Read this, then ask yourself: Isn't it amazing the riots haven't started yet?

[JaneyVee]

I'm a Member of the American 'Used-to-Haves'

I used to have a house. I used to go on vacations. I used to shop at department stores, get my hair done and even enjoy pedicures. Now, I don't. I'm a member of the American "Used-to-Haves."

Now, I'm renting an apartment and I'm desperately awaiting a check so I can pay the rent. Yet, I'm lucky to have an apartment that includes utilities. Despite my college degree from a prestigious college, and solid employment track record, I can't get a job. It's been so long since my corporate days, I now feel unemployable.

My age doesn't help. But I'm as healthy as a thoroughbred, I appear quite young and would gladly accept a basic salary. I'm a bargain! But no. I'm freelancing for $15 an hour these days, but I used to earn $100 an hour. In fact, all the freelance hourly rates have been driven down to $15-30 an hour. To make ends meet, I also work as an aide ($13.75 an hour) and run a small local company. And my annual earnings are under $20,000.

I'm lucky to be in Massachusetts, where my health care is paid for, and fortunate to be of sound health and mind. But on days when I feel hopeless, I can envision myself 20 years from now, living in hardscrabble poverty. Female friends my age who are in similar financial circumstances are terrified of the future. If we can't get decent paying jobs today, there's little hope of getting a corporate job with benefits in the future. And during the past few years as we've struggled, we went through all of our savings, 401(k)s and anything left in the bottoms of our pocketbooks. So we can see ourselves as old, pathetic bent-over women, living in bus shelters, our ragged belongings in supermarket carts.

The rest: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/kathleen-ann/american-used-to-haves_b_4732434.html

[NYC_SKP]

1. Indeed. We should all be earning an average $120,000/year. (link)

..

.

CEOs before Reagan made 78 times their minimum wage workers. Today, its almost 3500 times!

Without Reagan, America might have had the same income distribution we had in the 1970s, which would mean we would be averaging $120,000 annually--not $40,000.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=4465391

Obama v. Reagan: Fun Comparison I Did To Piss Off Wingnuts on Reagan's B-day
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2014/02/07/1275771/-Obama-v-Reagan-Fun-comparison-I-did-to-piss-off-a-wingnut-on-Reagan-s-B-day

H/T to ProSense.

[hfojvt]

5. nice to have this data

"In 1982, The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act raised taxes by $37.5 billion per year, and the Highway Revenue Act raised the gasoline tax by $3.3 billion.

In 1983, Reagan signed off on legislation to raise payroll taxes and tax Social Security benefits for some higher earners.

In 1984, the Deficit Reduction Act included increases in taxes on estates and distilled spirits and ended some business tax breaks, to the tune of $18 billion per year.

In 1985, Reagan signed legislation making permanent a 16-cent federal excise tax on a pack of cigarettes, then worth about $2.4 billion a year.

In 1986, the Tax Reform Act lowered the top income tax bracket from 50 percent to 28 percent. To pay for the reductions, however, the legislation closed a number of tax loopholes."

from politifact http://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2012/jun/25/gerry-connolly/rep-gerry-connolly-says-reagan-raised-taxes-during/

Although specifics would be nice too. "the legislation closed a number of tax loopholes". Okay, which ones?

And the NET effect was that in 1986 the top 1% paid an average tax rate of 33%. By 1990 they only paid 23% http://journals.democraticunderground.com/hfojvt/169

[7962]

20. 2 things I know that went away was deducting credit card interest & state sales tax. nt

[freshwest]

15. +1

[Initech]

18. Reagan was the worst thing to happen to America.

[leftieNanner]

24. First he ruined California,

and since that worked out so well, he took his game on the road to Washington. How is it possible that we are still fighting these battles? Saint Ronnie should have stayed in Hollywood making bad movies instead of screwing the country.

[glowing]

47. He was just a puppet for the head(s) of a hydra!

[abq e streeter]

51. Second worst... The millions of working people who voted for him come in at number one to me.

it wasn't like he was shoved down our throats. American voters overwhelmingly chose him. The old "be careful what you ask for" situation.

[RKP5637]

55. Quite true, many Americans leave their brains disengaged when they vote. Never, does it

cease to amaze me how many Americans vote for those who will serve them least. Sometimes, I think it has to do with religion, looking for punishment for their sins, something like that.

[Initech]

106. Perfect example:

The petition to address Justin Bieber getting deported? Nearly 200,000 votes.

The petition to investigate why West Virginia's water was poisoned and gave people explosive diahrrea and to prosecute and hold those responsible? Less than 500.

[RKP5637]

111. Yep, like WTF, they get excited about the trivial and don't care about the water. As Idiocracy

continues to take hold America is going to be lost. ... or, as usual, many will have to be pulled along ... but, they will continue to vote damn fools into office which will have the potential to sink the entire country. I never cease to be amazed at the damn fools they vote into congress ... and then often local politics is something to behold.

[IrishAyes]

153. Perhaps you could help by telling us where to find the WVA petition if it hasn't already been closed

I subscribe to a number of websites which I count on to keep me current on available petitions to sign, but I don't offhand recall that one. Of course it is late for me and I need a nap.

[Mr Dixon]

187. SMH

Truly an idiotic society

[freshwest]

116. Absolutely. I begged - begged my union coworkers to not vote for him. Then they got upset at PATCO.

But I said nothing, we all got what they voted for.

[Ikonoklast]

146. Those were the members of "The Greatest Generation." They wanted to go back to "how things were."

Racism played a huge part of that among working class Democrats, many of them union members, who remembered when their workplaces were not integrated, their trades were not integrated, their kid's schools were not integrated.

Many of these people were second-generation Americans, and were still quite racist in their views.

I saw it first-hand, I heard fellow union members whine that things aren't like they were thirty years ago, "those people" are taking "our jobs", crap like that. You couldn't convince them that it was all a charade and that Reagan would be the worst thing to happen to working people since the Robber Barons.


Instead of seeing Reagan as the threat to their livelihood as a corporate tool and an anti-Labor crusader, they saw him as a father figure who was going to change things back to how they were before women and minorities started to get an equal chance at a good paying job.

[debunkthis]

112. I don't know

It's hard to top Cheney...

[ladjf]

136. Yes. That thought has been on my mind for years. nt

[Lizzie Poppet]

163. Absolutely.

If I believed in any such thing as Hell, I'd be hoping he's roasting in it.

It's not just initiating the "trickle down" era that has so thoroughly skewed our economy, either. There's also the poisonous idea that government is the enemy. Reagan took what was one a healthy skepticism and turned it into outright hatred. That attitude is so unbelievably destructive, so contrary to the concept of democracy, that I am by no means convinced the nation will survive its effects.

[ProSense]

31. Thanks. More:

Reagan fooled people with his bullshit tax increases. Yeah, he increased revenue, but it was on the backs of low-income Americans and seniors, including taxing unemployment benefits.

<...>

Another Reagan proposal that came in for criticism was the plan to tax all unemployment compensation. At present, such compensation - stemming from a job-related injury or illness - is taxed only if the recipient's adjusted gross income exceeds $12,000, or $18,000 for a married couple filing jointly.

http://www.nytimes.com/1985/05/30/business/reagan-s-tax-plan-one-way-or-another-plan-will-touch-just-about-everyone.html

<...>

During the 1970s, some policy studies had shown that the proportion of wages replaced by UC benefits on an after-tax basis was large enough to erode a claimant’s work incentive.8 Taxation of UC benefits served to reduce the degree of after-tax wage replacement and reduce the work disincentive effect. However, UC benefits of lower-income claimants remained untaxed because their total income was under the tax threshold (i.e., their standard deduction and personal exemptions offset their income).

