Or so say's the U.N
Feel proud that your country is being compared to third world countries.
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Bush really doesn't care about Darkies
Bush really doesn't care about DarkiesFollow
Quote:
Child poverty rates in the United States are now more than 20 per cent
Child poverty is a particularly sensitive indicator for income poverty in rich countries. It is defined as living in a family with an income below 50 per cent of the national average.
The US - with Mexico - has the dubious distinction of seeing its child poverty rates increase to more than 20 per cent. In the UK - which at the end of the 1990s had one of the highest child poverty rates in Europe - the rise in child poverty, by contrast, has been reversed through increases in tax credits and benefits.
Child poverty is a particularly sensitive indicator for income poverty in rich countries. It is defined as living in a family with an income below 50 per cent of the national average.
The US - with Mexico - has the dubious distinction of seeing its child poverty rates increase to more than 20 per cent. In the UK - which at the end of the 1990s had one of the highest child poverty rates in Europe - the rise in child poverty, by contrast, has been reversed through increases in tax credits and benefits.
Slack-asses.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Does anyone else feel like the situation in the U.S. really is irretrievable?
The middle class is going away. My husband and I make nearly double what his parents made thirty years ago, yet have almost half the quality of life they had. The federal "poverty line" is absurdly low for what it's supposed to represent (the level of income at which a family of four cannot sustain itself.) The days when you could start with nothing in this country and wind up wealthy are long past. We are progressing further and further toward being a feudal system composed of a small, ultra-rich ruling class and an enormous underclass of impovershed wage-slaves.
I just don't see how it can possibly get any better. The more I let myself think about it, the more I think that the idealized America, the "land of opportunity" that has existed since the start of the industrial revolution is gone for good.
The middle class is going away. My husband and I make nearly double what his parents made thirty years ago, yet have almost half the quality of life they had. The federal "poverty line" is absurdly low for what it's supposed to represent (the level of income at which a family of four cannot sustain itself.) The days when you could start with nothing in this country and wind up wealthy are long past. We are progressing further and further toward being a feudal system composed of a small, ultra-rich ruling class and an enormous underclass of impovershed wage-slaves.
I just don't see how it can possibly get any better. The more I let myself think about it, the more I think that the idealized America, the "land of opportunity" that has existed since the start of the industrial revolution is gone for good.
But the UN is a commie conspiracy run by Saddam's Oil ministers.
Dumbass.
Child poverty in the USA? There's no poverty in the USA! I know, I've seen Beverly Hills 90210 and the OC.
Limey Conspiracist!!!!
Dumbass.
Child poverty in the USA? There's no poverty in the USA! I know, I've seen Beverly Hills 90210 and the OC.
Limey Conspiracist!!!!
"I started out with nothin' and I still got most of it left" - Seasick Steve
Quote:
ultra-rich ruling class and an enormous underclass of impovershed wage-slaves.
Most of the "Ultra-rich" are people who make money off of people with less money. Take Bill Gates as the perfect example. Assuming prices for everythign keeps going up and overall income stays the same. How is Bill going to make money selling products nobody can afford anymore?
Quote:
Assuming prices for everythign keeps going up and overall income stays the same. How is Bill going to make money selling products nobody can afford anymore?
So we can then take it as a sign that you've come to understand how complete a f'uck wit you make yourself out to be by assuming anything?
Quote:
Does anyone else feel like the situation in the U.S. really is irretrievable?
The middle class is going away. My husband and I make nearly double what his parents made thirty years ago, yet have almost half the quality of life they had.
The middle class is going away. My husband and I make nearly double what his parents made thirty years ago, yet have almost half the quality of life they had.
Making double income over 30 years ago isn't keeping up with inflation.
http://www.census.gov/hhes/income/histinc/h01ar.html
According to this chart, household income has about quadrupled.
PottyMouth wrote:
But the UN is a commie conspiracy run by Saddam's Oil ministers.
Dumbass.
Child poverty in the USA? There's no poverty in the USA! I know, I've seen Beverly Hills 90210 and the OC.
Limey Conspiracist!!!!
Dumbass.
