funny ILTB semed to miss the MOST qualifier in the above post

as in most people..........not the disabled, not the sick, not the crippled, not little kids

get a grip ILTB

people survived for thousands of years without cars or mass transit and havent evolved out of walking just yet, it still works
Then I take it that your definition of "most people" excludes all those others or anybody responsible for them. I also take it that in your view "most people" includes only those that fit the profile of a healthy young male with no family, no family requirements nor much prospect for ever having any familiy requirements; and most especially, no empathy for those who don't fit the urban healthy enthusiast "profile."

Then I take it that your definition of "most people" excludes all those others or anybody responsible for them. I also take it that in your view "most people" includes only those that fit the profile of a healthy young male with no family, no family requirements nor much prospect for ever having any familiy requirements; and most especially, no empathy for those who don't fit the urban healthy enthusiast "profile."

You do not have to be car free to walk to work if it is a short distance.
In fact, a nice walk outdoors can be a good change of pace.
And the word "most" can have different connotations.

In my mind, this kind of blanket statement doesnt work. Yes, some things have gotten better. Some things have gotten worse too. We have invented automobiles which let us drive great distances, but they are also polluting our environment. Medicine has advanced to a great degree, but this is only good if you can pay for the medical treatment needed. Walking or biking, however, should not even be an argument. They are the simplest modes of transportation, and therefore, the cheapest and most reliable. I think that we should use the technologies that benefit us the most WITHOUT costing us more than they are worth in time, money, or both.



Walking and biking are VERY unreliable for the crippled.

As far as paying for medical treatment, I see NOBODY dying in the street in this country of minor infections, broken limbs, or other ailments that were deadly 200 years ago. Even if they can't pay.

Yes, that's something else I forgot to point out.

"Reverting" (in quotes on purpose) to walking and cycling from driving doesn't mean all of the modern medical advances are going away.

Yes and people lived to be 35, 70% percent of children died before age 10, and a minor ailment could mean death. Do you want to go back? I don't.
And don't forget, people for thousands of years did without refrigeration, anesthesia, electricity or universal education for all youth. Some still do without today. I guess a few Luddites/iconoclasts want to go back to the farm and scratch out an all natural living and relive those fun filled simple life days.

And the word "most" can have different connotations.
What is yours? as in the context of most people can do something easily without breaking into a sweat

What is yours? as in the context of most people can do something easily without breaking into a sweat

A majority. Not to be confused with all people. Not to be confused with all the time.
In the context of my original post in this thread, it would mean the majority of people, who live within a mile or 2 of where they work, and are healthy enough to walk. Sure there are a lot of people who have to take children to school/day care. Sure there are some who can not walk due to disabilities or illness.
There are some other very valid reasons people can't walk and I am not going to try to list them all. But there are a lot of people who drive when its not necessary. I know I have done so. I try not to do so now.

What it is is a complete and utter lack of thinking on your part. It's a catchphrase, a bumper sticker. There's no reasoning behind it, no consideration, no thought at all. You think there is. You think it has a deep, resonant, universal meaning. It's a "truth". Because you think that, I don't think I have the skill to ever explain to you why it's meaningless.

"Personal responsibility" is an abstraction, it has no meaning outside of a context, yet you seem to think it's something definite and real, like a platonic idea or a stone. No. What it is is an catchphrase people pull out of their ass in lieu of actually thinking about something. There's a whole mythology surrounding it too. to such an extent anyone can pull it out and POOF!, problem solved, discussion over. It's like a magic trick. A politician can get in front of a TV and "personal responsibility" this and "personal responsibility" that all night, and suckers like you think it means something, think it answers some question. Frankly I think it's pathetic.

You're being played for a fool, led around with a simple catchphrase, thinking it's a powerful, liberating truth. The thing about abstract, meaningless catchphrases, especially ones that obtain a sort of mythcal cult status (your "truth"), is they make the perfect smokescreen. X is "personal responsibility" one week, the next week Y is "personal responsibility", a couple weeks later A, then B, etc., etc., etc. To a thinking person X is X and Y is Y, to you they're all part of this timeless truth. You're way, way down the rabbit hole, and I'm not nearly smart enough to talk you out of it.

sorry, if you think logic and observation is meaningless magic, then we must be in different universes. Maybe even different rabbit holes. I get the feeling that we use some of the same words, but are speaking different languages!

