Con_Alma;1572439 wrote:People disagree what is positive in their policies and what isn't...including you and me.

but one of us is right.

isadore;1572441 wrote:but one of us is right.

No disagreement there.

Con_Alma;1572438 wrote:Decent is subjective.

land of opportunity helps to define it.
I ran out of money before I could get a good education.

Being defined as a land of opportunity doesn't create the onus to be one.

Con_Alma;1572453 wrote:Being defined as a land of opportunity doesn't create the onus to be one.

it sure has for this country. And now it raises discontent as the statement becomes seemingly less true.

isadore;1572496 wrote:it sure has for this country. And now it raises discontent as the statement becomes seemingly less true.

Nowhere in our Constitution do I see such an obligation.

isadore;1572496 wrote:it sure has for this country. And now it raises discontent as the statement becomes seemingly less true.

I think you should head to Finland toot sweet.

[RIGHT]:[/RIGHT]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/wealth-gap-guide-... Some interesting comments from the article:
"But a study released last week found that the United States isn't any less mobile than it was in the 1970s. A child born in the poorest 20 percent of families in 1986 had a 9 percent chance of reaching the top 20 percent as an adult, the study found — roughly the same odds as in 1971."
"Most economists say some inequality is needed to reward hard work, talent and innovation.

Con_Alma;1572642 wrote:

[RIGHT]:[/RIGHT]

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/wealth-gap-guide-... Some interesting comments from the article:
"But a study released last week found that the United States isn't any less mobile than it was in the 1970s. A child born in the poorest 20 percent of families in 1986 had a 9 percent chance of reaching the top 20 percent as an adult, the study found — roughly the same odds as in 1971."
"Most economists say some inequality is needed to reward hard work, talent and innovation.

Here is some interesting context from the article
Gosh a ruddies
Q. Hasn't there always been a wide gulf between the richest people and the poorest? Three decades ago, Americans' income tended to grow at roughly similar rates, no matter how much you made. But since roughly 1980, income has grown most for the top earners. For the poorest 20 percent of families, it's dropped. Incomes for the highest-earning 1 percent of Americans soared 31 percent from 2009 through 2012, after adjusting for inflation.
Q. Hasn't there always been a wide gulf between the richest people and the poorest?
A. Yes. What's new is the widening gap between the wealthiest and everyone else.
Q. How has the middle class fared?
A. Not well. Median household income peaked in 1999 at $56,080, adjusted for inflation. It fell to $51,017 by 2012. The percentage of American households with income within 50 percent of the median — one way of measuring the middle class — fell from 50 percent in 1970 to 42 percent in 2010.
Q. Has it become harder for someone born poor to become rich?

Con_Alma wrote:"But a study released last week found that the United States isn't any less mobile than it was in the 1970s. A child born in the poorest 20 percent of families in 1986 had a 9 percent chance of reaching the top 20 percent as an adult, the study found — roughly the same odds as in 1971."

Other research has shown that the United States isn't as socially mobile as once thought. In a study of 22 countries, economist Miles Corak of the University of Ottawa found that the United States ranked 15th in social mobility. Only Italy and the Britain among wealthy countries ranked lower.
Q. Does it matter if some people are much richer than others?

Con_Alma wrote:"Most economists say some inequality is needed to reward hard work, talent and innovation.

But a wealth gap that's too wide is usually unhealthy. It can slow economic growth, in part because richer Americans save more of their income than do others. Pay concentrated at the top is less likely to be spent.
It can also trigger reckless borrowing. Before the 2008 financial crisis, middle class households struggled to keep up their spending even as their pay stagnated. To do so, they piled up debt. Swelling debt helped inflate the housing bubble and ignite the financial crisis. Experts note that the Great Depression and the Great Recession were both preceded by surging income gaps and heedless borrowing by middle class Americans.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/wealth-gap-guide-why-matters-080154912.html
　

Devils Advocate;1572641 wrote:I think you should head to Finland toot sweet.

As an American I want to bring the best policies and innovations of other nation to my country to make it a better place for its citizens.

Con_Alma;1572628 wrote:Nowhere in our Constitution do I see such an obligation.

look closer at our founding documents and the will of the American people.

isadore;1572671 wrote:look closer at our founding documents and the will of the American people.

isadore;1572373 wrote:no, not for the large majority in that situation

Here is a list of scholarships available for kids who put in the work.http://www.guaranteed-scholarships.com/ Granted, these are not for kids who have screwed around through high school and finished with a 2.5 and 20 ACT. Kids can also serve in the military and receive great educational benefits. For kids who are willing to sacrifice and put in the work, college is a realistic goal.

isadore;1572431 wrote:I know Ebenezer, the poor are always with us. Just there are some of us that want to allow them a true chance to better themselves

Me included. And the best pathway for that to happen is much smaller government and free market capitalism. That recipe has proven to be the best solution for the human condition, by far.

