? ??????????????Skulls and Flames? ????? ?????? ???Rating: 4.6 (23 Ratings)??17 Grabs Today. 8866 Total Gr
abs. ??????Get the Code?? ?? ?????Orange Burn? ????? ?????? ???Rating: 4.4 (49 Ratings)??15 Grabs Today. 11320 Total Grabs. ??????Get the Code?? ?? ???????????? ????Easy Install Instructions:???1 CLICK HERE FOR BLOGGER TEMPLATES AND MYSPACE LAYOUTS ?

Sunday, March 1, 2009

Reset Expectaions

President Obama's First Step: Reset Expectations


Posted Nov 05, 2008 12:15pm EST by Henry Blodget in Newsmakers, Recession, Election


Related: ^dji, ^gspc, ^ixic


From ClusterStock, Nov. 5, 2008:


If President Elect Obama were the incoming CEO of a corporation, he would now be preparing for the first act of his tenure: A massive write-off of the mountains of rotted junk buried on the company's balance sheet and an announcement that recovery will take a long, long time.


This flush would clear the way for several years of better than expected results. It would also take advantage of the new leader's one chance to blame the sorry state of the organization on his sorry predecessor.


President Obama began this process last night, in his victory speech, when he noted that restoring the country's health might take more than a term. In the next few weeks, he should go well beyond this:




The deficit will be more than $1 trillion a year for several years


The country needs a massive new fiscal stimulus


The housing market will continue to decline through at least 2010


Interest rates and taxes will eventually have to rise (after the economy stabilizes)


Weak corporations have to be allowed to fail


Millions of homeowners will lose their house


Unemployment will probably rise to 10%


The government simply cannot "bail the country out" -- not because it lacks the will, but because it lacks the power


In short, Obama needs to acknowedge reality, erring on the side of overstating the problems and challenges, and he needs to prepare the country for several tough years. Because if he doesn't, within six months of his taking office, the country will have forgotten all about the prior administration and will instead be blaming everything on him.


And the comments: (The first page of 20 anyway. Some reasonable and some more along the lines of ignorant people saying the ignorant things that make them as such but understand that the change does not happen over night - if it is to happen. Also understand that government is made by the people, elected officials are representatives for the people! If you want change then start changing with you and help the country change, don't wait for one elected official to change it for you. He can not do this on his own)! - T.



maryann062047 - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:26PM EST


There is one important bullet item missing from this article... continuing to keep this country safe from terrorists. Say what you want about Bush, but this country has been safe because of his policies. I do not feel safe with the new regime. Mark my words, we will be tested and it will be sooner then later.



Lotta Tards - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:26PM EST


Wwwhhhaaattt are you saying?! I thought Obama would pay my mortgage, lower my taxes, give me free health care and bring world peace. This sounds like blasphemy! Off with your head!



versaxx - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:27PM EST


Well we now have a far left liberal (maybe socialist) president and a democrat controlled congress. Can we all remember back about 32 years with a president named Carter.



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:28PM EST


Perhaps if he was honest, he would have stated this during the campaign - then again, the ignorant people of the USA would probably still elect him.



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:33PM EST


YES WE ARE IN ECONOMIC MESS IF IT IS CORPORATION IT IS ABOUT TO COLLAPSE.....TRILLIONS OF DEBTS....THE QUESTION IS...WHOSE FAULT IT IS.....IS IT OBAMA OR THE FORMER CEO.....



tradingfool - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:33PM EST


He and the democrats could turn the housing market around over-night by eliminating the prohibitions, penalties, and taxes on using your IRA to purchase real estate. The ensuing bull market in real estate would make the last one look like a walk in the park.



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:34PM EST


He will probably make the economy worse via a new new deal, and rightly deserve the blame for it in four years. FDR is credited as saving the economy, but reality is that after 8 years of his new deal we still had recession/depression. Leys hope that it does not end with war this time, though.



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:35PM EST


November 4th 2008, a date which will live in infamy, the United States elected as president one of the most disgraceful politicians of all time.



gerl676 - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:35PM EST


hope this economy collapses and every osama supporter starves.



julietwolcott - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:35PM EST


this is the hard reality no matter who is in the office



james l - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:36PM EST


I am sticking to my guns and religion........



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:37PM EST


Politics as usual and I expect the same big let down when nothing really changes. At some point people will figure out that change cannot happen by doing the same old thing with the same old crowd.



peterdreher100 - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:37PM EST


What? Low Interest rates will get us out of this pickle. GM's Hybrid cars coming out this Christmas will lower oil prices and raise GM production and profits and jobs. Low oil prices, lower inflation, lower interest rates.



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:37PM EST


Definitely the former CEO who was a drunk that got elected by the good old boys.



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:39PM EST


Now comes the hard part indeed. Our new tax and spend ultra-liberal president (and congress) is going to compound our nation's problems many, many fold. Added to the fact Obama will almost certainly push for outright bans on most firearms, we won't even be able to defend ourselves when society breaks down and the riots begin. Good job America!



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:40PM EST


He is going to need every ounce of his Hollywood producers to smoke and mirror this disaster. Hillary, Barney and Nancy with Carte Blanc to distribute your wealth (to them) not the illegal aliens who got them elected.



cestover@sbcglobal.net - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:43PM EST


You voted for him so I don't want to hear your whining.



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:43PM EST


I don't want to make this statement to sound racist, but in Obama's speech his accent sounded a little more like that of one used commonly by African-Americans than the one I believe Obama speaks naturally. After all, Obama did not grow up in the typical African-American community, but was largely raised by white relatives. His father was from Africa, and not a native-born African-American, and therefore did not speak with that accent either. My question is, am I hearing something that is not there, or is his accent affected? And if so, to what purpose?



choppedatknees - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:44PM EST


How long we he be able to blame the former CEO. The american people have a pretty short memory and high expections.



Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:44PM EST


"THE QUESTION IS...WHOSE FAULT IT IS.....IS IT OBAMA OR THE FORMER CEO....." Since the mess started with the Community Reinvestment Act, low interest rates, the encouragement of ARMs by the Fed, the elimination of down payment or income requirements for borrowers, and a refusal by the Fed to regulate mortgage-based financing instruments, all of which preceded the tenure of the former CEO, the answer is clearly "neither."

1 comments:

Terry said...

Honestly.....where do you get this mess *roll eyes*

The comment that I posted below from the "chat"....once again, WHERE do you get this mess. The only thing that had merit was your comment, change does not happen over night! President-Elect Obama does need to start focusing on the "reality" in many situations; people are quick to forget who/how/where the problem started and start blaming the current person in charge.....

Several tough years....UGH....going to sleep; DRINKS were great tonight!!!! (:

(the *roll eyes* comment)
Yahoo! Finance User - Wednesday November 05, 2008 12:43PM EST

I don't want to make this statement to sound racist, but in Obama's speech his accent sounded a little more like that of one used commonly by African-Americans than the one I believe Obama speaks naturally. After all, Obama did not grow up in the typical African-American community, but was largely raised by white relatives. His father was from Africa, and not a native-born African-American, and therefore did not speak with that accent either. My question is, am I hearing something that is not there, or is his accent affected? And if so, to what purpose?

Craziness....yes I focused on the stupidy of the article, lol
Posted by ♥ on Wednesday, November 05, 2008 - 8:41 PM
[Reply to this] [Remove] [Block User]



Terry


I am going somewhere with this. Consider it a work in progress.