In 1982, Congress lowered the AGI thresholds for taxation of UC benefits. The Tax Equity and Fiscal Responsibility Act of 1982 (P.L. 97-248) reduced those thresholds to $12,000 for single filers and $18,000 for joint filers.9 A primary motivation of this legislation was to raise revenue, but it left in place a policy of protecting lower-income claimants from taxation of UC benefits.10

Congress made UC benefits fully taxable in the Tax Reform Act of 1986 (P.L. 99-514), effective for benefits received after December 31, 1986. Although this action reversed the original policy of taxing UC benefits only above an AGI threshold, it occurred in the context of a law that removed many low-income filers from the tax rolls, lowered the marginal tax rates for the majority of taxpayers, and expanded eligibility for the earned income credit. The rationale for full taxation of UC benefits was to treat UC benefits the same as wages and to eliminate the work disincentive caused by favorable tax treatment for UC benefits relative to wages.11

Concern about claimants’ cash flow problems caused by the lack of tax withholding from UC benefits arose during the 1990-1991 recession. P.L. 102-318 required states to inform all new claimants of their responsibility to pay income tax on UC benefits and to provide them with information on how to file estimated quarterly tax payments. In 1994, P.L. 103-465 required states to withhold federal income tax from UC benefits if a claimant requested withholding, and permitted states to withhold state and local income taxes. P.L. 103-465 set the federal withholding rate at 15% of the gross benefit payment amount. The federal withholding rate was changed to 10% by the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 (EGTRRA; P.L. 107- 16) effective August 7, 2001.

https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21356.pdf

<...>

Q3. Which political party started taxing Social Security annuities?

A3. The taxation of Social Security began in 1984 following passage of a set of Amendments in 1983, which were signed into law by President Reagan in April 1983. These amendments passed the Congress in 1983 on an overwhelmingly bi-partisan vote.

The basic rule put in place was that up to 50% of Social Security benefits could be added to taxable income, if the taxpayer's total income exceeded certain thresholds.

The taxation of benefits was a proposal which came from the Greenspan Commission appointed by President Reagan and chaired by Alan Greenspan (who went on to later become the Chairman of the Federal Reserve).

The full text of the Greenspan Commission report is available on our website.

President's Reagan's signing statement for the 1983 Amendments can also be found on our website.

A detailed explanation of the provisions of the 1983 law is also available on the website.

- more -

http://www.ssa.gov/history/InternetMyths2.html

The top tax rate was lowered from 50% to 28% while the bottom rate was raised from 11% to 15%. [4] Many lower level tax brackets were consolidated, and the upper income level of the bottom rate (married filing jointly) was increased from $5,720/year to $29,750/year. This package ultimately consolidated tax brackets from fifteen levels of income to four levels of income.[5] This would be the only time in the history of the U.S. income tax (which dates back to the passage of the Revenue Act of 1862) that the top rate was reduced and the bottom rate increased concomitantly. In addition, capital gains faced the same tax rate as ordinary income.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_Reform_Act_of_1986

[Jamaal510]

34. I'm glad

I'm not old enough to remember Reagan's presidency, or I would've broken my TV every time I saw him on. Not only did he race-bait in order to win elections (hello, welfare queens), but it was shady of him to raise taxes on the poor, while cutting them on the rich from how they were under Carter. For real, what makes Republicans think it's a good idea to raise taxes on people who cannot afford to pay more, while lowering them on those who can afford to pay more?

[RKP5637]

39. It's the republican way, they don't give a damn about anyone but themselves. Republicans are

like prehistoric animals killing for the feast off others. Many IMO are also sociopaths.

[ladjf]

138. I am not joking when I say that I think Republican values are a result

of physical disorders in the brain. nt

[RKP5637]

144. They definitely are IMO. There are studies well documented demonstrating

regressive development in some parts of brains produce primitive and fearful thinking. Also, IMO, quite a few are sociopaths. I really think some level of mental health testing should be an absolute prerequisite for certain levels of political office.

[erronis]

147. Agree!

However I think it is more likely that the "State" will be testing candidates for "proper" brain functioning before they can run. And I can bet that most DUers don't have that "proper" brain functioning.

[RKP5637]

149. Yes! There are definite downsides to something like this. Also, it would open the door

to dangerous agendas, as you say, the "State" doing the testing.

Also, as one person once said, the far far left and the far far right have more in common than they might believe.

[ladjf]

183. To attempt to legitimize our theory would turn into a terrible

"can of worms". I don't think it will happen anytime soon. Naturally, those who have evolved into the Republican brain flaw will
vociferously argue that that are the sane ones. Who would settle it? Most definitely not the Supreme Court, as their majority has the same Republican gene.

[RKP5637]

184. Oh, yes, there would then be the "War on Brains!" Humans IMO just aren't ready

for something like this. And, then, that would bring in genetic engineering, "To Create the Perfect Brain." And then the "Normal" debates. Yes, I agree so much, we should just pass on all of this for now.

[tblue37]

60. The fact that the ones with money a the ones who purchased their loyalty and service, of course. nt

[IrishAyes]

155. Their true god, Ayn Rand, told them that good producers work harder when rewarded,

but that the leeches of society work less when rewarded, which is supposedly how they wound up in those slots. We know that for the crap it is, but it enables people to look down on those with less as being inferior. And if there's anything a bootlicker will do, it's fight to the death from winding up on the very bottom rung. That's why they collaborate on their fellows' subjugation - so they'll have at least someone to despise. While thinking the overlords will reward their loyal service!

[former9thward]

56. I always read that Obama is powerless because of the House Republicans.

Why was not Reagan just as powerless because the House (where revenue bills start) was heavily Democratic during the entire Reagan presidency?

[ProSense]

63. Why are you asking me? Do you admire Reagan's power? n/t

[former9thward]

66. I understand how bills are made into law.

All those Reagan revenue bills were approved by a Democratic House. BTW Obama admires Reagan and has said so on several occasions. http://content.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,2044712,00.html

[ProSense]

69. Good for you. n/t

[bvar22]

75. Shhhh!

[font size=1]They don't want to talk about THAT part.[/font]

[KittyWampus]

92. Obama doesn't "admire" Reagan, he's rightly pointed out that Reagan was popular. And many DU'ers

have pointed this out time and again.

So either you refuse to accept reality or are intent on being deceptive when it comes to Obama.

[former9thward]

93. I provided my link.

Perhaps you can provide yours.

[Progressive dog]

133. You should read it

"In the years that followed, Reagan would come to epitomize all that Obama opposed."

[former9thward]

137. The poster, who you jumped in to defend, says Obama does not admire Reagan.

Where is the link that has that quote?

[Progressive dog]

141. The Time article , I actually read it

and chose not to twist what it says to fit my beliefs.

[Hippo_Tron]

98. Dixiecrats

The House was Democratic in organization but not in ideology. Southern "Democrats" were all too eager to advance the Reagan agenda, at least during his first term. The House essentially runs on the Hastert rule, except when it can't because it's impossible to pass a budget or debt ceiling increase. If Tip O'Neill had tried to govern with the Hastert rule, he would've been removed as Speaker in short order.

[former9thward]

99. You might be right.

I won't dispute you. But it would be interesting to see who voted for what during that time period.

[Ikonoklast]

148. People forget just how divided the party was. The "Solid South" had their own agenda.

The party had to compromise with them first before they could get anything done with Republicans.

Of course, those seats are all Republican now, as the racist religious nutjob members of the Democratic party left it.

[Hippo_Tron]

150. Yea, and it was an older generation of people too...

The more recent crop of southern Dems (that became nearly extinct in 2010) had mostly grown up in a world with the Civil Rights Act. Back in the 80's you had people in like John Stennis who had adamantly opposed civil rights but had never become Republicans. To Stennis' credit, he actually became more progressive as time went on, but I still can't fathom him being a Democrat in today's world.

Robert Byrd is maybe the closest example we have in recent history, but he was an odd case. Byrd held some really bigoted insensitive views until the day he died, but he was really liberal in other areas which I suspect is why he never became a Republican.

[IrishAyes]

157. Well, Byrd was blessed with the uplifting influence of Teddy Kennedy.

Rather than blasting Teddy for associating with such a scummy character, I applauded him for guiding him higher instead.