Wake up.

QuakerOats;1572802 wrote:Me included. And the best pathway for that to happen is much smaller government and free market capitalism.

You mean constantly telling the poor the deck is stacked against them and they need the govt to survive isn't motivating?!?

QuakerOats;1572802 wrote:Me included. And the best pathway for that to happen is much smaller government and free market capitalism. That recipe has proven to be the best solution for the human condition, by far.

Wake up.

well gosh a ruddies that is far from what we see. Tax cuts, deregulation and cuts in state support for education have had quite the opposite effect, reducing opportunity and social mobility. GI Bill that provided free post secondary education for the veterans of WWII was a great example of government action that successfully increased opportunity and social mobility.

Al Bundy;1572801 wrote:Here is a list of scholarships available for kids who put in the work.http://www.guaranteed-scholarships.com/ Granted, these are not for kids who have screwed around through high school and finished with a 2.5 and 20 ACT. Kids can also serve in the military and receive great educational benefits. For kids who are willing to sacrifice and put in the work, college is a realistic goal.

Well thank you for the list. Of course most of the offers are very limited and the amounts granted are chump change when compared with the rapidly growing expense of a post secondary education

isadore;1572841 wrote:Well thank you for the list. Of course most of the offers are very limited and the amounts granted are chump change when compared with the rapidly growing expense of a post secondary education

The interest is so low (and deductible on incomes under like $60k) that it's pretty trivial. Learn personal responsibility at a young age - no one to blame but yourself if you take on $200k in debt to pull a C-average in art history at Columbia.

College (and even graduate school) in most non-technical fields is little more than a signal of ability and confidence to perspective employers. There's very little intrinsic value in, say business undergrad, as any smart person will easily be taught and learn what they need on the job. Wall Street and top-tier consulting firms are actually fairly notorious for NOT taking business undergrads because they want a clean slate to teach how they do things.

The people who really suffer with the debt or their school/major choice were poorly advised in more ways than one.

The larger failing is a disconnect between supply and demand - the vast majority of schools will offer a variety of business majors, with absolutely no regard for demand/need in the private sector. As a result, students who perform poorly can't find a job, and even those who do well see the supply glut drive down their earning power.

isadore;1572666 wrote:Here is some interesting context from the article
...　

It is indeed interesting.

Thinking the we must force people to makes less and other to stop borrow in hope of averting something combined with the belief that the wealth gap is too large are just a few of the things we most likely disagree on.

isadore;1572671 wrote:look closer at our founding documents and the will of the American people.

I would gladly read any any document contain the obligation of the nation's government to provide opportuntiy to the people.

Con_Alma;1572863 wrote:It is indeed interesting.

Thinking the we must force people to makes less and other to stop borrow in hope of averting something combined with the belief that the wealth gap is too large are just a few of the things we most likely disagree on.

I do believe in greater taxation of the income and wealth of the richest.
I do believe that maldistribution of wealth hurts our nation
We do obviously disagree.
you usually express yourself very well

but I have no idea what this means
"other to stop borrow in hope of averting something"?

"cuts in state support for education have had quite the opposite effect,"

Interesting, because some of the highest funded public schools in the nation have the worst performance results....how could that be?

Con_Alma;1572869 wrote:I would gladly read any any document contain the obligation of the nation's government to provide opportuntiy to the people.

implied in governments being instituted to insure the pursuit of Happiness in the Declaration
implied in government promoting the general welfare in the Preamble
and legislated in the Humphrey Hawkins full employment bill
the reason for US government student loan programs.

Manhattan Buckeye;1572904 wrote:"cuts in state support for education have had quite the opposite effect,"

Interesting, because some of the highest funded public schools in the nation have the worst performance results....how could that be?

LOL, yeah, the problems aren't really that we don't spend enough on education.

If there's one thing we can learn from other countries that have some successes is that the US is perhaps too large for one-size-fits-all federal policies to be effective. Maybe where we've actually gone off-track is growing the federal govt to crowd out state/local govts and, in many cases, perhaps being counter-effective to what they believe works and want to do.