Sooooooo...I'm kinda Republican.

[Guest]

Uh, hi. Please don't murder me, but I do lean right on many issues. I am always open to questions/comments and discussion. I don't plan to debate them much tonight. It's late here, and I'd like to make a relatively coherent argument on whatever topic anyone asks about. But yeah. Feel free to ask anything. Or insult me if you like, but I can dish out insults as well as take them, so be warned.

 

I particularly lean right on:

-Guns (2a was put in place for many reasons, and we haven't even addressed the main one in the media.)

-Abortion (I do believe that abortions should be legal in medical emergencies, but it is otherwise NEVER RIGHT to harm or kill a child, who has no voice, who can never express their pain to you, though they certainly feel it even in the womb. Who has a heartbeat at just 4 weeks. Who has a brain shortly after. Who has fingers and toes and tiny nails and even a face at around 12-13 weeks. Who you are now a part of, and have been since conception. Who you can give birth to at 20-25 weeks and still have a decent chance of them surviving. Who you can crush and get suctioned out of you up until 24 weeks, and even later in some states. That's wrong. That is on every level wrong. Sorry for the rant, but I am extremely passionate about fetal and child protection, and would do anything to save a child in danger, even if it meant a slow, painful death for me.)

-Speech (We can't actually limit speech in the U.S. under 1a, but everyone should have a voice, left or right, authoritarian or anarchist. The worst ideas will naturally get weeded out through rational discussion. And before anyone cites using voting as speech and how it caused Hitler to come to power, don't forget that he censored speech after he came to power so any voices of reason were shut down.)

-Religion Stuff (Practice whatever you want. I'm not a Christian per se, but I do believe that God does value ideals similar to those of Judeo-Christians. A bit more lax on some of the odd rules, homosexuality/gender-stuffs being the big one, but also other obscure things like...not wearing jewelry??? Apparently that's a thing. But in terms of moral values, I have had greater success in prayer assuming God has the aforementioned values more than I have with any other religions. And who knows? I could be wrong, maybe there are multiple gods. Maybe God has different criteria. Maybe God doesn't even exist! But I do believe in what I say, religiously speaking.)

 

And I mostly take a neutral/libertarian stance on other issues, including:

-LGBTQ Issues (I think they are important to discuss, but I don't have a problem with people being against them as long as they aren't violent or openly discriminating against them for a non-religious reason).

-Government size (Power to the people, no government needs to tell me what I can and can't do providing any involved parties consent knowing any risks involved, it doesn't intentionally bring physical harm to anyone, and it doesn't involve children or people that cannot defend themselves. Also, not my job to pay for other people's existence, but I can choose to give to charity privately or volunteer. Most people would do something out of kindness.)

-Govt programs (As noted before, I shouldn't HAVE to pay money to people who are less fortunate. However, I do believe in the power of private and community charities to assist the needy of your own free will. It's the right thing to do, but if you need the money, you need the money; I won't judge.)

-Feminism (Don't care for 3rd wave feminism, but the concept as a whole of women and men being equal? Eh, I don't mind so long as we acknowledge that some jobs men will just be better at, while others women will excel at. Not saying an individual of the other sex can't be successful in a different career, but in general.)

-Racial Stuff (Don't accuse only minorities of heinous crimes, as anyone can commit them. However, there is a difference in the proportions between different races committing more or fewer crimes, and this should really be addressed. Not just legally, but culturally. Everyone can make it, but not everyone can see a way out of their situation; as a person that struggles to find a way for a very different reason, I do know it is the most challenging thing to feel like the world is against you and try to smile and carry on. It's difficult, but it can be done. And if you struggle with such issues yourself, I believe that you have the power to overcome your circumstances, as bad as they may be.)

[Guest]

Tl;Dr Ask me questions about my politics and I will try my best to answer in a concise way. Insult me, and I insult back. I'm not all bark and no bite, but I do prefer to keep things civil for everyone's sake.

[Guest]

Also, I mean NO disrespect or offense with anything I say hereafter in this thread (unless you were rude, in which case I might be a little snippy.) If something sincerely bothers or confuses you and you remain civil about it, I'm more than happy to reword the material in question or explain it differently. I try to be polite and tolerant of all perspectives, and all I ask is for the same decency in return. No need to get riled up over our opinions that really wouldn't affect my relationship with you irl. Thank you!