[underthematrix]

109. President Obama cannot get blood from the GOP turnips. The reason behind the

rightwing nuttery is race. Didn't you watch the coverage of the 2012 presidential election?

[MADem]

132. Tip O'Neill was the Speaker of the House.

He understood the politics of compromise. He knew that a gridlocked Congress was not in the best interest of the American people. He and Reagan also got along well on a personal level, although Tip didn't think Ronnie was the sharpest tool in the shed.

Back then, the way to get something was to give something.

That paradigm hasn't been operative for some time.

[LittleGirl]

142. I was a waitress in 86

and I totally remember seeing my tax rate go up but forgot how much it was. 11% up to 15%. I made so little anyway and he raised my taxes! I was so freaking shocked and upset!

[RobertEarl]

2. Best to take over the cities

The cities are where resources can be gathered to do the most good for everyone. Leaving cities to be run by the rich will mean more of us on the streets left to fend for ourselves.

[bvar22]

3. OWS threw the first punch,

....and were brutally suppressed by Homeland Security Department working with the NSA and our militarized local Police Departments.

Our government sent a message to those who would gather peacefully to protest the Wealth Disparity,
and not enough of the Working Class & newly Poor were/are hungry enough to have given their support to the handful who actually turned out in the streets.

It is not over yet.
The Death Spiral for the Working Class continues while the 1% have never had it so good,
but some still cling to the "hope" that somebody in Washington still cares.
That veneer gets thinner every day.
It is going to be UGLY.

I'm too old to be of much help to OCCUPY beyond sending a few pennies.
My days of marching in the street are over, but my heart is with the Movements for Economic Fairness.
I hope I will live to see the People wrest the government from the hands of the 1%.

There is some hope.
Many Latin American countries have successfully taken their countries from the hand of their 1%
in near bloodless Ballot Box revolutions.
They did it by organizing locally.

Spread the WORD.
VIVA Democracy.
I pray we get some here soon!

[L0oniX]

7. ^^^this^^^ should be its own op.

[fleabiscuit]

12. Agreed.

~

[1000words]

21. Second that

[navarth]

50. third

[BelgianMadCow]

77. fourth

the revolution is local, first.

[go west young man]

105. Fifth. I love your post.

But I'm of the belief that if that change comes, it has to comes from a new party outside of the Democratic Party at this point.
Our representatives have become too centrist and accepting of everything that is wrong. A new party has to rise up with a truly progressive and hopeful agenda if the country is to be saved and all these issues are to be resolved. I truly feel for all these older people who are using and losing all their homes, savings, and retirements. I look around and I'm wondering how people are making ends meet. It's incredibly sad for so many.

[roody]

117. I think it will come from no party.

[polichick]

162. "it has to comes from a new party outside of the Democratic Party at this point." True.

[Dustlawyer]

13. Sad but true! They control the government,

all 3 branches, the media and law enforcement. OWS was a threat to that control so they crushed it.
To do a "ballot box" revolution you will need candidates willing to vote for COMPLETE CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM AND PUBLICLY FUNDED ELECTIONS! They will fight like hell to prevent it.
TIME IS RUNNING OUT, we need organizers NOW!

[Demeter]

16. Latin America Did it by sending the Yanquis home

Often in a box, or a barrel....

[RKP5637]

30. American is now an entrenched police state often invisible to most,

but talk of shaking the wealth of the country, the gravy trains, the corruption and bribery and the US will descend upon and eliminate that group. Militarization of police to protect us, yeah, right, it's militarization to suppress the majority. None in the seats of power and hoarded wealth are going to let anyone disrupt their feast. I have no idea how it will come about, but the current model is broken.

[sabrina 1]

58. Excellent post, thank you Bvar ...

They could not have done what they did to OWS had there not been support from those who never think beyond party politics. And they count on that.

[Warpy]

83. When peaceful protest is brutally crushed, you can bet the next ones will be violent beyond belief.

This will happen and what will set them off will be seen as trivial but it will be one of those last straw things.

I don't think non cooperation is a viable means beyond rolling strikes with the strikers staying home instead of assembling in a convenient crowd for the militarized police and national guard to destroy.

Crushing OWS was the worst thing they could have done, given the overall mood of the country.

And the fat cats always insist on that sort of reaction.

[BelgianMadCow]

90. the peaceful protest of non-consumerism, however, is unstoppable

but I agree with you we have to think beyond the classical forms of non-cooperation. Nonetheless, it were angry masses that made FDR make a new deal.

[bvar22]

94. "Those who make Peaceful Revolution impossible,

...make violent revolution inevitable!"
---JFK

[pampango]

128. As proven throughout history and in many places in the world today.

Protest against bad government policies, like poverty, unemployment and repression, are a basic human reaction to trouble and a basic human right.

Thanks for the post, Warpy.

[alfredo]

114. OWS planted the seed. They changed the conversation, made us think and speak of

wealth disparity. They pointed the finger at the 1%.

[Laelth]

130. Hear, hear! Well said, bvar22. n/t

-Laelth

[ladjf]

140. I admire what OWS did. However, there was no endgame plan.

The way it was structured guaranteed that it couldn't have possibly become an ever expanding force for change. What did happen was that Wall Street just bolstered up their defenses against any form of attack from the public.

The next assault will need to be planned for the "long haul". Personally, I can't imagine how that could be done. But, there is a way.
We just haven't found it or the Wall Street defenses haven't gotten internally rotten enough to begin to crumble from within.

[IrishAyes]

158. Look at the new Tunisian constitution!

Last edited Sun Feb 9, 2014, 03:18 PM - Edit history (1)

I don't just agree, I KNOW with absolute certainty that things will get really ugly and fast if they don't change a lot for the better, and soon. There's only so long that societal pressure can build before erupting. You'll notice revolts often start with food riots.

[hfojvt]

4. I am kinda wondering

why she isn't married.

I know. I know. It is a terrible thing to suggest that a woman should rely on a man for economic support.

But I read this

"Female friends my age who are in similar financial circumstances are terrified of the future."

and it seems to me that she, and they, are imagining facing the future alone. Well, wouldn't it be a least a little bit safer to face the future with a loving partner, or even a friend? If she has friends in the same circumstance, well they should consider pairing up - becoming roommates. Hell, that's how Vida Dutton Scudder lived from 1890-1940. She lived with her mother and with Florence Converse, and I think Helena Dudley might have lived with them too for a time.

Charlotte Perkins Gilman's recipe for independence was for women to take in boarders. Get income by renting out rooms.

She might have kept her house had she done that.

[KatyaR]

9. So, would you have said that if a man had said those things?

I can't believe that anyone still thinks the only and best way for a woman to survive in this world is to get married.

[RKP5637]

33. Well said!!! n/t

[gristy]

107. hfojvt's thoughtful post covered much more than his first point about marriage

[hfojvt]

160. I did NOT say "only"

But two is generally stronger than one.

It seems to me that in my life, I have survived because of my jobs. Yet I find most jobs to be - an abusive relationship. My employers treat me like crap. And there is no "for better OR worse, is sickness and in health, for richer OR poorer".

Nope, in the employment relationship as soon as I am no longer a benefit for THEM, they will cast me aside without a moment's regret.

As for what I would say to a man. Well, I would expect a man to give me the same answer that I would give. As in - I am not married because I cannot even find a woman willing to go out with me. The last six women I asked turned me down. (Okay, one did say yes, and then after I had taken the day off from work, said "oh, that was today, I'm too busy today. I've gotta wash my hair."

So, from where I sit - women have options in the relationship world. Men, on the other hand, have to crawl on their hands and knees over broken glass to beg for a date. Only to be told "you are not worthy".

YMMV.

[Springslips]

168. What is worse than being turned down

Six times in a row, is for a woman to marry you for only economic reasons, while you are madly in love.

But anyways, you do not know if she too can't find a date, or that she is gay and in a state that hasn't legalize gay marriage. Not that it matters, for she should be free to date or not date who she wants free from being force to for survival.

