NationStates Jolt Archive

I had to watch it. I'm a big Stossel fan. Anyone else who's watching this, and what do you think of it? Regardless of your ideology, or who you support, he does point out many major problems with the current candidates, and even many of the problems we as Americans have with our politicians. We expect them to be miracle workers (Well, some of us at least). And when they can't deliver, we get pissy.

So, what do you think of this? and what do you think of John Stossel in general?

I don't

Strossel is an idiot. I dont waste my time with him. If I wanted lies and distortion of facts, Id just watch Fox News. At least they dont try as hard to pretend that theyre balanced.

Strossel is an idiot. I dont waste my time with him. If I wanted lies and distortion of facts, Id just watch Fox News. At least they dont try as hard to pretend that theyre balanced.

*sigh* He doesn't try to pretend that he's balanced. He gives a mixture of his personal opinion and thoughts, and inconsistencies of others. Y'know, like that Republican saying that John McCain was going to lower childhood obesity.XD

Stossel always struck me as the stereotypical Look Out For Number One Fuck Everyone Else Libertarian. This belief sunk in especially when he talks about pittance minimum wage as being good for third world nations as opposed to no wage at all.

Stossel always struck me as the stereotypical Look Out For Number One Fuck Everyone Else Libertarian. This belief sunk in especially when he talks about pittance minimum wage as being good for third world nations as opposed to no wage at all.

So...hes a standard libertarian?

Yes, that is why I ignore him.

Stossel always struck me as the stereotypical Look Out For Number One Fuck Everyone Else Libertarian. This belief sunk in especially when he talks about pittance minimum wage as being good for third world nations as opposed to no wage at all.

Think about it. Which would you rather have: No job, or a long, hard job that pays very little? It's work or starve, and there isn't any welfare in most third-world countries. It's all relative.

*sigh* He doesn't try to pretend that he's balanced. He gives a mixture of his personal opinion and thoughts, and inconsistencies of others. Y'know, like that Republican saying that John McCain was going to lower childhood obesity.XD

Sorry, I just looked him up and I got him mixed up with a comrade of his who writes a serios of "the politically incorrect guide to..." books, which are nothing but historical revisionism to further an agenda.


Strossel, now I remember. Hes that selfish douche who lives in a fantasy land were things like the market always correcting itself for the better actually exist. IE a standard libertarian.

Think about it. Which would you rather have: No job, or a long, hard job that pays very little? It's work or starve, and there isn't any welfare in most third-world countries. It's all relative.

Which is the same as saying "Would you like a saltine cracker every day or nothing to eat at all?" Just like information, insufficient amount of anything tends to be much worse in effect than no amount of the same to begin with.

Think about it. Which would you rather have: No job, or a long, hard job that pays very little? It's work or starve, and there isn't any welfare in most third-world countries. It's all relative.

But that doesnt mean its a good situation. Strossel says we shouldnt pay them more because they should be happy with that. Its like me beating the shit out of you but saying you shouldnt complain and we shouldnt give you medical treatment because I didnt kill you.

Sorry, I just looked him up and I got him mixed up with a comrade of his who writes a serios of "the politically incorrect guide to..." books, which are nothing but historical revisionism to further an agenda.


Strossel, now I remember. Hes that selfish douche who lives in a fantasy land were things like the market always correcting itself for the better actually exist. IE a standard libertarian.

...

*sigh* So, I take it that you don't believe that the market corrects itself? Or that when it does, it worsens?

...

*sigh* So, I take it that you don't believe that the market corrects itself? Or that when it does, it worsens?

Sometimes it does. And sometimes it is for the better.


I just dont believe that it always will or that it always will be for the better.

For example, while the bailout sucks, its for the better, because allowing the market to self correct would have destroyed us. Im not nostolgic for the '30s

...

*sigh* So, I take it that you don't believe that the market corrects itself? Or that when it does, it worsens?

The Seven Billion Dollar Bailout doesn't believe the market corrects itself either.

But that doesnt mean its a good situation. Strossel says we shouldnt pay them more because they should be happy with that. Its like me beating the shit out of you but saying you shouldnt complain and we shouldnt give you medical treatment because I didnt kill you.
But with a higher minimum wage, those places would hire less people. That means instead of twelve people making a bare-minimum living, you have 4 people making an average living, and 8 people starving to death. Those countries are no where near industrialized yet. They're third world countries. They need time, they're still stuck in the early 1900s.

But with a higher minimum wage, those places would hire less people. That means instead of twelve people making a bare-minimum living, you have 4 people making an average living, and 8 people starving to death. Those countries are no where near industrialized yet. They're third world countries. They need time, they're still stuck in the early 1900s.

And exploiting the shit out of them KEEPS them in the 1900s.

Sometimes it does. And sometimes it is for the better.


I just dont believe that it always will or that it always will be for the better.

For example, while the bailout sucks, its for the better, because allowing the market to self correct would have destroyed us. Im not nostolgic for the '30s
Neither am I, and I'm not suggesting that it will correct itself in this case. What I'm saying, is that most of the time, government intervenes when there is no need to. This however, isn't likely to correct itself.
The Seven Billion Dollar Bailout doesn't believe the market corrects itself either.
The seven-billion dollar bail-out is a necessary evil at this point. If it wasn't for the government messing with the housing market in the first place, this seven-billion dollar bail-out would've been, say, a two-billion dollar bail-out.

Or for that matter, even further reduced if we hadn't jacked up oil prices with good ol' Mr. Bush.

And exploiting the shit out of them KEEPS them in the 1900s.
And forcing a higher minimum wage reduces their POPULATION to the 1900s.

What I'm saying, is that most of the time, government intervenes when there is no need to.

Like when?

And forcing a higher minimum wage reduces their POPULATION to the 1900s.

No, see, when you have wealthier people, they spend more money.

Spending more money, allows these companies to grow.

When these companies grow, they create more jobs.

When they create more jobs, more people spend more money.

This is economics 101. Im not seeing whats hard to understand here.

Like when?

Like in Iraq. Like in the endless red tape in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath. (Went down there with my church, amazing amount of paperwork to be allowed to do anything) Like in Fanny mae and that other, less catchy companies name. Like in a few hundred other things.

Like in Iraq. Like in the endless red tape in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath. (Went down there with my church, amazing amount of paperwork to be allowed to do anything)


These are not economic related. We are discussing things economically related. And the relief for Hurricane Katrina was not the problem. The way Bush and FEMA handled it was.


Like in Fanny mae and that other, less catchy companies name. Like in a few hundred other things.

FannieMae was done to prevent were we are now. It just didnt work.