People are stupid Peb. I have video (it is selective of course) but it is video that highlights not the smart things that people say about the issues but those other people out there. The worst Liberals and the worst Conservatives spouting off at the mouth for the world to see and hear. Problem is, again; they are selective and used to paint a false picture of any one group. Finance news forums allow people to chime in on issues at their will; there is nothing selective about it. The comments that have merit and those based in gross ignorance are not weeded out for the means of exploitation. Mr. I Don’t Mean To Sound Racist is a prime example of that, as is (Numbnutt) that hopes everyone who voted for Obama starves. At the same time you have concerns for national security and the programs behind community reinvestment acts and ARMs with no down payments and no proof of income and how the Fed pushed and supported these initiatives; have great merit.

Problem here is the latter is a liberal program not a conservative one and it directly led to the financial collapse of the housing market. For Obama, perceivably there is only one direction to go and that is up (perceivably) but he can not get there on the temperament of today’s liberal mind set and we both know that. People have got to stop looking for the easy road and actively take part in trying to make their lives better. Again, the latter; if you are looking to get into a house, with no money down, not proof of income, and a interest rate that will increase knowing you can barely afford the current mortgage - you were looking for a hand out and you do not deserve the home you are in because you simply an not afford it. That is no one’s fault but their own. Yet we wait for some one to come running to our aid vice getting out there and improving our lives in manner that we can have the luxuries in life we want. Our desire to have exceeds our will to accomplish. So we elect a president thinking he will change so much so fast, that his will to achieve for us will fulfill our desire to have while we sit on our asses and do nothing for ourselves just as we have always done. It is why we have allowed ourselves to fall behind and it why we want some one to catch us back up. We will sit on our front stoop with our hands out waiting for socialism to kick in and money to fall in our hands. A bit will, and that 16% increase in Iphone sales to households under 20K a year will go up to 22% and nothing with no improvement of conditions. What happens is the “have nots” have a bit more and the “haves” have a lot more, again; no change in conditions. That economic gap will again be looked at as people cry for not having what others have. Contrary to popular belief, wealth redistribution feeds the “haves” far more than the “have nots” because the conditions do not change. We increase taxes and that freed up money goes right back into the hands of those being taxed at higher rates. People fail to realize that they have to change their own conditions and thinking that one man can change their conditions for them is foolish.

Tons of e-mails I have gotten about ‘thank you, change is coming’ were individually returned asking what they are going to do in order to help change. Disappointingly, not one positive response. I personally responded to 298 e-mails and the best response I got was one person saying she could put her daughter in private school. One individual out of 298 is actively looking to break the cycle; and that, very nobly is through her next generation. Popular vote was looking for handouts, not change. Through all of this the answers to that one question remain the same - emotion, not principle. That means this man is going get left hanging by his supporters because they want more provided from him than they want to provide for themselves - but again, both liberalism and socialism are deeply rooted in that context aren’t they? (Rhetorical question, forgive the sarcasm).

This huge anti Bush movement got Obama where he is. It is hard to imagine more going wrong during a presidential tenure. That sentiment is what has led to this - and two strong years of campaigning. Let’s face it, the one thing Bush has done effectively is keep the nation safe. Twist this. Let’s say Obama were in office during these events. He would have been impeached had he acted the same way Bush has. That is a huge problem in my eyes. Just like you and I face the same double standards and have to prove ourselves worthy where others do not, he will have to do the same. As with both Andrew Jackson and Bill Clinton, they will seek his head; only for lesser reason. He campaigned on the virtual impossible because people wanted to hear it, now he has to live up to his word which he can not do unless people actually help him. That is where my worries lie. The motivation to elect him was to further absolve ones self of personal accountability and responsibility. These people (we collectively) are so far removed from ourselves that a lending hand for Obama will not be provided. Who is going to take advantage of tax breaks and invest in retirement? I would but isn’t that what makes me different and puts me where I am today? I now have more because of acting in this manner my entire life. Acting in this responsible way is what everyone needs to do to change their conditions - I am telling right here, right now; we won’t.

When people fail to act responsibly it gets them where they are, yesterday it did, and today and tomorrow it will continue to do the same. I hate to coin an iconic phrase “Ask not what your country can do for you...” This is where we are. We want change but are we will to sacrifice in order to get it? When these things do not happen they are going to go after Obama’s head. Not because he did not do what he said he would but because we failed to help him do it. That is not fair to him. When we fall under attack, they will go after Obama’s head, this will have a bit more merit but had it been Bush it would have been written off as the way of the world. He needs our support and we have to change our ways in order to give it to him and quit looking for the free ride and hand outs along the way. We have to assume both the personal accountability and responsibility of our own lives first in order for this to work. We must sacrifice a small bit now to give our children a lot more than we have today, tomorrow. We have to secure our own future and stop relying on the government to help us more than we are helping ourselves. If we do these things he (and we) will be highly successful. If we don’t he will fail and we will blame him for not giving us more effort than we give ourselves. Socialism exists because of lack of personal responsibility. The “I can’ts” actually believing they can’t don’t and we carry their weight for them.

You a hypothetical of a family who loses a parent and can not maintain their why of live. A good point but it still falls under the same thing. Why did they not have life insurance? Because they did not want to sacrifice to have it. There was something they did want to give up and made a gamble that they would live through it and lost. Personal responsibility; nothing more, nothing less. It so hard helping those who do not first help themselves. It is difficult to pick up the slack for a single mother because she decided to have three kids with three guys before she was twenty years old. Why are we picking her slack up? Because she lacked personal responsibility and we refuse to hold her accountable for her position in life. It has hard to pick up the slack for a dead beat dad who refuses to work so it wages are not garnished to pay support. The same two answers ring true. Responsibility and accountability. Socially we as a nation are an inept joke of contradictions. We want more but we don’t want to stride to achieve more. We enable dysfunction through growing socialism. We are at the beck and call of the “have nots” and never stop to question why they have not, and worse; do virtually nothing to change their conditions. We will give them a bit more so they can be in their current conditions “more comfortably” while effecting no true change.

The bottom line here is simple. We elected this man and WE need to help him help us and quit sitting on our asses waiting to get more for nothing. This is what separates me from being a true liberal. It is my belief that few people are truly in need and those few only need assistance for a short time. Social support is not a life style and those living on it as a life style need to be left behind. People get what they actually want out of life. Those with out truly do not want to “have” because if they did; they would.

Here is how I feel deep down inside:

Your children and your position are your responsibility; not mine. I find it insulting for so many of you to act so irreprehensible while asking me for so much because you lack the drive, initiative and responsibility for not obtaining what you want. I owe you nothing. You have gotten their just rewards and you need to deal with it. You need to begin to find a better way of life; not ask for handouts because you continually and repeatedly fail to actively seek more.

I sent this statement to those two groups I was working with through the election. One group responded in saying it was right to feel that way, the other group fed excuse after excuse. In each of those excuses they were trying to absolve people of their responsibility. Not hard to imagine what groups responded in what way.

