10 a month like I do? That would be $120 a year. Second, really? You're floored at spending .5% of a very low income on a very useful feature like texting?

You tell me Matt, which is quicker and more efficient a 30 second voice conversation or a 5 minute exchange typing every word?

OK, so which folks have it better than you did? Give me an example of someone we all consider poor that has it better than you did.

This is going to be simple. I was raised with one car in the driveway, our phone had a party line which means several homes and 15 or more people all shared one phone line. There was no cable TV, internet, game systems, DVD's, cell phones, microwaves, or air conditioning. :sorry1:

They are exaggerations because if you just stick to reality, it doesn't support your wild accusations.

I'm telling you that many rich people back in the 1960's did not have it as good as people who are below the "poverty line" now.

It is not a "wild accusation" that many folks had to pay their own doctor bills and take the time to prepare their own meals 365 days a year. Going out to eat was not even an option.

Parents did not drive their children to school every day and only the richest families children wore braces on their teeth.

 

[Revoltingest]

I'm telling you that many rich people back in the 1960's did not have it as good as people who are below the "poverty line" now.

We were pretty well off in the 50s. (Pop was an engineering manager at Ford.)
We had one leased car.
I picked up returnable pop bottles ($.02 each) from the ditches on my to buy candy.
We had no AC, no summer camp, no video games, no internet.
We shared a party line phone.
We got 4 TV channels. (We could watch curling on #9 - the Canadian station.)
I did have 2-speed bicycle though. (A friend had a 3-speed "English racer"!)

 

[Magic Man]

You tell me Matt, which is quicker and more efficient a 30 second voice conversation or a 5 minute exchange typing every word?

OK, this answers my question. Apparently you don't have a texting plan. The choice is not between a 30-second voice conversation and a 5-minute exchange. The choice is between a 1 minute conversation and a 20-second typing exchange.

This is going to be simple. I was raised with one car in the driveway, our phone had a party line which means several homes and 15 or more people all shared one phone line. There was no cable TV, internet, game systems, DVD's, cell phones, microwaves, or air conditioning. :sorry1:

OK, now can you answer my question?

I'm telling you that many rich people back in the 1960's did not have it as good as people who are below the "poverty line" now.

Cool, and I'm telling you you're wrong.

It is not a "wild accusation" that many folks had to pay their own doctor bills and take the time to prepare their own meals 365 days a year. Going out to eat was not even an option.

What do either of those things have to do with anything?

Parents did not drive their children to school every day and only the richest families children wore braces on their teeth.

And what do these have to do with anything?

 

[Magic Man]

We were pretty well off in the 50s. (Pop was an engineering manager at Ford.)
We had one leased car.
I picked up returnable pop bottles ($.02 each) from the ditches on my to buy candy.
We had no AC, no summer camp, no video games, no internet.
We shared a party line phone.
We got 4 TV channels. (We could watch curling on #9 - the Canadian station.)
I did have 2-speed bicycle though. (A friend had a 3-speed "English racer"!)

That's awesome. I just wish someone could tell me what any of this has to do with anything. Are you guys saying someone with no AC, no video games, no internet, no car, an old TV they didn't pay for, and who has to scrape by on crappy meals and a live in a crappy apartment is better off than you guy were?

 

[Alceste]

Move.

We did. The UK was much worse. There is no hope at all for our generation there. Here it has been possible to live on one income (mine) while my partner starts a business that has a chance of generating a reasonable livelihood. Property prices are pretty outrageous across the board in Canada still though. If we both work full time it still will not be enough, and we would have to live in a city.

It's cute how you think everybody moving is going to solve the problem of new buyers being priced out of the market across the board, though. Typical baby boomer thinking. "It was easy for me, so there is probably a really simple solution".

 

[Alceste]

We were pretty well off in the 50s. (Pop was an engineering manager at Ford.)
We had one leased car.
I picked up returnable pop bottles ($.02 each) from the ditches on my to buy candy.
We had no AC, no summer camp, no video games, no internet.
We shared a party line phone.
We got 4 TV channels. (We could watch curling on #9 - the Canadian station.)
I did have 2-speed bicycle though. (A friend had a 3-speed "English racer"!)