Her economic problems and your romantic ones are different; don't connect them; it leads to an unsavory insight about your nature.

[hfojvt]

172. and yet

I take jobs for economic reasons.

Should I be free to work or not work what I want to work at instead of being forced to clean toilets for my survival?

Still also, even though I am only here for the money, that does not mean I am not a good worker, even a better worker than most.

One does not expect a perfect job any more than they can expect a perfect relationship. But in the same way a halfway decent job can lift a person out of poverty, so too can a halfway decent relationship. She claims to be healthy and look young, so I am betting she could get a date if she wanted to. But I sorta have no idea either, how the other half lives. If I was a woman, would I have met a lot of single guys in the last fifteen years? I don't know. I never look for single guys.

And even if she was gay in a state that didn't allow marriage, if she had a partner she would have many of the economic benefits of marriage - shared housing expenses, shared vehicles, shared utility bills, shared housework, and personal support in a good relationship.

I might say that your desire to change the topic into being about me, and then to insult me says something about YOUR nature, but I am not going to pretend I know all that much about you from just a few posts.

[Springslips]

176. I bit of a confused response...

My apologies if you felt insulted. I mean no harm but to make you think: the last thing you need is to marry someone because and only because they are in economic peril. This is not healthy.

Your response is a bit confused and distorted. It does not follow that because able body people must participate in a system to slate our society's needs, wants, and desires that therefor everyone must also get married. This is a classic non sequitur fallacy. The problem isn't marriage, dating, and what not, it's inequality and the sad state of our economic policy since Ronnie had the reigns.

You last statement is projection is it not? You are the one that put you in the conversation, I didn't change it about being you, YOU did. It seems ( and true I don't know you so we'll just stay with it just seeming) that you are angry because the economic situation finally favor you getting a woman, if only they would comply, but they won't. Whether that's true or not I'll leave you to ponder.

[hfojvt]

188. actually able bodied people are NOT forced into the system

Not if they have a spouse who is already in there.

I would sorta think that giving a choice between being supported by

a. a spouse who loves you
and
b. an employer who wants to use you

That a sane person would prefer option a. But that's just me.

People with high-paying, high-status jobs, like this woman used to have, probably feel like they get more out of their job than they have to put in it.

Now she gets to learn how the other half lives.

And no, I did not put ME into the conversation. I used MY experiences to discuss the TOPIC. The topic being X.

Person A - I think X is true.
Person B - I think X is false, because of these things I have seen or experienced.
Person C - That says something bad about you, Person B.

For me to use my experiences to talk about topic X, is not an invitation to start talking about me.

Unless, of course, you want to point out how awesome I am.

I will give you a pass on that, because I know it is hard to NOT talk about my awesomeness which is so awesomely awesome that I am constantly unable to keep it hidden.

[grasswire]

10. she doesn't have to marry a man to be married.

And those with pensions could marry friends simply to provide better for them all. More social security, more pension money, better health care in some instances. I also wonder about adoption. Can an adult adopt another adult? That could extend some kinds of benefits, perhaps.

One thing is clear: going it alone is out. O-U-T.

[starroute]

25. Are we going to see non-gay same-sex marriage for economic reasons?

Are there benefits in terms of joint tax rates, family insurance coverage and so forth that would make it economically advantageous? If there are, it might be one way of getting through hard times.

[grasswire]

28. ...desperate times.

I think there's a TV movie in the concept.

[RKP5637]

35. It's one way to survive IMO. Today, the top priority in the US for most is survival. As our

standard of living continues to decrease more and more innovative ways to survive will develop. I was thinking just recently, are communes going to be a way to survive. As worker productivity increases Jobs will go away more and more.

[IrishAyes]

159. Perhaps for most people. But please excuse me from that lineup. It's a good plan, but

some of us have been on our own too long to share quarters under any circumstances, even with those we love. Maybe it was partly because my ex and his entire family turned out to be such sociopathic shrews that I got more than my fill of living with others early on. Besides, I'm a recognized subconscious empath and if there's another person in the house, I can't even sleep. I'll forego many other perks in life for my precious privacy. I may love humanity in general, but that doesn't mean I can live cheek to jowl with others. Not anymore.

[CTyankee]

65. I actually did that at one point as a single mom...it didn't work out well at all but oh, so what...

pooling resources is a very good solution, married or not.

America is no longer the land of opportunity, except for those in much worse circumstances. I tutor with Literacy Volunteers and hear the stories of people who come here from ghastly places and want to get ahead by learning English. There is a reason we don't see an outpouring of people from western european nations flocking to our shores...they have strong social safety nets and more income equality where they are. Here in the U.S. we are in a dream world about our being so great for opportunity. Bullshit. That dream died about years ago...

[mstinamotorcity2]

72. You kind of stepped

in that one didn't you???

[Curmudgeoness]

76. I just snorted my coffee.

As a 60 year old woman who has never been married, I am shocked and offended that anyone would think this is the solution to my problems. Marriage has a whole host of it's own problems. I will not go into why I am not married, but I will suggest that it is not the panacea that you are suggesting.

[hfojvt]

123. a panacea?

Maybe not.

But perhaps better than pushing a shopping cart filled with one's belongings.

So I am almost 52 and never been married.

I imagine that it might have some benefits. Like Schopenhauer, I have longed for a wife.

I know from the census of wealth that marriage seems to have financial benefits. Looking at the 2002 census of wealth (since I did not copy gender information for 2011)

For married couples age 65 and over
3.6% have zero or negative wealth
2.8% have less than $5,000
41.9% have over $250,000 in net worth
20.6% have over $500,000 in net worth

single men over age 65
9% have zero or negative wealth
9.5% have less than $5,000
23% have over $250,000 in net worth
8.6% have over $500,000 in net worth

single women over age 65
10.1% have zero or negative wealth
9.8% have less than $5,000
18.9% have over $250,000 in net worth
6.2% have over $500,000 in net worth

I know from experience that it is hard to get along with people, but the financial benefits of cooperation are pretty obvious and undeniable.

[Curmudgeoness]

151. I have also seen too many marriages

where one or the other is much less responsible with money. It would be ideal to find a mate who has the same frugal ideals that I have, and who has lived a life where saving is important, but that has just never happened for me. If you are in a marriage where your spouse is always spending money, and getting into debt, it is no bargain.

And as to "wealth", I have never expected or cared to be wealthy. I have only strived to be self-sufficient and responsible. I knew that, even if I married, I would not have had a wealthy spouse. And that wasn't the most important thing in life to me. But I have also considered the possibility that I may be impoverished at the end of my life, and that is a scary thing to think about. One of my dreads was to be a bag lady when I am old, but I could never have married someone just because of that fear. I have just tried to do what I can to save for my future, and if it isn't enough, I will deal with it when I must.

[raccoon]

101. Zoning laws might not have permitted her to take in boarders.

Another thing, while a loving partner would be a good thing, sometimes partners don't enhance your financial status, regardless of whether you're male or female. Sometimes they contribute nothing to the household. If they have a problem with drugs/alcohol/gambling, they can go through money faster than poop through a goose. In which case you're better off alone.

[IrishAyes]

161. Exactly. Aside his sociopathy, my ex and I would've made a great team. He made $ hand over fist

partly because he had no scruples. But it also flowed through his fingers like water. Several times he worked us into near-ruinous debt, then in desperation he'd turn the checkbook over to me to dig us out. Every time w/o fail, as soon as I had his head above water again, he'd spend it faster than ever and not on his family either. In fact he managed to stomp around hollering that a family was a burden and a detriment to a man. Well, that was partly due to my liberal political activism, but it still hurt.

Since he retired from a major rightwing group to become a Washington lobbyist, he really brings in the big bucks now. But I know he'll also die in hock up to his eyeballs w/o a single day of true peace or justifiable satisfaction in his life. I might have extremely little by comparison, but it's mine, not the bank's, and I can sleep at night. I never was so well shed of a person in my life. When he left, I piled his underwear in the driveway, surrounded it with brush, and lit a bonfire. The volunteer fire department showed up and I passed around the beer while we all had a good laugh.

