Skip to main content

TR Memescape

  • Talkrational:  We are all the Body of Christ.

Topic: How economically desperate (Read 929 times) previous topic - next topic

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #75
I doubt any of these people can even lightly jog 100 yards.

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #76
 Obama is the antichrist. ..."I don't know," he said. "Some people say that."

jesus he even sounds like Trump

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #77

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #78
meant to add...

it's not a conservative argument to say that if your job ceases to exist, you should move or find a new line of work. 
Well, unless you decide we should all get UBI, right?

that is just common sense.  this idea that the left doesn't believe  anyone is responsible for anything or has to make an effort has always been a straw man.  it has never been what anyone actually thinks.
Sure, it's common fucking sense.  Until someone else on the left comes along and insists that it's all wage slavery, and nobody should be forced to work in order to survive, and society should provide the basic necessities of life....

What is it that the left believes?  And how much consensus is there on that belief?
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #79
I don't even think there is anything wrong with wanting to live a simple, rural, old-fashioned lifestyle.  if you want to do that and it makes you happy, good for you.  but I find it enormously frustrating to watch people struggle financially because they insist on working in a dead industry in a dead town and refuse every option to get out of that dead end situation, because they are too scared to leave their comfort zone.
Or you know... their family and the friends they've known their entire life, their elderly parents who need help around the house, their church and their community, etc.

Yeah, just totally too scared.  Not even a remote possibility that there might be a wee bit more to it than your one-dimensional worldview allows for, hmm?
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #80
Idgaf about people living old fashioned rural lives but what I do gaf about is when those people demand their lifestyle and no one else's be subsidized.
Lol... Okay, now that I'm done giggling...

Why don't we take a look at the impact of city-based legislation within states?  ALL of WA is now paying for a high-speed rail that will serve a very small portion of WA.  The entirety of Eastern WA gets slapped with all sorts of cost-burdens, so that urban-dwellers in the very tiny footprint of Seattle can have better lives.  There are all sorts of state-assisted programs available for the poor as long as they live in cities - if they live in rural areas, well fuck-em.  They don't count, they're backwards ignorant hillbillies who don't deserve the assistance of their urban betters  ::)

For fuck's sake, do you have any idea at all exactly how much assistance and revenue goes to helping cities?  Do you have any idea how little of any kind of assistance goes to rural areas?

And you want to blather on about how it's so uppity of those nearly un-subsidized people in "fly-over" areas to demand that they should have some of the benefits of a modern society too!  How dare they! 
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #81

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #82
oh shit son, pandora got schooled

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #83
I don't think Oprah's that large anymore. But if she runs against Trump she's got my vote.
Pretty sure that if the literal antichrist ran against Trump in 2020, he'd win in a landslide.  Or 'she' I suppose, nothing says the antichrist can't be a woman... which would fit better with the biblical narrative of women being overall evil anyway.

 :hmm:   Maybe Oprah is the antichrist.
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #84
Yeah, that's why having the workers travel is better for the families and communities.
Fucking hell.  Okay - of the people who are highly recommending that the worker in the family should just travel and spend large amounts of time away from their family and community... have any of you actually done that for more than a week or two?  On either side of it - as the traveler or the person who stays at home?  Because it is seriously exhausting and really tough on relationships... and it seems to be being put forth as a viable and reasonable solution in a pretty cavalier fashion.

The money comes back to the community and the family isn't disrupted by a move to a strange place where they may not even stay long.
They are disrupted by having an important member of the family absent over an extended period of time.

These mega projects are mostly finite - it takes a few months or years to complete initial phases, and following phases may need far fewer workers. Having a home community to return to is important for stability. Many of these jobs are two weeks on, one week off, with the employer paying for travel, Some have longer stints, often because it's a smaller job, or very time constrained.
It's a lot of travel and strain on families and relationships, combined with uncertainty for the long term since they're mostly temporary jobs. 

Literally thousands of people live this way, and it works well for families. The people it doesn't work well for are younger single workers who don't save any money and just buy expensive shit, party, gamble, drink and drug like idiots in their time off.
Are you sure it works well?  Are you sure those are the only people it doesn't work well for?  Because when my spouse was deployed and I was home by myself, it was enormously sucky.  And when I was working at a consulting firm traveling a lot, it was enormously sucky.  Pretty much anyone with a family is likely to find this pretty fucking sucky.
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

  • meepmeep
  • Administrator
  • zombiecat queen
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #85
Idgaf about people living old fashioned rural lives but what I do gaf about is when those people demand their lifestyle and no one else's be subsidized.
Lol... Okay, now that I'm done giggling...

Why don't we take a look at the impact of city-based legislation within states?  ALL of WA is now paying for a high-speed rail that will serve a very small portion of WA.  The entirety of Eastern WA gets slapped with all sorts of cost-burdens, so that urban-dwellers in the very tiny footprint of Seattle can have better lives.  There are all sorts of state-assisted programs available for the poor as long as they live in cities - if they live in rural areas, well fuck-em.  They don't count, they're backwards ignorant hillbillies who don't deserve the assistance of their urban betters  ::)

For fuck's sake, do you have any idea at all exactly how much assistance and revenue goes to helping cities?  Do you have any idea how little of any kind of assistance goes to rural areas?

And you want to blather on about how it's so uppity of those nearly un-subsidized people in "fly-over" areas to demand that they should have some of the benefits of a modern society too!  How dare they! 

lol

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #86
Jesus Christ.

  • meepmeep
  • Administrator
  • zombiecat queen
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #87
Demanding the benefits of modern society = demanding the coal industry be artificially propped up and magically brought back at the rest of the world's expense while also refusing any retraining that would equip people to work in modern society

also lmbo at "nearly un-subsidized" still

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #88
Pandora how do you propose to keep a company town alive when the company shutters or leaves?

At some point the town will have to be subsidized by government, reinvent itself, train and educate its people to do something else or die and everyone packs up and leaves anyway.

  • borealis
  • Administrator
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #89
Yeah, that's why having the workers travel is better for the families and communities.
Fucking hell.  Okay - of the people who are highly recommending that the worker in the family should just travel and spend large amounts of time away from their family and community... have any of you actually done that for more than a week or two?  On either side of it - as the traveler or the person who stays at home?  Because it is seriously exhausting and really tough on relationships... and it seems to be being put forth as a viable and reasonable solution in a pretty cavalier fashion.

The money comes back to the community and the family isn't disrupted by a move to a strange place where they may not even stay long.
They are disrupted by having an important member of the family absent over an extended period of time.

These mega projects are mostly finite - it takes a few months or years to complete initial phases, and following phases may need far fewer workers. Having a home community to return to is important for stability. Many of these jobs are two weeks on, one week off, with the employer paying for travel, Some have longer stints, often because it's a smaller job, or very time constrained.
It's a lot of travel and strain on families and relationships, combined with uncertainty for the long term since they're mostly temporary jobs. 

Literally thousands of people live this way, and it works well for families. The people it doesn't work well for are younger single workers who don't save any money and just buy expensive shit, party, gamble, drink and drug like idiots in their time off.
Are you sure it works well?  Are you sure those are the only people it doesn't work well for?  Because when my spouse was deployed and I was home by myself, it was enormously sucky.  And when I was working at a consulting firm traveling a lot, it was enormously sucky.  Pretty much anyone with a family is likely to find this pretty fucking sucky.


My husband and I have lived this way for over twenty years. Many of our friends live this way. Very large numbers of people in this province live this way. In most cases it is two or three weeks away and one week at home, but it can be longer depending on the job.

This isn't new - people in this province have travelled away from home to make a living since the 1800s, when girls as young as 14 went to 'the Boston States' to work as maids, and men have always been away months at a time as fishermen, or in the woods for weeks or entire seasons.

It is seriously a way of life that can be accommodated with a little adjustment. If your relationship is strained by it, maybe you need to work out why that is and how you can resolve the issues.

Plenty families don't find it 'sucky' at all. Quite a few genuinely like it - it gives both partners breathing space, for one thing. It certainly is a lot better than having families driven into poverty and/or out of their homes because the wage earner with the most earning potential is lying on the couch in front of the TV for months on end.

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #90
Pandora how do you propose to keep a company town alive when the company shutters or leaves?

At some point the town will have to be subsidized by government, reinvent itself, train and educate its people to do something else or die and everyone packs up and leaves anyway.

I have a better solution. It starts with "car" and ends in "fentanyl"

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #91
Uh... you sure about that?



http://washingtonstatetaxpolicy.blogspot.com/2012/05/great-east-vs-west-debate.html
Fucking hell - Bill Gates lives in King county.  Amazon is in King County.  Starbucks is in King county.  King county, and the Puget Sound in general are ridiculously fucking wealthy.  I don't mean just a little bit, I mean massively more wealthy than the rest of the state. 

