Oso planning to go pro
i never said "nothing. ok, let me lay out what i do for those in poverty-pay my taxes,
Agreed. But the problem is that being born into the middle or upper class does absolve you from making bad choices in a majority of cases. I have a friend, love him to death. He was born into a middle class family. He is an alcoholic (though he has it managed now), has tried every narcotic known to man and been addicted to several of them at various times. Gone to rehab and relapsed multiple times. Been to jail multiple times. Despite this, he has steady employment and is firmly in the middle class. He's there because his parents were able to afford to send him to treatment multiple times and judges were willing to give him leniency because of his class (and i would guess because of his race as well). If he had been born into a family in poverty, he would likely be homeless or in jail.My friend screwed up multiple times but he was able to figure it out and become an extremely productive member of society. I don't think people born into poverty deserve less grace simply because of their socio-economic status. In fact, I think they deserve more grace because they have less access to education.
glad to hear your friend has been figuring it out. have you ever seen a "rap sheet" for some the "less fortunate" out there? and they got their 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 6th.....chances because of ....?
TAMUI do know, Newsie is right on you knowing ball.
Have you? Because I can give you dozens of studies that show that those with lower socio-economic statuses and minority status receive harsher sentences for the same crimes. Don't trot out tired old cliches. Actually do the research.And why did you put less fortunate in quotation marks?
i put "less fortunate" in " " marks because many have different interpretations of the "less fortunate"yes i have seen many rap sheets and they happen to take up way too many dead trees for me. studies? i'm open. let's see a few. tired cliches? and what may those be? are you trying to tell me that those in the lower socio-economic classes do not get a few chances? comes a time man when enough is enough and we need to remove people from society when they show that they cannot behave themselves. you've heard of recidivism, eyn'a? i don't even want to guess what chance# that was
And why did you put less fortunate in quotation marks?
Right. As the authors of 'Freaknomics' found many years ago, the #1 predictor of a child's academic success isn't his or her school district or teacher or type of school. It's the number of books in his or her home.In other words, educated parents who care about learning produce educated kids who care about learning.There are hosts of problems with some of our public school systems (and, to be fair, others that are beyond outstanding), but it's laughable that some continue to first and foremost blame teachers, who at best have kids for 5-6 hours a day/180 days a year, while ignoring the other, often more important, influences on a child's education. Like, let's ignore that a kid is growing up in a gang-infested neighborhood, where walking to school is a dangerous proposition, where his single-parent mother works two jobs to put meager food on the table, where he has to raise his younger siblings cause his mom is always at work and dad is in prison or just absent, where there are no books or computers in the home, where there are no expectations of success, where future prospects aren't clearly evident. No, that kid's real problem is the teacher's union.OK.I'm not saying that teacher's unions aren't at times counterproductive, but on the list of things negatively influencing education these days, they're way, way down the list.
So was my friend needed to be removed from society? I'm not saying there isn't a point where yes, people do need to be removed from society. Just that it seems that "point" is at different positions on the scale for different people.Do you deny that people from lower socio-economic statuses have less "margin for error" as Pakuni put it?
So all those Washington politicians, including presidents, that choose to send their kids to private schools instead of public - nevermind. Here's a study that says private schools beat public, one of the reasons I sent one child to Marquette. At the collegiate level, most of the top 50 schools in the nation are private, but one can get an excellent education at any number of private or public.I've attended both. Pros and cons to both. My kids went to very good public schools, private for college. To each their own.An article from a different perspective https://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/private-schools-vs-public-schools-why-private-schools-are-betterFor some people, private is truly better, same is true for public. It would not surprise me if this also came down along ideological lines to some extent, it seems to all too often.
re: your friend? yes-as you said, he went to rehab a few times, relapsed a few times, back to rehab and for right now, he is doing well-i hope he continues to get it today, then the next today and the next...by going to rehab, he was removing himself from society until he could learn how to cope safely for others and himself-God bless him
do those in a lower socio-economic caste have less margin for error? from a standpoint of access to our legal system, i.e. dream teams of lawyers? absolutely. from a standpoint of who gets the most chances at breaking the law before they are sent to the cross-bars motel? that's a more complicated question and depends on the severity of the crime(s). unfortunately, many of those aren't taken too seriously until they kill someone. then i guess that's really really bad. even when they have multiple violations involving guns(you know, guns are bad bad bad) well they sure in the heck aren't legally carrying that gun. that in and of itself should be enough for the "anti-gun" crowd to throw him/her away for a long long time, so often they plea out the illegal gun thing and slap them on the hands for the other stuff and let them out on a signature bond. now what the heck do the judges or commissioners think they are going to do while out on signature bond? decide to go back to school? go job hunting? (buzz kill) or go knock off another corner grocery store...hmmm, i'll take door #3 for recidivism alex.
tamu, please just do a quick check on length of rap sheets and severity of crimes committed before you talk about "chances" we have too many judges allowing for these people to staying our society for too long, hurting innocent people. are these judges ever held accountable?
i thought justice was blind?
"Rocket, I work regularly with the police in my job. I'm well aware of what's out there. Why is a dentist looking at rap sheets regularly?" well, let's see; my nephew is a chief of police, his brother has been the elected county sheriff for multiple terms, my cousin is retiring the sheriff's department. he has been in charge of the swat team. my family, fortunately or not is full of attorneys, including a retired judge. we have discussed this topic from both sides as for your friend-if he is still doing well, that's all that counts. not many people go running into their jail cell screaming of joy
Thank you. That does give some more context. So a dentist in a family full of law enforcement? I'm sure there's a joke in their somewhere.We've been going around in circles for a while now. I'll leave by just repeating my main point and you are free to have the last word. Everyone has a chance to make it in America. But everyone has a different margin for error for achieving that chance. In my opinion, too much of that margin for error is decided by factors beyond an individual's control. Specifically, what family they were born into. I believe it is our duty as decent human beings, and specifically for me my duty as a Christian to try to even that playing field as much as possible."Every valley shall be filled in, every mountain and hill made low. The crooked roads shall become straight, the rough ways smooth." Luke 3:5
Down 1 w 5 seconds left. Doable.
Is Target on a suicide mission?https://www.cnbc.com/2017/09/25/target-to-raise-its-hourly-minimum-wage.html
Target was $80 a share last year. Hasn't been above $60 in 2017. They've been on some kind of mission.
And it was $37.50 in 2000 and only spent about 6 mos below the mid 30's all through the recession. Meanwhile, glassdoor reports the avg target wage at $10 for just about all in-store jobs. I was going to say that I think they'll be okay, but that's actually not true - but that has everything to do with the decline or retail and next to nothing to do with bumping their customer service people a couple bucks.
Absolutely not. This was a business decision. No one is forcing them to raise their wages.They are going to attract better employees than the Walmart across the street that pays less.
Oh, I agree.I just think it helps illustrate the folly of those who argue in favor of low wages by claiming pay hikes will decimate businesses and lead to all low-wage workers being replaced by robots.
If you make a higher wage mandatory, and force companies to pay more to a person than the value it is receiving in return, it certainly will.
You're making an assumption that people are paid an amount equal to the value they provide. And, I'll note, the people who make that argument when it comes to low-wage workers never seem to have a problem with executive compensation that exceeds the value those workers provide.