[Muledeer]

What about access health care.  Is it a right or a privlage? 

[Nirnroot]

I also am republican. Well, I'm registered as one, although I think I'm more in between. 

[Grumpy Alien]

How old are you?

Did you grow up conservative and/or Christian?

[Rynn]

What do you think of this? 

 

[Guest]

@Muledeer I do believe everyone should be able to get healthcare, but I don't like to consider it a right. I have a couple stories from people who lived in countries where it is a universal right, and neither one ended very well. One ended with a 2 year old dying in the U.K. when they were offered treatment in Italy. They wanted to go, and Italy offered to grant them citizenship so they could get it covered better. They were not allowed to leave and the kid passed away about a week later. The other one ended with the family leaving Canada for the U.S. after the government denied both the mother and daughter treatment for their ailments, despite the fact that the mother's could have prevebted her from having more children and the daughter's could have been fatal (she was born with a heart defect but is actually doing well today. She's a sophomore at my school.).

 

@disGraceful I am 18.5 and was raised in a not-Christian-but-quasi-conservative household. I'm actually further right than my dad, I think. Which is really weird. But I am always willing to hear out any other opinions and maybe we can find some sort of peace and compromise between sides. We're stuck among one another, so might as well try to get along.

[Evren]

I promise we don't burn Republicans on the stake around here. Unless they're unbearably rude. Wait, does that make us like Hannibal. We like you as long as you're polite? Though to be honest we don't burn you on the stake if your not polite you just get banned for a bit. So not entirely like Hannibal. Less chance of death, less good food. But also more chance of living a long life and less food with people in it. (I'm just rambling at this point, ill stop now :P) 

[Alawyn-Aebt]

21 hours ago, The Phage Mage said:

I do believe everyone should be able to get healthcare, but I don't like to consider it a right.

So how would you implement that? You say you don't want Universal Healthcare (which is different from Socialized Healthcare and Single-Player Healthcare technically, but I am assuming that you, like most of my fellow US Citizens, are using them fairly interchangeably, as in more connected to the goal rather than the minute differences in practice between them.) but then you say everyone should get healthcare. You also do not consider it a right, so the Government is not required to provide it, yet you somehow expect it to be provided without at least an implicit guarantee?

 

I will also say that quoting two horror stories, while meant to tie into emotions, does not necessarily prove it is bad or unpopular. In fact, people in the UK and Canada report more satisfaction with their healthcare than Americans do (Marcoeconomics, 4th ed., Hubbard and O'Brian, 2016.). America also spends more than the UK and Canada do per person on healthcare (Ibid.).

 

(You had previously put emphasis on rationality and reason, so I thought providing a citation would be the most reasonable thing to do.)

[Guest]

I do not expect it to be a guarantee, but I believe everyone SHOULD have healthcare. That often means healthcare through jobs and not being just given to you. True, there are some people that struggle to get jobs, and my heart goes out to them. But there are also people who are just lazy and expect benefits for doing nothing. It's not that I think they shouldn't be healthy and happy, but why would I want to put my tax money toward someone who won't do anything? I would rather put that money toward a trustworthy group that provides medical care to the needy, for example, St. Jude's. Because I simply don't trust bureaucrats that I've never met to make decisions about my health and money. When I donate, I choose who I trust. And people still benefit. I think we don't give fellow humans enough credit; people will be kinder to one another than we expect. Not everyone, of course, but a lot. By working to bring the pople below the poverty line up rather than bringing the upper and middle classes down through heavy taxes, everyone wins.

[Guest]

Thank you for pointing that out though, I don't always make myself as clear as I think I do.