So what is it that you want?  Do you want wealthy people to pay a higher share of taxes?  Or do you want counties to get back something comensurate with what they're putting in?

So for giggles, let's look at King County and Ferry County.  King has the lowest receipt-per-dollar-contributed, Ferry has the highest. 

https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ferrycountywashington,kingcountywashington,WA/PST045216

King:
Population: 2.15 Million
Bachelors+: 48%
Median Household Income:  $75K
Per-Capita Income:  $41,600
Total Income:  $90 Billion
Persons in Poverty:  9.8%
Health & Social Assistance/$1000 Revenue*:  17,719,220
Assistance/$1000 per capita:  8.24

Ferry:
Population: 7.6 Thousand
Bachelors+: 17%
Median Household Income:  $38K
Per-Capita Income:  $20,600
Total Income:  $157 Million
Persons in Poverty:  20.40%
Health & Social Assistance/$1000 Revenue*:  12,408
Assistance/$1000 per capita:  1.63

So yes.  King County reaps a lot more benefit in terms of social services.  King is also massively more wealthy than any other part of the state.  Shouldn't they be contributing even more?  King receives more in terms of health and social assistance per capita than Ferry, by a significant amount. 

What we've got is a bastion of liberal values and government that routinely keeps a higher portion of assistance money for the already wealthiest populations... and then manages to convince people that those woefully poor areas at 20% poverty are mooching off of them and should get less assistance.

ETA:  Health & Social Assistance/$1000 Revenue*

*This is the dollars of assistance related to Health Care and Social Assistance received by that county, for every thousand dollars of revenue that the services in question generate in total. 
  • Last Edit: Yesterday at 11:02:26 AM by Pandora
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #92
the point is that the wealthy areas subsidize the non-wealthy (rural) areas, which is true.

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #93
Pandora how do you propose to keep a company town alive when the company shutters or leaves?

At some point the town will have to be subsidized by government, reinvent itself, train and educate its people to do something else or die and everyone packs up and leaves anyway.
They should undergo some combination of those things.  Some degree of subsidy, some level of initiative to reinvent the town, training and education, and some degree of migration.  All of those are options, and all of them are reasonable.

I'm a bit more taken aback by the condescension here and the lack of sympathy shown.  Also quite flabbergasted by the casual "oh they should just always travel for work, that's a fine solution" put forth so cavalierly.

Jesus christ.  The people expressing no sympathy and suggesting that these people deserve what they're getting in some way are the exact same people who insist that the minimum wage (which only really matters in cities) should be higher because people aren't making a livable wage, and companies should be forced to make sure that anyone, no matter how completely untrained and uneducated should be able to live a decent life on minimum wages.  They're the same people who insist that the wealthy should pay ever-increasing progressive taxes, because they don't merit what they've earned, and the less fortunate should be able to benefit from the incomes of the wealthy (as long as they live in cities and vote democrat, I guess).  They're the same people who argue that UBI is a fine idea, and hold up the results from tiny rural towns in other countries over a short period of time as evidence of how wonderful it would be if everyone just all got their needs met!

I guess those sentiments don't actually hold once you get outside of some academic hypothetical and start looking at real fucking people?  I suppose that generosity of spirit only extends to people who vote the way they are supposed to, and who are willing to uproot and move to fucking cities where they can be surrounded by the lovely piss-smell that envelops all of San Francisco.  Or you know, where the denizens of the city consider it an artistic expression to stick gum on the side of a wall over the course of several years - that's a tourist attraction right there!

God I hate cities.  And for the most part I'm none too fond of city-dwellers who have convinced themselves that city life is the bestest and living on top of each other with no wilderness, no privacy, and no quiet is just the best thing in the world... and anyone who doesn't share that view just isn't worth their effort  ::)

ETA:  Maybe a bit over the top.  It may not apply to all of you.  Just an awful lot.  And it's hardly limited to this board.  It's a pretty common viewpoint that is just astonishingly condescending and arrogant.

But hey - we get to have a major thoroughfare be built as a tunnel through unstable ground at a much higher cost than the raised freeway that was the alternative.  The viaduct is ALREADY a raised freeway through downtown.  But you know - making it a tunnel will increase the property value of the already-wealthy who want a better view of the sound  ::)
  • Last Edit: Yesterday at 11:22:27 AM by Pandora
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

  • meepmeep
  • Administrator
  • zombiecat queen
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #94
u mad bro?