How old were you when you bought your first home? How much did it cost? What was your job at the time? You're taking about baubles and trinkets. Let's keep it relevant.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Typical baby boomer thinking. "It was easy for me, so there is probably a really simple solution".

Yeah, it was sooooo easy being forced to go to Vietnam and come back to a economy with double digit unemployment and inflation. Every week you had to buy less at the grocery and pay even more money for it.

A credit card was a pipe dream and when you did find a job, you where forced to work overtime.

Every generation thinks they are special, but I don't believe your generation appreciates just how hard we had to work, the crap we had to put up with, and how long we had to wait to get simple things in our life.

It is hard to explain to you young whipper snappers that everything we have came very slowly to us while you think you deserve everything all at once after you have worked a year or two.

Hard work and sacrifice is a thing of the past.

The bottom line is, we worked longer and harder for less than you have back in the day. My dining table was a wire crate with lawn chairs, my bed was a water mattress with four boards on the floor.

I did not have a TV or phone nor did I want one. I did have a peach crate of albums and a killer stereo though.

My car was a POS and I had to work on it on my one day off to make it back to work on Monday.

The big difference was, I was happy back then. It was fun to be alive and I could care less what the rich folks where doing or how much money they had.

 

[Alceste]

Yeah, it was sooooo easy being forced to go to Vietnam and come back to a economy with double digit unemployment and inflation. Every week you had to buy less at the grocery and pay even more money for it.

A credit card was a pipe dream and when you did find a job, you where forced to work overtime.

Every generation thinks they are special, but I don't believe your generation appreciates just how hard we had to work, the crap we had to put up with, and how long we had to wait to get simple things in our life.

It is hard to explain to you young whipper snappers that everything we have came very slowly to us while you think you deserve everything all at once after you have worked a year or two.

Hard work and sacrifice is a thing of the past.

The bottom line is, we worked longer and harder for less than you have back in the day. My dining table was a wire crate with lawn chairs, my bed was a water mattress with four boards on the floor.

I did not have a TV or phone nor did I want one. I did have a peach crate of albums and a killer stereo though.

My car was a POS and I had to work on it on my one day off to make it back to work on Monday.

The big difference was, I was happy back then. It was fun to be alive and I could care less what the rich folks where doing or how much money they had.

Same question to you. How old were you when you bought your first house? What was your job at the time? How much did it cost?

This sounds like a bunch if hot air to me. The generation that grabbed everything they could rationalizing the consequences of their greed resting on the shoulders of their children and grandchildren.

 

[Reverend Rick]

Same question to you. How old were you when you bought your first house? What was your job at the time? How much did it cost?

This sounds like a bunch if hot air to me. The generation that grabbed everything they could rationalizing the consequences of their greed resting on the shoulders of their children and grandchildren.

OK first off I support the balanced budget amendment and do not want to burden my children and grand children with my debt.

To answer your question, my first home cost me 27,000.

I was 27 years old and put 20% down.

My mortage was 12% fixed 30 years.

It took me almost ten years to qualify for this loan and was very lucky to get it.

This home was not in the best of neighborhoods.

It was a starter home with two bedrooms and one bathroom.

 

[Magic Man]

Yeah, it was sooooo easy being forced to go to Vietnam and come back to a economy with double digit unemployment and inflation. Every week you had to buy less at the grocery and pay even more money for it.

A credit card was a pipe dream and when you did find a job, you where forced to work overtime.

Every generation thinks they are special, but I don't believe your generation appreciates just how hard we had to work, the crap we had to put up with, and how long we had to wait to get simple things in our life.

It is hard to explain to you young whipper snappers that everything we have came very slowly to us while you think you deserve everything all at once after you have worked a year or two.

Hard work and sacrifice is a thing of the past.

The bottom line is, we worked longer and harder for less than you have back in the day. My dining table was a wire crate with lawn chairs, my bed was a water mattress with four boards on the floor.

I did not have a TV or phone nor did I want one. I did have a peach crate of albums and a killer stereo though.

My car was a POS and I had to work on it on my one day off to make it back to work on Monday.