I did not vote for Obama. Having said that, I will support him. He is OUR president and WE need to change in order for him to effectively do what he has set out to do. He will only fail if we allow him to. Ironic how the same people who put him where he is are the same people who can stop him cold in his tracks. We can not allow that to happen. We have the first Black president and we need to do everything in our power to not allow a mockery to be made of this. (Not one of you thought you about this when you were casting your ballots did you?! Not a single one of you. What you wanted was for some one to change things for you, make things easier for you while never thinking what you had to do and what your responsibilities are when it comes to effecting change). People are selfish Peb; you and I included. Since the sixties government is “here for us”, we are not here for it. When the government asks us for something we revolt just the same way we do when the government is not providing what we want. What we want is an utopia with out sacrificing to get it. Nothing in life comes with out sacrifice, work and effort. We all have to pitch in to obtain our goals and dreams.

I fear that no one will pitch in and help Obama. We will pay more in taxes to allow those to continue doing what they have always been doing; now we will just pay them more to do it, make them more comfortable while they do it, and the whole time further enabling them to do it. A leech is a leech, they skim the boundaries of their society looking for every easy target to suck a little bit of life out of so they can continue to exist. Just like the eco-system of the lake by your house can survive with out them, so can the economy of our society. They are unneeded parasites with no positive consequences of their existence, nor any negative impact of their extinction. So why accept, embrace and cater to them? We are the only social order in existence that efforts its weak to such degrees and it hinders natural evolutionl.
Posted by Terry on Thursday, November 06, 2008 - 2:28 PM
[Reply to this] [Remove] [Block User]






Ok let me choose my words carefully and express my thoughts accurately. As I've stated countless times in our discussion concerning politics, many things are imbedded early on in life that helps to "shape" our thought processes. You stated in an earlier conversation that you felt I would be more conservative than liberal; you need to think back on my reasoning for voting for Obama to begin with.

I totally agree; YOUR children, YOUR position, it is YOUR responsibility. With that I take measures to take care of ME, it's no one else’s job to do this. Where we veer from each other, I'm more tolerant than you. Were I don't feel it's my responsibility, I understand someone has to do it. Does that make sense? That goes back to me expressing I'm neither, or....I'm always in the middle. I see the need and whether I agree or not, it has to be taken care of.

A prime example, you know the current situation with my school district and my thoughts on that matter; last night a friend girl and I were discussing our current classroom resources....I have a class set of books and a piece of chalk, whereas she has personal laptops available for her entire class, novels, an Elmo, a documentation camera, an Infocus machine, a smart board, etc. With the lack of resources available for both set of students, they will BE held to the same standards. I feel I'm a GREAT teacher, but in that same aspect my children are being cheated, yet they're expected to compete in the SAME field (testing, college admission, work force, etc.) as Mina's students. Is this fair that my district can't afford printing paper YET her district can afford to buy personal laptops for their entire district? NO, but it's the reality, so we deal with it and we strive for success with what we're given. To say that, I support my theory on single moms (the scenario you gave some time back), I don't support the outcome, but it's here Terry; what is your solution, turn your back and walk away because it's not your problem? The hell it's not your problem! It's not your responsibility, but it's your problem. You live in the same country I do; it affects us all, period. Does that make that person a leech or a person in a screwed up situation, REGARDLESS of how they got there. My students are in a jacked up situation, which is of NO fault of theirs, but they're there, plain and simple.

As you stated though, the "haves" will continue to have and the "have nots" will continue to not; okay I can agree with that. We've already talked about my feelings on Obama's plan for our past/present economic problems; the problem that lies here, you and I see things TOTALLY differently. You take a solid stand on a side and I refuse to; goes back to our tolerance levels. I see the aspects of everything. Some things are not so cut and dry.

I, as you know, voted for Obama. I do not feel he was elected into office simply because people were fed up with the Bush administration, but mainly because he posed a more feasible plan that "more" Americans could relate to. Simple. Will he be able to do it alone, of course not, but that falls back into your thoughts on responsibility and accountability. The two must work hand in hand.

My last thought....your comments on my hypothetical; same end result (your friend), but different means of getting there. Ok, yes, we can put blame and say why no life insurance, etc. Once again though, this is where our thoughts clearly differ, it does NOT matter about the whys or the hows (the same with our economic problems....people don't CARE about the whys or hows....it's here and they want it fixed) the point is, it is what it is, what are we going to do about it!?!?!?

I thought that was my last thought, but your last paragraph was quite harsh Terry....you have already labeled me as a pleaser; do you also view me as an enabler as well? No positive consequences of their existence? ARE you serious?!?!? How do you feel we are accepting, embracing, and catering? Do you truly feel these people are happy in their current situation? Let me rephrase that, do you feel ALL are happy with their current situation? You, yourself, admitted to lending a helping hand to your friend because she presented the drive to do better for herself and her children. What makes her and her situation different, or deemed acceptable for help? Because she strives for something better? As I told you in that conversation, who decides WHO gets the helping hand? You can't have it both ways.
Posted by ♥ on Thursday, November 06, 2008 - 4:56 PM
[Reply to this] [Remove] [Block User]



Terry


I am right so this is not a debate! LMAO!

First things first; I have no idea as to your reasoning behind voting for Obama. I assumed you were too ashamed to confess it openly! LOL!

Your bleeding heart kinder, gentler temperament of tolerance is what allows these problems to grow. Look at this from a slightly different perspective. If one of your students fails to turn in an assignment, you don’t pass them for it. You fail them and hold them accountable - because you care. Some one who has extenuating circumstances you may give an extension to, but you still would not just blindly pass them. These rules apply to all social programs. Firm is indeed fair. Problem here is we allow too many to get away with too much because we feel bad for them. We sympathize with their situations regardless of the cause. We set loose parameters of social program eligibility and do not differentiate the cause of application. Some are deserving of more because their judgement is not the root of the problem. “It is that they need help”, not why they need help, or for how long they will need help that is taken into consideration.

You also have to remember where I am from and how I was raised. I know what is out there and what these people do - and how proud of themselves they are for doing it. Origins have a lot to do with it. I will not argue that at all. Will the kids in Mina’s school out perform the kids in yours? Yes, they will but that is not to say they have to. I will put a twist on it though. Your students who go on to do things will go further. They will have to work harder to get further sooner. That builds a work ethic that others who are in a more well to do situation will not have. This I see every single day here with the engineers. The ones that came up the way I did are the better performers - FAR BETTER. I can’t say all of them are the smartest but I can say they are the better engineers, less two Ivy League guys that came up with silvers spoons but they are truly elite engineers - arguably my best two (Ken and Lance - go figure). Because you are not overly advantaged does not make you fully disadvantaged. It means you have to take matters into your own hands sooner. I am sure you are telling your students this day after day by not being easy on them because you feel bad that other schools have things that your school does not. You lean on them and do not cut them breaks because it will only hurt them right? Expecting people to achieve their potential is never a bad thing. Being firm is seldom a bad thing. And making excuses for people is ALWAYS a bad thing. My school was much like yours - only with very regular shootings and stabbings. We were told that being a garbage man for the city was something to strive for. Continuing your education was limited to the community college next door to the high school and the Jr college a mile away. “No college or university will take any one fo you from this school without a sports scholarship.” is what we told day in and day out. Wanting to go to Temple I found out what I needed to get in. I gave up all of the things I loved to prepare for my SAT and consequently aced it. No laptops, no fancy do dads, just a broke ass underachieving public school in a corrupt inner city school district. I made it out because I wanted out. No one could tell me that it was okay to be where I was because wasn’t ok withme. Then again, I was not raised to not have hope and aspirations for more either. If I was and decided to stay in that lifestyle, who is to blame? Me, or my Aunt and Uncle for raising me that way? Eventually I would have seen a nice shiny BMW rolling down the road and thought there was better out there. Not pursuing that or putting myself in a position that I could not pursue a good future is my fault - regardless of upbringing.