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #95
the point is that the wealthy areas subsidize the non-wealthy (rural) areas, which is true.
But isn't that what liberals WANT to be happening?  Why bitch about it if it's in line with your master plan?

I'm of the opinion that liberals only want the wealthy areas to subsidize non-wealthy areas that vote liberal
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

  • Pandora
  • Resurrected Robot
Re: How economically desperate
Reply #96
Just because you're unique doesn't mean you're useful.

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #97
Pandora how do you propose to keep a company town alive when the company shutters or leaves?

At some point the town will have to be subsidized by government, reinvent itself, train and educate its people to do something else or die and everyone packs up and leaves anyway.
They should undergo some combination of those things.  Some degree of subsidy, some level of initiative to reinvent the town, training and education, and some degree of migration.  All of those are options, and all of them are reasonable.

I'm a bit more taken aback by the condescension here and the lack of sympathy shown.  Also quite flabbergasted by the casual "oh they should just always travel for work, that's a fine solution" put forth so cavalierly.

Jesus christ.  The people expressing no sympathy and suggesting that these people deserve what they're getting in some way are the exact same people who insist that the minimum wage (which only really matters in cities) should be higher because people aren't making a livable wage, and companies should be forced to make sure that anyone, no matter how completely untrained and uneducated should be able to live a decent life on minimum wages.  They're the same people who insist that the wealthy should pay ever-increasing progressive taxes, because they don't merit what they've earned, and the less fortunate should be able to benefit from the incomes of the wealthy (as long as they live in cities and vote democrat, I guess).  They're the same people who argue that UBI is a fine idea, and hold up the results from tiny rural towns in other countries over a short period of time as evidence of how wonderful it would be if everyone just all got their needs met!

I guess those sentiments don't actually hold once you get outside of some academic hypothetical and start looking at real fucking people?  I suppose that generosity of spirit only extends to people who vote the way they are supposed to, and who are willing to uproot and move to fucking cities where they can be surrounded by the lovely piss-smell that envelops all of San Francisco.  Or you know, where the denizens of the city consider it an artistic expression to stick gum on the side of a wall over the course of several years - that's a tourist attraction right there!

God I hate cities.  And for the most part I'm none too fond of city-dwellers who have convinced themselves that city life is the bestest and living on top of each other with no wilderness, no privacy, and no quiet is just the best thing in the world... and anyone who doesn't share that view just isn't worth their effort  ::)

ETA:  Maybe a bit over the top.  It may not apply to all of you.  Just an awful lot.  And it's hardly limited to this board.  It's a pretty common viewpoint that is just astonishingly condescending and arrogant.

But hey - we get to have a major thoroughfare be built as a tunnel through unstable ground at a much higher cost than the raised freeway that was the alternative.  The viaduct is ALREADY a raised freeway through downtown.  But you know - making it a tunnel will increase the property value of the already-wealthy who want a better view of the sound  ::)

For a libertarian, you sure do seem to think that the government ought to spend a lot of taxpayer money on your way of life.

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #98
the point is that the wealthy areas subsidize the non-wealthy (rural) areas, which is true.
But isn't that what liberals WANT to be happening?  Why bitch about it if it's in line with your master plan?

I'm of the opinion that liberals only want the wealthy areas to subsidize non-wealthy areas that vote liberal

The point was that this:

Quote
The entirety of Eastern WA gets slapped with all sorts of cost-burdens, so that urban-dwellers in the very tiny footprint of Seattle can have better lives. 

was dumb and wrong as Eastern WA gets subsidized with all sorts of money from the urban-dwellers in a very tiny footprint of Seattle.

Re: How economically desperate
Reply #99
King has the lowest receipt-per-dollar-contributed, Ferry has the highest. 

Actually, San Juan has the lowest. I wonder what their "Assistance/$1000 per capita" is?

Hmm, looks like it's 1.62. Even lower than Ferry's. And according to the map I posted, they only get back a paltry $0.46 for every dollar they put into the system! Man, they must be getting fucked over even worse than Ferry, huh?

Or so it would seem, until you realize that this...

ETA:  Health & Social Assistance/$1000 Revenue*

*This is the dollars of assistance related to Health Care and Social Assistance received by that county, for every thousand dollars of revenue that the services in question generate in total. 

...is bullshit. It's not a measure of "assistance." "Heath Care and Social Assistance" is the name of the industry they're measuring. The number given is the amount of revenue that industry generated in that county. The ($1,000) indicates that the given value is expressed in thousands of dollars.

Yeesh.