But with a higher minimum wage, those places would hire less people. That means instead of twelve people making a bare-minimum living, you have 4 people making an average living, and 8 people starving to death. Those countries are no where near industrialized yet. They're third world countries. They need time, they're still stuck in the early 1900s.

Some people argue those countries were better off back when they were not trying to industrialize.

As in, people there could just farm their darn land and live off it. They had no need of a job then.

Now they need a job because (most of) the (good) land is property of transnational corporations using modern agricultural techniques to farm luxury goods like coffee, exotic fruits and chocolate for the west. Instead of being used to grow basic crops like wheat, corn, soy, rice and so on to feed the local populace.

Basically, "Would you rather have a sucky job that doesn't pay or no job at all" is a false dichotomy(which is a logical fallacy). There are other options than just those two.

No, see, when you have wealthier people, they spend more money.

Spending more money, allows these companies to grow.

When these companies grow, they create more jobs.

When they create more jobs, more people spend more money.

This is economics 101. Im not seeing whats hard to understand here.

Neither am I. I'm not disagreeing with anything there. What I am seeing is that these countries are at a disadvantage. The countries that colonized them kept them down technologically (Forcing natural resources out of them instead of actually investing in them). History 101. They're still struggling to catch up, and with the recession, enough people will be losing their jobs, especially in those third world countries. Higher wages, yes, but the timing has to be right.

The Seven Billion Dollar Bailout doesn't believe the market corrects itself either.

I feel the need to point out that it's a Seven Hundred Billion Dollar Bailout.

That's 700 000 000 000$
Not 7 000 000 000$

A significant difference.

Like in Iraq. Like in the endless red tape in Hurricane Katrina's aftermath. (Went down there with my church, amazing amount of paperwork to be allowed to do anything)
What do either of these have to with economics which is what you were discussing (narket self-stabilization, remember?)
Like in Fanny mae and that other, less catchy companies name.
20/20 hindsight
Like in a few hundred other things.
Do these few hundred actually have anything to with with the discussion at hand (i.e. economics)

These are not economic related. We are discussing things economically related. And the relief for Hurricane Katrina was not the problem. The way Bush and FEMA handled it was.

Really? So the invasion of Iraq had NOTHING to do with the higher gas prices? And I doubt any other official at the time would've handled it differently.


FannieMae was done to prevent were we are now. It just didnt work.
What makes you think throwing a bag of money into the fire will put it out the next time, if it's on a larger scale?

Neither am I. I'm not disagreeing with anything there. What I am seeing is that these countries are at a disadvantage. The countries that colonized them kept them down technologically (Forcing natural resources out of them instead of actually investing in them). History 101. They're still struggling to catch up, and with the recession, enough people will be losing their jobs, especially in those third world countries.

Ok...we're on the same page here so far...


Higher wages, yes, but the timing has to be right.

Like when? Seriously? Maybe when the economy is good? Like under Reagen? Or Clinton?

See, no matter how well theyre doing, companies arent going to raise the wages because they just dont care about these people theyre employing. It has nothing to do with "the right time" and everything to do with "this will make our profits higher and get me a bonus quicker!"


Come on, youre a smart kid, you should know this.

See, no matter how well theyre doing, companies arent going to raise the wages because they just dont care about these people theyre employing. It has nothing to do with "the right time" and everything to do with "this will make our profits higher and get me a bonus quicker!"

Reliance on the non-existent altruism of wealthy individuals and corporate entities is what makes Trickle Down Economics such an epic fail when applied in practice.

Really? So the invasion of Iraq had NOTHING to do with the higher gas prices?

Doubtful. Besides, gas prices werent that high pre-Iraq. And even if they were, boy that invasion sure lowered those gas prices!

Iraq was ideological. Pure and simple. Sure, allowing defense contracters and oil companies to line their pockets was a side benefit, but Iraq was an ideologial war.

Besides, every year oil companies post record profits, and then raise gas prices further. No amount of new oil will change gas prices much. Theyre gouging. Pure and simple.

And I doubt any other official at the time would've handled it differently.

Considering we have had very successful humanitarian and relief efforts under other administrations, I can tell you that your doubt is misplaced.


What makes you think throwing a bag of money into the fire will put it out the next time, if it's on a larger scale?

It might not. But doing nothing would have had a 100% chance of screwing us. At least if we keep trying, it might work.

What do either of these have to with economics which is what you were discussing (narket self-stabilization, remember?)

Government intervention, remember? The invasion of Iraq propped up oil prices. that helped with our current recession. Katrina has kept New Orleans half-destroyed, making New Orleans in a poor economic state.

20/20 hindsight

Do these few hundred actually have anything to with with the discussion at hand (i.e. economics)
Yes. They do. Like the incredible high (Highest bracket in income tax is 35%! I mean, isn't that just a little high?)taxes that keep many people down (See economics 101 post by KoL :D), excessive regulation (Some regulation is needed, but it's gotten ridiculous), etc, etc.

Really? So the invasion of Iraq had NOTHING to do with the higher gas prices? And I doubt any other official at the time would've handled it differently.
Yeah, it did... It made them go up. Still not an economic intervention though.
What makes you think throwing a bag of money into the fire will put it out the next time, if it's on a larger scale?
I don't, but something definitely has to be done, and that is the "fix" that has been proposed. And with certain caveats it might actually work, at least somewhat.

For the record CM, the reason Im always particularlly harsh on you an your opinions is youre a smart kid and I see so much of my early high shool self in you.

Thus, I must mold you to my (correct) world view :p

Ok...we're on the same page here so far...




Like when? Seriously? Maybe when the economy is good? Like under Reagen? Or Clinton?

See, no matter how well theyre doing, companies arent going to raise the wages because they just dont care about these people theyre employing. It has nothing to do with "the right time" and everything to do with "this will make our profits higher and get me a bonus quicker!"


Come on, youre a smart kid, you should know this.
Of course they aren't, but you can't say "Higher minimum wage!" When employers are already going to lay off people by the hundreds, not unless you want to increase that to the thousands. Government has to increase it at the proper time, when the economy is good.
Reliance on the non-existent altruism of wealthy individuals and corporate entities is what makes Trickle Down Economics such an epic fail when applied in practice.
Trickle-down economics is not "no government intervention whatsoever"
Doubtful. Besides, gas prices werent that high pre-Iraq. And even if they were, boy that invasion sure lowered those gas prices!

Iraq was ideological. Pure and simple. Sure, allowing defense contracters and oil companies to line their pockets was a side benefit, but Iraq was an ideologial war.