[Alawyn-Aebt]

9 minutes ago, The Phage Mage said:

That often means healthcare through jobs

Do you really expect all/vast majority of employers to provide healthcare? I doubt this and, since you are an American (and from Indiana, I used to live there but my political views clashed with everyone there, how do you like it Indiana by the way with your political views?) I have a perfect example: Papa John's Pizza and Obamacare. CEO "Papa" John announced that Obamacare would raise the cost of each pizza by a whopping 11 cents, and decrease the revenue for him from $1 billion by a massive 0.4%! Because of this incredibly small number he pushed and pushed for the end of Obamacare. When I see people who have it all try to stop those without even basic healthcare from getting it I doubt that capitalism as it developed in America is able to make moral decisions without oversight and at least occasional interference. 

 

Then what about self-employed?

 

20 minutes ago, The Phage Mage said:

By working to bring the people below the poverty line up rather than bringing the upper and middle classes down through heavy taxes, everyone wins.

Sounds lovely I must say. But do you not think we have to work both sides of the issue? There are super-rich because there are super-poor. There are super-poor because there are super-rich. Economic models show this to be true, be they mathematical-models or thought-models. The divide in wealth is shocking in America, in fact the Gini coefficient of the USA from the last time the CIA calculated it in 2014 is 0.47, South Africa under Apartheid was 0.48 in 1978. The USA has about the same wealth inequality that a regime bent on racism, superiority, and brutality had (1=perfect inequality, 0=perfect equality by the way). If we nationalized all the Billionaires in the USA we would have enough to give everyone in the USA over $20,000. That, going into normal economic flows of MPC and MPS,would stimulate the economy to a degree that, according to my rough calculations would grow the entire economy by trillions. This would grow the economy by more than letting the billionaires keep it and accumulate because once someone reaches at most a $500,000 income, their MPC falls drastically and the MPS rises, the fall in MPC will lead to a lessening of the multiplier effect, making it, especially if the person has over a $1 billion,likely to be zero or negative. 

 

I don't mean to feel like I am challenging you, just trying to understand your position. Even though you call yourself "kinda Republican" you seem quite unlike most Republicans I have met. I am also a practically-minded person, so if I can find your practical way to implement what you talk of I will of course consider those positions under a different light.

[uhtred]

I'm mixed on guns.  I think we need to agree on *why* people want guns before working out rules. We don't want private nukes so there need to be some restrictions.    The answer if people want to gun down bambi is different from if they want to resist a government gone bad. 

 

I completely agree with you on free speech.  I'm appalled students at Berkeley arguing *against* free speech. 

 

We are going to be in deep water on abortion soon anyway - we are not far from being able to fertilize and grow a child outside of the womb, and eventually will be able to fabricate the DNA from a data file.  I think viability is not a useful standard.

 

I believe in freedom or religion - as long as that doesn't result in acts that substantially impact other peoples lives.  I'm not willing to base our laws on religious morality because which religion do we pick?  There is some pretty terrifying stuff in the bible. 

 

LGBT: while I support the right for people to speak out against this, I don't support restricting rights / freedoms at all

 

I have never understood why people look at state and federal government differently. To me states are just smaller, less efficient, and often more corrupt versions of the federal government. Lots of people want to cut govt spending on things that benefit *other* people. 

 

Feminism: and Racism:  I think there was, and still is widespread discrimination, so I'd like to stop that. 

 

 

[Joe the Stoic]

@The Phage Mage, how do you feel about Trump?  Is he a good or a bad Republican?

[Guest]

@Rob Boss I wasn't too sure at first. He isn't my favorite, but he isn't as bad as I expected. Tax cuts and national security are definitely good things, but he definitely is an inflammatory guy. Not my personal cup of tea. Though it is kind of funny sometimes, it might be making the political divide in America, and maybe even in other countries, far worse.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, uhtred said:

We don't want private nukes so there need to be some restrictions.

Aww, come on! No Recreational(tm) Nuclear(tm) McBombs(tm)?

 

I'm kidding, I'm not that bad. I make fun of the extremes, even if it's the side I prefer.

 

I do see your points, especially on Feminism and Racism. It's a huge issue in some parts of the world, and I do think it should be addressed. My statement on them was more from the perspective of a developed nation; not perfect, but definitely far enough along that we can worry about other pressing issues first, like finding better and more abundant energy sources or helping people get access to clean drinking water in some way. I cannot propose a specific solution to either, but I do agree that they are important to discuss. Not as a government to its people, but as human to human. (As for the energy, I think we should look into biological processes like cellular respiration or photosynthesis, although the latter is the better option.) So thanks for sharing!