Things here are cut and dry; they are not wishy washy. Painting that abstract picture of sympathy with tears is what has led to the system being taken advantage of. There was a day when having to go on welfare has the most humiliating thing a person could do. Today it has become an accepted way of life. Does something not seem right about that to you? You don’t see how the bleeding heart sympathy card has been played and exploited? Do you not see how further advances in a socialist democracy can be of further economic detriment by not holding those accountable for their positions in life? Do you not see how this (your) temperament is being taken advantage of to the tune of millions of dollars annually? Because you feel bad for them, you want to give them a hand out as they laugh in your face for it. You accept it because there are those that do not deserve to be in that bottom five percent. We need to weed them out from the leeches Peb. These are the leeches we can do without. We have given them opportunity and they have taken but only the hand out portion that comes with that opportunity. It will only grow worse. It does need to be taken care of but it is the how that concerns me. Why am I more accountable for people than they are themselves? (Not a rhetorical question).

No, I stated the “have nots” have more than they ever had. It is just that it is being measured against the “haves” which is foolish. Just like the “have nots” have more than ever before so do the “haves”. It is called economic growth. Everyone has more of everything because there is now more to have then ever before. If you want something you don’t have, go get it. This is why I say people’s will must exceed their desire to get. It is easier to have a little bit given to you than it is to bust your but to get more. Too many people settle for that and we put them under the micro scope and look at them through the wrong lens. I know better than the five percent today knows what it is being poor and broke. I know what it is like not having heat in the winter and not having sheets on the bed. I know what it is like not having decent clothes to wear to school and to eat the same old cheap ass meals over and over. I know what it is like having the whole world around you telling you can’t. What it taught me is that if you want more and believe in yourself, you can have more; you can have a better life - but it is on you to do it. Had I kicked back and waited for the government to help me I would not be where I am today.

If you see how Obama’s plan is to work and see how we need to change are ways to accomplish it; when then do you argue against me? Is it because my choice of words are offensively candid and I refuse to sugar coat things? Being nice gets you nowhere Peb. It is why I am such an asshole. It is why I enjoy being such an asshole. It why I like to piss people off. And it is why I am as such a jerk. You have far greater impact helping, not coddling. I do not sympathize but I help greatly. (More about that in a minute). You say that responsibility and accountability have to work hand in hand to fix this but you argue that we have to continue blindly supporting societal leeches. Can’t have it both ways kiddo. LOL! (But I guess that is the border line conservative side of you peeking out).

Be that as it may, this is social enabling and yes, given your position I am calling you an enabler - but we all are now aren’t we? Enabling dysfunction is a bad thing. If you give the wrong type of person the easy road they will abuse it and turn it into a life style.

(Just using this as an example). Statistically speaking, one in four women under the age of 20 are single mothers. (Believe it or not, there has been a decrease in young single mothers since 2004). Seventy five percent of women in this age group have an advantage over the others because their lives are no where near as complicated. Our emphasis is on the 25% who have willingly disadvantaged themselves. (Yes, there are single cases in there that should get more than others but they don’t because we group them all together. A girl who may have been raped but does not believe in abortion is not given additional assistance even though she did nothing to bring her situation onto herself). The socioeconomic impact of this is substantial. You say this is OUR problem - last week you would have been right in saying that, this week you are wrong. This is much more my problem than it is yours. The next tax increase for me is a nice one. I fully anticipate paying $43,387.50 every quarter (my taxes will go up $10,150.00 every year). Where as I called you the enabler, it is now me who is the true enabler of this social dysfunction; not you. If this were ‘our’ problem there would have been an issuance of a universal tax increase of .6%. What that would mean is a household bringing in 60K a year would be responsible for and additional $360 and I would be responsible $2700 but the total revenue generated by the government to shell out to programs actually rises by 17.5%. Fair taxation and redistribution of wealth are obviously two completely different things. They want to take my income because I have found a way to do what others want to (or do they? - we will get to that in a minute). Forgive my frustration here but my annual tax under this policy will be $175,500.00. You know how hard I work and you know what I put into my work. My income is not by accident and I sacrifice day after day to do what I do. How many people do you know that work 2 and 3 week stretches of 20 hour days? The things I have, I have earned. Every dime I make, I have earned. And to have almost 40% taken because others did not choose the best path is a slap in the face. It irritates me to buy groceries and see a young mother buying brand name everything with food stamps. And not the way you would think. When you were texting me the last time I was in AZ and I was shopping I was in line behind a young mother with three little girls. She was short on her food stamps card. She had the best of the best everything in her cart and was wasting her money. It is no wonder she came up short. You know me well enough that when I do get irritated it is quick, this was no exception. I got hot and told the cashier to kill the transaction and ring me up. I forced my way through and she did. I told the young girl who I had just walked over to not go anywhere and I would be right back. I went out and put my groceries in the car and came back to the register where she was waiting. Of course I am getting crazy looks and the fact that I do not hide my displeasure very well did not help. LOL! I tell the cashier that she is not getting any of these items and she can have them restocked. I drag this young (turned out to be 19) woman through the store and taught her how to shop. As she is loosening up to me she starts telling me of things she wanted to get but figured that she would not have enough. I ended up getting a second cart and we loaded groceries as I taught her how to stretch her money. We got to the check out and she was saying how she did not want to be embarrassed again and almost refused to go through. The to full carts were $25.00 more than her 3/4 cart she had. I bought her groceries that day and told her the next time she shopped she could use her food stamps card but she had to shop the way I showed her. We go to her car and the groceries would not fit so I had to follow her home. We get there, a run down trailer in a very bad section of town - but sure enough she has a flat screen tv, a kick ass stereo sytem... yadda yadda yadda. (The have nots have more than they ever had). This was why I originally stopped responding to your text messages that day.

You see, I do help. I just have to do it my way. You can’t just through blind dollar bills at dysfunction and expect the results to change the underlying conditions!!! How many times must I say that? I am ok with paying more taxes for the RIGHT reasons and those dollars distributed the RIGHT way. Time is everything to me (I think you know that all too well). I would give both my tax increase with no qualms about it if I could do it in a manner as I did with this young woman. The three hours I spent with her were of far more value than what I paid for her groceries (and the few toys I threw in for her girls). I do things like all of the time, I just don’t talk about them. Is she deserving of more social support? Absolutely not! Three kids, three fathers and oldest to youngest are three years apart. What she needs is time, not money. Education, not hand outs. Effort, not charity. Empathy, not sympathy. (That is how we fix this by the way. We stop just handing out money to people who act irresponsibly and instead we help them get on track. Paying a person to be a deadbeat is not means to motivate success in life. A fallen person may indeed need a hand to get up but they don’t need their hand held for the rest of their lives). You would think that this is the exact type of person I would straight up refuse to help, but you are wrong. (Mainly because I don’t tell you every little thing that I do - not your fault for thinking that; mine for withholding it). I will help pretty much anyone but I have to it in a way that makes sense to me. (Call it my control issues). Just as easily I could have paid her balance and walked off but that would have been doing the same thing that everyone else has done for her - the hand outs have to stop. This is the ‘change’ we need to make that I was talking about. We do the exact same thing (with throwing more money at it) at the same time expecting different results - we are not going to get them. This is the enabling behavior that pisses me off. This girl could have come up short on food and legally petitioned for more support. Here in a few months she will get whether she petitions or not. It does no good. Being tough does not mean you don’t care. If I were indifferent, that would be cause for concern. Had I just walked off and gone on with me weekend not giving a damn about her, we would have an issue. Sounding harsh and saying harsh things tells you that emotion lies underneath. No emotion, no concern is cause for concern.