Besides, every year oil companies post record profits, and then raise gas prices further. No amount of new oil will change gas prices much. Theyre gouging. Pure and simple.



Considering we have had very successful humanitarian and relief efforts under other administrations, I can tell you that your doubt is misplaced.

How many can you name and back up?

It might not. But doing nothing would have had a 100% chance of screwing us. At least if we keep trying, it might work.
Let me put it this way...

We can have a 100% chance of getting screwed to the pwoer of ten,

OR

We can have a 95% chance of getting screwed to the power of twenty. *

I don't like to take my chances with something like that.

*numbers may not be completely accurate, and reflect only the spirit of what is happening.

Of course they aren't, but you can't say "Higher minimum wage!" When employers are already going to lay off people by the hundreds, not unless you want to increase that to the thousands. Government has to increase it at the proper time, when the economy is good.


Yes, we can say "Higher minimum wages!" because if no one does, they never will.

Again, you can say "Governement can only increase when the economy is good!" but there are two problems with that. The governments of these countries like US companies exploiting their people because it makes THEM rich, so they will never raise minimum wages.

Two, without pressure, a corperation wont raise minimum wages EVER because they dont care about the people they are employing. Timing has NOTHING to do with it. We said the same things under Clinton, when the economy was golden. The economic timing was right then, but they didnt do it.


How many can you name and back up?

Well, the Balkans....

Let me put it this way...

We can have a 100% chance of getting screwed to the pwoer of ten,

OR

We can have a 95% chance of getting screwed to the power of twenty. *

I don't like to take my chances with something like that.

*numbers may not be completely accurate, and reflect only the spirit of what is happening.

Again, a 5% chance of restoring our economy is better then a 0% chance.

Yeah, it did... It made them go up. Still not an economic intervention though.

As far as I'm concerned, if it's started by the government, it was intentional and unneeded, and it impacts the economy, in the short or long-term, it's an economic intervention.
For the record CM, the reason Im always particularlly harsh on you an your opinions is youre a smart kid and I see so much of my early high shool self in you.

Thus, I must mold you to my (correct) world view :p
But what if it turns the other way around, I mold you to my (correct) world-view? :eek2:

Government intervention, remember? The invasion of Iraq propped up oil prices. that helped with our current recession.
Still not an economic intervention thus has no bearing on the discussion.
Katrina has kept New Orleans half-destroyed, making New Orleans in a poor economic state.
Hurricane Katrina was not a government intervention, economic or otherwise. It was a natural disaster.
Yes. They do. Like the incredible high (Highest bracket in income tax is 35%! I mean, isn't that just a little high?)
Care to check how much you have to make to qualify for that?
It's over $200k, I'd hardly call that "being kept down".
, excessive regulation (Some regulation is needed, but it's gotten ridiculous), etc, etc.
Specifics

But what if it turns the other way around, I mold you to my (correct) world-view? :eek2:

No. Because yours is not correct.:p

As far as I'm concerned, if it's started by the government, it was intentional and unneeded, and it impacts the economy, in the short or long-term, it's an economic intervention.


Emphasis mine. No true scotsman.

As far as I'm concerned, if it's started by the government, it was intentional and unneeded, and it impacts the economy, in the short or long-term, it's an economic intervention.

That's where you are wrong. An economic intervention would be in intervention down for economic reasons.

Stossel always struck me as the stereotypical Look Out For Number One Fuck Everyone Else Libertarian. This belief sunk in especially when he talks about pittance minimum wage as being good for third world nations as opposed to no wage at all.

Unfortunately, we know it to be an absolute truth. This does not justify paying an absolute minimum wage. That's the type of thinking that brings down the American Empire - build up the third world by outsourcing to them. Heh! Heh! Remind me of Ancient Rome hiring barbarians to defend them.:D

Yes, we can say "Higher minimum wages!" because if no one does, they never will.

Again, you can say "Governement can only increase when the economy is good!" but there are two problems with that. The governments of these countries like US companies exploiting their people because it makes THEM rich, so they will never raise minimum wages.

This is where we gather in a huge crowd with signs and catchy chants.

Two, without pressure, a corperation wont raise minimum wages EVER because they dont care about the people they are employing. Timing has NOTHING to do with it. We said the same things under Clinton, when the economy was golden. The economic timing was right then, but they didnt do it.

Because we, as Americans(Or possible, as humans), have a long history of electing nitwits, crooks, incompetents, and otherwise unworthy people into office. We need to elect people who KNOW what to do, and who won't flip-flop because if they don't they might lose a few points in the polls.

Well, the Balkins....

Back it up with links?

Again, a 5% chance of restoring our economy is better then a 0% chance.
Again, I'd rather get screwed to the power of ten instead to the power of twenty.

Heh! Heh! Remind me of Ancient Rome hiring barbarians to defend them.:D

Oh! How does it end for Rome? They stay the most powerful empire right?



;)

Still not an economic intervention thus has no bearing on the discussion.

*sigh*

Hurricane Katrina was not a government intervention, economic or otherwise. It was a natural disaster.

No, but the aftermath was caused by the government intervention. it shouldn't have lasted for three years, and counting.

Care to check how much you have to make to qualify for that?
It's over $200k, I'd hardly call that "being kept down".

It's 325,000, if memory serves correctly. it discourages people from making money. The more people make, the more they spend (Or perhaps even invest in a company). The more people spend, the more money goes into the economy. This helps stimulate economy. 35%, when coupled with state taxes, and the assortment of taxes other then the income tax, lead to ridiculous amounts being taken from people. It's being punished for making good choices and doing well.
No. Because yours is not correct.:p
http://www.atpm.com/11.06/moraine/images/2-two-docks-420.jpg

This is where we gather in a huge crowd with signs and catchy chants.

Because we, as Americans(Or possible, as humans), have a long history of electing nitwits, crooks, incompetents, and otherwise unworthy people into office. We need to elect people who KNOW what to do, and who won't flip-flop because if they don't they might lose a few points in the polls.

What do our elected officials have to do with other countries minimum wages? They cant mandate the minimum wage in another country (unless we take them over...*ahem* bring them democracy). No, our politicians arent at fault for this. The companies must themselves make this conscience desicion, and only through outside pressure will they do this.

Of course, Americans would have to do things like boycott, and we all know how hard that is for good little consumerist sheep.

Back it up with links?

I ask this not to be a dick, but as a serious question. Do you really know nothing about our involvement in the Balkans during Clinton? All our peace keeping and humanitarian efforts there (after we bombed the shit out of them and killed a bunch of Yugoslavian leaders for war crimes)?