[madville]

104. While not ideal, there are some solutions in there

I wouldn't ever get married to solve the problem but I would endorse the roommate/boarders idea. I've had three different roommates during my adult life, has probably saved me over $50,000 through the years and we got to live in nicer places and areas than we would have been able to afford on our own.

Isn't this topic what the show "The Golden Girls" was based on?

[Skittles]

108. not all us gals want to be married

I myself would never inflict that kind of torment on a man

[hfojvt]

124. well on the other side

even though I come with a house, two cars and $90,000 in cash, the last gallup poll showed that 99.6% of women aged 35-55 would rather live on the street than be married to me.

Plus, I exxagerate about the cars. Only one of them is currently running and the interior of that one has been demolished by one of my dogs.

[Skittles]

173. you want I should kick your exaggerating ass, hfojvt?

LEMME AT YOU!

[eridani]

122. Probably because men in her age group are dying off much faster than women

That said, some kind of partnership ought to be possible. Wondering why more women aren't thinking along those lines. Given that the majority of single women are heterosexual, such relationships would not necessarily have to involve sex.

Years ago, I met an older couple living with another woman who had been together with the wife long before marriage, and who made it plain that she and her friend came as a set. No idea whether it was sexual all the way around.--felt uncomfortable discussing things lile that with people a generation older than me.

[DeSwiss]

6. Riots won't cut it.

In fact that's exactly what many would want to give them excuse to clamp it all down. No, the way forward is to stay at home and don't do a damned thing.

Absolutely nothing but essential/emergency work.

NOTHING ELSE.

- See how long their system lasts without us running it for them.........

K&R

[rhett o rick]

8. I am reading Chris Hedges "Death of the Liberal Class" and that's what he says also.

Rebel but dont revolt. Only use violence when your life is directly at stake.

I say there is a lot we can do. Boycott, buy less, buy local, be as self-sufficient as possible. Stick with the Democratic Party but support candidates and not the party. Dont compromise your principles and vote for the lesser of evils. That only postpones the inevitable. Dont count on violence. They are better equipped and looking for an excuse to tighten controls. And if we were to win via violence, we wouldnt like what we would become.

[grasswire]

11. yes, it is clear what the militarization of local law enforcement is about.

It's been more than twenty years since Attorney General Janet Reno signed a memo of cooperation between the DoJ and the DoD to develop tools and methods of law enforcement that would restrain what was called "urban hostiles". Defense contractors went to work to develop all manner of expensive products for local enforcement. It was a huge profit center.

Urban hostile? Apparently that's you, and me, and granny, and hungry children, and public school teachers, and unionized bus drivers, and .......

[DeSwiss]

167. That'll work for starters.....

...but we have to make the complete paradigm shift. No more half-measures. No more fixes and amendments and riders on bills. No more political-money thru 3rd-parties. No more bribery called ''campaign funding.'' No more pay-to-play. We can't fix this vehicle while its running off the cliff. We don't have the time to waste anymore. This system has run its course. There is no further that capitalism and democracy can go.

It's time to evolve.

- Besides, you can't fix corruption.........

[center][/center]

[rhett o rick]

170. That all sounds swell but how do you get corrupt people to reform themselves?

Are you familiar with Elite Theory? The elites always rule. Kill them and they are replaced by other elites.

[DeSwiss]

171. Reform isn't the aim.

The people do what the system is designed to do. When it doesn't do what TPTB want, they create a loophole so it does. For them. I used to think that fraud was illegal. But President Obama said in an interview with some very important ''adults'' he was talking to, that it isn't illegal when Wall Street bankers (who coincidentally contributed large sums to his campaign -- money he gets to keep I might add) do it.

That's why the system itself must be abandoned. Replaced. It is inherently corrupt because its whole premise is based upon a LIE. That money can be pulled from thin air. They do this sleight-of-hand in banks everyday.

So we should think of all the past ages and steps that humanity's taken up til now, as the precursors that led us to this stage. We know better now what works and what won't work. But first the existing decrepit system must be defanged. And its leaders neutered so they can't do any more damage. Abandoning the system should accomplish this nicely. It's barely standing now as it is. One strong wind will knock it completely over.

And then, whenever and whatever we create to replace the old, it must have at its central core One Law: UnConditional Love. Without this anything we build will fail in the end.

Only UnConditional Love accepts everyone equally for what they are. Only UnConditional Love respects a person's right to express their own free will. And only through UnConditional Love can a person's right to exist remain sacrosanct.

Now I understand that all the naysayers and pragmatists will think this is pie-in-the-sky folderol. So be it. Evolution does not require anyone's permission. We can either take responsibility for our lives, or we can continue to be slaves to an inequitable system fooling ourselves continuously that it'll get better one day if we elect just the right savior.

- ''The system isn't broken. The system is fixed.''

[rhett o rick]

174. Forgive me if I sound like a "naysayer", I agree things need to change.

But over and over we have acknowledged that things need to change. We got that. How to do it, is the question. It's easy enough to say "the system itself must be abandoned." What does that really mean? What is the first step? And plez dont say vote out all the corrupt politicians.

We need a strategy.

[DeSwiss]

178. The first step in our ''strategy'' should be......

...to stop feeding the beast. To stop providing it with its source of power. It can do nothing without us.

- Which means the strategy is to do nothing it wants.

[rhett o rick]

179. I totally agree, but we must be more specific.

Move money to local banks or credit unions.

Buy less, buy American.

Help neighbors.

Grow a garden. Be as self sufficient as possible.

[DeSwiss]

180. Somebody get a pencil (do they still make those?).

- You keep talking and I'll roll one. This is gonna be fun......

[rhett o rick]

185. Sorry but I dont get it. Do you agree or disagree? nm

[DeSwiss]

186. I agree.

Sorry, but I had to go last might, so I kinda left things with that flip answer. But pain is my constant companion. And I pushed it too far, as I'm wont to do.

And yes, I agree that planning needs to take place. But it should be an organic process. It's too easy to fall back into the old ways of thinking and doing things. We need to get away from hierarchical thinking processes. We need to think in terms of responding to problems and meeting our needs with ideas that make sense and are sustainable.

And to do so where these issues present themselves, instead of using this cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all, off-the-rack approach that we've developed in order to raise productivity and increase the wealth of our former Wall Street slavemasters. We must avoid it because it's an easy trap since it's all we know how to do. And a new paradigm in thinking also means that there will be no path to follow, per se. We'll have to blaze a new one.

There are a few groups that I follow that are trying to do just that. Or, are in various stages of discussion about changes we need to make. Here are just a few that I've run across:

Collective Evolution Bright Agrotech Children of the Sun Earthship Food Farmer Earth Food Abundance The Venus Project The Venus Project Channel TVP Education TZM Channel Valhalla Movement wearechange Learn Liberty

[Demeter]

17. And don't spend a dime into the general economy

strike!

[llmart]

131. Agreed!

Unfortunately, I would wager a guess that many DU'ers would never forego shopping and accumulating gewgaws from China themselves. I have always advocated voluntary simplicity and yet it's difficult to get people to see that they are enablers to the 1%'ers when they spend all their discretionary income on stuff they can live without.

I'm a 65-year old woman and I resent the suggestion that I should have to share my home with someone at this stage of my life while I watch the 1%'ers hide their millions in the Caymans. That is NOT the answer to real change in this country. I also resent the fact that this is only suggested for senior women and not men. What a ridiculous solution.

[Egalitarian Thug]

23. ^^ This is the most effective strategy available to us. ^^

So, here we are half a century later and "Drop Out" is still the ticket.