What is and is not fair Peb? Is it “unfair” to others that I have aggressively taken advantage of opportunity and made my breaks in life? (That is NOT a rhetorical question). What I am being told (by liberals) is that it; because I have done right, I have a bigger burden to bare. (Ok, I can live with that - to whom much is given, much is owed right)? We can single out the bottom five percent but that is not where the bulk of the money is going. The bulk of the money is going to the ones that have been and are doing okay (you). Middle class America. My best friend as you know works security and is content with his place in life. Not rich, not poor and no aspiration to more or do better. He gets the tax break, I get the tax increase. What the hell sense does that make?! You have got to be kidding me. That is just stupid! Redistribute wealth to those that are doing okay... what’s mine is yours and what’s yours is yours. Another very good friend of mine settled into working at a grocery store. He has been there for over 20 years, never so much as changed his shift. His drive is not that of mine but I am being told (by liberals) that he is an under achiever and if I did not have as much as I do, he would be further along. Ok, I know a crock of crap when I here it. The ones that want to, will and the ones that don’t, won’t. It is that simple and that cut and dry. America is the only country on the planet that you make a million dollars five times, claim bankruptcy five times and die a millionaire. I know that because one of my uncles did it. There are no greater opportunities in existence than right here in American - even in the worst economic conditions. Those truly striving with belief in themselves find ways to succeed, but bleeding heart liberals want everyone to have everything whether they really want it or not. That both turns line grey and widens it - it is because we make simple things complicated by trying to live the lives of others for them. If you say you can’t; guess what? You are right; you can’t. If you say you can, you will. (So all of you liberals out there can quit handing me sob story after sob story because what it all boils down to is personal drive and initiative issues. Of course people want more when they are asked. I want more too - difference is I believe I can and because of that I will. Not because some one wants it for me. When I was a kid, (liberals) would tell me I needed to have more. Today, these same liberals are telling me I have too much. When it comes to liberals I am not allowed to decide for myself and determine what is good for me because you liberals want to control my life for me. You want to feel sorry for me when I’m broke and you want to rob from me when I am not. For some reason you liberals think I can not stand up and brush myself off for myself when I am down. “I’m a big boy mom, I got this!” LOL! That bothers me about you liberals. I did not need your help then and I do not need your help now. All I have to do is set a goal and I go get it, my drive is internal and I believe in myself.

Now Peb, you acknowledge that avoided pitfalls in order to ensure you can get where you want to go in life. (Why that is just down right conservative of you)! LOL! You acknowledge that people need to be taken care of but you voted to not be the one to do it. You voted that I do it for you. You see the problem but want some one else to now handle it. You absolved yourself of that burden and placed it on my shoulders - fully knowing that in advance. I see a very sour contradiction in your sincerity to issue. “It exists, it needs to be dealt with but let some one else do it for me.” Am I reading that right? You knew I would get the tax increase and you would get the tax break but the issues would persist and your ownership of those issues would shift to further to my shoulders. I am ok with that, middle class America obviously could not handle it! LMAO! Let’s get you guys off the court and put the big boys in! LOL! In all seriousness. I hear what you are saying and see where you a on the fence in terms of liberalism but I want you to see mine too. Middle class America (as voted) wants to help others more, that too is cool. The out for you is you just wanted some one else to help while you take the credit for helping. Good play.

Gotta run, did not get a chance to edit this because of interruptions and now my time is tight, So the typos and errors are sumbitted solely for your amusement! LOL!
Posted by Terry on Friday, November 07, 2008 - 4:56 PM
[Reply to this] [Remove] [Block User]






Terry....Terry....Terry....you are truly special, lol. Okay you are right about this not being debate, it's a discussion, which you're refusing to listen to reason in because as always you "think" you're right, lol. You make good points, but you are so wrong is so many areas. I'll work backwards, because as I'm sure you knew when writing this, you hit a nerve....

You see a sour contradiction in my sincerity....are you serious?!?!?! Yes I acknowledge there is a problem, people need to be taken care of, and someone needs to do it. I didn't exclude myself from that solution, President-Elect Obama and McCain did that. I didn't "knowingly" put the problem on your shoulders per say; I don't believe it's your responsibility or mine, but the responsibility of all. The solution that was put on the table to fix the problem is jacked up; I've already attested to that, but it was the most feasible solution set forth. Go figure; I see the problem, am tolerant to the problem being fixed, yet my "class" is missed, whereas the class that could care less about the problem being fixed, is the "class" hit to fix it. Ironic, yes, but that doesn’t make my sincerity contradictory; it makes the system screwed up, plain and simple. So I'm going to need you to fix that Mr. Mykes....yes I'm rolling my eyes, lol. I'm glad you understand my stand on being conservative and liberal, and I totally see your position on the fence (even in the mix of your sarcasm); where we are clearly missing each other is your total lack of perception in believing that we (middle class) want to help, receive the credit, yet put the entire burden on "your" shoulders....that was clearly meant to be taken as a joke....clearly. WE didn't set the standards, yes we voted for it, but once again what was McCain trying to do....or was the solution just to simply agree that their extinction would have "no negative impact" -end quote.....good play....I swear you are such a smart ass, lol.

Back to the beginning....you said you "already" knew why I was voting for Obama....don't play innocent! You should be embarrassed to admit openly you voted for McCain, lol.

I understand your analogy of firm being fair in correlation with my students, but Terry that is not the same thing. I believe in tough love, true, but for the purpose of teaching a lesson. I know what they are up against; I've been there and done that. Where I believe we are missing each other is your "extenuating circumstances" comment and you failing to make the association with the two; do you not feel that being a part of lower class America is not an extenuating circumstance? How is my gentler temperament a means of allowing the problem to grow? If we went on your temperament that problem would rankle until it eventually "fixed" itself, which I feel we can actually agree would not have been a pretty outcome. I feel bad for no one; I feel responsible for no one; I believe we need to get that straight, BUT I do empathize. You stated I know your background, where you came from, well Terry you know my situation as well. That's why it is SOOOOOOOOOOO hard for me to understand why you can't see my point. I'm not telling you NOT to proud of your achievements, but everyone didn't have the same drive, aspiration, need to achieve, strive to be successful, the need to "get" out, as you illustrated. Do we fault them for a: never illustrating these traits, or b: exemplifying these traits later in life, after we're left taking care of the bad decisions they made along the way? (My mistake, not we, but "you") lol. Your comment on who deserves more makes no sense. You said some are more deserving of help because their judgment is not the root of the problem. I beg to differ; every situation, in my opinion, we have a hand in creating. I may not use my best judgment at all times, but my judgment is always the root of my current situation. If not my judgment Terry, what is the root of the problem? I feel you are referring to your friend, correct me if I'm wrong; she was dealt a bad hand, true, but she was never without her judgment, so that in essence is the root of her problem, thus putting her in her current situation.

I understand your rational on my students in comparison to Mina's students, and in correlation with Ken and Lance, but let's face reality, my kids will have to work their asses off, and I will be there ensuring that they do, but what about the students that don't have that extra push from their teacher, parents; that internal motivation to succeed? I'm sorry, I have to disagree, sometime drive doesn't always make the better "employee". Better performers, in aspect of work ethics, but as you stated, not the smartest. So who would I want performing surgery on me....the smartest or the one with the most drive....*ding* both in a perfect world, but if I had to chose, the smartest. You can't bring yourself into this "argument"; you're smart and you possess drive; many people have one or the other. For example, I have some students that are "natural" writers. No practice, study time, etc. is needed; they're naturally gifted. Then I have students that struggle, but work their ass off to excel, because they know I expect nothing less. Which would make the better employer, honestly I can't say. They both hold pros and cons; my only point in that situation is Education Reform is in desperate need of help. Regardless of how much drive I have, if I'm not equipped with the same materials/provided the same opportunity to receive knowledge as my competitors I will have to work harder to succeed, but the truth of the matter I will always be one step behind. I had a student my first year teaching miss a question on the practice TAKS test because he had never heard of a guestroom. Sad, but true. I worked in the heart of Oak Cliff; he had only been exposed to a single bedroom apartment, shared with his mom, her boyfriend, and his two younger sisters. A very bias question in some people's opinion; a common knowledge question in other's opinion. My opinion, exposure; you can't expect children to perform at the same level when the playing field is warped from the beginning. I know everyone will not succeed, but at least give them the opportunity to make that decision, don't make it for them. Some people are set up for failure, in my opinion; less than some have the drive to overcome this and flourish. Your story is not the norm.

I'm not wishy washy....but we still disagree, things are not cut and dry....sorry, but you are wrong (: Yes Terry many do exploit the system, BUT many do not! You don't punish all, because of the ignorance of others. Craziness….Yes we have leeches, yes these leeches need to be weeded out, BUT I ask you, what then? We can't send people "away" because we can do without them. Do you not see the harshness in your words? I do not feel my tolerant is being taken advantage of, but I feel the system is being exploited, because somewhere down the line someone dropped the ball and welfare became a thing of acceptance rather than a means of last resort. Why are you more accountable for people than they are for themselves....do you honestly feel like that? I honestly just cannot grasp that thought process. I don't feel I'm accountable for them, but I feel they need to be helped. No I'm not placing the problem on someone else, I'm placing the problem on that person, but with that, we have to realize some people need a hand to brush off their pants when they fall down. I make it a point not to fall, but somethings are out of our control. That's why I say it's not all cut and dry. It's not a bleeding heart, or a gentler tolerant, it's simply the essence of caring. The situation in Boston; you said you handled the situation the way you did because if the tables were ever turned, you would want them to break their backs for you and yours. Why can you not see the relationship in the two? Is it because the lower 5 percent are doing nothing for you? Please tell me I'm reading your thoughts wrong.

I don't argue against you, I argue with you in the essence of you seeing all aspects. I'm nice, but I'm not naive. No I don't agree with your choice of words, or your way of expressions some times. No biggie, I know you're an asshole, but being an asshole doesn’t excuse you from only seeing things from your view and disregarding the views of others because your BARK is louder than theirs. One more comment on me being "middle road"....I've noticed your many digs on my views correlating with both sides....once again some things are not cut and dry....

Okay you and the young lady in the grocery store; I agree it would have been simpler to just pay her bill and move on; I do believe the route you opted to take was more beneficial for her, but let's be honest, how often does this happen? This goes back to my reality of situations; you view me as an enabler, fine, but I'm truly not. Your practice in this incident supports my beliefs; employing the unemployed, empowering the powerless; for example my favorite quote; "Give a man a fish you feed him for a day; teach a man to fish you feed him for a lifetime." I'm not embracing handouts, as you clearly believe I am, I'm embracing the fact there is a problem and we need a solution. You're caught up, I believe, on the current solution that has been presented because it affects you deeply; I've told you before I didn't support this solution, but it was the most feasible presented at the time. I have never said you didn't help, nor just because I feel you're an asshole, that you wouldn't help that "type" of person. Honestly I feel that is the exact person you would opt to help, because they're the ones that need the most help. Things like that, in my opinion, aren't always meant to be talked about. I see so many things with children, mainly because of the area I work in (socioeconomic status); not to say things don't happen to the rich, but that's not the demographics I'm presented with daily. The day I texted you about the girl that gave birth in my class; blew your mind, daily occurrence to me. It doesn't benefit me to tell you all that I've done for that young girl and her CHILDREN; why, because I don't do it for gratification, I do it because I want to, and I see the need. Simply meaning no one else has taken the time for her, so I make it a point to. I'm like that with all my students. So with that, I put nothing past anyone. I think you're harsh in your words, but not without compassion. It could be your control issues, and thinking you're always right, lol. Whatever the reason, I see you as a very helpful person, but as you stated, as long as it is on your terms/makes sense to you (YES clearly you have control issues, lol).

I think your biggest problem is control is being taken away from you. And who are "these" liberals you keep referring to?!?!?!? I think somewhere in that paragraph you drifted off....this is WHY I don't take a clear stand...conservatives are too damn conservative and liberals are too damn liberal. Craziness....

This is a clear discussion that has no "middle" ground....two stubborn people!!!! It's late here, I'll NOT argue with you later (:
Posted by ♥ on Friday, November 07, 2008 - 10:19 PM
[Reply to this] [Remove] [Block User]






You know typos amuse me (hence your smart comment at the end of your post), lol. Soooo I had to fix this sentence; "Okay you are right about this not being "A" debate" left out that oh so important article, lol.

I'm going to sleep NOW!
Posted by ♥ on Friday, November 07, 2008 - 10:27 PM
[Reply to this] [Remove] [Block User]



Terry


LMAO! No, it is you that is the special one!

The whole good play, not needing then or now and contradiction in sincerity was just to ruffle your feathers. Policies change, it is the way of the world. But to answer you question; McCain would have hit you guys they way Obama hit us. Then I would have been the one receiving the ‘good play’ comment. But you have to admit, a hit below the belt could hardly be more cleanly delivered!!! How could I not use that against you? It was like some one pulling the last bud lite out my cooler and walking away from it... too easy! LOL!

Most feasible? As in better me than you? Which is more feasible; a .6% universal increase across the board to generate 17.5% more or an exclusionary tax break and tax increase?