Sure the "personal responsibility" phrase it is misused by folks for their own purposes - what is not?

And please don't confuse me with someone who thinks it's a "liberating" truth. it is not. Realization that I am responsible for my own actions bears great weight and is a burden. This, do you understand?

Realization that I am responsible for my own actions bears great weight and is a burden. This, do you understand?

No. I don't understand why you think knowing you're responsible for your own actions is a big deal, a huge point of pride, a cross you have to bear, something to get all jesus-martyred up about, or why the abstracted concept is some sort of "truth", or why it's seemingly a cure-all or alternatively the lack-of it is the root of most evils.

I suspect though that Harry is talking about you here-
Convinced that reality has no inherent nature, which he might hope to identify as the truth about things, he devotes himself to being true to his own nature.

And the logical end to that is a view of the world where reality is composed of the self. Whether it's yourself or some other self.

I mean, I know that I'm responsible for my own actions. I feel pretty confident everyone I know knows the same thing, but I haven't heard any of my family or friends tell me it's a great weight and burden. Of course if they did say to me, "Tim. Realizing I'm responsible for my own actions is a great weight and burden." I'd laugh in their face.

Then I take it that your definition of "most people" excludes all those others or anybody responsible for them. I also take it that in your view "most people" includes only those that fit the profile of a healthy young male with no family, no family requirements nor much prospect for ever having any familiy requirements; and most especially, no empathy for those who don't fit the urban healthy enthusiast "profile."

does your definition of MOST people mean that MOST are disabled, crippled, or little kids unable to walk? if so, Id like to see some stats on that backed up with some solid links

quit being a contrarian *** just for the sake of being a contrarian ***

families can walk just fine, even fairly young kids can walk just fine, heck I walked to school as a kid for years, so did my sister, as do many people all over the planet every day

as usual all you do is nitpick, no positive contributions, no solutions, no original posts, why do you waste your time here?

quit putting word into others' mouths too, that got old more than a year ago, most of us are quite capable of articulating EXACTLY what we want to say, I understood what the other poster meant by MOST, apparently you think everyone has some anti car agenda, we dont, and WTF is wrong with walking? are you unable to walk? I dont know very many people that cant walk, do you?

Yes and people lived to be 35, 70% percent of children died before age 10, and a minor ailment could mean death. Do you want to go back? I don't.

now your flailing, get serious

Since when did car culture automatically make walking something that should never happen anymore? See, I can be just as obtuse and silly. Is that the prevalent mindset nowadays? Is walking now for unevolved dinosaurs? For those that are too stupid to use autos?

the slow death of car culture doesnt mean all the advances are gonna go away, in fact, a bit of walking here and there would likely even prolong it for awhile

It amazes me that almost every person here (except ILTB :) and a couple others) have so little understanding of the problemns addressed in the original article. A few facts that mostof you have no understanding of:


Most of the poor in America suffer from a physical or emotional disability. Obviously, many are unable to walk or ride very far, let alone work full time at a physically demanding job.
Many poor people lack education or training to get a job that is not physically demanding.
The American infrastructure is set up for the automobile. All of you know that, but you evidently do not know how this fact affects people who are disabled, or who have sole coustody of young children or sick relatives.
You blithely speak of social forces like "globalization" and "peak oil" without stopping to think that these forces actually affect REAL peole in REAL ways. For example, when manufacturing jobs are offshored by the millions to China, the "millions" refers to millions of Americans out of work. Through no fault oftheir own! Most find other jobs eventually. But often the jobs are substandard, and they may be far from their homes.
EVERYBODY want s to do better, and especially EVERYBODY wants their children to have a better life than they have. Most poor people are doing everything within their power to do better. Poverty is a trap. It sucks you in but it doesn't want to let you go. We used to have a social structure that helped people to escape the poverty trap, but Americans in their gread have pretty much eliminated it so that they can have lower taxes.
Americans have come to prefer cheap food and goods rather than paying enough to ensure that the people who make, distribute and sell the goods can make a living wage.


In other words, if you want to blame somebody for the poverty problem in America, look in the damn mirror.

does your definition of MOST people mean that MOST are disabled, crippled, or little kids unable to walk? if so, Id like to see some stats on that backed up with some solid links

I don't know about your state. Here in Michigan there is no welfare available to healthy adults. Only the disabled and poor children get welfare, and precious little to them.