Yes, we get it. You had to walk uphill to school both way in the snow with no shoes and no jacket. We've all heard the stories. The problem is reality doesn't match up to your stories.

The big difference was, I was happy back then. It was fun to be alive and I could care less what the rich folks where doing or how much money they had.

I'm happy now. I also realize that the rich have gotten much richer while the rest of us have gotten poorer than we were 20, 30, or 40 years ago. It's not about what the rich are doing or how much they have. It's how that affects everyone else. Them getting richer is fine, as long as everyone else is getting richer accordingly.

 

[Magic Man]

OK first off I support the balanced budget amendment and do not want to burden my children and grand children with my debt.

To answer your question, my first home cost me 27,000.

I was 27 years old and put 20% down.

My mortage was 12% fixed 30 years.

It took me almost ten years to qualify for this loan and was very lucky to get it.

This home was not in the best of neighborhoods.

It was a starter home with two bedrooms and one bathroom.

How did it take you almost ten years to qualify for that? What does that mean? You started trying to get a loan when you were 17?

My wife and I are paying $200,000 for our house. We put 10% down. Our rate is 5.5% for 30 years. We saved up for 5 years for the down payment. It's a starter home with 3 bedrooms, one bathroom and 1,500 sq. ft. The main thing to remember is that my wife and I make 50% more than the median household income. 40 years ago, a couple in our financial position could have bought an average house for twice our income, whereas now it cost us 3 times our income.

 

[Alceste]

How did it take you almost ten years to qualify for that? What does that mean? You started trying to get a loan when you were 17?

My wife and I are paying $200,000 for our house. We put 10% down. Our rate is 5.5% for 30 years. We saved up for 5 years for the down payment. It's a starter home with 3 bedrooms, one bathroom and 1,500 sq. ft. The main thing to remember is that my wife and I make 50% more than the median household income. 40 years ago, a couple in our financial position could have bought an average house for twice our income, whereas now it cost us 3 times our income.

Sometimes a picture is worth 1000 words:

Taking my grandparents as an example, they bought their first property (riverfront, 1/2 acre, 30 minute commute downtown) at the bottom of that dip in the 40s for $2000, sold it at the top of the spike in the 60s, sold again at the top of the spike in the 70s and moved to an area where the homes are now "worth" over half a million dollars - double what they paid. They were lucky. Anybody who bought a house - or issued a mortgage - at the top of that spike is an idiot, as is anybody who expects a home purchased after 2000 to increase in value. OTOH, where are we (the generation who started needing permanent, independent shelter around 2000) supposed to live?

Sometimes I wonder if maybe economic collapse would be the best thing for us. Sure it would wipe out the assets of our parents generation, but either a major public program of low-cost housing, a massive private market correction or a massive spike in wages must happen if our generation is to have access to affordable housing. There's no support in the boomer generation for "entitlements" such as affordable housing programs and no prospect of increasing average wages (they have been declining since about 1970) because the boomers' pensions are utterly dependent on private profits which can only be maximized in a global labour market, so that leaves only one possibility.

 

[Reverend Rick]

How did it take you almost ten years to qualify for that? What does that mean? You started trying to get a loan when you were 17?

It means that when I was 17, I saved 1,000.00 of the 5,400.00 I put down on my first home. Not too many teenagers can save money like that today much less adjust that for inflation. I was making 1.65 an hour back then.

But then I was not playing video games and walking around staring at text messages everywhere I went either.

 

[Alceste]

It means that when I was 17, I saved 1,000.00 of the 5,400.00 I put down on my first home. Not too many teenagers can save money like that today much less adjust that for inflation. I was making 1.65 an hour back then.

But then I was not playing video games and walking around staring at text messages everywhere I went either.

What year did you buy your first house? The graph I posted is inflation adjusted and based on the consumer price index (basic cost of living), so that should make it pretty easy to compare your situation getting into the "housing market" (a profoundly irritating term) to ours.

 

[Reverend Rick]

What year did you buy your first house? The graph I posted is inflation adjusted and based on the consumer price index (basic cost of living), so that should make it pretty easy to compare your situation getting into the "housing market" (a profoundly irritating term) to ours.