No. Being a lower class American in and of itself is not an extenuating circumstance. This is one of the areas that we differ. There are those that are there through no fault of their own - those are the extenuating circumstances in my book. A person who deliberately works long enough to collect unemployment, gets themselves put out of work, collects until they exhaust it to only go forward and repeat this year after year; are there because they want to be. To you, that person being in lower class is unacceptable and warrants more assistance. I simply do not see it this way. What I see as an extenuating circumstance is the 18 year old girl who just lost a parent is caring for a younger sibling. One deserves more than other - let me correct myself; one is deserving and the other should not get a single dime in social support. You will try but it will be hard to argue against that. These manipulative deadbeats are not in small numbers. I say it will only worsen because we are currently enabling them now - we give them more and we only serve to further motivate their behavior. I am telling you Peb, you give them more and the problem will only grow. One lady in AZ was standing in line to cash her little state check. She got into a discussion and she actually said “If Obama wins I am never going to have to work because I will be getting more money than I ever got from the government.” Because I am paying for this, shouldn’t I have had the right to walk up to her and just slap the livin shit out of her? LOL! Something lies here as well and you did kind of key on it. We all have had a hand in creating this. What this is, is a socioeconomic caste system. The reality is that it is a MUST for society. We have to have our sanitation workers and we have to have the engineers that are working 20 hour days. Should anyone of them cease to exist, society as we know it will collapse. What you can not have is one sole effective middle class. (Forgive the stretch) but that concept is what drives the socioeconomic principles of communism and everyone will end up poor. You can not mitigate a class and expect social balance. Some one has to do the things that most do not want to do in order for all of us to continue your way of life. That broccoli at the super market did not get there by paying some one $17 an hour. Lower class America (as ugly as this may sound) is a much needed evil in even the most socialist of economies. It is no different than an increase in minimum wage. You raise it and prices of everything go up to support the wage increase; it negates itself. If a person does not want to be lower class, then they should remove themselves from it. It is unfortunate that it takes the amount of effort and work that it does to get out of it but that is the reality of the situation. There are multitudes of success stories in every facet of our country of those that have done it but that part of it is down played and we want instead to give people what they should have to earn. A person has to earn their way out of the lower class because we have to have a lower class to exist as a cohesive society. We are not an army of ants or a hive of bees. Our complexity mandates that we have multiple ways of life. As soon as you shell more free anything to any societal caste the result is increased costs. A household income that goes from 12K to 15K as a result of social benefits that the entire class is getting, is offset because everything else in society increases in price. It is inflation. You put more dollars out there and interests rates rise. You put fewer dollars out there and prices decreases. Now that 12K household has the same amount but it is not enough - they will never have enough because we are robbing Peter to pay Paul under this concept. Thus, a person in a lower class has to take it upon themselves to get out of it and in to a higher class where they are more comfortable. Those individuals will then feel relief, but the class has to be “lower class”. It is a must. Sadly, the class is beyond help as a class. Individuals of the class can move forward but the lower class will always remain intact and it will always do what it does today. It will provide for the things that you will not provide for yourself. You are not going to take your own trash to the dump. You are not going to pick your own vegetables. And you are not going to clean your own streets. Because those function have to get done (regardless of what we opt to pay) it will always be this class that does them. There is nothing to empathize with, there is nothing to sympathize with when you get right down to it. Those with less provide for other what they are simply will to provide for themselves. Peb, sadly all men are NOT created equal. A man born with a lower mental acuity and man that does not believe in himself but is born with an overly developed mental acuity are both going to be in the bottom rungs of society. It HAS to be that way. What we deny is the existence of natural selection. A lion who refuses to hunt will die just as fast as a lion who can not hunt; here they are both accepted because they will do what we won’t.

EQ v. IQ is what we are talking about in a sense. In many cases crafty is better than smart. Then again, smart has its inherent advantages as well. First bad thing in using this as a reference is that engineers are not stupid by any stretch of the imagination. Both Ken and Lance excel in both EQ and IQ and they are where they are because of that very fact. I have an engineer in AZ with an IQ of 120. He is the lowest in the entire organization but there is no system in existence that this man can not troubleshoot because his EQ is maxed out. Yes, he struggles when a new systems falls under review for development because his cognitive base is not that of the others but as soon as he sees how it works he all over it. This innate ability makes him the go to guy because no one can figure things out faster than he can (Ken included). When I left, Ken literally put him on speed dial! LOL! (Don’t tell him I told you that because he will sick Chauncey on me)! Coming in to the interview he stated that he was not the ‘smartest’ engineer out there but he could be one of the best if given room to put some extra hours in. Of course I am going to give him a shot - just because of his ethics. Sure enough, he needed a bit more effort but there were few nights that I left before he did. He worked harder and longer than everyone to get to where every one else was - just like he said he would do. He wanted it, so he got it - he made his break. Good in math, (not great) he struggled his way through school and finished in the bottom third of his class. His internship was marred with comments about not picking up new concepts quickly, but at the same time he fixed three propulsion system failures with no supervision. Now, I don’t know if you have ever tinkered with a propulsion system that was in development but to fix a portion of one is a huge feat in and of itself - and it is unheard of during an internship. It was obvious what did not add up, he had to be hands on. When we started working with him he demonstrated these exact same traits and was slow picking things up. Ken came in my office screaming that he was going to kill this guy. We went down to the lab and I had him open the system up. Not ten minutes later he says “ok, I got it.” The next morning the system they were working on was in the air. The others having a higher IQ understood the system but struggled to troubleshoot it. The swing was 20 points in IQ to more than 50 in EQ! Such a high EQ is rare but the idea is you need both. Some of the worlds smartest people do not have a lick of common sense. The disadvantaged develop EQ at a much higher rate because they must be more adaptive to get ahead. This can be of great benefit if it is exploited in their developmental years. “HappYness” is another very good tale of EQ developed through a situation of being disadvantaged just as much as it is a tale of will being stronger than desire. You can look at and desire whatever you want but it does you no good at all if do not study where you are, then work to get where you want to go.

My preference leans towards problems solvers; EQ over IQ because it makes sense to me. I will hire some one with the ability to figure things out over some one who is just plain old smart any day of the week. It probably has a lot do with why these guys are so good at what they do. There are 17 Ivy Leaguers here but only five of them are in key leadership positions. Not because I have not had them moved up but because they lack the balance needed perform at all the aspects of this foeld at this level.

I can argue against exposure; especially at that age. Not the strongest argument in the world but I can present it. Reading. Reading takes you places you can not get to on your own and shows you worlds that are far different from your own. This young man that sadly did not know what a guestroom was, is not an avid reader. That I will bet you a dollar on! LOL!

Our perspectives do differ. Mainly because I seek no excuses for failure. I do not even attempt to rationalize failure. Failure to me is not an option to me so I push, and push hard. The way I see it, when a person is failing it is because they have opted to not succeed. Most people do have the ability to overcome hurdles in life but give up the fight - they quit. If you quit on yourself, on your children why ask for more? Your student living in a one bedroom apartment - some one there has quit, they have walked away from hope and have accepted their place in society. I say this because they would have been pushing harder for him to seek more for himself. If he did not know what a guestroom was it is because no one was sending him in search of more. A more subtle point I think you may have been getting at is the question in and of itself. Who would and would not know what a guestroom is to begin with. The upper class kid that has a guestroom that his PS3 is set up in, or the inner city kid living in a one bedroom apartment? We have been up against this our entire lives. Systematically certain individuals are sought out over others. We know this to be true. There are two approaches to this; correct the tests, or teach the under privileged more that takes them away from where they are. The tests are not going to get corrected and what real good would correcting them do? When I say teach them more - I am not saying you in the classroom; I am saying parents who actually want more for their children. Only good can come of that; correcting the tests alone leaves the children under developed and you are bringing the tests down to a level that should not be acceptable. Yes, some children have to strive harder. Fair or not it is our way. That basic understanding that some have to strive harder than others is what has gotten us where we are today as a People. That fight has to still be fought for generations to come. You can not fight it making excuses and not dealing with the reality of what is actually going on. Working harder today will only be of benefit tomorrow. It is not fair v. unfair. That is a battle for a separate playing field. A lot of systems are not designed for minorities and those that are disadvantaged to get ahead, but you do not stall out because some have it better than others and it is “not fair”. You fight forward harder than ever before. The more that make it out, stand to enhance change. We have been fighting this battle for over 200 years - it is safe to say we have a few more years of fighting left to do. What has changed is the way we fight. Forty years ago, parents were fighting in the home to teach their children things they were not and could not learn in the school in order to get them out of the communities. Today we want others to fight for us. This student serves as a prime example of that. It gets back that one thing we get caught up in; responsibility. It starts in the home, with the parents. When they do not assume their role it makes it harder for you and I to effect positive change.