[Guest]

@Aebt No, you're fine. I like hearing what you got to say! I will have to hunt down a link, but I do recall a healthcare system that was ridiculously cheap and covered quite a bit. I'm not saying this is mandatory for everyone to be on, but I think we should explore such a system. Even if it has some flaws, we can try to work through them. Nothing is completely perfect after all.

 

As for helping the poverty stricken up, it certainly won't be an easy path by any means. But with the money that the rich invest in their companies (not all are/were CEOs, but many of them are/were), it should help to expand the job market. Unemployment rate is at a low in America right now, meaning that we have more jobs than ever. People can help themselves out here. If is simply isn't enough to live on at a minimum wage job, which it usually isn't, they can put just a little bit of money and/or time toward learning a new skill every week. Not learning one skill per week, but putting a little effort into it every week. Programming and tech support aren't always ideal, but they are better paying than a fast food or retail job usually. Plus, computer sciences is a growing field, so it's a real option for them.

 

I don't believe either of them to be completely foolproof, but these are just idea I got floating around in my head. Please feel free to critique them; I love the feedback!

[Evren]

2 hours ago, The Phage Mage said:

@Aebt No, you're fine. I like hearing what you got to say! I will have to hunt down a link, but I do recall a healthcare system that was ridiculously cheap and covered quite a bit. I'm not saying this is mandatory for everyone to be on, but I think we should explore such a system. Even if it has some flaws, we can try to work through them. Nothing is completely perfect after all.

 

As for helping the poverty stricken up, it certainly won't be an easy path by any means. But with the money that the rich invest in their companies (not all are/were CEOs, but many of them are/were), it should help to expand the job market. Unemployment rate is at a low in America right now, meaning that we have more jobs than ever. People can help themselves out here. If is simply isn't enough to live on at a minimum wage job, which it usually isn't, they can put just a little bit of money and/or time toward learning a new skill every week. Not learning one skill per week, but putting a little effort into it every week. Programming and tech support aren't always ideal, but they are better paying than a fast food or retail job usually. Plus, computer sciences is a growing field, so it's a real option for them.

 

I don't believe either of them to be completely foolproof, but these are just idea I got floating around in my head. Please feel free to critique them; I love the feedback!

Two problems: 1. Your theory about growing the economy requires you to trust that these CEOs will actually put the money into their companies instead of just keeping it. 

And 2. If a poor person can't afford to live on what they make they don't usually have time to learn a new skill. If your working poor (as I am) then if 40 hours doesn't give you enough money you work 50 or 60 or 100 (I knew a guy who did this) to afford the basics (food, rent, bills). Also even if you do have time, a skill that you don't have documentation for is useless. I could try to teach myself programming but if I don't have proof that I can program no one will hire me. Someone could be an awesome mechanic but if they don't have proof they can fix a car then no one will hire them.

 

The biggest problem I often have when talking to Republicans or Libertarians, is that I often think we are talking about completely different groups of people. Many Republicans/Libertarians seem to think that poor people at best work 40 hours a week, live the rest of their life as everyone else does and then complains about not having enough money. At worst many of them seem to think that poor people don't work at all and want everyone to just give them money and then complain about not having it.

 

While the people I am talking about work as I said 50 to 100 hours per week every week at 2 to 4 jobs, to pay their bills and nothing extra. Which is a problem because there is always something extra. Health insurance is extra, a birthday party is extra, Christmas presents are extra, breaking your arm is a huge extra, going to a movie is extra, when you are poor everything is extra except for food, rent, heat, and air and that's just not right.  

[Guest]

You are right about CEOs. They don't always put money back in, but they often didn't have much at first either, especially if they founded the company. And since most start-up businesses fail and go bankrupt for a variety of reasons, most of them lose everything. Usually there's a reason why they save their wealth, not just for the press, but for ensuring the same financial security to their families that they didn't have. Apple started in a garage, Windows by a clever but broke college student. It can be done. Most of us won't though because of the risk involved. Part 2 will cone after I drive home. I have ice in the car...

