ThreePointTakedown

I'm curious about your first sentence. What about my comments leads you to believe that I don't appreciate hard work? As much as you might want to think it is an attack on you, personally. Pointing out that you, obviously, lack complete understanding of a situation and should check that first, is not an attack. It might keep you from being able to opine about every topic but those are the breaks. To a hammer everything looks like a nail. To the rest of your comment. You know what your kids, probably, didn't have to work hard at? Having enough to eat, or having seasonally appropriate clothing, transportation to/from school, help with school work. What you see as lack of hard work may not be that at all. Just having to work to keep their heads barely above the water let alone being able to have a cushion to take risks to spend 40k or whatever. If you can't admit that people struggle in ways you can't imagine, then how can you begin to think you have a solution to their problems? The life boat you were born on has offered you great opportunity. Not having to waste energy by swimming. Now it seems as if you are unwilling to toss the life preserver to others in the water. For fear of them, potentially, taking your spot in the boat. Can you see where I am coming from based on your comments?

Not 5th but not interested in going into detail. Sorry.

Yes, there are plenty of things that make the health care industry unique. But it isn't insurmountable to make it more transparent. If it was universally covered by the government(like other, less rich countries) then it wouldn't matter the circumstances of your appendix(within reason, of course). Treatment and cost would be roughly the same. Less anxiety about going to the doc for fear of a bad diagnosis that could cost A LOT. Maybe would make for a more, overall, healthy population. Talk about a moral argument. That we can afford to offer health care to everyone and don't. What could the reasons possibly be? Equality scares the hell out of some people.

How is it you laid out all the ways that people can use the community around them as a safety net to ensure they don't slip through the cracks. Which is quite a privileged position. Then in your next breath emphasize hard work as the primary pillar of success. All while being to exhausted to talk about outlying case? We're only talking about outlying cases! You're upset about the outlying cases! If you didn't see the outlying cases you would only have the successful, lifted themselves up by the boot straps that their privilege afforded them, cases. It seems as though you're saying, 'be more like the middle part of the bell curve even though you were born on the one not-so-great-end! But do it without the help that most of the middle-curve-people received to get there!' If that is what you're saying, can you not see how incredibly insensitive that is? And how much like of a jerk it makes you seem? It feels like it comes back to a zero-sum mentality. That if someone gets something that wasn't afforded to you, then you are losing. You've won. We get it. Your kids get it. No one is taking anything from you by giving it to someone who might really need it. Will there be WF&A? Of course. But the % of that from the pot being spent on those less fortunate is nothing compared to banks and companies pulling one(s)(many) over on us and leaving us with the tab. But they have the PR firms to convince you and like minded people that the poor are the real enemy and shouldn't be given anything because their too lazy to earn or appreciate it. For fear of the food being taken out of your mouth. Its ridiculous!

Not sure of your point. I think you should invest in one of those classes because teaching finance to kids, and I may be mistaken, won't alleviate the need for teachers in the future. Correct me if I'm wrong?

But do you understand the interesting position you're in now. Wanting cake and doing something else with that cake too. Why don't you just say, 'Give more money to education, so we can have more and better stuff for our kids!' Less money means less flexibility for teachers. Fewer classes offered. Less diversification of information. Or is that your point? You want a very narrow scope being taught to our/your kids for your peace of mind?

Correct. But the thing that people often fail to see or purposefully ignore are the roadblocks that were put in front of people. Systematically holding them back from acquiring generational wealth that helps develop trust in the state or civil leaders. That they have their best interests in mind. Can you think of a group that might feel a bit snookered by local, state, and federal leaders? (I'll give you a hint you're not wrong but you're not thinking of the group I'm thinking of) Those disadvantaged are the intangible things that we know, now, are crucial in building a community. Things that reduce crime rates because schools are funded by property taxes. Increase working opportunities by ensuring small businesses flourish in neighborhoods so people don't have to travel long distances for work. Your response makes it seem like you have the only path towards prosperity and those that have not matched your opinion of what success looks like, are deficient in some way. You should be careful about having that opinion or wording it in such a way, if that is not what you mean.