Walking and biking are VERY unreliable for the crippled.

As far as paying for medical treatment, I see NOBODY dying in the street in this country of minor infections, broken limbs, or other ailments that were deadly 200 years ago. Even if they can't pay.
But millions do die prematurely from heart disease, diabetes and many other chronic conditions because they can't pay.

I'm pretty sure that you don't REALLY want to go to the American health care system to support your arguments! ;)

The idea, of course, is to keep employees afraid to look at other jobs.

Other reasons can be found as well. One of the main things an employer needs is the ability to rely on trained labor to be arrive on schedule. If your employers views you as a risk to leave/quit they need to find someone else. I am also sure that many employers to use this as a means of keeping labor through fear...

I have someone working for me now that drives 78 miles roundtrip. This is for a low wage retail job. $7 an hour part time (6 hour shifts, 5 days per week). Mapquest it; Ionia, MI to Hastings, MI. I just counted and there are 21 direct competitors of mine within a closer driving distance, and probably thousands of other retailers. I can't think of one single large retailer that isn't constantly hiring at the same (or better) pay. Imagine $42 per day - taxes and driving expenses. I've even offered to call other stores in my co-op and buying groups to get a closer job. not even enough ambition to take a job offer...
How can anyone say this is a result of "The System" instead of a series of bad decisions by this individual?
Of course it is the system what else could it be :D
Maybe there is something other then the money that makes the trip worthwhile? I mean yeah it could be just a really really bad decision or someone afraid of working at another location where you wouldn't be their boss ;) I do believe the system of cheap fuel and drive everywhere did allow distance not to enter the equation. Hopefully that will change and not crush the masses.

I remember when I was in HS I drove 50 miles round trip to a job that paid near minimum. I just liked being there and really liked the people. In fact to this day it was the best job I have ever had. There were a bunch of places in between that were competitors that I could have worked I just didn't have any desire too.

Luckily I didn't work at another place because while working there I got some skills I wouldn't get elsewhere and got into the field I'm in today, not my reason for staying at all I wasnt' thinking this far ahead back then. The only reason I left is because it wasn't the type of job a college grad stays in so I got me a temp job and have been working full time at the company ever since.

I don't know about your state. Here in Michigan there is no welfare available to healthy adults. Only the disabled and poor children get welfare, and precious little to them.


that has nothing to do with what im getting at

fact is MOST people in this country are quite healthy, certainly healthy enough to walk a bit

if its true that that many people in this country are so damn crippled that they cant even walk a little then I must be sleepwalking or seeing things, cause I rarely see crippled people or people that cant even walk

I do however see a fair amount of people with weight issues and bad fitness which make walking a chore, sorry, that isnt an excuse for anything.

many of our problems as I see it are nothing but mindset and not based on reality at all:
many of us, myself included were raised to avoid physical labor.......why? it isnt the plague, in fact its quite healthy

somewhere along the line simple walking fell into the "labor" category......again, why?

its a bunch of nonsense, and if you really wanna see evidence of this, look at the roadie forum........people there routinely make a huge deal over amounts of basic exercise that those with physical jobs do every damn day and they act like its a huge accomplishment........it isnt, its all mindset and lack of experience

one of the incredibly obvious results of ever increasing costs of energy will inevitably be that more people will be faced with more physical labor, to many it will be viewed as a hardship when in reality it will be quite healthy for them, it will be a bitter lesson to learn, such is life

its easy to be slothful these days, easy to let ones physical fitness drop to the point of it becoming life threatening, one of the consequences of cheap energy im afraid, it will go the other way and people arent gonna like it

that has nothing to do with what im getting at

fact is MOST people in this country are quite healthy, certainly healthy enough to walk a bit

if its true that that many people in this country are so damn crippled that they cant even walk a little then I must be sleepwalking or seeing things, cause I rarely see crippled people or people that cant even walk

I do however see a fair amount of people with weight issues and bad fitness which make walking a chore, sorry, that isnt an excuse for anything.

many of our problems as I see it are nothing but mindset and not based on reality at all:
many of us, myself included were raised to avoid physical labor.......why? it isnt the plague, in fact its quite healthy

somewhere along the line simple walking fell into the "labor" category......again, why?

its a bunch of nonsense, and if you really wanna see evidence of this, look at the roadie forum........people there routinely make a huge deal over amounts of basic exercise that those with physical jobs do every damn day and they act like its a huge accomplishment........it isnt, its all mindset and lack of experience

one of the incredibly obvious results of ever increasing costs of energy will inevitably be that more people will be faced with more physical labor, to many it will be viewed as a hardship when in reality it will be quite healthy for them, it will be a bitter lesson to learn, such is life

its easy to be slothful these days, easy to let ones physical fitness drop to the point of it becoming life threatening, one of the consequences of cheap energy im afraid, it will go the other way and people arent gonna like it
Sorry I got off track. Obviously I agree with most of what you say in this post.

