Reply With Quote
Absolutely. Usually the best education does, in my opinion.
"I've never let my school interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
That's one of my favorite quotes. I'm asking because he's so critical of our education in the U.S.
A valuable question. Both for what it will reveal about the respondent, but also the interlocutor.
Why must we care? Is there a limited amount of wisdom and judgment in this society? Does education not happen without a tuition bill?
Absolutely. Usually the best education does, in my opinion.
"I've never let my school interfere with my education." - Mark Twain
That's one of my favorite quotes. I'm asking because he's so critical of our education in the U.S.
Oh, I thought you were asking because you'd absolutely, positively want to avoid sending your children to that ins ution, which I wholeheartedly understand.
you couldn't afford the $50K/year anyway. Stick with SAC or IIT Inst or Phoenix.
UTSA is 50k a year?
You should change that to ITT... IIT is the best system of undergrad technical schools in the world. And ITT and Phoenix are crazy expensive.you couldn't afford the $50K/year anyway. Stick with SAC or IIT Inst or Phoenix.
boutons went to the school of hard knocks, and evidently was picked on egregiously.
thats my horoscope word of the day. evidently im sagittarius now and am still adjusting. capricorn sucked, anyhow, so i welcome the change.
How could I forget? Repe ive too.un able?
Holy . I couldn't make this up if I tried.you couldn't afford the $50K/year anyway. Stick with SAC or IIT Inst or Phoenix.
boutons is as mean as a snake and about as well spoken. At times the lizard brain clearly predominates.
America is ed and un able. Facts is facts.
And nobody here has a single proposal with any chance of being implemented to un it.
Thanks for your contribution. You're worthless.
So you, too, don't have any suggestions how to un America and Take Our Country Back?
Hmmm. I never pictured croutons as a Buchananite.
Time is the universal solvent. Facts change, for better and for worse, over time.
A empty taunt with a funny tail. What's your solution?
"Facts change, for better and for worse, over time."
This time it's different.
The Repugs, conservatives, capitalists, corporations, aka VRWC, have been working/conspiring for 35+ years (since Nixon's disgrace) to get the UCA into its current hole, with the lower 98% ed, while the top 2% holds enormous wealth and power, and control the political/regulatory/legal ins utions. The UCA will be in this hole for decades, if not forever.
The last time America was so ed, in the 1920s, it was the same gang (it's always the same gang, in every society), but they didn't have the taxpayers to bail them out, so they took a serious hit in the 1930s. That's why the Repugs/conservatives have absolutely HATE and TRASH FDR 80 years later.
In this VRWC-caused financial catastrophe, the VRWC was bailed out by their government conspiratorial s with taxpayer dollars, took no hit at all, leaving the taxpayers in $Ts of debt, with the eternal ripoff that much of the interest on the debt is paid by the taxpayers to the VRWC holding govt bonds.
"A empty taunt with a funny tail. What's your solution?"
GFY
I'll post my solutions later today, not that they will EVER be implemented because the UCA will remain .... guess.
Just to get the discussion back on track.
Is the money illegally distributed in this way and, if you successfully redistribute it, how will you keep the bottom 90% from just handing it back over to the top 10%?
Just to get the discussion back on track.
What will the bottom 90% do to make sure the redistributed wealth will stay put?
Won't they then have to ins ute commercial enterprises that tend to hold value and attract wealth?
That bottom 10% makes $31,000 a year because that's all they're capable of doing. If they knew how to save, invest, and build wealth, they wouldn't be making $31,000 a year; in fact, many of those in the top 10% used to be in the bottom 90%.
I guess I don't see how your graphic defines a problem as much as it defines the nation as one that rewards producers and gives everyone their just rewards. Are their rich people that got they way through luck, illegal, or immoral means? Sure. But, there are way more poor people that got in their condition due to those same cir stances.
If as a child no one ever taught you how to make good decisions, then how do you suddenly learn how to do those things?
People in these brackets often spend 100% of their income on rent, food, health care, and transportation for work, often with more than one job.
If you have no money to save, and you don't make enough money to be considered worthy of a loan, how do you start a business?
By modeling people who were once in your position and have risen out of it.
The vast majority of "poor" have made themselves that way through overspending, under saving, and impulsive poor choices.
I look at the vast majority of my friends -- some of whom make considerably more that I do -- who complain about being poor and living paycheck to paycheck.
I make slightly above that median income of $31,000, in the first graph at the link, and I have a fully funded emergency fund, an investment portfolio, retirement savings, growing college fund for my kids, etc...
I don't live paycheck to paycheck. I live below my means and save or invest the rest. I don't have credit and I don't need it. I don't buy new cars, I don't eat out more than 8 or 9 times a year (unless traveling).
We will always have the poor; some of whom are not responsible for their cir stances. But, I reject the premise that more than a small minority of the 90% (described in the graph) are incapable of surviving on the incomes they make. They just choose to be undisciplined.
Well, you don't learn by receiving handouts. That just creates an en lement mentality that will never motivate you to learn to do for yourself. My parents didn't teach me finance. I had to learn the hard way.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions