So a bit of a economic lesson in 1976 the top 1% of the wealthiest in america only made 9% of the national income. now it's around 24% to 26%. it was 24% in 2009. while the bottom 80% e.g. the poorest 80% only take in 7% of the national income. again 2009 data. But I can tell you it's gotten worse for the most part.

As for the poverty level as in the "takers" that you mention.


This was taken from http://www.nclej.org/poverty-in-the-us.php . Most of it's info comes directly from the national census of 2012. So yeah not 50%.

see what your saying but I don't trust census stats... there is more money going out than going in right?

the welfare-ers are marketed into those programs ..they market welfare in certain areas of the country creating more bloat. more bureaucracy... aka bloat the bureaucracy.

thus in turn, breaking the bank creating more indigents who will scream
more redistribution creating more taxes and flushing everyone down the toilet.

Am more into solutions... you are talking to a red neck hillbilly blue collar guy... we always find ways to make things work and I am from the old school of making something from Nothing...

Have a hard time with class warfare... bigger fish to fry.. with all due respect... just trying to help...

You might try looking at some old popular mechanics mags... the ones I fin of interest are from the 60's,,, motors for bicycles, home made airplanes, all kinds of neat stuff... heck I do crazy stuff. it will make you old school

yep that's why I'm giving you the info that I know of. Sorry that you don't trust the census though. There is a certain amount of unreliability taken into account in any statistical survey. And any statistician worth their grain of salt does what ever it takes to reduce as much bias as they can. How they do this is a bit complicated and very mathy (it deals with laws of probability and normal distributions of discrete random variables).

I unfortunately don't have many solutions to this problem other then redistribution of wealth. But that's an argument that is defined as "Against Capitalism", so I'm trying to find different ways. like placing an income cap on CEO's (majority of the top 1% earn their income through being CEO's). increasing the national minimum wage to $10 per hr (which will cause even more issues then you will think).

A national tax on Excess profit in big businesses?

we need to find a way to hit the 1% hard. Like robin hood but legally. any Ideas?

you dont want to limit creativity

you want the best and the brightest that means expenses

you have to get the beast off of the back of the people so they can be freee to create more than cell phones

last we are fighting the nwo , cfr, the fed and internal suppressors for our right to free expression and creativity. All manufacturing shipped to china and mexico... heck I would love to go to mexico and take soil samples and explore buy good luck with that..

but we have been sold out by both sides so...

example the district I live in in texas has the two highest rated congress people in the country,,, less taxes more freedom meaning more prosperity... took years of fighting the fakers and the gamers... i mean years... you will be in this for the long haul... you will come under all kinds of attack some days you will think your life is over, other times its a lovefest redneck heaven...

To live free from encroachers and tyrants is an Ingrained style of life from child birth... teaching your kid how to shoot. or drive..pick eggs milk a cow.... now all called child abuse its a process its Biblical... book of Revelations... its called terrorism now... homeland security says anyone growing tomatoes, hoarding food. likes guns,, a christian is a terrorist ... that stuff HAS TO GO are you getting this

its not about the Gubment You have to raise your kids by example

I would like to se. the Glass Stiegle act put back in place...

heck all the Banks are TAX EXEMPT... Money And Fiat Currency are the Problem

you have to.lead by example. we are broken its worse because of government... when growing up the sky was the limit,,, but its always banker wars to keep us on the reservation.

I buy gold and silver thats money

Fiat money, trillions in debt because ot the lucys, it's good against evil. evil has to be exposed made an example of... a humble nation will be an exalted nation...I have solutions its simple so simple...

I understand you to a certain extent. I just don't understand how restricting the wealthiest from making taking too much money will limit creativity?

Or how the issues that you are discussing will reduce the amount of people in poverty?

Wouldn't more freedom for companies just allow them to either screw the smaller people more or ship more jobs to those countries?

If Texas was so great then why does it have such a High poverty rate? in fact it's one of the top 5 highest poverty rates in the US.

Living free is great and all, I totally agree with you on this. I just feel that the main reason why our government exists is to protect people so that they can be free to do as they wish. Well so long as their actions don't infringe on the freedoms of someone else right.

Anyhoo, I feel that this can be dealt with within the bounds of the governing body that we have now. We just need to work with them. This way our wishes for a better and more free future will be realized.

its the communist driven districts that will be poor. you have to elect bible school teachers if you have to...

you cant have a prostitution industry or a drug industry... you want to reach for the stars find new inventions that can be used for good... pharmaceutical co.s are slow killing millions... you have to know Jesus read the bible///

do you Want to be Free? Or do You Want to be a Slave

your getting a bit off topic. this isn't the issue. I am free.

How does this resolve the issues we're talking about?

There have been studies done that welfare is a drug and has caused more damage to inner city black communities than help. Perhaps misguided, but the OP article is about how to stop the cycle of creating an underclass of uneducated, violent, inner city youth. Morality aside, continuing to have children when you can't afford to support them is bad for the children and bad for society.

The following link is a good explanation of the problem

http://www.aei-ideas.org/2012/12/welfare-programs-that-do-more-harm-than-good/

lol,,

Yep your absolutely right! one of these problems is Disability. Unfortunately that website didn't give you the broad scope of the problem. Keep in mind Disability is a form of welfare, but is only one of the darker sides that doesn't fix the real problem. What disability does is for certain groups of people that can't work or have don't have the means to care for them selves due to a physical or mental issue, the government steps in and hands them a check.

It is because of this stipend that many Americans that are in Deep poverty are able to survive. The problem is, like the issues that the website discussed, that many individuals that have disability keep it. This is not due to laziness, but because literally working 40 hrs a week won't pay the bills, whereas being on disability DOES. Also, once someone Does get on disability they are saying that they can't work. So they are no longer in the workforce, and have no ability to return. As of yet there is no rehabilitation systems in place that will help them get back into the workforce.

Because of this and the other reasons that website mentioned Disability needs to be overhauled.

However we continue to have people say that They are the problem with society. They must be weeded out. They must be sterilized.

The last time I heard this kind of argument about a certain kind of people. It was about the Jews. And when someone did something about it, he became the most loathed person across the entire world. But hey, I guess this is the reason that I find it difficult to accept this type of argument as a valid one.

if capping income limits createivity and 'job creation',, why is it back in the seventies when the wealthy earned LESS of the money, we had LOWER unemployment

and since the seventies , while their share grew,, unemployment also got larger


lets try paying people decent wages,, that is the difference between the 'taxpayer' and the 'non'.. not morals or productivity, but WAGES, as the tax system is based upon income brackets


lets try creating those jobs that these wealthy allegedly can create more of while their income exponentially grows

lets evolve from our slave worker system that tells people take what we offer you and don't complain and don't be upset that you cant participate and don't matter because you are in the wrong income bracket,,

create the environment where people can earn the income necessary to pay taxes, and the gap wouldn't be so large


as to the sexists who continue to blame women having babies ,, women have been having babies since time began,,, it really cant continue to be the scapegoat for all social problems,,,and BY THE WAY,, none of them have managed to do it without an all too willing man,,,,

To fix a problem, the root has to be dug out.

Problem is, too many people. Throw more money at the problem only encourages more irresponsible behavior.

Only stupid liberals would come up with the idea of taking other peoples money and give it to folks who don't want jobs, gang bangers, professional ghetto rat factories,etc.

Someone washing dishes needing assistance, great, they earned it.

Someone sitting on their butts claiming they won't take any job they feel is beneath them, kick 'em to da coib.

only 'stupid' conservatives continue to promote the idea that 'welfare' gets 'thrown' at people who

don't 'want' jobs
are gang bangers
and 'ghetto rat factories'

someone who is in an area where there isn't abundant work, needing assistance while seeking work,, is more like what usually happens, as opposed to people not 'wanting 'work

someone who claims they wont just take 'any' job because not 'every' job is suitable for their skills or needs, is also more often what happens as opposed to it being 'beneath'them


but as I said, its easier to blame women making 'babies'(all on their own , I suppose) and people who aren't in the right tax bracket to pay taxes

to label them moochers and takers and non contributing,, blah , blah, blah

to dehumanize and make them less than, so that the policies can be supported to begin stomping them out,,,, or keeping them in their rightful place as non citizens or non humans

just the serfs whose jobs it is to produce for the owners,,,,

Cracked out mom.


Idea.

End the welfare for non-contributors.

Offer tax breaks and financial incentives to get spayed and neutered.

what is a 'non contributor'?


anyone that isn't 'employed'? cause that's a lot of seniors, and disabled people gonna be dying out,,,,,,,


which 'contributions' are gonna matter,,? just money?

nice introduction into a true classist society,, perhaps we should begin to appoint kings and queens as well,,,

Seniors earned it.
The disabled can't.

Big freakin' difference between can't and WON"T, no?

Kewl plan, Mr. Pearce.

Is there a similar plan for castrating poor, unemployed men...yanno, just to be doubly-safe, or are poor, unemployed women ONLY the problem?




If they hit the lottery/get a good-paying job, do we give 'em back their wombs/testicles, or is this the price one pays for once being poor?


By the way, do college students who don't (yet) have a pot to piss in qualify for "poor" and "unemployed"? How about let-go former CEOs of large companies, who've filed for bankruptcy? Are they "poor" and "unemployed"?