Reply With Quote
Not quite the 50's but close enough
While we are getting all misty-eyed about the 1950's, and how cheap everything was.
http://www.ohiohistorycentral.org/images/11-3-52.jpg
(edit)
The phrase "the river is on fire" is always at the back of my mind when people start talking about "government overreach" and limiting jobs through environmental legislation, but that is a whole different thread.
Not quite the 50's but close enough
And whatever, Ohio.
I grew up in small town Ohio. Loved it.
So sour.
(you can spit out the cat turd anytime you like)
I saw a family buy Tide w/Bleach at HEB. Rich people.
Not sure, but I think a two income family can afford the HEB brand.
That wasn't the conclusion of the op. Try reading the last 3 paragraphs.
Tendentious. Makes sense, but the blockers are leaning too hard into the running back.
Has such a policy actually been proposed? Are we talking about the new health care law now?President Obama plans to make this situation worse by creating a new “poverty” measure that deliberately severs all connection between “poverty” and actual deprivation.
----------------------------------------------------That misrepresentation has international implications. Rector and Sheffield explain that U.S. government poverty statistics portray a misleading negative image around the world. Al Jazeera, Iran’s Teheran Times, Chinese and Russian media have latched on to U.S. poverty statistics to depict the United States as a failed, nightmarish society. And nothing could be further from the truth.
President Obama plans to make this situation worse by creating a new “poverty” measure that deliberately severs all connection between “poverty” and actual deprivation. Rector and Sheffield say that the goal is to measure income “inequality,” not poverty—giving the President public relations ammunition for his “spread-the-wealth” agenda.
Rector and Sheffield write that when it comes to making policy, the broader reality of what poverty in America means should be taken into consideration: “Sound public policy cannot be based on faulty information or misunderstanding . . . In the long term, grossly exaggerating the extent and severity of material deprivation in the U.S. will benefit neither the poor, the economy, nor society as a whole.”
"Our enemies already use our poverty statistics in propaganda, when being poor in the US is better than in many other places"
[while ignoring that it still sucks]
"Obama plans to exaggerate policy, in my opinion, by adding a new measure of poverty, that I won't go into detail about."
[start wondering why the author doesn't elaborate]
"This planned new measure of poverty won't benefit anybody, in my opinion."
[in addtion to not saying what this measure is, there is nothing except this guys word in the OP to support WHY]
Critical thinking fail.
So essentially we have the argument:
"This new unspecified measure of poverty in this country will let Al Qaeda say mean things about us."
??
I guess I'm guilty of not being generous. From what I would consider poverty, I calculated the following quick, general, annual numbers:
1 person $11,400
2 people $14,460
3 people $17,520
4 people $20,580
I probable missed some basic necessities, and this should be higher. But not dramatically so in my view.
How'd you arrive at the numbers?
Being a miser at rent, utilities, food, and clothing. No cable, car, insurance, etc. A person can eat on $150 for a month. I added $110 monthly per additional person considering combining meals. I figured $50 monthly per person on clothing. Rent and utilities $750 for a single person, with an additional $95 per person. Maybe I should have included some transportation expenses.
Ideas?
tell us what they'll eat for $150 a month.
Just keep talking. I can't wait to see what comes next.
Pretty much. Hey don't ask me to explain it, I was just pointing out the conclusion of the op wasn't "it ain't so bad to be poor in America".So essentially we have the argument:
"This new unspecified measure of poverty in this country will let Al Qaeda say mean things about us."
??
No need. They all have Air Jordans.
Try reworking the numbers factoring in "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Instead of just "life".
What do you think Darrin meant?
Are you saying they can't cook from scratch?
Stop buying prepared and ready to cook food. Just that simple.
I make sandwiches for work. I buy the good bread that costs me 3 loaves for $550 at the outlet store, but $3.59 or so a loaf at a supermarket. The meats and cheeses I buy add up. In the end, using supermarket prices, I get good healthy sandwiches for about $1.53 each that include meat, cheese, two spreads, and lettuce. I could skimp on the quality and pay far less, but I buy top notch.
Breakfast is cheap. A few eggs, pancakes, some type of meat.
What about Raymen?
No soda, but milk, juice, and water.
It doesn't cost much to eat if you stick to the basics.
What about Raymen?
Everybody Loves Raymen
That means getting a better job. Some people are comfortable with their government assistance. That tells me it's too good.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