Great question. Good read! Lots I didn't know.

I don't necessarily disagree with these points. But you're bringing up that a life skill, like changing a tire, should now be the responsibility of a public school(I assume you mean a public school). Private schools can and should teach whatever they want with few exceptions. I'll let you guess which. But with regards to the conversations we've had before. Should financial knowledge be left to schools or to parents? What subjects do you default to professionals/experts and insist they take on that additional burden. Which do you say, 'I don't want my child doing it, so no child should do it!'?

And that is a travesty. This industry should have more transparency. If there is no way to compare then why is it a for-profit industry?

Its not the same society as it was when people try to make the 'personal responsibility' argument. But they never acknowledge that. Why is that never taken into account? Cost of housing, education, and many goods/services were a much lower % of income. Lowest tiered employees made a wage that could afford all that stuff. Often times with just one income in a household. Jump ahead to today.(doodly doo, doodly doo) Lowest tiered workers are in 'Right to Work' states and can be fired for even considering asking for a higher wage(or being LGBTQ+ or athiest or any different religion or for ANY REASON WHATSOEVER). Wages have not risen at near the rate of inflation for years and years. So they are essentially paid less and less each year while having to pay more and more for the things they need to live. More and more people are paycheck to paycheck with less and less saved or, heaven for bid, invested. Housing and education costs are higher % than ever. As one party is clamoring to cut public school budgets or threaten librarians. All to further the narrative that the school system doesn't work, hasn't ever worked, and needs to be changed. We're trusting the people that broke it, to fix it, and they tell us that we never really needed it or that it'll cost too much to fix. But they have an idea of where all that sweet sweet public school money can go.... (drum roll) FOR PROFIT or Private (often Religious) Schools. Its not an integrity things. Why is that the knee jerk reaction? Seems a bit lazy. (old man yells at cloud, kinda thing) Our economy was in shambles. We were attacked. We rallied. Spent unknown sums of money to ramp up production for a huge war effort. Sent millions to Europe and the Pacific. Won. Decided that it would be a good idea to educate and house those millions that came back. Spent that money and built the economy back up in a huge way(google it). Decided in the 70's(before then, even) that we didn't want EVERYONE to take advantage of education or housing so the attacks started. Where from I wonder? (cough cough, the right). I know it can be easy to vilify a group of people for, supposedly, needing/wanting a handout. But if you step back and look at more of the moving parts you get a better idea of why that attitude exists. The war on education, making it seem like only elites try to get educated. As if its a bad thing. Why would anyone say something like that? What could their motivation be? Possibly to appeal to a group that hasn't and probably won't benefit from higher education if things stay as they are. Who are those people? Poorer white folk AND the near entirety of the black community. Which two groups are pitted against each other most often when it comes to just about every issue in politics? Those same two groups. One of those groups is much larger than the other. So it would benefit a party to keep one of those groups happy with their station by making it harder and more debilitating to achieve anything through education. As well as demonizing those that would advocate for education, as elite or soft or privileged. Is education any of those things, really? No.

Hard 'disagree'. Is there a new toy to play with in Israel and Gaza? Ya. Will Christians ever waiver in their support for Israel? No, because where will the world come to an end other than from Israel. But if you give someone the facts as they stand and ask if we should support the defense of Ukraine, they'd probably say yes.

Why do you think? There have been a bunch of younger reps that have been sworn in lately. Unfortunately the conservative ones seem like dumpster fires but the other ones seem pretty legit.

Still haven't answered the questions. But nice try.

Never said it did. One party had a leader that tried to blackmail the President of Ukraine, by holding back much needed aid. That same party seems to think that doing it again will be a winning strategy for them, in the long run. Never mind what happens to the people of that country and the country of whoever Putin feels like doing this to next. How have you not realized that they, not necessarily just Russia, is the villain in this story? But you probably won't answer that question either.

Are you deliberately refusing to answer the questions?

Words don't have magic powers. The discussion should be about teaching kids about slurs, what they mean, how they were used, and why they shouldn't be anymore. Swearing usually takes care of itself as we age.