However, walking and cycling were never practical for everybody, and never will be. We need public transit that's safe and accessible for the milllions of people who are unable to walk or ride. We need this now, and we'll need it even more in the future as cars become less common.

I mean, I know that I'm responsible for my own actions. I feel pretty confident everyone I know knows the same thing, but I haven't heard any of my family or friends tell me it's a great weight and burden. Of course if they did say to me, "Tim. Realizing I'm responsible for my own actions is a great weight and burden." I'd laugh in their face.

Great! Glad to hear we are in accord.

You previously wrote:

"'you don't know what their specifics are, a lot of these problems are institutional and systemic, you can't make the blanket statement that any poor person who drives is an idiot, because context is key"

How do you combine your two statements: both endorsing personal responsibility, and absolving individuals of personal responsibilty, because their problems are institutional and systemic?

I must be missing something big, because they seem contradictory to me.

Most of the poor in America suffer from a physical or emotional disability. Obviously, many are unable to walk or ride very far, let alone work full time at a physically demanding job.


That's the 2nd time you've stated that. What are you basing that on? There's something like 40 million living in federally defined poverty, and something like 50 million americans who claim to be disabled, about 30 million of them severly disabled. About 1/4 of the severly disabled live in poverty. Even if it was a quarter of the whole that would be less than half of the people defined as living in poverty. I couldn't find national figures but apparantly most states consider a large portion of the poor in their states as working poor.

So where are you getting that from?


Related, a good slice-of-life article I stumbled upon:

http://www.greenbaypressgazette.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070601/GPG0101/706010566/1978

The poor often drive low-cost, unreliable vehicles that break down, so they can't get to work. Public transportation is one option, though buses don't run on evenings or weekends, hours those in low-wage service jobs often must work. Some look for jobs that are close enough to walk or bike to, though that isn't often an option if service jobs are in the suburbs and affordable housing in the inner city.

Fools! They should talk to the dudes here on bike forums.

Great! Glad to hear we are in accord.

You previously wrote:

"'you don't know what their specifics are, a lot of these problems are institutional and systemic, you can't make the blanket statement that any poor person who drives is an idiot, because context is key"

How do you combine your two statements: both endorsing personal responsibility, and absolving individuals of personal responsibilty, because their problems are institutional and systemic?

I must be missing something big, because they seem contradictory to me.

You're missing the ability to reason and think critically. You lack the meta-cognitive skills necessary to evaluate your own understanding.

That's what you're missing if you think that quote "[absolves] individuals of personal responsibilty" or in any way contradicts anything else I've written.

one of the incredibly obvious results of ever increasing costs of energy will inevitably be that more people will be faced with more physical labor, to many it will be viewed as a hardship when in reality it will be quite healthy for them, it will be a bitter lesson to learn, such is life

its easy to be slothful these days, easy to let ones physical fitness drop to the point of it becoming life threatening, one of the consequences of cheap energy im afraid, it will go the other way and people arent gonna like it

+1! I work with able-bodied folks who wait for a slow elevator instead of walking 1 flight of stairs. they get winded dragging themselves up into their suv's. wow!

I really think the majority of this county's health issues are due to excess weight / lack of physical labor. People are meant to work.

You're missing the ability to reason and think critically. You lack the meta-cognitive skills necessary to evaluate your own understanding.

That's what you're missing if you think that quote "[absolves] individuals of personal responsibilty" or in any way contradicts anything else I've written.

this is a meta-answer.

You lack the ability to explain your statements.

Sorry I got off track. Obviously I agree with most of what you say in this post.

However, walking and cycling were never practical for everybody, and never will be. We need public transit that's safe and accessible for the milllions of people who are unable to walk or ride. We need this now, and we'll need it even more in the future as cars become less common.