1978 I believe.

 

[Magic Man]

It means that when I was 17, I saved 1,000.00 of the 5,400.00 I put down on my first home. Not too many teenagers can save money like that today much less adjust that for inflation. I was making 1.65 an hour back then.

But then I was not playing video games and walking around staring at text messages everywhere I went either.

No, I get it. You were so much better than today's youth. Just like your father was so much better than the youth of your day. Just like his father was so much better than the youth of his day, etc. We get it. You walked to school uphill both ways, with no shoes and no jacket in 4 feet of snow.

Now, let's look at your math.

You made $1.65/hour. To save $1,000 in a year at that rate, you'd have to put away 12 hours worth of your pay a week. The down payment for your house was $5,400. This $1,000 was 19% of that down payment.

Now, a kid these days would make $7.50/hour. If this kid saved 12 hours worth of pay a week for a year, they would end up with $4,700. The down payment for a similar house now would be $35,000. 19% of that would be $6,700. So, doing the same exact thing you did, they'd be left with 13% of their down payment, rather than 19% of it.

And by the way, not too many teenagers saved money like that in your day either. But you're welcome to go ahead and keep pretending that your generation is so much better than the current one. It won't ever come true, but I guess it'll make you feel better about yourself.

 

[Averroes]

Of late, I have been wondering where people got the idea that they deserve different things. There is a distinct entitlement mentality that has crept into the realm of accepted thought and I am curious where that thinking originated and where it leads.

Do people deserve to have a job? Is it a basic right? How would you create a system that ensures all able-bodied people had employment?

Do people deserve a home? Is it a basic right? If not, why not? If so, why?

Do people deserve free medical, paid for proactively, through taxation? Is it a basic right? If not, why not? If so, why?

Do people deserve a "living wage"? Is it a basic right? If not, why not? If so, why?

Do people deserve a free education, up to and including, a doctorate? Is it a basic right? If not, why not? If so, why?

Do people have a responsibility to help those around them? Is it a basic obligation? If not, why not? Is so, why?


I promise I won't be critical of what people may say here as I am genuinely interested in why people believe what they do and what kind of economic system/political system others think would serve mankind better than capitalism.

Here's your chance. Convince me.

Not trying to convince someone who may not have been born in a disadvantaged position. Some people feel entitled because they were born in environments where they started out in a disadvantaged position. Do people deserve a job? Yes. We live in a capitalistic society where financial gain equates to success. Is having a job a basic right? No, because jobs aren't technically human necessity. However the structure of our society makes it that way.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

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.

Quite often text only is cheaper than minutes. Some plans deduct minutes for texts. Texting is so cheap today, it's not worth getting worked up for.

Move.

That is always a gamble, especially when you don't have much money for it. And moving presents it's own problems. Here I have family to rely on in a pinch, but if I move I may not have anyone. Moving is much easier said than done, especially when you need money to move.

You tell me Matt, which is quicker and more efficient a 30 second voice conversation or a 5 minute exchange typing every word?

You apparently don't have many poor friends that don't have minutes, or are running low, and the only way to get ahold of them is through texting. Or you can spend 30 seconds waiting and hoping they pick the phone up, or take 30 seconds to type and send a text. Even without a full keyboard, 5 minutes is a very, very long time to text.

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.

I had it pretty good growing up too. And now I don't because I grew up and moved out of my parents home. And really all there is for now is low wage dead-end jobs.

The times have changed, but things haven't changed that much. The poor may have different things, as a great many different things have been invented since the 50's and 60's, but the poor still use cheap, used, run-down stuff they can get for cheap or free.
As for cell phones and internet, you really can't go without. Cell phones are cheaper than land lines, and you NEED internet access for school, job applications, work and more.

 

[Alceste]

1978 I believe.

OK, then looking at the graph, somebody who was trying to enter the market in 2000 would have had to work twice as long, earn twice as much or work twice as hard as you did to save up a downpayment for their first home - 20 years of working and saving, just for a down payment, never mind the time needed to repay the resulting mortgage obligation - another 60 years for me to repay the equivalent of your first mortgage, and my entire window of opportunity for starting a family just saving up for a down payment.