Personally, I advocate "tuning in, and turning on" as well.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

115. ^^^^ THIS POST IS WHY I REC'D THIS THREAD ^^^^

[jtuck004]

120. You are correct. That's what Étienne de La Boétie told the French in 1550.

They ignored him, of course, and the guillotine was used first on the tyrant, but then on the leaders of the "rebellion" and tens of thousands of others.

And the rich wound up in control

It's too bad they didn't listen...

"Poor, wretched, and stupid peoples, nations determined on your own misfortune and blind to your own good! You let yourselves be deprived before your own eyes of the best part of your revenues; your fields are plundered, your homes robbed, your family heirlooms taken away. You live in such a way that you cannot claim a single thing as your own; and it would seem that you consider yourselves lucky to be loaned your property, your families, and your very lives.
...
Where has he acquired enough eyes to spy upon you, if you do not provide them yourselves? How can he have so many arms to beat you with, if he does not borrow them from you?
...

From all these indignities, such as the very beasts of the field would not endure, you can deliver yourselves if you try, not by taking action, but merely by willing to be free. Resolve to serve no more, and you are at once freed. I do not ask that you place hands upon the tyrant to topple him over, but simply that you support him no longer; then you will behold him, like a great Colossus whose pedestal has been pulled away, fall of his own weight and break in pieces."

http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/%C3%89tienne_de_La_Bo%C3%A9tie

And to your first point, that they want riots and violence...

"The way to make money is to buy when blood is running in the streets."

John D. Rockegeller. Attributed in The Fourth — And by Far the Most Recent 637 Best Things Anybody Ever Said (1990) by Robert Byrne; attributed elsewhere to Nathan M. Rothschild

[Zorra]

165. ^This^. We win the game by simply refusing to play.

“Our strategy should be not only to confront empire, but to lay siege to it. To deprive it of oxygen. To shame it. To mock it. With our art, our music, our literature, our stubbornness, our joy, our brilliance, our sheer relentlessness – and our ability to tell our own stories. Stories that are different from the ones we’re being brainwashed to believe.

The corporate revolution will collapse if we refuse to buy what they are selling – their ideas, their version of history, their wars, their weapons, their notion of inevitability.

Remember this: We be many and they be few. They need us more than we need them.

Another world is not only possible, she is on her way. On a quiet day, I can hear her breathing.”
― Arundhati Roy

[DeSwiss]

166. I can hear her breathing too!

[Springslips]

169. Yes!

Let's start a cultural revolution. Move to a dead city like Detroit, and bring it alive with our own values, memes, and beliefs.

This is where we should be thinking. Something like this.

[kelliekat44]

19. This sounds like my daughter with two kids under 8 and out of work for two years.

She's working at all kinds of temporary jobs living from her pay check and my retirement to pay check. But she never complains just is grateful that she has a place to rent (lost her home after her husband died from pancreatic cancer and then lost her job) and a mom who is in a position to help somewhat. But why riot? People are too tired, to busy trying to survive to riot. Too many guns, too many hateful people, too many evil people in positions of power. The time she has not working or trying find work is used to give her children as much time as possible.

[KauaiK]

22. I'm right there with you JaneyVee

Solid job at high 5 to low 6 figures; with all the fringe benes. 401k's turn into 201k's then nothing. The one thing I do still have in my house with a very small mortgage. But the insurance and property taxes may force me out. I am convinced that the Koch conservatives, TeaBaggers, and GOP are trying to destroy this country so as to have serfs to work on their estates.

Nevertheless, I'm a die-hard liberal from the 1960's. I will not stop fighting for what is right.

[WillyT]

26. HUGE K & R !!!

[riderinthestorm]

27. K&R. People are going to have to join together to get through this

Going it alone is going to get a lot tougher.

[starroute]

29. People would fight back if they had a clear vision of how to do it

Riots are not direct action -- and neither is peaceful protest. Both attempt to put pressure on the official authorities to make them give you what you want. Direct action means doing things for yourself. It means mutual aid and finding ways to route around a broken system.

One of our current society's most effective deceptions is selling people hyper-individualism. Convincing them that they stand or fall on their own, have nobody but themselves to blame if they're not making it, and their only options are succeeding in a dog-eat-dog capitalistic system or becoming a welfare parasite.

If we can start to think in terms of mutual support we will become better able to imagine options. But we're not there yet.

[Jack Rabbit]

41. This is something I keep bookmarked

This is not the first time I've responded to a post like this by reposting it.

Gene Sharp, From Dictatorship to Democracy, (PDF), Albert Einstein Institution

This work was a major influence on the Arab Spring.

[KoKo]

62. Mutual Support... Been thinking about that lately.

Many of us have moved around and lost ties with friends and family through divorce, death and political differences.

We've got to be thinking about connecting with like mined people where we are now to create new kinds of networks.

The Jobs to China also cut out many local craftspersons and artists who earned a living through working at home and selling wares at art shows and craft fairs. Unfortunately Chinese workers making pennies could make and sell (using US Designers) and so what many women and men did as either full work or sideline work disappeared.

I don't know the answer to the craftsperson/artist dilemna...but, President Obama in his Saturday Address today emphasized education. If one has an arts degree it means they should have retrained to be in some other profession. Or, if they have talents in other directions they are "left behind" because China can turn out all kinds of stuff as such low prices that there's no point in having talents but to have something marketable like an MBA so that you can work for Wall Street or for a Major Corporation.

We have lost Clerical Jobs to Computers...which means that more of us work harder doing our own

[Martin Eden]

125. Organize. Organize. Organize.

Collective Action is needed, but despite the internet we are not together. Yet.

[bkanderson76]

36. Riots?...Mere Child's Play....Storm The Gates and Hang 'Em High....

[Lizzie Poppet]

145. Soon(tm)

"Boiled frog syndrome" isn't working very well any more. Change is coming...one way or another.

[Enthusiast]

37. We need to cut taxes on the job creators and

cut job killing regulations.


















I kid.

[Phlem]

44. Well that's the answer for sure!

Good luck on DU.

-p

[Phlem]

48. Meaning it's so binary

it's embarrassing. All of a sudden a whole lot of the population just started living in the dark side and just like it there?

-p

[NYC_SKP]

54. I like kale. And I like libraries!

Huffington Post, not so much.

[hrmjustin]

64. lmfao!

[uppityperson]

79. kale in the garden / trying so hard to avoid / feral cat urine

kale haiku is all the rage.

[hrmjustin]

85. I can't wait for the op.

[uppityperson]

86. Been pretty calm day so far.

[hrmjustin]

87. And here is to many other quiet and calm days.

[uppityperson]

88. Indeed.

[uppityperson]

78. are you all having fun?

using it as an educational experience

Oh, leafy green kale
So tasty dehydrated
Why eat greasy chips?

[NYC_SKP]

80. Oh, excellent thought. Lemme see...

.

Raw, cooked, or garnish

curly, dino, red or green

Get in my belly

...

https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=10150458562345700&id=28960860699

[uppityperson]

82. yes, I am plagiarising from there also.

World is in peril
Only Kale can save us now
Kale for president

[hrmjustin]

89. Lol.

New names?

[uppityperson]

91. Look in my closet-There's nothing at all to wear-Eat kale, go naked!

[SomethingFishy]

67. You know you really shouldn't worry your pretty mind with things like this..

ignore it and it will go away. It's called whistling past the graveyard.

[Phlem]

102. NS.

But they do have the RW lurkers back! I'm sure they'll rationalize it someway.
With friends like that who needs the Right Wing?

Woo Hoo DU!

American Exceptionalism!!!

-p

[mn9driver]

40. My wife lost her corporate job 3 years ago.

She is a licensed attorney and turns 50 this year. She is still paying off student loans from 25 years ago.

In 3 years of searching for another job, the best offer she's gotten is temp work reviewing documents at $18 per hour, no benefits, nothing longer than 90 days, often months between jobs.

In her last temp job, in order to use the restroom she needed to go to the supervisor, who would escort her, unlock it, and then relock it when she was done. After child care expenses she netted about $11 per hour.

This is our new normal.

