72% of Americans live paycheck to paycheck

[Homeland Security]

true, but there is no chance for anything close to a bloody revolution here as the powerful control the military. if anything, the masses would spend more time killing one another.

The program is simple:

1) Get newly poor whites agitated against groups they already hate, like blacks, Mexicans, etc. It gives them an outlet for their anger and lets them do the dirty work of stamping the boot in the face of those other groups so those in power don't have to get their hands bloody.

2) Pick a group of wealthy outcasts, for example gays and other urban liberals, liquidate them, seize their assets, and redistribute them to poor whites. This will make lower-class whites utterly loyal and ready to serve at the whim of their dictator.

[MannyIsGod]

And all you're doing is wanting to write it all off over some "systematic problem" that you can't seem to define. Couldn't possibly be that there is anyone in that 72% who's living paycheck to paycheck because they bought more than they really need. Nope, it's all due to "systematic problems".

Who ever said the 2 are mutually exclusive? You don't think this statistic points to a problem with our society? Asking WHY these people are making bad decisions or how we can avoid them in the future is a bad thing?

I have already said on multiple occasions that there are people who legitimately can't avoid living paycheck to paycheck. All I've said is that percentage is a of a lot less than 72%. Do you agree or disagree with that statement?

I agree.

As I have already stated, the "they" I am referring to are the non-poor Americans who are living paycheck to paycheck. So yes, why can't THEY live financially responsible? Care to provide an answer?

I don't think there is a simple answer but I think many aspects of our consumer society have definitely pushed us here. I think there has been a deliberate push by our nation toward this by corporations who seek short term profits over long term society health. I think a lack of education for our nation has helped lead to this. Uneducated people make worse decisions in almost every measurable way. I believe that wage stagnation and increased costs have attributed to this situation.

If you've got a solution for your "systematic problem" I'd be more than happy to hear it.

There's not a simple solution and I'm no expert but I can see many ways in we could curb this starting with what I mentioned above.

Are you advocating we just ignore it?

[Sportcamper]

Waiting for the chart that breaks down household incomes?

[MannyIsGod]

Off the top of my head; serious expenses people don't NEED, but almost all HAVE:

1. Cable TV.
2. Cell Phone(s)
3. Car payments (because they buy new, and trade it in too often)

another killer many poor are guilty of:

Cigarettes!

If they have any of those; I have little sympathy.

So why do you think poor people tend to purchase these items? What about our society makes me walk into a house delivering Elf Louise gifts and see a 60 inch HD TV in the living room?

[coyotes_geek]

Off the top of my head; serious expenses people don't NEED, but almost all HAVE:

1. Cable TV.
2. Cell Phone(s)
3. Car payments (because they buy new, and trade it in too often)

another killer many poor are guilty of:

Cigarettes!

If they have any of those; I have little sympathy.

+ eating out
+ clothes
+ HD TV's
+ season tickets
+ alcohol
+ etc.......

There are far more people living paycheck to paycheck because they're struggling to meet their wants than there are people living paycheck to paycheck because they're struggling to meet their needs.

[MannyIsGod]

Ok, but why are people's priorities so ed up?

[Crookshanks]

Ok, but why are people's priorities so ed up?

Because we're a nation of people who are trying to fill the void in their lives with things rather than with God. I realize this will probably start a firestorm of comments - but that's what I believe. People think they will feel better if they have material possessions - or they think people will think better of them. It's also about "keeping up with the Joneses".

I agree with the comment earlier that said "poor" people have cellphones, cars, cable TV and other things that poor people in other countries don't have. I can't even begin to count the number of times I've seen people paying for food with the Lone Star card, but yet they're yakking away on a nice cellphone and they have tattooes and piercings and are buying cigarettes and alcohol with a $100 bill. That's NOT poor!!!

[Wild Cobra]

--

[MannyIsGod]

Good, you quickly edited your strawman that I already addressed.

[baseline bum]

This country is so ed when we judge whether people are well off by whether they have a cellphone and a big tv instead of whether they can get a decent house, afford medical care, have money for their kids' education, and so on.

[Wild Cobra]

Good, you quickly edited your strawman that I already addressed.