[uhtred]

3 hours ago, The Phage Mage said:

Aww, come on! No Recreational(tm) Nuclear(tm) McBombs(tm)?

 

I'm kidding, I'm not that bad. I make fun of the extremes, even if it's the side I prefer.

 

I do see your points, especially on Feminism and Racism. It's a huge issue in some parts of the world, and I do think it should be addressed. My statement on them was more from the perspective of a developed nation; not perfect, but definitely far enough along that we can worry about other pressing issues first, like finding better and more abundant energy sources or helping people get access to clean drinking water in some way. I cannot propose a specific solution to either, but I do agree that they are important to discuss. Not as a government to its people, but as human to human. (As for the energy, I think we should look into biological processes like cellular respiration or photosynthesis, although the latter is the better option.) So thanks for sharing!

Hey, I like nuclear explosions - so no problem personally there, but there are some wusses who think nukes can't be used safely  😉 

 

I think that while overt racism and sexism isn't that common, I think there is a large amount of subtle bias that  adds up.  Since someone's career goes though many steps, a few percent effect at each step can add up to a much smaller probability of success.  To me this links to your other problems because I want the best people working on those problems, not the best people who fit some demographic. 

 

I don't see overt sexism at my workplace, but I've seen a difficult-to-measure tendency for women to be treated more negatively for their mistakes than are men. No specific incident I can point to.  I've been under pressure to fire one of the female engineers / scientists in my group.  It would make a great story to say that she was *brilliant* and horrible biased people wanted me to fire her.  The reality is that she is marginal - but I believe that there are men still in the organization that are worse, so I won't fire her.  Its a judgement call though because there is no quantitative measure of how good someone is. 

[Cimmerian]

11 hours ago, Aebt said:

I don't mean to feel like I am challenging you, just trying to understand your position. Even though you call yourself "kinda Republican" you seem quite unlike most Republicans I have met. I am also a practically-minded person, so if I can find your practical way to implement what you talk of I will of course consider those positions under a different light.

I think the OPs views are actually pretty representation among a good segment of Republicans (with the LGBT stance usually being a stronger negative stance in others) that I know.

[Sally]

Tax cuts would be good if they covered the right people.  However, Trump's tax cuts only covered the top 1%.

 

As far as national security, the fact that our national intelligence agencies agree that the Russians interfered with the 2016 election, and that several people have been found to have managed to enter the President's private club (where he spends many weekends) without security knowing about it, and also the fact that near the start of his term he had a conversation with other couhtries' leaders about secure government business while members of his club were gathered around listening doesn't speak much to his handling of national security.  

[Guest]

@Sally Tax cuts helped my family, and we're only middle class. As far as collusion goes, the report found no evidence of collusion with Russians on Trump's part. The club thing is new news to me, and I don't particularly approve of that. He's not the perfect president; quite frankly, I don't know why we chose him over some of the other candidates. But I think we needed it in a way to open up conversations, you know? So we can find the limits of what's acceptable and what's not. He could always be worse, though.

[Guest]

And to everyone here so far, thank you for being respectful. I'm not the best at articulating thoughts in my head, but I love answering and asking questions. Thanks for your kindness, everyone.

[Guest]

@Evren Sorry this is so late! 😅 I got caught up with a different project and forgot! Anyways, Part 2:

 

I do want to make it clear that I don't believe that most people in the lower class are lazy. Many of them, including yourself as you made it seem, are hard workers and are willing to do the jobs most people won't touch. I really appreciate that. It too often goes unrecognized. However, I would like to disagree on the point about learning a skill. You can learn a skill without documentation just fine, but without any proof? Well, your projects are your proof. Anything you work on to improve your skillset you can save and/or document fairly easily. Even just logging your progress in a notebook can help. Yeah, it isn't "official proof" like a degree or something, but really, most jobs really shouldn't require a degree. NOT ALL. There are obviously exceptions, especially if you're trying to become a doctor or lawyer or some other doctorate degree job. But if we're being honest, who needs a degree to program a computer, paint a picture, work as a lab tech, run a business, etc.? You can google most of that and learn more than you'd learn in school anyway. I do believe a degree can help a bit, but it really doesn't make a difference in the long run as long as you can deliver on whatever job you're asked to do. Employers look for more than a degree, usually, and that includes informal training, skills, and willingness to work hard and adapt. 