[Phlem]

42. Me too.

I made a total of $800 last year. I've made a little more at the beginning of this year but freelancing sucks for many reasons, the economy being a main contributor.

Fortunately my wife's business keeps us from ending out on the street but we've burned through a lot of savings we built up before our child and we're one major disaster from being there. The ACA's a gift but I don't think that's going to be of much use when you have hospital bills pile up and you have no job.

It's easy for some people to say it's gonna be fine, everything this administration's planned is going along swimmingly. Unemployment is down, yadda yadda yadda . On a webpage we can't see each other's perils. I noticed this a long, long time ago but no everything's just fine and yet the situation has gotten worse and more acute. It's really sad to hear the "everything's just fine" club continue that message.

Maybe, for some, but not for all and I'm thinking the latter more than prior. I saw grief and pain on people faces a long long, time ago, now I don't see the faces at all. They're gone.

Mostly I worry for my child and all the other children that's going to suffer through this I don't see things getting better soon.

Mr. President, it's always been about the jobs. We are all more than willing to work but I can't support a family on McDonalds pay.

Don't give up JaneyVee.

-p

[glowing]

43. And people half her age think $15.00 an hour is a Godsend!

That we are lucky if we have a job that pays that much. It's pathetic and fucking sad and we really need to be at our state houses and in DC demanding real action... Of course most of us are too broke to be able to get to any of these places and if we could hop on a protest bus, we might lose our meager paying jobs because we missed work for the day or what not.

We are stuck in a bad way in this country! It's time for everyone to wake up, activate, and begin electing local, state, and Federal Reps who will work for the people and act in a swift manner. Politics is known for corruption and moving slower than a turtle (or in the last 4 years, not moving at all!)

[sadoldgirl]

46. OWS did a lot of things wrong IMHO,

They came up with at least 20 different issues (from privatized prisons to Guatanamo and pot). I was with them as often as I could. I don't think you can run a successful political protest if you don't stick to 1 or 2 issues. And you certainly cannot be a charity at the same time. Yes, I saw the storm troopers coming and destroy everything, and I was appalled. However, I think OWS could have been much more effective, if they had stuck to Wallstreet and corporation issues only. May be it will happen again.

[mstinamotorcity2]

49. This is a Great op!!

We all have been there. But I remember Dick Army and Rumsfeld and those other cohorts standing on a podium with Reagan Screaming "Middle class whats Middle class??" You are either rich or poor. there is no such thing as Middle Class.
George W. Bush told us at a press conference that Middle class was people making about 5 million dollars a year. Can you believe that shit??
The stupidest thing I hear them say is they love Ronald Reagan. The rotten dog who started the middle class and welfare queen mantra. They were going to take us down. They also had a fat bitch on stage who said " Down with Unions." I had friends and family who had never been out of work until Reagan got in office. That was the start to the cuts to the Safety Networks. This wasn't something that just happened. This was planned from start to finish. And if truth be told the big boys got mad at the strides towards equality in this Country. They were very angry with Unions and Public Schools and all things that came in between them and their cheap labor.

So any company not valuing their employees is of no surprise to me. They have been taught you don't matter. Like I tell people stop giving your all to these people. If you die tomorrow, they will have someone in the seat by the end of the day. Your job is an employer. You work for your well being and the people you love. And when you die there is this little thing that companies have called Dead Peasants Insurance on all employees. And you won't know how much the policy pays. Wal-Mart is famous for this. And you get probably nothing. Its like insuring property.

[Laelth]

135. +1. n/t

-Laelth

[n2doc]

52. She isn't rioting

People aren't rioting because things haven't gotten bad enough, or bad enough fast enough. It either takes a shock (many people suddenly losing everything at the same time) or having conditions so bad that you have nothing left to lose. In the first case, we did have a movement (occupy) that was suppressed, and which was not joined by the vast majority of Americans. Indeed, many americans laughed at Occupy and called them dirty hippies without a cause or leadership. If more had joined them things might have worked out differently.

Even the writer isn't there yet. She has a roof over head, food, and medical care. Maybe when there are so many people who have lost everything that they can't fit under the bridges, they will riot. The question is, will anyone else join them?

[Rex]

57. Hungry stomaches living in a car with no gas makes it REALLY hard to riot.

The banksters figured out a way to screw over the general populace and face no blowback from their actions. Expect it to happen again and again and again.

Until DC realizes we count, they will always side with Wall Street.

[jtuck004]

121. Oddly enough, so do full ones along with working cable tv.

Take the cable away, and look out

[nobodyspecial]

70. Yes, we're all limousine liberals with trust funds

Sure didn't take you long to figure us out. We are soooo busted.

If you don't think this shit is happening to millions of your fellow Americans, you are sadly deluded. If you are over 50 (45 often) and looking for a good job, you are shit out of luck, even if you are the most positive, upbeat person on the planet.

[Phlem]

73. +1000000

-p

[Phlem]

81. Or could it be the fact that

what people are writing are voices of "help, I've followed all the rules why isn't anything getting better." and are needing compassion.

For some, hopefulness comes from the confirmation that it's just not them, it's happening everywhere.

Hopelessness tends to come from people like you who disregard facts and then come down on the individual as being "flawed".

Cause bud your complaining right along with us.



-p

[Phlem]

95. You make absolutely no sense.

"I am asking how this helps uplift people? I disagree with you that hearing other people agree with one's wretched state alleviates stress and makes people feel happier. I think it reinforces negative concepts"

Did I say it actually makes them happier? And more to the point the environment we live in (at this state) "reinforces negative concepts". You think if everything was going peachy that the "flawed" would somehow find another thing to be depressed about?

You have no concept of depression, I'v had long term PTSD from child abuse and you think I live "there" in my mind? A long career as a technical 3D artist, buying my house and and having a wonderful happy child in a marriage still going 25 years later would make that impossible wouldn't it?

So we're all just going to hold hands and sing Kumbaya and we somehow make the problems go away? You've done a lot more damage in this post then help. What's your solution?

"Actually I have been unemployed for a loooong time. And it is entirely possible that I am being discriminated precisely because I have been unemployed for so long. I have had several interviews where I could tell that human resources was puffed-up, judging me and acting as if they held so much power. I realized that I was lucky not to have to deal with that shit on a daily basis."

Right.. and yours is the "worst case " scenario. Because nooooooooo body else has had it worse, specially those pesky seniors.

"We are protected, even if in the 11th hour."

what?

"The days of putting in 40 years at the company, retiring with a gold watch and then dropping dead are over.
And thank GOD for that."

again, what? The days of retiring are dead, what's your point?

-p

[Phlem]

97. Well sh#t.

That was creepy. I think I need to shower.

-p

[DCBob]

61. Riots are not the answer... that will just make the situation worse...

especially for those most in need. There is no easy answer. The biggest problem is the rich and powerful have a huge advantage over the weak and less fortunate. From a political perspective, that is fine with most Republicans.. they see that as good competition, making the best of ones situation, ie.. survival of fittest. If someone cant make it on their own, thats their problem. Except they dont realize that almost all those who have made it good have had many benefits not available to the lower class and less fortunate.. like a good safe home, good education, support from family.. money, contacts, etc. Many who have been successful dont realize the many advantages they have had to help them get where they are. I think the most important thing we can do is make sure Republicans dont get any more political power than they have already.. otherwise this situation will just get worse.. much worse.

[FrodosPet]

129. Are you kidding?

There is no better way to stick our tongue out at the 3 million 1%ers than by tearing down the few remaining stores in impoverished areas!

That'll teach them. When they see Detroit's Cass Corridor in flames, they will tremble in fear, knowing that it is going to interrupt regularly scheduled programming.

[maddiemom]

68. Thr Reagan worship from the Republican party is insane, and explains a lot about

what the party has become. They used to be "the party of Lincoln." Those of my generation wonder what happened to Eisenhower, who should be their last, good president. My parents were active in the Democratic party, and I know the Democrats were hoping to get Eisenhower, and turned against him when he ran as a Republican. I was a first grader at the time, but was exposed to a lot of political talk. It wasn't until I had grown up a bit, that I thought Ike was a good president. Nixon won the first presidential election in which I voted. I despised him at the time, but despite his being an obviously paranoid, screwed up individual, he was, no contest, the last Republican president who accomplished some good. His overall legacy was obviously important to him. Later Republican presidents seem to have been unabashedly champions of the one percent, and the Democratic presidents are only going through the motions in presenting themselves as anything otherwise.

[underthematrix]

110. Reagan had Alzheimers during his first and second terms

GOP wingnuts believe if they act like Reagan was in control of his faculties the rest of us will believe it. I have been reading about all the presidents for the past two years. In the work I read about Reagan, his team used to write on cards what they wanted him to say and that's what he would say EVEN WHEN IT WAS NOT RELEVANT TO THE CONVERSATION.

[Phlem]

71. From Koko

Chris Hedges

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1017174536

Just this small segment is spot on.

-p

[SamKnause]

96. Strike

A nationwide strike is the answer.

This would include workers who do not belong to unions.

The workers of America could bring the powers that be to their knees.

Alas this will not happen.

US people are not known for sticking together.

The people have power.

There is strength in numbers.

There is POWER and STRENGTH in the people.

There is POWER and STRENGTH in UNIONS.

If every worker in America chose to stay home for one week, just one week, we would see change.

[Laelth]

139. +1. n/t

-Laelth

[blkmusclmachine]

103. "Trickle Down," bay-bee!

Just ask the White House

[alfredo]

113. It's too fucking cold!

[progree]

118. Did you know Mike Malloy read your post on the air? I heard him 2/9 around 1 am I guess

I'm very sorry to hear about your circumstances.

[obxhead]

119. Ha

Try starting at $10/hr and getting your wages busted back to minimum and hours dropped to part time.

Riots??? We're too tired from working 3 jobs just so we can get 3 squares a day of garbage we like to call food.

[CanonRay]

126. I shared a house with three other guys and we got along great

maybe that was just a unique experience. One guy was a neat freak so he cleaned all the time, but couldn't boil water, another was a good cook, so he did the lion's share of that, but was a slob, and the other two split the odds and ends. It worked out well for us all.

[Laelth]

127. k&r for the truth, however depressing it may be. n/t

-Laelth

[marble falls]

134. Its the same with men, too. From six figures to mid teens. It happened quick: I turned fifty.

[RadiationTherapy]

143. Where was this person when she did "have"? She'll have to take a number and get in line

behind the "never did haves." Vacations? Pedicures? Department stores? Shiiiiiiiiiiit.

[IrishAyes]

152. First of all, kudos for a great OP.

If anyone can make it through this mess, it will be you, I'd wager.

As for where the riots are, speaking as an historian and not a provocateur, I see where the youth are massing for a Keystone sit-in somewhere this week. Those things have a way of getting out of hand at times. A cop overreacts, or ....

I encountered difficulties similar to yours shortly before retirement, when your income has more impact on Social Security checks than the same amount of earnings much earlier. I slid into forced early retirement on a wing and a prayer. W/O years of preparation, a super-thrifty nature, and the hallowed LUCK OF THE IRISH, I'd be 'living' in a cardboard box under a freeway somewhere.

When things went south for me at age 59, I was fortunate to sell my remote little horse ranch for enough to scrape by on until age 62. Bought a classic fixer in the cheapest cost of living place I could find, even though it's overrun with Republicans. But with just 3 1/2 years to go, I didn't think it would profit me to move to a city, absolutely requiring work to stay and forced to move eventually anyway. So I came here and froze and damned near starved before 62, then held my breath for the next 3 years until Medicare kicked in. The state didn't want to let me on Medicaid because I had slight assets until they ran out too.

Anyway, I can sympathize with people who've undergone such a trial by fire from personal experience. To this day I get the vapors at the sight of a cardboard box, because I've seen people trying to shelter in them. If the tiny house movement had been in full swing back then, I think I would've put my money into one of those. Might yet, if I ever get this barn of a place renovated enough to see a good return.

Anyway, best of luck to you and everyone else out there. No doubt, it's a hard world.

[BallardWA]

154. We don't' show up in the statistics, either

We have a small business that serves the high-end construction market. We are artists. We once owned a home, our business had no debt, and we put our daughter through college with no loans.
We had to sell our home, or face foreclosure. Luckily, the housing market was experiencing a little boost and our neighborhood was desirable. Still, we sold for about $150K less than what we should have gotten. We were behind in our studio rent, and we were evicted.
We now rent a house about 110 miles from Seattle, and are waiting it out. We are nearly out of money. We have a son graduating high school in June.
I would march in the streets, but I'm too old and exhausted.

[elzenmahn]

156. They haven't started yet...

...in large part, because the people saw what lengths the Government was willing to go to protect their corporate owners - witness the brutality levied against #Occupy.

That, combined with throwing the book at the protesters and levying heavy fines and bail amounts (see: Occupy Los Angeles), as well as the criminal record that comes with an arrest for civil disobedience and all that entails, has cast a pall over the population and anybody who dares to speak out.

And I don't need to go into the NSA and domestic spying.

We're being told to bend over and take it. I'm sorry if the imagery is deemed offensive, but there is no other appropriate way to describe it. I don't advocate violence in any fashion, but I fear that it's only a matter of time.

[JDPriestly]

164. That is the best article on the situation of the best and brightest in America today

that I have ever read.

And they bring in immigrants on H1-B visas because the claim they can't find Americans to fill the jobs. I know a woman with a PhD in computers. She is in her late 60s. She is not eligible for coverage on her husband's government pension and he is ill. She has very little Social Security because for years when she applied for government jobs, some younger foreign student who had volunteered as an intern moved into the job. She tried teaching but could only get substitute work. Finally, in her 60s, she went back to school to get still more coursework in a very, very difficult technical field so that she could add another specialty in order to get a job. She was a Merit scholar and top of her class, a hard worker, the best there is. To have to go to such an extreme just to get a job that isn't necessarily going to pay all that much, just a decent salary is ridiculous.

Republicans are in denial about what is going on in America today.

The story I am telling and the story told in the Huffington Post are those of our best and brightest, of the top of the heap folks who should be the most employable.

The people in the bottoms of their classes, those who never made it through high school much less college are in even worse shape.

Yet the Hillarys want to extend visas to cheap intellectual labor. I support a path to citizenship for "illegal" immigrants who are in our country. I support an immigration policy that gives an equal chance for American citizenship to all immigrants.

I support trade agreements that protect the national sovereignty, self-determination (democracy), human rights including rights of working people and preservation of our natural environment. But I do not support NATO which has resulted in the exploitation of the cheapest labor by the richest few, the degradation of our environment (think Keystone Pipeline for example) and the race to the lowest pay, the filthiest environment and the dictatorship of the corporate CEOs. In other words, I oppose the trade agreements now under consideration and will vote for anyone who PROMISES to renegotiate the agreements we have to protect our rights and those of working people in other countries.

We need to develop our economy. When having a degree from a good college or university and an excellent work record does not give you a job, what will? It is time for more progressive change than Obama has brought. How can we persuade Americans to vote against Tea Party candidates when we don't have a plan that will make the American economy work for the Tea Partiers as well as the liberal college grads? Huh?

[Nye Bevan]

175. Do you think riots would be helpful?

Is there an advantage to attempting to institute change through violence and destruction as opposed to at the ballot box?

[cprise]

181. K&R

[Spider Jerusalem]

182. Nope, it's not amazing the riots haven't started yet.

If there are riots? They won't start because of things like this. They'll start because the genuinely poor are deprived of what little they have, including food. Educated middle-class people finding themselves in reduced circumstances are far less likely to lead to riots than things like food stamp cuts are. It wasn't the bourgeoisie manning the barricades in Paris in 1789, and it won't be in the USA either if it ever comes to that.