Yep, you caught me. What can I say.

Feel better?

[MannyIsGod]

This country is so ed when we judge whether people are well off by whether they have a cellphone and a big tv instead of whether they can get a decent house, afford medical care, have money for their kids' education, and so on.

I have to wonder in a day and age where advertising has reached all time sophistication if that has ANY big of influence over how people spend their money.

[Crookshanks]

I have to wonder in a day and age where advertising has reached all time sophistication if that has ANY big of influence over how people spend their money.

Of course it does - or companies wouldn't pay the big bucks to advertise their products! Think about some recent commercials you've seen - they probably perpetuate the notion that you're a better person if you have such and such product. I'm thinking about one I saw last night (I think it was for Sears) where this woman is wondering how her neighbor could afford a new washer and dryer. It was because she could put it on lay-away. The commercial ended with the woman saying wistfully "I want her life".

[clambake]

Because we're a nation of people who are trying to fill the void in their lives with things rather than with God.

what a freak.

[101A]

I have to wonder in a day and age where advertising has reached all time sophistication if that has ANY big of influence over how people spend their money.

Of course it does.

...and if people can be so easily influenced to do things that are, ultimately, not in there best interest; makes one wonder if Democracy is now over-rated, or very wise a form of government.

[rjv]

lets take 2 teachers at a salary of 40,000 each in the city of san antonio. after taxes and insurance they are probably left with about 68,000 which is about 5600 per month. if they have 2 kids, which is not a large family, both under the age of 5 then they spend about 1000 a month on day care. then they have probably 2 cars at about 1000 after the car payment and insurance. gasoline runs about 300 per month. utilities another 300 (and this is a modest estimate), groceries about 500 per month, clothing another 500 and then car upkeep and the usual assortment of miscellaneous expenses of the househould such as lawn care and car maintenance have to reach close to another 500 or so a month as well. if they have student loans to pay off on top of that they really are left with about a few hundred dollars per month. not exactly the sort of left over income to stash away in real estate investments.

so the argument being made here, even by manny is god, who is supposedly the one defending the proletariat is that people should make better choices about their jobs and the amount of children they have. everyone just seems to be arguing in a vacuum from what i can tell.

[ploto]

I know single people who make $100,000 a year in San Antonio and who live paycheck to paycheck and have no kids. The statistic simply means that most people live above their means and does not really say anything about what those means are.

[word]

'em.

[CosmicCowboy]

Of course it does.

...and if people can be so easily influenced to do things that are, ultimately, not in there best interest; makes one wonder if Democracy is now over-rated, or very wise a form of government.

WTF?

So since some people make bad choices you are advocating that government make all the choices for all the people?

[SnakeBoy]

Because we're a nation of people who are trying to fill the void in their lives with things rather than with God.

To the big government crowd...do we get to declare the war on poverty lost now or do we stay the course?

[MannyIsGod]

Of course it does.

...and if people can be so easily influenced to do things that are, ultimately, not in there best interest; makes one wonder if Democracy is now over-rated, or very wise a form of government.

Such a dangerous line of thinking but one that anyone with any form of political curiosity has to come to quite frequently these days.

[clambake]

prayer should handle it!

[MannyIsGod]

WTF?

So since some people make bad choices you are advocating that government make all the choices for all the people?

I tend to think of it being more along the lines of people can be easily manipulated and your fortunes are tossed in along with them.

I used to think libertarianism was the solution to this but then when you realize that in that case you're just allowing corporations to take the place of the government.

[rjv]

Of course it does.

...and if people can be so easily influenced to do things that are, ultimately, not in there best interest; makes one wonder if Democracy is now over-rated, or very wise a form of government.

well there's always china...

[rjv]

I tend to think of it being more along the lines of people can be easily manipulated and your fortunes are tossed in along with them.

I used to think libertarianism was the solution to this but then when you realize that in that case you're just allowing corporations to take the place of the government.

of course, you are kind of running in circles now. if the people are really all that gullible and prone to such bad decision making then why even advocate any sort of revolution on their behalf? why not let the status quo exist as it is? this is sort of an ortega y gasset "revolt of the masses" argument that i seem to be reading from you here.