-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
Cast Member Wages
- Thread starter Madison Kozlowski
- Start date
NelsonRD
Well-Known Member
Nobody is against helping people that fall on hard times. The problem is the safety net program has grown too large and encourages fraud, dishonest behavior, and laziness. 50% not paying income taxes carrying the other 50% is the injustice. Nobody is debating using taxes for infrastructure, the problem is when more money is spent on SNAP, which is supposed to be a supplemental food budget, not your sole source for food, than is spent on education.
Edit: I forgot to mention, this is in the middle of our obesity epidemic.
Edit: I forgot to mention, this is in the middle of our obesity epidemic.
Last edited:
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
It's neither naive nor judgmental. It's based on academic research and confirmed, measurable facts.
flynnibus
Premium Member
This assumes you have no dependents... not all dependents are children born out of wedlock..
This assumes you've had no life activities that could have put you very far behind (never had an accident?)
This assumes your work exceeds your expenses... which assumes you had a support structure at the start to allow you to build up to that tipping point.
Many many many people do not have those assumptions pointing to their favor.
Hell, I'm not looking forward to having to redo my brakes in my car.. because shop expenses have gotten so crazy out of hand. But I can handle a $400+ dollar bill without any issue. If I'm making $8/hr and clearing $6.. making $1200 a month, and dealing with roughly $1000 in living expenses... that single REQUIRED maintenance on my car represents two months of all my disposable income.
Costs are getting nutty.. and it makes it really hard for those on their own to stay above water.. nevermind if they have any baggage holding them down.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
I would like to see some stats on how many people are below the poverty line due to bad choices and decisions made throughout their lives. I would imagine it would be significant. Lets not pretend that these people do not exist.
But that is not to say there are also people that have tried to work hard and make the choices that would allow them to succeed, but still failed and currently live in poverty. Lets not pretend that these people do not exist either.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
not all dependents are children born out of wedlock..
Of course, but the number born out of wedlock is significant and is growing...especially in poorer communities. This contributes to the problem. Now, with that being said, that doesn't mean I write all of these people off...
flynnibus
Premium Member
Yeah, but you didn't say " your risk of ending up in poverty is virtually eliminated. That's not that hard" - Captain did. I guess he never knew anyone who didn't have working parents who could support their whole family. Never knew anyone who had older parents who needed support. Never knew anyone who had their parents abandon them. Never knew anyone who had elderly in their family to support.
Everyone is just a happy suburban family with two working parents who make enough to happily support their family and its on the kids to make sure they don't fall off the train. Hop hop!!
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
No, it doesn't assume any of that. The statistics include all of those "what ifs." The research was done by Brookings and it's not some right-wing hack organization. Brookings is moderate to slightly left-of-center.This assumes you have no dependents... not all dependents are children born out of wedlock..
This assumes you've had no life activities that could have put you very far behind (never had an accident?)
This assumes your work exceeds your expenses... which assumes you had a support structure at the start to allow you to build up to that tipping point.
http://www.brookings.edu/research/papers/2003/09/childrenfamilies-haskins
Finally, we conduct a combined simulation implementing each of the four individual tests sequentially. The full-time work test is conducted first, then the high school education test, followed by the marriage test, and finally the test that assumes families have no more than two children. After each test, each family's poverty status is reevaluated and only those families that are still poor are eligible to participate in the next test. The combined effect of these four tests is a 9.3 percentage-point drop in the poverty rate among families with children, from 13 percent to 3.7 percent. Thus, the poverty rate among families with children could be lowered by 71 percent if the poor completed high school, worked full-time, married, and had no more than two children.
flynnibus
Premium Member
That is not 'statistics' - that is a SIMULATION playing with input data. It is not a study of historical fact, its a hypothetical math exercise assuming if we apply past measurements to new combinations the math will stay true.
These are not facts, nor historical measurements.
Nor does it account for the scenarios I outlined.
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
my measurable fact is there are some right rockets on this thread what a set of dobbers.
TLtron
Well-Known Member
Less than 15-years from now...that suburban family is gonna have a much different reality, as there is another elephant in the room we all seem to be overlooking.
http://www.businessinsider.com/health-care-costs-will-exceed-average-household-income-by-2030-2012-3
Sans Souci
Well-Known Member
OP is like Eris throwing the Apple of Discord.
My *measurable fact* is something is very wrong when you have to utilize a Scottish Dictionary just to insult people. Wow. I was really enjoying this discussion a lot until you posted and killed the thread.
Pumbas Nakasak
Heading for the great escape.
im sorry hen but I forgot that individuals such as your arrogant self believe that people should modify their natural parlance to satisfy their imperialist leanings. But its good to know you are as selective in your outrage as you are in every other Disney funded piece of your sad little life.
but laughing at you as always.
jloucks
Well-Known Member
I never quite got why people have kids they cannot afford. I have two and I can tell you first hand those buggers are expensive!!
Well, other than the welfare checks, child support, and other stipends that can be viewed as incentives by some.
I have other phenomenally unpopular views on this, but I'll just not get banned today.
Matt_Black
Well-Known Member
... You realize it doesn't always work like that? It's not like people actually mail out forms to the stork and he shows up 9 months later?
Disney.Mike
Well-Known Member
Have enough kids and you don't have to work... because we can't let the children starve...
xdan0920
Think for yourselfer
I appreciate how theoretically empathetic you are towards the less fortunate.
jloucks
Well-Known Member
My gut feeling is that there is a bubble being inflated by insurance companies that will burst sooner or later.
Indicator ...same drug, different prices, different countries.
Insurance companies are artificially tinkering with, price supply and demand.
I think the burst should be good for U.S. Consumers. ...unless I am wrong about high-end global demand. (That demand making it not necessary to lower prices domestically)
Oh, and to end on a sadder note, unless somebody develops some new antibiotics soon, we are all going to be up a bacteria riddled creek here within the decade.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Because there is no true balance on the prices of things.. as no one pays those prices, hence there is little pushback on what the prices are.. the system is a runaway train at this point. Same thing is happening with Education... where because everyone is paying with federally backed loans instead of what people can actually bear.. there is little pressure on pricing.
Its why if you have college aged kids right now, you are looking at 10-40k a year for school. How is anyone who makes 50k and less supposed to even be able to approach those kinds of numbers?