If Russia wins, what are your thoughts on what happens to the people of Ukraine? Do you think its worth pulling our support?

Well, now we're talking about two different people. Goal posts, shifted.

There's 'personal responsibility' argument that holds no weight whatsoever. Firstly, there are already programs to relieve some borrowers of debt, long before Joe or Tiny-Hands McGee took office. Secondly, why is it, because you were lucky enough and sometimes it is just that, luck, that you were able to make it to your current situation that others weren't so lucky and could use a boost? You were able to help your kids achieve as much or more than yourself. Some are not afforded the privilege of that experience. How does it help anyone to keep them from getting a bit of help? Its not a zero-sum game. Third, can you tell me what the IRS is for, over how long, and what might it do to offset the entirety of the extra funding? I imagine you're going to ignore these questions because the answers might run counter to your narrative but I'll fill in the blanks on my next post if you don't know. If anyone wants to give away the answer, be my guest. Fourth, an initial round of loan forgiveness was offered to those that were victims of predatory lending and deceptive practices by institutions of higher learning. All things that the previous Orange guy and the Dep of Ed ignored and dragged out. Should we allow grifters to take advantage of people? The answer to this question will say a lot about you. Also, if you are hip with economics, many have said that some of the repayment options for holders of some of the loans are not as economically beneficial for the the debt holder or the payee. Could be a little confusing so my apologies. The US is the holder of the debt. We have an incentive for people to spend money to grow and diversify the economy. If borrowers cannot spend any money on good and/or services because they are repaying a loan to the US. It might not help as much to hold the debt as it would be to wipe it and allow people to spend that money on living their lives. Either way its not a great look for a government to be making a profit(a small one but, nonetheless) on crippling debt that it holds over its citizens. That you want to punish people because you were fortunate enough to make it, makes you seem like a crappy person. Some people need help. Looking down your nose helps no one.

How can the majority of the public support someone they didn't vote for and for whom they did not know existed until a few weeks ago? If you're referring to the Speaker as the new sheriff, interesting take. Let's see if he can live up to it.

Fair. I guess if it improves things. We'll see.

Ok. Take it a step further. You brought it up but didn't address it. Why are prices soaring? While you're doing that. I also mentioned health insurance companies. Many not private. Motivated by profit. Other than the ACA handcuffing them to spend a certain percentage on care they would otherwise look to make as much money as possible. All while trying to avoid two things: getting sued, or getting bad enough press that their bottom line takes a hit. Things that any other public company would do. Hospitals may be private. But you cannot tell me that they have the best interest of their patients at the forefront of their mind. The Catholic hospitals that own a significant portion of beds in the country refuse certain procedures when the person giving birth and/or the baby is in life threatening danger. If you are a hospital and you have less than an 100% commitment to do whatever is necessary/possible to do NO HARM, then you are not looking out for the best interest of your patients and therefore not living up to the ideals of someone in the hospital business. Made up? As Thor said, 'all words are made up' but what is said is a real thing. Sorry. Fiduciaries have to put the interest of their customers first versus their own financial benefit or at least have to be able to prove they tried. Why can't a hospital or insurance company be held to a similar standard?

Interesting guess. However, what I don't like about it is that more funding for the IRS is good. If someone is serious about transparency and accountability they should be all for bringing the funding of the IRS up from where they have been compared to where they were. Are you in a position where it would be worth the time and effort to look into your situation? https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/taxes/2023/03/02/triggers-irs-tax-audit-red-flags/11106113002/ The money spent to increase the IRS footprint will only help to recover money that the US is already owed and can use to help diminish deficits and help bolster programs and people in need. Why/how is that a bad thing?

Re-election inertia is a real thing. I get that. Its frustrating in some cases. In some, I hope they live to be a thousand. I think she's done a great job leading the party in congress. Raising money and the profile of issues. First female Speaker of the House. That's not nothing. That she's stepping back and letting someone else lead is a big step. Much more then anyone else has done in her position. Last three from the other side resigned or were fired. Fourth and fifth were POSs. Considering what she is compared to. I'd take Nancy every single time.