Hard times: 7 in 10 Americans say they’re living paycheck to paycheck now

Tax the **** out of corporations and have them move operations off shore.

That's the democratic way!

 

Or too disadvantaged by having the brass neck to be disabled.
‘Anybody’.
LOL….supposed to be a Christian country too.
Nah, a nation of the selfish and greedy.

 

Wrong. Shareholders.

Who are shareholders?

 

The number of people that are disabled to the point of preventing them from doing ANYTHING is very low. We have systems, which I support, in place to sustain and care for these people. Also, children and elderly.

This is just an excuse to avoid the facts. Americans are entitled and financially illiterate.

Oh, and keep religion out of politics. Most people who bring politics into their welfare arguments and the like are the first to hate on religion.

I'm agnostic, so it has no bearing on me.

 

Thats why I said “the corporation”. Now also understand that the lions share of shares in any company are to institutional, and corporate investors. The average joe may see 2% a year in growth. But the CEO, CFO, and the corporate officers whose salaries and bonus’s are based on that profit make the most. Hell the overall S&P 500 was 9% last year, but that was on open transactions. .

This idea that the increased price of a product somehow ends up in the pocket of the average investor is beyond disingenuous. Most of the share of stock in a company are actually owned by that company, but you knew that already

 

Give a few examples of these corporations, and what kinds of businesses they're in.

 

What you describe as ‘systems…..in place’ is an example of American socialism.
So there you have it, politics in a welfare argument.

 

They’re also the ones taking all the risk.

 

Hey if the goal was equity then I don't see a problem here?

 

Most companies have 50%+ of their stock held by outside entities.

I guess I don't see the issue with corporations desire to be profitable. That is the whole reason they exist

Should companies be setup to provide goods and services and employment at cost?

Why would anybody do that?

And at what point is profit ok before its "greed"

 

You're right. There are aspects of our society that are based on socialist principals. In this case Social Programs.

You will find very few conservatives that oppose ALL programs.

Nome of your attempts to sideline this conversation based on social programs, or religion, changes the facts that Americans are entitled and generally financially illiterate.

When you want to circle back to that fact, rather than attempting endless excuses, let me know.

 

Excuses for what?
My post was in response to this:

'Anybody can become wealthy, they are most just too lazy and entitled.'

A sentence that has a lot wrong with it, starting with the word 'anybody', then leading on to the question as to what 'wealthy' means. That's before the lazy stereotyping of poor people.

 

Who CAN'T get wealthy? And let's define wealthy as in "money is no longer a worry..."

 

It’s standard practice. Stock awards happen daily.

 

Not my definition of wealth.
For some money is no longer a worry when they, and all the members of their extended families, can live off the interest of the interest.

 

That's a ridiculous definition. A person is an individual. They are not a group or family. Redefine your use of the word wealth.

 

Wealth is enough to reasonably survive on for a person doing an honest day's work isn't it?

 

Can I just get those examples please?

 

That's getting by in my opinion. To be wealthy means to not have any financial worry

 

For some living off the interest of the interest for them and theirs is the point they aspire to in order to not have any financial worry.
I would say that getting by is also a point to reach that means they have no financial worry.
Wealth and being wealthy is not obvious or easily defined, it is easier to define greed and greediness.
Living paycheck to paycheck, providing that reasonably covers expenses, with possibly a little bit put by for unforeseen circumstances sounds like wealthy.
I grew up in a time without 'credit' as such, and if you wanted something, you saved up for it.

 

The overwhelming majority of poor people are poor because of poor life choices and laziness.

What amazes me, is hypothetically 2% of people have a disability which prevents them from working any kind of job, they will be held up in order to defend and deflect from the other 98%.

There are people right here on this forum that don't work because they are "disabled". Which apparently means they can type into an online forum all day but can't do data entry. They could, they just don't want to. It's easier to get a disability check.

Until we start to be honest about the actual, real, number of people that need assistance, then people will continue to rally against social program fraud as well as the excuses.

 

Im not going to o do your research for you. It’s SEC rules….

 

And do corporations pay out dividends to the stock holders? Who are the stock holders?

 

I posted the same before seeing your response. Why that thought is beyond some, I just don't know.

 

Yep. These ##### will shill for that 98% all day long, and don't give a damn what it costs the genuinely needy. When Welfare is sold to you as a public good, and you're the type who doesn't like too much thinking, you'll extrapolate that to mean those who receive it are good. It's an astonishly careless and disinterested attitude.