Child poverty in the USA? There's no poverty in the USA! I know, I've seen Beverly Hills 90210 and the OC.
Limey Conspiracist!!!!
Exactly!
I think we shoul go with what the UK has been doing in a lot of areas. We should have socialized medicine. Get rid of medical insurance. But make it voluntary socialized medicine so that if the rich people want to pay out through their *** for private care they can. That way they don't ***** as much.
The problem is, to do that we have to increase taxes. The majority of this country can barely pay our taxes as it is, and those that can afford to pay more will make sure they never have to, because they are the ones that are in the Senate, and Congress, etc. Granted there's rich people not involved with the governemtn, but they have the government to protect them, instead of the government protecting all ofus like it is supposed to.
The problem is, to do that we have to increase taxes. The majority of this country can barely pay our taxes as it is, and those that can afford to pay more will make sure they never have to, because they are the ones that are in the Senate, and Congress, etc. Granted there's rich people not involved with the governemtn, but they have the government to protect them, instead of the government protecting all ofus like it is supposed to.
Youshutup the Vile wrote:
On that note, I have a question. If someone comes to a hospital in the US without insurance and is clearly going to die if they are not seen to, are they? Is there any legislation or rules one way or the other?
My understanding is: Yep, if they are in immenant danger. If, say, they have cancer and without chemo they will die, they don't get chemo. They *might* get something to make them comfortable.
There are free clinics. Likely, you can get seen eventually and perhaps, if you are lucky, diagnosed. However, if it requires surgery and is not immediately life threatening, it isn't going to happen unless you can pay for it.
Youshutup the Vile wrote:
On that note, I have a question. If someone comes to a hospital in the US without insurance and is clearly going to die if they are not seen to, are they? Is there any legislation or rules one way or the other?
They'll get treated, but they'll be fu[b][/b]cked for life.
Quote:
My understanding is: Yep, if they are in immenant danger. If, say, they have cancer and without chemo they will die, they don't get chemo. They *might* get something to make them comfortable.
I think state legislation determines what amount of care hospitals are required to provide in emergency situations, so it varies. I do know that a friend of mine had a benign tumor the size of a baseball in her head and managed to get it removed despite the fact that her health insurance was not going to cover it because she went out of plan to find the best doctor to perform the surgery. Of course, she had a bill approaching $100K that she'll be paying off the rest of her life, but she did get it removed.
You will never be, legally, refused life-saving treatment at a hospital in the USA, regardless of financial status. You will, however, have to foot at least some of the bill by any means you can, even if it is paying a dollar a day for the rest of your life.
edit: This does not mean you will get the best of the best of care. I.e. you will not be seeing any elite specialists.
A law was recently passed (I think it was passed) that says hospitals can pass the costs of services rendered to people who can't pay on to the Federal Government. I haven't been paying attention to this bill, so I am going on info from a few months ago, but the top paragraph is accurate.
Edited, Thu Sep 8 21:15:26 2005 by tonmaitre
edit: This does not mean you will get the best of the best of care. I.e. you will not be seeing any elite specialists.
A law was recently passed (I think it was passed) that says hospitals can pass the costs of services rendered to people who can't pay on to the Federal Government. I haven't been paying attention to this bill, so I am going on info from a few months ago, but the top paragraph is accurate.
Edited, Thu Sep 8 21:15:26 2005 by tonmaitre
Quote:
The problem is, to do that we have to increase taxes.
No, you don't have to increase taxes. You just have to stop spending over 50% of the budget on defense. I mean really, does the U.S. navy really need another aircraft carrier that costs over 2 billion dollars to make. 2 billion dollars can do wonders for the health system.
Quote:
But make it voluntary socialized medicine so that if the rich people want to pay out through their *** for private care they can. That way they don't ***** as much.
hmm... I was under the impression that quality of treatment has very little to do with it. I thought it was something like the government turning into a nanny-state(ok more of one, if its possible) so they don't have to pay out the *** when timmy and bobby cook up another stupid scheme. Personally, I want the right to hurt myself, however idiotically I choose to do it.
it seems Kanye West agrees with the topic
You dont want to go the same way as the UK, our health service is compared to the worlds worst. Our hospitals are as dirty as third world ones, and you wait for a year for treatment. It also costs about 10 times as much as insurance in the US does, overall id take your system anyday.