 

College is lowkey a cash-grab. More than lowkey. Most of the degrees won't pay out what it costs to get them, as evidenced my several people I know and I'm sure many, many others. One lady I know has been back to college 4 or 5 times trying to make more money to pay off her student debt. This certainly isn't everyone, (and I don't have much data on hand because I'm in AP Lit class rn and trying to split my attention, haha), but I know crap like this happens more often than anyone wamts to admit to. I'm heading to college in the fall entirely on scholarships (except housing, but $7k a year is far easier than $53k), and I encourage anyone going to or going *back* to college to find scholarships if they feel they need a degree. And there are scholarships for anything and everything. From something as big as academics or a 800 word essay to finding a picture of yourself with pigtails from kindergarten (yes, this is a real scholarship, not worth a whole lot, but all the small ridiculous ones that no one applies for will add up pretty quickly.

 

That was kind of an odd tangent, but the point is, there are many more ways to prove a skill than a piece of paper with your name on it. They may be more efficient and save you more money in the long run. It's a climb, but it can be done. It takes effort to climb from middle class as well, which I hope to do for my own family by becoming a pediatric oncologist.  I have no expectation of being in the top 1%, but any improvement is far better than none. And I truly believe anyone, no matter what roadblocks they have in their way, can improve their financial status. Sometimes it takes extra effort (providing one *can* work more, I have no expectation of people working 50, 60, 100 hours a week to work more). Sometimes it takes the courage to ask for a raise or hunt down a higher paying job (Hobby Lobby part-timers start at $10.45 an hour, full-timers at $15.70 an hour, I believe Panera Bread starts you around $12 an hour for part-time but don't quote me on that. Baristas also make fairly decent wages to my knowledge). Sometimes you just need to learn how to work the system (find any sort of LEGAL exploits you can to save every possible penny; if I recall, Bill Gates learned to program by utilizing a glitch to get free time in the computer lab. I cite that as one example, not the only example. There is always a way to save more). Sometimes it takes some luck, but not always (there are obviously a few people that just so happen to be in the right place at the right time to get a great job). Essentially, where there is a will, there is a way. Not always an easy or ideal way, not always a fun way, not always a way that takes the burden off immediately or ever, but I guarantee that everyone is capable of it.

 

Hope I didn't upset you at all, this is just my two cents. I believe in you, m8!

[uhtred]

12 hours ago, CBC said:

Ehh. I'm a socialist (and not American; I'm a member of the NDP in Canada, which is essentially a democratic socialist part) and I certainly disagree on things like guns (American gun culture is just so very different from anything I grew up with) and abortion... well, and other stuff... but honestly I don't find any of your beliefs absolutely abhorrent or anything, and agree with a few. I definitely don't think all Republicans (or conservatives in general) are dreadful people or stupid or haven't put any thought into their views. Diversity of opinion is healthy in society.

Might be a good separate threat.  Are you a social democrat (eg you want a democracy strong social programs), or a democratic socialist (which I think means wanting socialism, eg, collective ownership of the means of production)?   A lot of people confuse the two, but they are very different. 

[uhtred]

58 minutes ago, The Phage Mage said:

@Evren Sorry this is so late! 😅 I got caught up with a different project and forgot! Anyways, Part 2:

 

I do want to make it clear that I don't believe that most people in the lower class are lazy. Many of them, including yourself as you made it seem, are hard workers and are willing to do the jobs most people won't touch. I really appreciate that. It too often goes unrecognized. However, I would like to disagree on the point about learning a skill. You can learn a skill without documentation just fine, but without any proof? Well, your projects are your proof. Anything you work on to improve your skillset you can save and/or document fairly easily. Even just logging your progress in a notebook can help. Yeah, it isn't "official proof" like a degree or something, but really, most jobs really shouldn't require a degree. NOT ALL. There are obviously exceptions, especially if you're trying to become a doctor or lawyer or some other doctorate degree job. But if we're being honest, who needs a degree to program a computer, paint a picture, work as a lab tech, run a business, etc.? You can google most of that and learn more than you'd learn in school anyway. I do believe a degree can help a bit, but it really doesn't make a difference in the long run as long as you can deliver on whatever job you're asked to do. Employers look for more than a degree, usually, and that includes informal training, skills, and willingness to work hard and adapt. 

 

College is lowkey a cash-grab. More than lowkey. Most of the degrees won't pay out what it costs to get them, as evidenced my several people I know and I'm sure many, many others. One lady I know has been back to college 4 or 5 times trying to make more money to pay off her student debt. This certainly isn't everyone, (and I don't have much data on hand because I'm in AP Lit class rn and trying to split my attention, haha), but I know crap like this happens more often than anyone wamts to admit to. I'm heading to college in the fall entirely on scholarships (except housing, but $7k a year is far easier than $53k), and I encourage anyone going to or going *back* to college to find scholarships if they feel they need a degree. And there are scholarships for anything and everything. From something as big as academics or a 800 word essay to finding a picture of yourself with pigtails from kindergarten (yes, this is a real scholarship, not worth a whole lot, but all the small ridiculous ones that no one applies for will add up pretty quickly.

 

That was kind of an odd tangent, but the point is, there are many more ways to prove a skill than a piece of paper with your name on it. They may be more efficient and save you more money in the long run. It's a climb, but it can be done. It takes effort to climb from middle class as well, which I hope to do for my own family by becoming a pediatric oncologist.  I have no expectation of being in the top 1%, but any improvement is far better than none. And I truly believe anyone, no matter what roadblocks they have in their way, can improve their financial status. Sometimes it takes extra effort (providing one *can* work more, I have no expectation of people working 50, 60, 100 hours a week to work more). Sometimes it takes the courage to ask for a raise or hunt down a higher paying job (Hobby Lobby part-timers start at $10.45 an hour, full-timers at $15.70 an hour, I believe Panera Bread starts you around $12 an hour for part-time but don't quote me on that. Baristas also make fairly decent wages to my knowledge). Sometimes you just need to learn how to work the system (find any sort of LEGAL exploits you can to save every possible penny; if I recall, Bill Gates learned to program by utilizing a glitch to get free time in the computer lab. I cite that as one example, not the only example. There is always a way to save more). Sometimes it takes some luck, but not always (there are obviously a few people that just so happen to be in the right place at the right time to get a great job). Essentially, where there is a will, there is a way. Not always an easy or ideal way, not always a fun way, not always a way that takes the burden off immediately or ever, but I guarantee that everyone is capable of it.

 

Hope I didn't upset you at all, this is just my two cents. I believe in you, m8!

One thing to keep in mind i that despite our best efforts, half of people are below median in abilities.   Since we consider even 10% unemployment to be pretty high, we need a way for the bottom 10% of people to have useful jobs.     What you suggest above works for the talented, ambitions people, but there are a lot of people not like that. 

 

Also there are people who really are in situations where finding  job is difficult.  They may live in areas that just have very few jobs, may not have the clothes, or even have anyone to explain to them how to apply for a job. There is so much knowledge that people take for granted, that not everyone hease. 

[uhtred]

1 hour ago, CBC said:

Yeah that's very true. Personally, democratic socialist. The party I belong or leans more towards social democracy, although Wikipedia lists its ideologies as both (huh?) and its roots lie in another party (the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation, the CCF), which was most definitely democratic socialist. I've considered breaking away from it in recent years (I've been a member since 2004) for something a little further to the left, as it seems to have begun trying to inch closer to the centre, but I also think it's the best chance left-of-centre Canadians have. The NDP actually has a significant number of seats in the House of Commons and has formed the Official Opposition at times. Smaller parties that appeal to me really don't have that same ability to impact the political scene much at all, no matter how much we may wish they could.

Don't want to Hijack this thread, but it would be an interesting discussion somewhere else 

[Bruce Wayne]

Did you say "LGBTQ Issues (I think they are important to discuss, but I don't have a problem with people being against them as long as they aren't violent or openly discriminating against them for a non-religious reason)"? So when kids laught at me at school for being flamboyant and eccentric non-heterosexual, which isn't openly discriminating, they can do it? Of course not!