I don't think the Dutch would agree with you, nearly everyone rides a bike there, but then they have set up the country for it. Americans have set up their country for automobiles, the question is, how will Americans fix the problem of high auto fuel prices. Well fighting for a larger piece of the supply isn't working.

3500 Young American men have died in the Iraq oil war, expect Britain to bail as soon as Tony Blair steps down, his successor will want a new mandate (read election), and asking for a new mandate while your in an unpopular war that is looking difficult if not impossible to win,, is not smart (you tend to lose the election). Showing that your predecessor was a dumbass, and that you want to fix the mess your predecessor created without a switch of parties is. Once Britain bails, expect other allies in that war, to cut their losses. At some point it will become another Vietnam, and the US will need to bail as well, many trillions of dollars and still countless lives later.....

Thing is, if the US had dedicated the money spent in Iraq, to transit within it's own borders, the economy would be on fire, inner city ghettos would have lots of vibrant new development, and all those dollars now flowing into the Middle East, fuelling the other side of the war on terrorism would be drying up.

that has nothing to do with what im getting at

fact is MOST people in this country are quite healthy, certainly healthy enough to walk a bit
And if they choose not to, or wish to spend that time doing something else; why is that your concern?

What are you getting at; besides riding a high horse of self righteousness?

Then I take it that your definition of "most people" excludes all those others or anybody responsible for them. I also take it that in your view "most people" includes only those that fit the profile of a healthy young male with no family, no family requirements nor much prospect for ever having any familiy requirements; and most especially, no empathy for those who don't fit the urban healthy enthusiast "profile."

Just because I don't have kids doesn't mean I don't have a family.

I honestly lean towards the belief that there is no excuse, no reason, for an able-bodied person to be poor. I know first-hand in my and my peer's jobs: companies have a hard time attacting and keeping good mid-paid people ($12-17/hr). All they really need to do is be reliable, just show up: no special skills needed! Yet the job market must be really good, cause they get bored after a few weeks, quit showing up, don't bother to call in... and get on "unemployment" till it runs out.

Where I live, there are almost no jobs that pay that much available to anyone without years of experience in that field, or degrees. For those without formal education beyond high school, connections, or special skills, $8/hr is considered "good money". There is just about nowhere to work here for the majority of people aside from retail or call-center work.

Most of the poor in America suffer from a physical or emotional disability. Obviously, many are unable to walk or ride very far, let alone work full time at a physically demanding job.
Many poor people lack education or training to get a job that is not physically demanding.
EVERYBODY want s to do better, and especially EVERYBODY wants their children to have a better life than they have. Most poor people are doing everything within their power to do better. Poverty is a trap. It sucks you in but it doesn't want to let you go. We used to have a social structure that helped people to escape the poverty trap, but Americans in their greed have pretty much eliminated it so that they can have lower taxes.



While your first claim may be true, where is the documentation? So what if people can't get jobs that aren't physically demanding. Short of a severe mental disability, why can't any one of us do physical labor?
I think you need to get out more if you think everyone really wants better. Many people are very satisfied with what they have and don't have. I could make 2x as much if I wanted it, but the results would be a net negative. I would have less time, more stress, and more money. I'm very happy to make 50k per year, live simply and be happy. When I look back at past years budgets, I can't understand how a person could struggle "to survive" on 12-15k per year. When I remove my vacation expenses, restaurant meals and savings, I come up with $9600 per year. So $12000 would still provide a nice $2400 per year for savings/incidentals. Add a car and the budget explodes....

by the way, $10 per hour at 30 hours per week is $15,600 annually...

A lot of people have disabilities where they can't even sit or stand in one place. What job do you find for them?

Many jobs pay less than a living wage of $8 to $10. Obviously, somebody has those jobs, or they wouldn't exist. They probably work much harder than I do, so they're not lazy. So how do you all account for them being poor?

I always say move close to your job. I am unskilled and flexible. I just moved and then found a job a mile away. My commute went from an 120 min. to 10.

If I had a house and then needed to change jobs, I would move if needed in a heartbeat. I refuse to spend time getting to work so I can spend time making money.

Just because I don't have kids doesn't mean I don't have a family.
If you have responsibilities for the welfare and transportation of another person(s), especially somebody(ies)who may not have an easy time walking or cycling everywhere, year round, then you do not fit pedex's profile of "most people."

A lot of people have disabilities where they can't even sit or stand in one place. What job do you find for them?

Many jobs pay less than a living wage of $8 to $10. Obviously, somebody has those jobs, or they wouldn't exist. They probably work much harder than I do, so they're not lazy. So how do you all account for them being poor?

I don't "find" any job for them. If an individual isn't motivated to improve their financial situation it really isn't my problem. Please note, I consider physical disabilities and mental disabilities as separate issues.

Most "poor" people I have witnessed take a different approach. They end formal education too soon, they have children too soon, they make poor financial decisions, and they don't want to work hard enough to break this cycle.

Even at $6 an hour a person can make $9360 per year.

I see no fault of my own in other peoples poor decision making.

I think this thread needs a line drawn between poor and disabled, the two are not mutually inclusive or exclusive.

I feel a lack of sweet Jesus is to blame.

That's my feeling and my feeling- my personal opinion- is sacred.

I also don't believe in evolution or gravity.

I can't understand how a person could struggle "to survive" on 12-15k per year.
I'm going to take the easy way out and use 12K as an example. Obviously the cost of living will vary widely from area to area, so I'm just going to use mine as an example.

A person making that much could have an apartment for $500 monthly. That leaves them with $6K every year. Out of that, eating frugally, they'd spend about $200 a month on food. So, taking housing and food expenses into account, that's $3600 for an entire year. Can you even envision what a tiny amount that is over the course of a year's time? What about their insurance payments, medical bills, and money spent on necessities like soap, toothpaste, and clothing? And that's just if the money goes to one person. I can understand very easily how someone could struggle "to survive" on $1000 a month, especially if they have dependants.

Obviously the cost of living will vary widely from area to area, so I'm just going to use mine as an example.

A person making that much could have an apartment for $500 monthly. That leaves them with $6K every year. Out of that, eating frugally, they'd spend about $200 a month on food. So, taking housing and food expenses into account, that's $3600 for an entire year. Can you even envision what a tiny amount that is over the course of a year's time? What about their insurance payments, medical bills, and money spent on necessities like soap, toothpaste, and clothing? And that's just if the money goes to one person. I can understand very easily how someone could struggle "to survive" on $1000 a month, especially if they have dependants.

A person making $1000 a month shouldn't (in my opinion) have a $500 month lease. How about a $350 mortgage, $100 real estate taxes, $50 insurance, and rent out the spare bedroom for $300? That's exactly the kind of good decision making I'm talking about. Brings about a whole change of the calculation, plus you could have a small yard/garden to reduce the food budget.

Now you would be at $9600 after housing, -$200 pm for food would leave $7200 ($600 month) for incidentals.

A person making $1000 a month shouldn't (in my opinion) have a $500 month lease. How about a $350 mortgage, $100 real estate taxes, $50 insurance, and rent out the spare bedroom for $300? That's exactly the kind of good decision making I'm talking about. Brings about a whole change of the calculation, plus you could have a small yard/garden to reduce the food budget.

Now you would be at $9600 after housing, -$200 pm for food would leave $7200 ($600 month) for incidentals.
Yes, and then how about investing that extra money in a stock that doubles in value monthly, too?:rolleyes: Seems just as likely as an individual who starts out with a $12,000/year income today and no equity, being able to successfully follow your shrewd real estate investment advice in any habitable area in the U.S. market.

Yes, and then how about investing that extra money in a stock that doubles in value monthly, too?:rolleyes: Seems just as likely as an individual who starts out with a $12,000/year income today and no equity, being able to successfully follow your shrewd real estate investment advice in any habitable area in the U.S. market.

On $1200 per month, if an individual can come up with $1000 down you could easily buy a $60,000 house. The housing market is way down in certain parts of this country. Mortgages are easy as hell to get as well.

Within 10 minutes walk of many $8-12 hour jobs, hospital, shopping, etc. No car needed:

http://public.grar.com/public/pubrecn.mac/start?MLS=G586231
http://public.grar.com/public/pubrecn.mac/start?MLS=G593940
http://public.grar.com/public/pubrecn.mac/start?MLS=G589900

This is just the examples from one of the thousands of small towns all over the US.