You made a comment in a text message about jr schoolers and pregnancy. If the parents are not doing right by their children, how can we really be of help other than but in the form of charity? (Which changes nothing). Our society is morally eroding faster than ever before and parents are increasingly less involved in their children’s lives. This is for many reasons but largely now due to fact that so many parents were not yet ready to be parents. “The children of children have habits like rabbits and have children if their own.” A very famous quote I am sure you recognize. They are not mature enough to sacrifice the things it takes to raise a child because they still want the freedoms of being one. That child follows their example and in return fails. Dysfunction begets dysfunction. Here we have an issue of social assistance I think we will actually agree upon. This person is deserving but it must come with restrictions and education. That young mother who followed in her mother’s footsteps did what she was expected to do - yes, she should have know better but her tools to know better were limited. You give her social support and help her get out. (These are the cases you speak to in terms of needing help). I come off as Joe Hard Ass and fault them for not wanting better for themselves. Problem is, we are both right. They do need help, but in too many cases they perpetuating their own fate at the hands of our assistance. If I said “ok, let’s help them BUT when they pick up their check they must get a Depo Provera shot.” the ACLU would flip out because I am violating their rights. If we help them and do not take control of the problem, we become the problem. So, we are at a crossroads where no one wants to give the right of way. I know people that have opted to stop this cycle, but I know far more that have not and continue to have kids they can not afford, refuse to give their children the parenting time they need to have a fighting chance and refuse to take matters into their own hands. The ones that see this and chose better for themselves are the ones who need assistance for a short period of time. All the others are what make these social programs fail. Having been enabled to not achieve more will not and do not seek better. You want to help them all, I want to only help the ones that want to help themselves and/or have some sense of control as to how I help them all. Still, I say that soft liberal ‘kumbyah’ mind set does more damage than good. If it didn’t, we would not have these issues now would we? It has only proven to be a large scale failure. Yes, some have moved straight through and onto other things in life but I would have selectively helped them anyway. Not being nice has not yet been tried. We should not give that single young mother more money every time she pumps a child out. What are we showing her when we do that? We are showing her that we will take better care of her than she will herself. Peb, that is enabling behavior all day long. We stop the enabling and we force her to do better. I would rather see her children raised directly and completely by the state than by her anyway - it makes more sense than letting her do it because she obviously does not care about their long term benefits. So many dollars are going that direction - redirect them from her pocket to facilities to raise children for people who can’t manage to do it without risking their future development. (Yes, I am saying take her children from her - she should not have had them to begin with). Harsh? Probably, I don’t really know. But what I do know is the cycle of moral and social dysfunction has to be stopped and to do it will take extreme measures - to continue to do the same will get the same thing it has gotten you (us - forgive me)! LOL!

In all actuality, there are several ways around the proposed tax increase. It is nothing a stroke of a pen and click of a mouse can not offset in less then 15 minutes time followed by 5 minute call. I could even donate back to my own organization right here at work just to keep the money away from where I would not want it to go. It took me less than five minutes to learn this. What happens when the top 5% figure this out and protect themselves from the increase and everyone else’s taxes are cut? Both the Congress and senate protected against redistribution wealth policies under the last democratic president. Hmmm, the plot thickens. I am not saying I would do it, but I could. I see the need to help, but I don’t see the need to do it the way we have been doing it because it has only proven to fail.

Because our society needs all walks of life, our society needs to accept that their will always be people with less. Increasing what the lower rungs have, increases what the higher rungs have - they intern invest it and grow it causes further and further separation of class. The individuals in the class have to be the ones to decide for themselves to move forward. Feeling sorry for them only pushes them further behind.
Posted by Terry on Sunday, November 09, 2008 - 12:24 PM
[Reply to this] [Remove] [Block User]






I knew I would be sorry when I read your response....lol. I'm working today (since I opted not to Friday and Saturday, lol), BUT I had to tell you, this would be one of those conversations were I would have a glass of wine and simply ignore you, lol.

We are clearly going in circles. There are areas we agree, areas where you're totally wrong, etc. (:

Soft liberal ‘kumbyah’ mind set….lol. I can "argue" your thoughts on enabling until I'm blue in the face, but we clearly see things differently. Fine, no biggie. One thing we do agree on is helping, but we would clearly take different paths in achieving this goal. I can accept that. I don't believe it's a fixable problem, in a short time span, with a minute of options given. That's what is happening within this conversation, and in my opinion, what happened with Obama and McCain.

Most feasible....we always go back to you or me....it's not about "whom" but "how" and "when", in my opinion.

We can agree, to an extent, that there is a need for lower class America; I never said there wasn't. It was you grasshopper that said their extinction would not be missed, lol. You are right, there are certain things I will not do, and I realize it has to be done. Okay, as you stated, no need to empathize or sympathize, it is what it is.

Exposure goes far beyond reading in my opinion. If you rely strictly on the argument of reading, you have to focus on my argument of materials being available to my students that are made readily available to their competitors. As you stated though, not the strongest argument in the world....you just like to argue!

You stated the smartest people, at times, lack common sense. Another one of my favorite quotes: "It is a thousand times better to have common sense without education than to have education without common sense."-Robert Green Ingersoll. I gave this to my students, and if you can imagine, many actually disagreed. They couldn't appreciate the essence and importance of common sense. Education can be acquired, common sense cannot. I believe many of my students couldn't grasp the meaning of the quote simply because they couldn't grasp the meaning of "common sense"; I told them it's simply a natural understanding. So with that, I believe we can agree on the EQ vs. IQ.

I don't make excuses for failure; I realize the full aspect of all entities encompassed within failure. Simple. I want to help all, you want to help the one’s that want to help themselves….hmmmm you may have a small point. Dysfunction does begets dysfunction, so without that am I making excuses for failure, or recognizing a lack of mature role models. You’re contradicting yourself within your argument and in correlation with the quote you use for illustration purposes. I keep telling you….you can’t have it both ways, lol.

Your thought process on removing children from their homes and putting them in the system....I'm not even going to touch....I don't have the ENGERY for that one *roll eyes*

“ok, let’s help them BUT when they pick up their check they must get a Depo Provera shot.” That was actually something I found myself laughing at, but agreeing with at the same time, lol. It will "never" happen....too many conservatives, too many liberals, lol. Not a bad idea though.

Getting around the "proposed" tax increase....you have tooooo much time on your hands!

The special one huh....I told you I was special.....you're just special in special "areas" lol

BACK to work! I thought you were writing this last night?!?! All work and no play, lol.
Posted by ♥ on Sunday, November 09, 2008 - 4:57 PM
[Reply to this] [Remove] [Block User]