Because if you dont, I will find you links. But I dont want to waste my time if this is a knee-jerk "source or it didnt happen!" thing that happens on NSG all the freakin' time (and if it is, no harm, I do em too).

Again, I'd rather get screwed to the power of ten instead to the power of twenty.

But there is that 5% chance you wont (in reality, its much bigger). As opposed to a surity we go back to the '30s.

Oh! How does it end for Rome? They stay the most powerful empire right?



;)
We're.... We're not down! just... Waiting! that' right, biding our time. Mark my words, in a few hundred years, the all-powerful New Italian Empire will rise again! *dons toga*

What do our elected officials have to do with other countries minimum wages? They cant mandate the minimum wage in another country (unless we take them over...*ahem* bring them democracy). No, our politicians arent at fault for this. The companies must themselves make this conscience desicion, and only through outside pressure will they do this.

Of course, Americans would have to do things like boycott, and we all know how hard that is for good little consumerist sheep.



1. Then make the companies with a boycott.
2. Then stop being a sheep dammit! One man can make a thousand sheep follow suit!
3. Our politicians are at fault. They raise the minimum wage at the wrong times, here at least.

I ask this not to be a dick, but as a serious question. Do you really know nothing about our involvement in the Balkans during Clinton? All our peace keeping and humanitarian efforts there (after we bombed the shit out of them and killed a bunch of people for war crimes)?

Because if you dont, I will find you links. But I dont want to wastemy time if this is a knee-jerk "source or it didnt happen!" thing that happens on NSG all the freakin' time.

With all seriousness, all I knew about the Balkans was the part where we bombed the shit out of them.

But there is that 5% chance you wont (in reality, its much bigger). As opposed to a surity we go back to the '30s.
In reality, it's more like 20 or 30%. I'd still prefer the thirties to the middle ages.

Oh! How does it end for Rome? They stay the most powerful empire right?



;)

They ignore the signs that say, "Do not feed the barbarians"and end up getting eaten.:eek2:

They ignore the signs that say, "Do not feed the barbarians"and end up getting eaten.:eek2:

Hey, as long as the US doesn't start hiring any sort of mercenaries to do our military's job. Especially not one who's name starts with a color and ends with water.

...

HOLY SHIT!:eek2:

Hey, as long as the US doesn't start hiring any sort of mercenaries to do our military's job. Especially not one who's name starts with a color and ends with water.

...

HOLY SHIT!:eek2:

Awesome.

*sigh*
So you're finally giving up? Good, about time.
No, but the aftermath was caused by the government intervention. it shouldn't have lasted for three years, and counting.
How was the government intervention unnecessary? Poorly executed, yes. Unnecessary, no.
It's 325,000, if memory serves correctly. it discourages people from making money. The more people make, the more they spend (Or perhaps even invest in a company). The more people spend, the more money goes into the economy. This helps stimulate economy. 35%, when coupled with state taxes, and the assortment of taxes other then the income tax, lead to ridiculous amounts being taken from people. It's being punished for making good choices and doing well.
Actually, as a percentage of income, low to middle income people actually put more back into the economy.
Personally I would prefer a flat tax with no deductions, but that is unlikely to happen.

It's 325,000, if memory serves correctly. it discourages people from making money. The more people make, the more they spend (Or perhaps even invest in a company). The more people spend, the more money goes into the economy. This helps stimulate economy. 35%, when coupled with state taxes, and the assortment of taxes other then the income tax, lead to ridiculous amounts being taken from people. It's being punished for making good choices and doing well.


People generally try to make more money irrespective of income tax (and I wouldn't say 35% is high, but I'm a dirty leftie). There's some drag around the boundaries where people doing some acrobatics to just stay under it, but no-one seriously stops trying to earn money based on interest rates. The most you could argue is they try to relocate rather than give up.

See it as a flat tax on luxury income (which obviously increases as a % of total income as you go higher up the pay scale).

Kenya is undeniable proof that crossing your fingers and hoping that the existance of rich people will make the poor better off doesn't work. It genuinely is a mansions neighbouring slums place. When you walk past an exclusive polo club, and a castle-like boarding school, and just down the road you have a huge slum of tiny shacks and people struggling to live, you realise just how idiotic that idea is.

The last time we raised minimum wages was because its the platform the democrats ran on to win congress two years ago. For once, politicians kept their word, and you complain?

And again, our politicians cannot be faulted for the leaders of other countries keeping minimum wages low. Unless we prop up their inhumane and oppressive regime. And we do. A lot. But the ones who do it the most are the ones you probably credit with being more in line with your economics;)

As for points one and two, you and I are in agreement 110%.
(
That's because my economics normally work with industrialized countries, ex. what we can do, and what works in the long run. And I didn't say our politicians were at fault for their low wages, only for raising ours at the wrong times, and failing to do so at other times. And two years ago wasn't my choice. Ten years ago, maybe.

Im looking through documents for you now. My google fu is weak, so give me a minute.

Ima actually suprised you dont know about this. Especially considering anyone you know who was in the military during the '90s had a decent chance of being a peace keeper over there.

Bah. Your powers are weak old man. You don't know the power of the toolbar!:p



Until we have lack a centralized state of any kind, we are not near the Middle Ages;)

Oh, and for the record, some areas in the Middle Ages were EXTREMELLY wealthy.

But we already are starting a new Crusade, so thats a step in that direction:
Some areas. A large amount of wealth concentrated in the hands of the government officials (liege-lords) who had no interest in enriching their citizens (Serfs) instead draining them with with excessive taxes. And fine, the late Roman Empire. Many wars, shrinking borders established a few hundred years ago, increasing use of mercenaries instead of an actual army, inflation...

Hey, this sounds familiar...

So you're finally giving up? Good, about time.

How was the government intervention unnecessary? Poorly executed, yes. Unnecessary, no.

Actually, as a percentage of income, low to middle income people actually put more back into the economy.
Personally I would prefer a flat tax with no deductions, but that is unlikely to happen.
That's because there are more middle to low income people. 12$ in the hands of a thousand people is more then 50$ in the hands of ten people.

And yes, I'd love a flat tax with no deductions. Somewhere closer to ten, or five percent.
People generally try to make more money irrespective of income tax (and I wouldn't say 35% is high, but I'm a dirty leftie). There's some drag around the boundaries where people doing some acrobatics to just stay under it, but no-one seriously stops trying to earn money based on interest rates. The most you could argue is they try to relocate rather than give up.

See it as a flat tax on luxury income (which obviously increases as a % of total income as you go higher up the pay scale).

Kenya is undeniable proof that crossing your fingers and hoping that the existance of rich people will make the poor better off doesn't work. It genuinely is a mansions neighbouring slums place. When you walk past an exclusive polo club, and a castle-like boarding school, and just down the road you have a huge slum of tiny shacks and people struggling to live, you realise just how idiotic that idea is.
I DIDN'T SAY THAT! I'm saying that government must intervene, yes, but doing so at an untimely moment will make everything crumble. And better to have shacks and slums then rows of tombstones.

And I'm saying it discourages, they try to keep under it for as long as they can, and once they can't, they go as high as they can. Which is why i prefer a flat tax %.

With all seriousness, all I knew about the Balkans was the part where we bombed the shit out of them.

Ok, Im going to concede this point to you, because I for the life of me cant find anything I dont have to pay for or that was written during the 90. However, it is something I highly recommend you research, not because Im being lame and saying "Im right find your own damn source!" but because its very interesting and heart wrenching.


I have a book on it, but sourcing that wont do us much good.

Ok, Im going to concede this point to you, because I for the life of me cant find anything I dont have to pay for or that was written during the 90. However, it is something I highly recommend you research, not because Im being lame and saying "Im right find your own damn source!" but because its very interesting and heart wrenching.


I have a book on it, but sourcing that wont do us much good.

I dunno, name it. I bought every book in sight when my local library was selling history books for 5 cents a piece. I might have it. If I don't I'll look it up after I get my Warcraft map in running order.:D

That's because there are more middle to low income people. 12$ in the hands of a thousand people is more then 50$ in the hands of ten people.

And yes, I'd love a flat tax with no deductions. Somewhere closer to ten, or five percent.

I DIDN'T SAY THAT! I'm saying that government must intervene, yes, but doing so at an untimely moment will make everything crumble. And better to have shacks and slums then rows of tombstones.

And I'm saying it discourages, they try to keep under it for as long as they can, and once they can't, they go as high as they can. Which is why i prefer a flat tax %.

I was thinking more along the lines of 15%...

I was thinking more along the lines of 15%...

Fifteen is a bit high, but not enough to make an issue out of it.

I dunno, name it. I bought every book in sight when my local library was selling history books for 5 cents a piece. I might have it. If I don't I'll look it up after I get my Warcraft map in running order.:D

The Balkans: Nationalism, War & the Great Powers, 1804-1999 by Misha Glenny

The Fall of Yugoslavia by Misha Glenny

Balkan Ghosts by Robert Kaplan. This one is very popular.


None of them, however are as heart wrenching as the real thing. They tend to be more historical in nature and look at the conflicts reasons for happening and are more often then not written with a detatched historisism.

My friend's family actually through his church was actually a "foster home" for a few years for a survivor of the atrocities who was orphaned because his parents werent so lucky, so a lot of my stories come from him. The actual news reports and articles from the time are also sad (if you can find these archived somewhere).

Granted, I was young at the time (at its climax I think I was in 4th grade?), but I remember the little bits I did hear about and read about, because it disturbed me beyond anything I have seen yet.

Fifteen is a bit high, but not enough to make an issue out of it.

How is 15% high?

And actually if free health care was part of the bargain I wouldn't complain (too much) if the %age was higher.

The Balkans: Nationalism, War & the Great Powers, 1804-1999 by Misha Glenny

The Fall of Yugoslavia by Misha Glenny

Balkan Ghosts by Robert Kaplan. This one is very popular.


None of them, however are as heart wrenching as the real thing. They tend to be more historical in nature and look at the conflicts reasons for happening and are more often then not written with a detatched historisism.

My friend's family actually through his church was actually a "foster home" for a few years for a survivor of the atrocities who was orphaned because his parents werent so lucky, so a lot of my stories come from him. The actual news reports and articles from the time are also sad (if you can find these archived somewhere).

Granted, I was young at the time, but I remember the little bits I did hear about and read about, because it disturbed me beyoned anything I have seen yet.
Nope. not in my collection. Of course, I might've missed a few (Dozen), so I'll check again in the morning. *reads rest of post*

Wow...I'll look it up for certain.
How is 15% high?

And actually if free health care was part of the bargain I wouldn't complain (too much) if the %age was higher.
Mmm. I just think fifteen is a bit high, considering sales tax, all those taxes on your phone bill, etc, etc.

and what do you think of John Stossel in general?

He's a tool. A complete jackass.

Nope. not in my collection. Of course, I might've missed a few (Dozen), so I'll check again in the morning. *reads rest of post*

Wow...I'll look it up for certain.

We're talking chaining stripped young women to a chain link fence and keeping her there for a week or two without food and water so the town and soldiers could rape her and beat her at will, until she died kind of atrocities (actually happened).


You know, those fun kind of war crimes that make us feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

He's a tool. A complete jackass.
I rather like him. I think that a lot of the time, he presents the truth, although he sometimes pushes his own views too far.

Mmm. I just think fifteen is a bit high, considering sales tax, all those taxes on your phone bill, etc, etc.

But then, I am, unlike you, actually a tax-payer...
(and 15% would be a decrease for me)

We're talking chaining weapon up naked to a chain link fence and keeping her there for a week so the town and soldiers could rape her and beat her at will, until she died kind of atrocities (actually happened).


You know, those fun kind of war crimes that make us feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

That's horrid... It reminds me of what the Japanese did pre-WWII...

But then, I am, unlike you, actually a tax-payer...
(and 15% would be a decrease for me)

bah. Just because I'm not a tax-payer doesn't mean I don't carefully examine all incoming bills. And it also doesn't mean that I don't do math for fun. Or calculate my mother's total income when compared to the amount she pays tax-wise, all things considered.

I don't get out much... Or sleep much for that matter.

bah. Just because I'm not a tax-payer doesn't mean I don't carefully examine all incoming bills.

I actually agree with this. It always annoyed me when I was in high school and my opinion on economics was somehow less valid because of my age.


I am in college now and work during the summers and breaks. I pay taxes. Just not much. And I get most of it back via tax returns. ;)

Doesnt mean I dont understand taxes. Besides, Ill have my undergrad soon and have to find a real job to pay my way through law school. I damn well better be paying attention to tax laws and economic matters.

EDIT: Yep, thats right. Im talking about taxes again. Im depressed from talking about Yugoslavia. Time to move on. :p

I actually agree with this. It always annoyed me when I was in high school and my opinion on economics was somehow less valid because of my age.


EDIT: Yep, thats right. Im talking about taxes again. Im depressed from talking about Yugoslavia. Time to move on. :p
Mmmm.... Taxes, cures what ails ya...:p

But I don't get that a whole lot. Most people I know, adult or otherwise are politically apathetic. Which is a real shame in my eyes, because we have all of these rights, and so many people ignore them.

EDIT: You mean there's going to be another lawyer here on NSG? Wow, best of luck to ya.

Meh, I thought I knew what I was talking about in high school too, I now realize that I didn't because I wasn't seeing the whole picture...

And btw, that's all I meant by my comment, it wasn't meant as a put down or slight towards you CM

I rather like him. I think that a lot of the time, he presents the truth, although he sometimes pushes his own views too far.

If you think he presents the truth, it is because you don't actually know that much about him or what he presents.

FAIR Archives: John Stossel (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&media_outlet_id=19)

Media Matters: John Stossel (http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/search_results?qstring=john+stossel)

These are just the tip of the iceberg of douchebaggery.

And btw, that's all I meant by my comment, it wasn't meant as a put down or slight towards you CM

I know. My comment was more a general comment rather then rightous indignation.

Meh, I thought I knew what I was talking about in high school too, I now realize that I didn't because I wasn't seeing the whole picture...

And btw, that's all I meant by my comment, it wasn't meant as a put down or slight towards you CM
Don't worry, I know what you mean.
If you think he presents the truth, it is because you don't actually know that much about him or what he presents.

FAIR Archives: John Stossel (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=19&media_outlet_id=19)

Media Matters: John Stossel (http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/search_results?qstring=john+stossel)

These are just the tip of the iceberg of douchebaggery.
:confused:

All I see are his opinions, and a lot of skepticism. Nothing wrong with having your own opinions, especially since a lot of what he says is true. Has it really been that long since you've been in the public school system? It is HORRIBLE. uninspired, uncaring teachers, who take years to get fired. I had one in the sixth grade. Took her THREE years to get fired, even with the hundreds of parent and student complaints. Vindictive, suffered from an inferiority complex, and took it all out on her students. The principal even admitted that they "had problems" with her in the past. What's causing Global warming is STILL under debate. You can't deny it's happening, and Stossel was just trying to look on the bright side. And like I said, he tries to get his opinion through.

Don't worry, I know what you mean.

:confused:

All I see are his opinions, and a lot of skepticism. Nothing wrong with having your own opinions, especially since a lot of what he says is true. Has it really been that long since you've been in the public school system? It is HORRIBLE. uninspired, uncaring teachers, who take years to get fired. I had one in the sixth grade. Took her THREE years to get fired, even with the hundreds of parent and student complaints. Vindictive, suffered from an inferiority complex, and took it all out on her students. The principal even admitted that they "had problems" with her in the past. What's causing Global warming is STILL under debate. You can't deny it's happening, and Stossel was just trying to look on the bright side. And like I said, he tries to get his opinion through.

You really should dig into some of those articles and what they have to tell us about John Stossel's alleged "reporting."

So you have no problem with: The Stossel Treatment: Selective editing and other unethical tactics (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1134)?

EDIT: More good reading John Stossel Is A Pathological Liar (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-sirota/john-stossel-is-a-patholo_b_21903.html)

Stossel Tampers with the Facts (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1682)

Stossel's Distortions Finally Catching Up With Him? (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1887)

Has it really been that long since you've been in the public school system? It is HORRIBLE. uninspired, uncaring teachers, who take years to get fired. I had one in the sixth grade. Took her THREE years to get fired, even with the hundreds of parent and student complaints. Vindictive, suffered from an inferiority complex, and took it all out on her students. The principal even admitted that they "had problems" with her in the past.

Myth about public schools. I had excellent teachers who were very inspiried. Teachers make shit pay in a very stressful job. One doesnt become a teacher for the money, one becomes a teacher BECAUSE they care.

Private schools have just as many shit teachers. Some have more, because theyre hired for religious qualifiations more then anything ele.


What's causing Global warming is STILL under debate. You can't deny it's happening, and Stossel was just trying to look on the bright side. And like I said, he tries to get his opinion through.


Humans being involved in Global Warming is NOT under debate. What is under ddebate is how much exactly we are to blame.

You really should dig into some of those articles and what they have to tell us about John Stossel's alleged "reporting."

So you have no problem with: The Stossel Treatment: Selective editing and other unethical tactics (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1134)?

Change the name from John Stossel to Michael Moore and then you'd have CM howling in outrage.

You really should dig into some of those articles and what they have to tell us about John Stossel's alleged "reporting."

So you have no problem with: The Stossel Treatment: Selective editing and other unethical tactics (http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1134)?

So you have no problem with this unsourced article? It makes a lot of fabulous claims, without presenting any proof. Stossel, at least, backs up what he says, or puts it up as his opinion. US schools, at least in the earlier levels, without a doubt tried to indoctrinate us on what was going on, in their twisted view of the world. They told us that if we kept using oil, we'd be out of it by 2005. They told us that oil was destroying our Ozone. They told us that it was all mankind's fault for global warming. Now, why we may have caused extincions of several animals in the past, we are NOT definitely global warming. I'm fairly certain that it's natural, although I'm not entirely rejecting the theory that we're causing it, it's not proven. I think it's just another cycle in our temperamental Earth, ready to freeze you for a few hundred years, then suddenly heat up for almost a thousand.

Change the name from John Stossel to Michael Moore and then you'd have CM howling in outrage.

Who?:confused:

Myth about public schools. I had excellent teachers who were very inspiried. Teachers make shit pay in a very stressful job. One doesnt become a teacher for the money, one becomes a teacher BECAUSE they care.

Private schools have just as many shit teachers. Some have more, because theyre hired for religious qualifiations more then anything ele.

I can't say anything about the private schools, haven't been to one. What I do know is that I had nothing but crappy teachers, with maybe one or two truly inspired ones in between. Also, the same seems to run with the four states I've lived in, and my friends in other classes. Also, teachers are not underpaid:
See? (http://www.payscale.com/research/US/All_K-12_Teachers/Salary)

Humans being involved in Global Warming is NOT under debate. What is under ddebate is how much exactly we are to blame.
The return of the link! (http://www.oism.org/pproject/)

US schools, at least in the earlier levels, without a doubt tried to indoctrinate us on what was going on, in their twisted view of the world.

No. They dont. They teach what is currently the leading, established and commonly accepted theories, as well as facts. The fact that this tends to fly in the face of the right wing's fantasy world doesnt, nor should it matter.

They told us that if we kept using oil, we'd be out of it by 2005.

Never, ever was told this. Nor were my siblings. Nor were any of my friends. Both from this state or outside it.

They told us that oil was destroying our Ozone.

And it is...

They told us that it was all mankind's fault for global warming.

I was never told it was ALL our fault. Just that we were involved. And we are. Just how much is the debate.

Now, why we may have caused extincions of several animals in the past, we are NOT definitely global warming. I'm fairly certain that it's natural, although I'm not entirely rejecting the theory that we're causing it, it's not proven. I think it's just another cycle in our temperamental Earth, ready to freeze you for a few hundred years, then suddenly heat up for almost a thousand.

And it is established by anyone without an agenda that humans are contributing to and SPEEDING UP the cycle. The Greenhouse effect happens. We are contributing to the greenhouse effect.

Also, our destruction of biozones contribures to global warming.

Who?:confused:

You seriously don't know who Michael Moore is? He's one of the more popular figures the Right like to demonize.

Also, teachers are not underpaid:
See? (http://www.payscale.com/research/US/All_K-12_Teachers/Salary)

Woah woah woah. Really? Are you going to pretend that this isnt under paid? Really? Especially for how much work they do?


Do you really understand the economy and money as much as you claim? If you think teachers are not underpaid, Id wager you dont.

Woah woah woah. Really? Are you going to pretend that this isnt under paid? Really? Especially for how much work they do?


Do you really understand the economy and money as much as you claim? If you think teachers are not underpaid, Id wager you dont.

Almost $40,000 for a NINE MONTH JOB? I'd say that's pretty good.

You seriously don't know who Michael Moore is? He's one of the more popular figures the Right like to demonize.
Was he the guy who said Americans were idiots (Despite he, himself being an American)?

Almost $40,000 for a NINE MONTH JOB? I'd say that's pretty good.

You're failing to consider the amount of work they put in when they are not at work, or for that matter the stress level of the job.

Almost $40,000 for a NINE MONTH JOB? I'd say that's pretty good.

It must be tons, because most of them get summer jobs or they wont be able to pay bills.


And that amount wont get you anything. My mom was a teacher. Many people in my family are teachers. Trust me. Thats not much. Most of them either live alone, or their wife/husband also has to work because they cant pay for a house on that, let alone a car, food, etc. They also tend to do summer jobs, like freakin retail.


No, 40k may seem like a lot to someone who doesnt have to pay bills (I really dont mean to be condescending. Avoid paying bills as long as you can!), but you'll see once you start having to pay bills and buy groceries, money disappears fast.


Sorry, defending teachers is a big deal for me. My family is mostly lawyers, engineers, or teachers. And people dont seem to know how much work they do for shitty pay.

Was he the guy who said Americans were idiots (Despite he, himself being an American)?

Filmmaker. Credits include Bowling for Columbine, Roger and Me, Fahreinheit 9-11 and Sicko.

It must be tons, because most of them get summer jobs.


And that amount wont get you anything. My mom was a teacher. Many people in my family are teachers. Trust me. Thats not much. Most of them either live alone, or their wife/husband also has to work because they cant pay for a house on that, let alone a car, food, etc. They also tend to do summer jobs, like freakin retail.


No, 40k may seem like a lot to someone who doesnt have to pay bills (I really dont mean to be condescending. Avoid paying bills as long as you can!), but you'll see once you start having to pay bills and buy groceries, money disappears fast.


Sorry, defending teachers is a big deal for me. My family is mostly lawyers, engineers, or teachers. And people dont seem to know how much work they do for shitty pay.
It must be very little, because of all those people working year-round in crappy Wal-Mart jobs who are supporting their family with no problem.

Something's wrong here...

Filmmaker. Credits include Bowling for Columbine, Roger and Me, Fahreinheit 9-11 and Sicko.

In all fairness, its probably for the best that he doesnt know who Moore is.

In all fairness, its probably for the best that he doesnt know who Moore is.

Not a good reflection on the American left, or would I go off on a rant about him?

It must be very little, because of all those people working year-round in crappy Wal-Mart jobs who are supporting their family with no problem.



LOL like who?


Besides, most people who work at Wal-mart are on medicare and other forms of wellfare.


Just trust me on this. $40k is jack shit for any job. When you consider how much work teachers do, what they have to put up with, and what their hours are (especially all the work they have to do off the clock, like grade), it is fucking nothing.

Not a good reflection on the American left, or would I go off on a rant about him?

Because hes an idiot, and idiots deserve ignominty no matter whose side theyre on.

LOL like who?


Besides, most people who work at Wal-mart are on medicare and other forms of wellfare.


Just trust me on this. $40k is jack shit for any job. When you consider how much work teachers do, what they have to put up with, and what their hours are (especially all the work they have to do off the clock, like grade), it is fucking nothing.

...

Like my Grandfather, who isn't on any kind of welfare, smokes like a maniac, and has nothing in the way of medicare. Yet he still supports his wife and one of his daughters, with no sweat (figuratively that is).

Just trust me on this. $40k is jack shit for any job.

Indeed, btw the way want to send this to my boss?
:(

...

Like my Grandfather, who isn't on any kind of welfare, smokes like a maniac, and has nothing in the way of medicare. Yet he still supports his wife and one of his daughters, with no sweat (figuratively that is).

Social Security?

I know how much money walmart employees make, and I know how much money it takes to live in general.

Something with your story doesnt add up.

...

Like my Grandfather, who isn't on any kind of welfare, smokes like a maniac, and has nothing in the way of medicare. Yet he still supports his wife and one of his daughters, with no sweat (figuratively that is).

I call bs.

I call bs.

I dont think hes lying, just something that he isnt aware of.

Social Security?

In a few years.

I know how much money walmart employees make, and I know how much money it takes to live in general.

Something with your story doesnt add up.
Careful planning. He doesn't make minimum wage, because he's been with Wal-Mart for a while, but it's still no 40,000 a year.

In a few years.

Careful planning. He doesn't make minimum wage, because he's been with Wal-Mart for a while, but it's still no 40,000 a year.

Then there is something your not aware of. In my appartment, by myself, supporting myself, I find it hard to live on $1000 a month. I do, but it takes enormous sacrifices and barely scraping by. And thats even with my car being fully paid off.


In a house, supporting a family, and paying for a car? No, $40k wont do it.

In a few years.

Careful planning. He doesn't make minimum wage, because he's been with Wal-Mart for a while, but it's still no 40,000 a year.

Where does he live (what state)?
I agree with KoL, there is information that you aren't giving us (probably because you don't know it).


Then there is something your not aware of. In my appartment, by myself, supporting myself, I find it hard to live on $1000 a month. And thats even with my car being fully paid off.


In a house, supporting a family, and paying for a car? No, $40k wont do it.
Well, actually it depends upon the cost of living where he is...
I make app $40k a year, own a house, have a car payment and I'm getting by (I wouldn't say without breaking a sweat, but I am making it).

Im out for a bit, might be on later tonight. Nice talking to you CM. Dyakovo, nice to see you back.

Peace.

Then there is something your not aware of. In my appartment, by myself, supporting myself, I find it hard to live on $1000 a month. I do, but it takes enormous sacrifices and barely scraping by. And thats even with my car being fully paid off.


In a house, supporting a family, and paying for a car? No, $40k wont do it.
*shrugs* Some people can find a way to manage.
Where does he live (what state)?
I agree with KoL, there is information that you aren't giving us (probably because you don't know it).

I go over their budget (They need a better password), if there was something else, I'd notice it.

And Maryland.

Im out for a bit, might be on later tonight. Nice talking to you CM. Dyakovo, nice to see you back.

Peace.

See ya KoL.

*shrugs* Some people can find a way to manage.


I go over their budget (They need a better password), if there was something else, I'd notice it.

And Maryland.

OK, depending upon where exactly in Md (i.e. pretty much anywhere away from DC) the cost of living is low enough where it is feasible.
That would be the info you were leaving out CM, where you live has a huge effect on what is a "living wage" and what isn't.

I'm hurt when people demonize libertarians. We're not just "looking out for numero uno at the expense of others." Rather, thats what true libertarians are against.

We are against the sense of entitlement that some people think they have in that they deserve to reap from others success. We do value individual liberty above almost all else.

For instance, I'm for the complete legalization of all drugs. Why? Because I feel everyone has the right to do whatever they want to their body, and others can't stop them. There's also the evidence that legalizing drugs lessens the use and abuse of them as well as eliminating the byproduct crimes that people commit to get their fix. European countries, for an example, and my favourite: The Prohibition, where drinking rose and organized crime came into play.

I support gay marriage, because even though as a Lutheran, I don't think churches should be required to perform gay marriages, our country has a separation from church and state, and as such can't use such reasons to deny homosexual marriage. There isn't one valid reason outside of a religious context that says gays can't get married.

Universal health care? Fine, but I should have the option to opt out of it and not pay for it then. This means I get a tax credit for having my own health care and, since I should have this right to weigh the costs, I can choose not to own any health care. If I get hurt, I took the risk with full knowledge of the consequences and would face them as such. (I would go without health care now if the fact that both my parents are in the medical industry automatically locks me in. Just pointing out my apparent hypocrisy)

Private organizations have the right to impose any rules they wish (like no gays in scouts). They designed it, and so have the right to run it how they please.

I support free market economics, except in the case of market failure. That is the only justifiable time for government intervention. On this recent crisis, I'm hesitant to comment without further research, but I believe that this was the market correcting itself. The situation arose from people and lending corporations making bad decisions, and they should suffer the consequences for those decisions.
That being said, I think the bailout was a necessary evil to give people the feeling that something was being done and prevent a stock market crash. It annoys me, but I don't really know a feasible way a different solution could have been implemented.

And I'm against widesweeping regulations on private businesses. Smoking bans, to me, prevent business from making the decision on whether they want to cater to smokers or non-smokers. Despite what they think, non-smokers do not have greater rights than smokers. (And fyi, I never smoked and never will).


In support of a flat tax (not no tax, because I acknowledge that the free market fails at times and in situations, so the government needs money to work on those things. As such, government is rarely profitable, since if it was, a private company would do it).

OK, depending upon where exactly in Md (i.e. pretty much anywhere away from DC) the cost of living is low enough where it is feasible.
That would be the info you were leaving out CM, where you live has a huge effect on what is a "living wage" and what isn't.

True, true. I know how much it is out in the city to live, but out where I am (Western Maryland) things are a bit cheaper.

A comparison of Cumberland, Md and Baltimore, Md (both of which fall below the national average in cost of living)

Cost of Living Comparison:
Cumberland, Maryland - Baltimore, Maryland


Baltimore is 22% more expensive than Cumberland.

Housing is the biggest factor in the cost of living difference.

Housing is 93% more expensive in Baltimore.

A salary of $40,000 in Cumberland, Maryland should increase to $48,851 in Baltimore, Maryland

Just as a note here's the comparison between Cumberland and where I live:

Cost of Living Comparison:
Cumberland, Maryland - FE, New York

FE is 31% more expensive than Cumberland.

Utilities are the biggest factor in the cost of living difference.

Utilities are 44% more expensive in FE.

A salary of $40,000 in Cumberland, Maryland should increase to $52,452 in FE, New York

I support free market economics, except in the case of market failure.

A zen-like saying. I'm off to meditate on it. :wink:

A comparison of Cumberland, Md and Baltimore, Md (both of which fall below the national average in cost of living)

Cost of Living Comparison:
Cumberland, Maryland - Baltimore, Maryland


Baltimore is 22% more expensive than Cumberland.

Housing is the biggest factor in the cost of living difference.

Housing is 93% more expensive in Baltimore.

A salary of $40,000 in Cumberland, Maryland should increase to $48,851 in Baltimore, Maryland

Just as a note here's the comparison between Cumberland and where I live:

Cost of Living Comparison:
Cumberland, Maryland - FE, New York

FE is 31% more expensive than Cumberland.

Utilities are the biggest factor in the cost of living difference.

Utilities are 44% more expensive in FE.

A salary of $40,000 in Cumberland, Maryland should increase to $52,452 in FE, New York

You're making me very uncomfortable. Because Cumberland is where I live.

O_o.

Creepy. Was that just a coincidence, or did you try to guess my city?

Geolana:
"We are against the sense of entitlement that some people think they have in that they deserve to reap from others success. We do value individual liberty above almost all else."

no one feels entitled to take form others' success. I hate when people look at things like theyre black and white. It's just when people exploit others for "success", the exploited feel entitled to alittle balance. take for example a CEO making 7 figures doing the same amount of work as the guy at the bottom. his job is equally important, but not nearly equally appreciated. and dont give me "the CEO worked very hard to get there" crap. Most people get up there through lucky breaks, nepotism, and kissing ass.

You're making me very uncomfortable. Because Cumberland is where I live.

O_o.

Creepy. Was that just a coincidence, or did you try to guess my city?

Coincidence, I looked at map and picked the first "big" city in western Md.

Coincidence, I looked at map and picked the first "big" city in western Md.

Not sure you can call it big...:tongue:

Not sure you can call it big...:tongue:

It's big enough to show up on a regional map and it's larger than the town I live in (that's why the big was in quotation marks)