What I'm ticked about is the idea- that is so prevelent everywhere in US social/politcal rhetoric- that whatever problems the powerless face, it's mainly their own damn fault. That's what this boils down to and it's, to me, a sick, undemocratic way of looking at the world.

Even the seemingly reasonable idea that unskilled laborers, by being unskilled, can easily or simply find a different job- because it doesn't matter what they do- is just horribly insulting. It strips a whole class of people of their humanity. Ambition is for people who can afford it. Goals are something the priviledged attain. Fullfillment isn't something the poor need to concern themselves with.

This attitude, this idea that an epsilon is a epsilon because they're an epsilon is what keeps our country arranged the way it is. Why isn't there better mass transit? Why are public schools failing? Why are corporations allowed to pollute everyone's air and water? Why isn't there much clean and affordable housing in mixed use neighborhoods? Because the initiative to do anything about any of those situations doesn't exist because the benefits are always for some perceived, unworthy "other". Why help out a failing school if you're well off enough to not live in that district? Why improve the bus system is you can afford to drive everywhere and busses just get in your way? Why clean up water? You don't drink out of the tap. And who wants to pay for a building so people- who are too dumb to make enough money to get their own apartment- have a place to live among those of use who do?

But, there are no problems in this country, right? There is no need for collective effort (government), because only the poor are really subject to the problems- even the middle class can buy themselves out of a failing sewer system, for instance- plus the poor can always move and they can always find a different job. If they don't, it's their own fault for being so stupid. They're unskilled, they can go anywhere.


Good for you. Don't care.

My, my..........do we have a flaming liberal?????????

Do you REALLY think the government can solve everyone's problems????????

Do people have NO responsibility for their decisions??????????

Do you really believe there are that many people incapable of making decisions that the government should take care of them?????????

And I thought this was a bicycle forum. Think I will migrate back to the over 50 bunch.

A person making $1000 a month shouldn't (in my opinion) have a $500 month lease. How about a $350 mortgage, $100 real estate taxes, $50 insurance, and rent out the spare bedroom for $300?

For so many people, that's so very impossible. Not everyone can afford a big down payment; a lot of people on low incomes have an extremely hard time developing a savings. Some people live in areas where homes for sale are far out of the reach of someone who makes $8 an hour, and moving is not always possible. And even if someone did get a $350/mo mortgage, who's to say they'll be able to find someone willing to pay $300 for a spare bedroom? What if there IS no spare bedroom?

Brings about a whole change of the calculation, plus you could have a small yard/garden to reduce the food budget.

If someone is working 40 or more hours weekly, it's very difficult to have a garden productive enought to produce a significant source of food. It's possible, but most crops that yield a high food value (like corn and beans) take a lot of time to work on, and require space, and that again is a concern for people who don't have much money. It takes time and/or money to keep away pests (which can range from insects to dogs to crayfish, depending on where you live), too, and not everyone has much of either to spare.

For so many people, that's so very impossible. Not everyone can afford a big down payment; a lot of people on low incomes have an extremely hard time developing a savings. Some people live in areas where homes for sale are far out of the reach of someone who makes $8 an hour, and moving is not always possible. And even if someone did get a $350/mo mortgage, who's to say they'll be able to find someone willing to pay $300 for a spare bedroom? What if there IS no spare bedroom?

If someone is working 40 or more hours weekly, it's very difficult to have a garden productive enought to produce a significant source of food. It's possible, but most crops that yield a high food value (like corn and beans) take a lot of time to work on, and require space, and that again is a concern for people who don't have much money. It takes time and/or money to keep away pests (which can range from insects to dogs to crayfish, depending on where you live), too, and not everyone has much of either to spare.

So is this what your saying?

Person A is:
Not smart enough to live somewhere affordable
Not smart enough to see a mortgage broker for $0 down loan
Not smart enough to grow vegetables

So why should I feel obligated to help this person? Because they aren't very smart?

By the way, 40 hours is nothing. I've worked 40 hours a week by Wednesday at lunch. But you right, maybe I should give more of my money to the not very smart folks out there....

Just imagine if gas prices in America were the same as in Europe. Last I checked gas in Europe was 2 Euro/Liter which is like $8/gallon. As it is gas in Canada is over $4/gallon.

This is not discussion, your posts are largely pollution. You make no friends and influence no people by throwing mud, and rabidly attacking the OP as above. I assume you are taking the time to write in such length and detail because you hope to influence others on this board. Please start showing enough maturity to debate in a reasonable manner. This is doing the forums no credit.
.

Agreed.

The person is very well educated, there's no question about that. However, individuals like him/her tend to change over time if they intend to continue posting. Most end up leaving and never return after receiving constant insults and attacks from other forum members. The best forum members are those who can inject humor and intelligence or just plain life experience.

If you're going to insult others, this forum will become a source of anger and disappointment. You won't like posting here or visiting this site because others will put you right in your place even if you're right.

So why should I feel obligated to help this person? Because they aren't very smart?

By the way, 40 hours is nothing. I've worked 40 hours a week by Wednesday at lunch. But you right, maybe I should give more of my money to the not very smart folks out there....
Talking about very smart:
Monthly payment: 30 Years
Current overnight Interest rate: 6.190%
Loan amount: $ 59,000.00
Monthly payment $ 360.97 a month

Of course you forgot that no bank will make a 1% down loan without mortgage insurance. If it would make such a loan at all to a person with only 1% down and an income of 12,000/year, which I seriously doubt no matter how dang "smart" the customer.

And of course you forgot about the money requirements for fire insurance, and water, sewer, trash and utility bills, furnishings, appliances, and maintenance and exactly what kind of house, garden and neighbors $60,000 buys.

If I were you, I would cease boasting about your real estate investment or sociology "smarts."

S
So why should I feel obligated to help this person? Because they aren't very smart?

By the way, 40 hours is nothing. I've worked 40 hours a week by Wednesday at lunch. But you right, maybe I should give more of my money to the not very smart folks out there....

+1. I work a job that often ends up requiring a 12 - 20 hour weekend in addition to what I put in during the week. So I'm supposed fork over some of my compensation for this lost time with my family so that someone else can: only work 8 hour days five days a week and drive a big smog belching car at the same time!?!?!

The very idea leaves a sour taste in my mouth.

Do you really believe there are that many people incapable of making decisions that the government should take care of them?????????


This attitude explains why there is such an enormous homeless population in the US. The estimates are about 750,000 on any given day. And why 25% of them have some form of mental illness.

I saw a CBS report a few weeks ago where hospitals actually "dropped off" mentally ill patients (who had recovered physically...) in homeless areas. The hospitals claimed "why should we bear the brunt of looking after the mentally ill when no one else does it?"

+1. I work a job that often ends up requiring a 12 - 20 hour weekend in addition to what I put in during the week. So I'm supposed fork over some of my compensation for this lost time with my family so that someone else can: only work 8 hour days five days a week and drive a big smog belching car at the same time!?!?!

The very idea leaves a sour taste in my mouth.
Perhaps you should correspond with a few of the posters who are full of advice for turning meager earnings and a simple life style into financial wealth and security for their retirement years. You will be able to work regular hours then, if you have to do any work at all besides counting your incoming dividend and rental checks.:rolleyes: No more sour mouth!

by the way, $10 per hour at 30 hours per week is $15,600 annually...
Uh... That's $14400/year by my calcs. And if the gubberment takes out 15% in taxes, we're down to $12240/year, aka about a grand a month. Oh yeah, and then there's social security/medicare/state taxes/etc...

My, my..........do we have a flaming liberal?????????

Do you REALLY think the government can solve everyone's problems????????

Do people have NO responsibility for their decisions??????????

Do you really believe there are that many people incapable of making decisions that the government should take care of them?????????

And I thought this was a bicycle forum. Think I will migrate back to the over 50 bunch.
We have liberals, conservatives, libertarians, democrats, republicans, apoliticals, and even a few fascists around here. This is a bicycle forum, but it is the nature of this particular forum's subject matter that some politics will inevitably be mentioned or discussed. The trick is to not delve too deeply into that area. People have been doing a decent job with that on this thread thus far. Let's keep it that way, please.

Just because I don't have kids doesn't mean I don't have a family.

this one.

We have liberals, conservatives, libertarians, democrats, republicans, apoliticals, and even a few fascists around here. This is a bicycle forum, but it is the nature of this particular forum's subject matter that some politics will inevitably be mentioned or discussed. The trick is to not delve too deeply into that area. People have been doing a decent job with that on this thread thus far. Let's keep it that way, please.

Let's not forget the socialists, anarchists, anarcho-communists, syndicalists, etc. :)