Quote:
Child poverty rates in the United States are now more than 20 per cent
Child poverty is a particularly sensitive indicator for income poverty in rich countries. It is defined as living in a family with an income below 50 per cent of the national average.
The US - with Mexico - has the dubious distinction of seeing its child poverty rates increase to more than 20 per cent. In the UK - which at the end of the 1990s had one of the highest child poverty rates in Europe - the rise in child poverty, by contrast, has been reversed through increases in tax credits and benefits.
Child poverty is a particularly sensitive indicator for income poverty in rich countries. It is defined as living in a family with an income below 50 per cent of the national average.
The US - with Mexico - has the dubious distinction of seeing its child poverty rates increase to more than 20 per cent. In the UK - which at the end of the 1990s had one of the highest child poverty rates in Europe - the rise in child poverty, by contrast, has been reversed through increases in tax credits and benefits.
I wonder why. Here's a good idea for you out there in cyberspace land.
If you're fu[/b]cking poor, stop fuc[b]king.
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
Quote:
Child poverty rates in the United States are now more than 20 per cent
Child poverty is a particularly sensitive indicator for income poverty in rich countries. It is defined as living in a family with an income below 50 per cent of the national average.
The US - with Mexico - has the dubious distinction of seeing its child poverty rates increase to more than 20 per cent. In the UK - which at the end of the 1990s had one of the highest child poverty rates in Europe - the rise in child poverty, by contrast, has been reversed through increases in tax credits and benefits.
Child poverty is a particularly sensitive indicator for income poverty in rich countries. It is defined as living in a family with an income below 50 per cent of the national average.
The US - with Mexico - has the dubious distinction of seeing its child poverty rates increase to more than 20 per cent. In the UK - which at the end of the 1990s had one of the highest child poverty rates in Europe - the rise in child poverty, by contrast, has been reversed through increases in tax credits and benefits.
I wonder why. Here's a good idea for you out there in cyberspace land.
If you're fu[/b]cking poor, stop fuc[b]king.
That's like telling an alcoholic to stop drinking, or a crack who[/b]re to stop using crack and who[b]ring, or telling Gbaji to stop posting long *** posts, or... you get the point.
Nepthys wrote:
If you're ******* poor, stop *******.
Yes, because only the affluent should be allowed sexual gratification or parenthood.
Quote:
Yes, because only the affluent should be allowed to be responsible and logical.
Fixed you stupid hippy whiner.
Look, if you don't have the money to support yourself, you don't have the money to support children. If they want to be parents so bad, be responsible and logical about your life decisions.
It is NOT the government's job to come in and make sure that ever poor person is taken care of if they refuse to be responsible.
If you don't don't have the money, having a 6th kid is not going to help.
It's your right to have childern. It also becomes your fault if they grow up impoverished and malnurished.
NephthysWanderer the Charming wrote:
If you're fu[/b]cking poor, stop fuc[b]king.
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Quote:
But then we'd run out of poor people within a generation and have to hire the wealthy to bus our tables and ditch our b[b][/b]itches and pick our crops!
How I read it for some reason.
Say the word...
Hehehe... like drive them out into the middle of a forest, kick them out of the car and drive away real fast?
How about wealthy people fu[i][/i]cking the poor? In the physical sense, not some social commentary. Are we down with that?
How about wealthy people fu[i][/i]cking the poor? In the physical sense, not some social commentary. Are we down with that?
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
Jophiel wrote:
Hehehe... like drive them out into the middle of a forest, kick them out of the car and drive away real fast?
How about wealthy people fu[i][/i]cking the poor? In the physical sense, not some social commentary. Are we down with that?
How about wealthy people fu[i][/i]cking the poor? In the physical sense, not some social commentary. Are we down with that?
only if they've recently washed
Recent Visitors: 169
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (169)
- Forums
- Cross Site
- The Asylum
- Bush really doesn't care about Darkies
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC