Nap and I agree on almost nothing but I'll say a few things about this thread:
- People "require" too many expensive appliances and electronics nowadays. We're now at the point where if you don't have a smartphone, laptop, flat screen HD TV, your own washer and dryer and your own dishwasher you're poor. Throw in a XBOX to boot.
- Wealth is being perceived relative to other people within their own country. A "poor" person in the U.S. would be "well off" elsewhere. Poor people in the U.S. compare themselves to rich people in the U.S. As long as that inequality exists there will always be "poor" people in the US no matter the absolute wealth they have.
BUT the real issue is something I've touched on in a growing number of threads:
- The decent/good jobs that require no education have all but vanished in the US. Manufacturing provided that. You weren't going to get rich off of it but you could have a solid life without going to college. That option really doesn't exist anymore. I don't think it's realistic to combat poverty without either:
1. Educating everyone to the point where they can compete in the globalized service industry
2. Using a combination of trade and immigration controls to bring back manufacturing
Trump wants number two, and Bernie wants to use parts of number two with the plan to get to number one. Hillary has no path to closing the gap. She is the perpetual "lets have an underclass" candidate.
Which means I also just find it funny because Nap's neoliberal leanings created the mess he's complaining about with this thread. I'm sure Hillary/Nap would like it if people just took $10 an hour to live on and liked it.
- People "require" too many expensive appliances and electronics nowadays. We're now at the point where if you don't have a smartphone, laptop, flat screen HD TV, your own washer and dryer and your own dishwasher you're poor. Throw in a XBOX to boot.
- Wealth is being perceived relative to other people within their own country. A "poor" person in the U.S. would be "well off" elsewhere. Poor people in the U.S. compare themselves to rich people in the U.S. As long as that inequality exists there will always be "poor" people in the US no matter the absolute wealth they have.
BUT the real issue is something I've touched on in a growing number of threads:
- The decent/good jobs that require no education have all but vanished in the US. Manufacturing provided that. You weren't going to get rich off of it but you could have a solid life without going to college. That option really doesn't exist anymore. I don't think it's realistic to combat poverty without either:
1. Educating everyone to the point where they can compete in the globalized service industry
2. Using a combination of trade and immigration controls to bring back manufacturing
Trump wants number two, and Bernie wants to use parts of number two with the plan to get to number one. Hillary has no path to closing the gap. She is the perpetual "lets have an underclass" candidate.
Which means I also just find it funny because Nap's neoliberal leanings created the mess he's complaining about with this thread. I'm sure Hillary/Nap would like it if people just took $10 an hour to live on and liked it.
Last edited:
