Obama proposes cuts to social security and medicare

[solanis]

I've lived in Manhattan my whole life... I guess New York, N.Y. (which is listed under location) doesn't count as a major city.

The argument isn't that "you're already rich so you can afford more." thats half of it. The argument is.. that if the choice is between cutting funding for poor people, seniors, disabled people, children and women or reverting taxes to Clinton era on those that can afford it I would choose the latter.

Early start as in "born in to money." That doesn't count bro.

whether it's half or a fourth or 10%, it's still too much because that is an absurd argument and indicative of an unhealthy relationship with money. it would take a heartless villain to argue against paying taxes that would help people that simply could not be helped otherwise; unfortunately, that's not our current situation. governmental spending is a clusterfuck, and until they get their shit straightened out and start spending efficiently and responsibly, I don't want them flinging more of my money at bottlenecks because they're too incompetent to get it done properly. that goes for people in lower tax brackets too.

early start as in "got a $1k loan from a local bank and grew it exponentially" but thanks for playing

[tyven]

SOLANIS DO YOU BELONG TO ANY TRADE ASSOCIATIONS?

I really hope you do not belong to a certain advocacy group I work for, it would be a real embarrassment if you saw this was how i used company time

[solanis]

stop playing with my heart tyven, gay marriage is legal here in a few days!

[arus2001]

Seriously this.

I mean, I'm all in for saving for a rainy day, but it's just preposterous the perspective some of the wealthy lose on stretching the dollar and living comfortably without being a hedonist. You don't need a new BMW every year, some blow, hookers, some more blow, a yacht, get enough blow yet, and all that other bullshit. I know empathy is too much to ask for, and blah blah government sucks, but the world doesn't need a bunch of greedy Scrooge McDucks. Offer 10k to a regional high school that puts out the best SAT scores, set up a scholarship related to whatever field you're involved in for someone aspiring (Oh wait, the fucker will probably be your competition one day~), fix up a park, buy a new home for a family that lost their home to a fire, whatever. But no, all those faggots don't deserve it. Fuck making life better for our future generations, you just wanna sit on the cash you "earned" off the backs of those you're snubbing, those that educated you, those made your food, those that stopped the zombie apocalypse, and so on.

This rant brought to you by everyone busting their ass daily and still struggling to make ends meet, let alone save for retirement.

[volcanicweather]

Arguing finance with a Jew = waste of time. My gf is one and her dad has his own business... it's a bad idea. I've learned to just cut my losses and agree to disagree.

Not to play the socialist card, but here's an interesting article about Sweden (where I lived for awhile after college) and how even though taxes can be around ~60% for some most people aren't venomously opposed to their government because, unlike in the US, people there for the most part trust the government not to mess everything up: http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2008...burden-welfare

I'm not saying Sweden or socialist countries have the perfect system, there is still privitization in education / health care and some wealthy Swedes move to Luxemborg for tax breaks. I've been to big cities around the world and of all of them Stockholm and Gotenborg stood out the most to me. The streets are immaculant and even people who aren't well-off and are working grunt jobs seem to have a better attitude than most places because they are taken care of. With that said though I could never live there, way too damn cold and dark for half the year, but it's no secret that the percentage of people trying to immigrate to Sweden is at record levels, albeit from pooer countries.

[Kuya]

But the most eye-catching benefit is probably parental leave. Parents enjoy a joint parental leave lasting 480 days. For 390 days they receive 80 per cent of their income, capped at 440,000 kronor a year (£35,800), while for the remaining 90 days they receive 180 kronor (£14.60) a day. In theory the leave is split fifty-fifty, but it is up to the couple to decide how they want to organise it. One partner can give as many days as he or she wants to the other so long as each parent takes up to 60 days at the minimum. A single parent is entitled to the full 480-day period.

For some couples, this means the father can become the child's prime carer during the first years. 'I'm taking 15 months off while my wife, Anne, will take five months,' says Gustav Levander, 31, a teacher and musician. 'Some of the leave we're taking together at the same time, while for other periods either Anne or I will be at home while the other is at work. It's unbelievably good that I have the opportunity to stay at home for a long time. My son, Olle, will get the chance to know me well in his early years.'

Oh my god, that's wonderful.

[archibaldcrane]

It's a little extreme considering that in many multi-child families, by the end of 480 days you're pregnant with the 2nd or 3rd.

However, it's a benefit everyone enjoys equally, since, ya know, everyone is born at some point.

[Kuya]

I'm a firm believer that parents being able to spend at least the first year of their kid's life with them, and i mean both parents, is vital to good child development, so something like this here in puerto rico would be so awesome.

[solanis]

do the swedish breed as gleefully as americans?

[zoobernut]

I'm a firm believer that parents being able to spend at least the first year of their kid's life with them, and i mean both parents, is vital to good child development, so something like this here in puerto rico would be so awesome.

I agree with this. I really wish we could do that here in the states. Having just found out my wife is pregnant I am trying to figure out what we will do once the baby is born. We are a two income household and while we will be fine with both incomes I really wanted to figure out a way to be a one income house at least for the first year so at least one of us could be there for the baby.

[archibaldcrane]

I'm a firm believer that parents being able to spend at least the first year of their kid's life with them, and i mean both parents, is vital to good child development, so something like this here in puerto rico would be so awesome.

Sure sounds like some developmental psychology in here.

[Kuya]

'If you start talking to someone in Britain, you can be fairly sure that they will end up saying that taxes are too high. In Sweden, you can't do the same,' he says. 'Most people trust the state to manage taxes well. There's a broad, deep faith that the money going into the welfare state will be employed usefully.'

But he also points out that self-interest is at play: 'The median voter is a woman who works for the public sector, and around two-thirds of the electorate draw most of their income from the state, either because they work in the public sector or draw benefits from it.'

Overall though, he says, 'Swedes are very attached to the idea of the state as the People's Home. Everyone in society is under the same roof, everyone will be protected. Sweden is now a more diverse society, but this idea still persists.'

That's the kind of thinking that i wish we had.

[Kurokikaze]

I'm a firm believer that parents being able to spend at least the first year of their kid's life with them, and i mean both parents, is vital to good child development, so something like this here in puerto rico would be so awesome.

This, I too, can agree with. Unfortunately it would NEVER happen here.

The biggest complaint for that here is "Why should I pay a worker for not working?" or "Getting pregnant shouldn't warrant leave but termination instead because you are making yourself sick on purpose." (yes, I've heard both arguments and a few other facepalm worthy ones.).. I mean seriously.. this is a country where we can't even guarantee some employees a week's worth of sick leave per year.

[Drex]

You don't need a new BMW every year, some blow, hookers, some more blow, a yacht, get enough blow yet, and all that other bullshit...the world doesn't need a bunch of greedy Scrooge McDucks.

Err...scrooge mcduck was a penny pincher, as many rich people are. The hedonists are a vocal minority of rich people. If anything though, you should be encouraging a new BMW, some blow, hookers, etc. because all of those things put "rich people money" back in the economy where it's desperately needed.

And many rich people do all the things you listed as well, or did you forget that regional high schools with high SAT scores are usually private and funded heavily by rich people to begin with?

Don't base your stereotype opinions on fictional characters. Even Trump donates to a number of charities (albeit probably for the tax benefits).

[archibaldcrane]

That's the kind of thinking that i wish we had.

That's a lot easier to do when you're talking about only 9 million people who are a very homogenous group.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._frame.svg.png
Their biggest cultural minority are...Finnish people.

edit: Ok i didn't try to copy a big white circle from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden but that's what it gave me. Although, it kinda makes my point as well as the actual graph.

[Kuya]

That's a lot easier to do when you're talking about only 9 million people who are a very homogenous group.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi..._frame.svg.png
Their biggest cultural minority are...Finnish people.

edit: Ok i didn't try to copy a big white circle from here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Sweden but that's what it gave me. Although, it kinda makes my point as well as the actual graph.

Yea, whatever america, i know. But we (puerto ricans) can't use that excuse.

[Zoolander]

Well, that makes sense in Sweden because they aren't paying for a defense budget that is almost bigger than all other military expenditures combined or the costs associated with having BY FAR the highest incarceration rate in the world (not to mention all of the indirect costs to society with having such an ass backwards justice system, judicial costs, etc - sorry to hammer that point again, but it is a system in serious need of reform and something multiple professors & scholars I've spoken with point out).

Rich people dont seem to get that theres a line of "being able to live, and not being able to live," a hand-to-mouth existence, that they simply never come close to approaching but that many people have to deal with on a daily basis. You don't take shit away from people who have nothing. Besides making it even more difficult or potentially impossible to live (and you can forget about any medical costs), when you continue to drive people into further destitution, it becomes that much more difficult to escape that sort of life. Middle class, especially/at least 15-20+ years ago, was fucking rich in comparison to every other group on the planet. Theres just such a disconnect between the haves and the have-nots, because its impossible for most to really understand what its like to be constantly hungry, constantly struggling, etc. Its a weight that builds and builds. Instead of empathy there is a sense of entitlement and "merit" that its "unfair" to tax them higher which solanis has so aptly demonstrated.

News flash: pretty much everyone works hard. This notion that the poor don't work hard has to be one of the dumbest assumptions that continues to persist. This discussion always reminds me of this image that was highjacked by communism but is a perfect image of capitalist society, where the masses prop up the bourgeoisie & they sit completely oblivious to the fact that everything they have is because of those on the bottom. Without them, they're nothing.

http://a1.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphot..._6776634_n.jpg

[zoobernut]

I wonder how much money the federal government would save if it legalized marijuana and released all small time non-violent offenders who were in jail for possession of pot.

[Kuya]

Oh god i always get zoobernut and zoolander confused.

[Stiker]

I wonder how much money the federal government would save if it legalized marijuana and released all small time non-violent offenders who were in jail for possession of pot.

Philly saved $2 million it seems: http://consumerist.com/2011/07/phila...t-smokers.html