|
Post by jeremysgirl on Jul 1, 2019 11:11:42 GMT
I feel that my words are being perverted. I didn't accuse anyone of not being entitled to social security. I didn't say anyone didn't deserve to live as long as they are. I am thankful that my parents have money to retire. And I acknowledged that they were hard workers..
What I said was 1) we are the first generation to be more educated and make less money. This is reality. 2) what is said was pensions are being funded by us and they enable an earlier retirement and longer retirement than we will be able to have. What I said was 3) many of our parents have no idea about education costs and they don't care. 4) I agreed that boomers in the workforce aren't taking entry level jobs away, they are taking management ones away from people who are middle aged. 5) there are a variety of confounding factors that all need to be addressed.
I left my personal comments to those who I personally know. I don't believe peas are reflective of my general social circle. What I see are people who don't educate themselves about politics (unlike most peas), people who don't have a concern about climate change (there's one recycler in my over 60 crowd), people who have disdain for the poor (my mother made the comment that she would never live in my neighborhood), that success is measured by the house you live in and the amount of dollars you make, racist attitudes (probably why she won't live in my neighborhood, it's just too diverse), a disdain for technology and using it and spending money on it, but cars, houses, and 5 vacations a year are worth spending on, and a distinterest in healthcare reform (because we have Medicare), a disdain for social programs (entitlements! But don't take our social security away.) This is what I'm surrounded by. And every political discussion leads to the phrase...kids today just don't know....and the passive aggressive comments about how kids are spoiled because I have a 17 year old who has challenges which make him not ready to launch at 18. But I ruined him...because he has a cell phone and plays videogames. 50 years ago we would have made a man out of him by sending him off to war.
Now I know that this isn't reflective of peas. As a group I believe we are much more politically knowledgeable, compassionate of parents dealing with children with physical and mental disabilities, we are probably more formally educated, and I'm guessing by a lot of the posts here we are probably economically blessed. But I cannot imagine that my surroundings are unique. I admit there's a lot of trump support going on, but when he adopted a slogan of make America great again, my family takes that as validation that they way things are moving are not right and that it is actually Gen X that is screwing up the world.
So while you might feel offended by my comments (where there was no offense intended, I love the peas) I am constantly being offended by those that think our generation has screwed up everything.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2019 11:17:54 GMT
This, exactly. When the SS retirement age was set at 65, the average life expectancy for men was something like only 58. It was never expected that most people would live to see retirement. Now we've created a culture that says we're all entitled to 20-30 years of vacation at the end of our lives, and you're right, it's not sustainable. But as long as one of the largest and most consistent voting blocs is those receiving social security, there's little hope of change. DH and I, like most GenX-ers we know, are thinking more in terms of a second act than full retirement. We have lots of friends in their 60s with no thought of retirement - but they do move into positions that allow them more flexibility and job satisfaction than a regular 9-5 job. And no, they're not taking jobs from younger workers. Most do consulting type work that relies on the benefit of their years of experience, or they work in non-profits that pay less than most new college grads with families and mortgages would want to work for. One couple are entrepreneurs and have started a new business. Those people in their 60's are Boomers. I'm the first year of Gen X and I turned 54 this year. As much as I hear people on this board bitch about "privilege" the statement that Gen X will just gently retire into consulting or non-profits to keep themselves from being bored for 30 years and not suck up all the SS (that they paid into all their working life) after retirement is about the most elitist bullshit I've heard to date. Not all Gen X have a degree or experience to "consult" when it's time to retire. Some of them worked back breaking jobs and maybe would like to enjoy retirement not toiling at a shit job to save SS for the younger generation. They paid into SS all their working life and deserve a chance to benefit. I don’t think anyone should have to consult or whatever if they don’t want to. My point is that our generation is not likely to be able to retire at 65 without additional work because SS is not likely to be there for us to the same degree that it is for current retirees. We’re looking at other options and making the best of that because full retirement is not a likely financial option if we want to have anything left in our 90s or beyond. And I do worry about people my age working in the trades or other manual jobs that are not physically sustainable past a certain age (heck, I can make a strong argument that teaching is not physically sustainable). What are those folks to do when SS payments are cut or eliminated and their retirement savings run out? A lot of people my age are prioritizing their kids’ college over their own retirement because the kids simply cannot pay for it themselves. This is foolish, of course - but it’s reality for many working families.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 16, 2024 1:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2019 12:18:17 GMT
Those people in their 60's are Boomers. I'm the first year of Gen X and I turned 54 this year. As much as I hear people on this board bitch about "privilege" the statement that Gen X will just gently retire into consulting or non-profits to keep themselves from being bored for 30 years and not suck up all the SS (that they paid into all their working life) after retirement is about the most elitist bullshit I've heard to date. Not all Gen X have a degree or experience to "consult" when it's time to retire. Some of them worked back breaking jobs and maybe would like to enjoy retirement not toiling at a shit job to save SS for the younger generation. They paid into SS all their working life and deserve a chance to benefit. I don’t think anyone should have to consult or whatever if they don’t want to. My point is that our generation is not likely to be able to retire at 65 without additional work because SS is not likely to be there for us to the same degree that it is for current retirees. We’re looking at other options and making the best of that because full retirement is not a likely financial option if we want to have anything left in our 90s or beyond. And I do worry about people my age working in the trades or other manual jobs that are not physically sustainable past a certain age (heck, I can make a strong argument that teaching is not physically sustainable). What are those folks to do when SS payments are cut or eliminated and their retirement savings run out? A lot of people my age are prioritizing their kids’ college over their own retirement because the kids simply cannot pay for it themselves. This is foolish, of course - but it’s reality for many working families. And it has always been the same. You are only feeling it because it is your current reality. My ex and I couldn't put our kids through college. They had to figure it out for themselves. Our parents couldn't afford to put us through either, nor could their parents (my former fil went from a 4th grade education to a bachelors, both of my grandmothers had a college education before federal financial aid existed for anyone. Middle class people simply didn't send their kids to college) The college dream only lived among the elite during those eras. But my grandparents did it. And they saved like crazy for their retirement years as did my parents. They didn't prioritize their kids futures above their own. I didn't prioritize my kids future above my own future. That is YOUR choice. Don't assume all retirees are counting solely on SS. Yes, some do but those that do were the low wages earners who literally had nothing to save. YOU do have something to save but are choosing not to. One way to lower cost of college is to stop making universities the major player in research. Put research in the market place. Research is what classifies the "top tier" universities above lesser known universities. Expect your kids to live at home for their associates instead of going to "boarding school" for four years. Expect them to start part time jobs in high school and save for their own future. College doesn't have to be finished in 4 years. Go part time, work part time. Teach them they won't start off at the same place in life they left home. My parents first house they bought for a family of 4 was a whole 600 square feet. Now young families expect to buy 2-3,000 square feet starter homes with high end kitchens.
|
|
pancakes
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 4,993
Feb 4, 2015 6:49:53 GMT
|
Post by pancakes on Jul 1, 2019 12:31:13 GMT
I didn’t read through all of the pages on this thread, so caveat.
I personally have a significant amount of student loans as someone who graduated from college only 10 years ago. I don’t need the loan amount wiped, as I understand the ramifications of that amount on the greater populace. But I think help with the ballooning interest would be great.
I also think the cost of college is outrageous, regardless. I had many scholarships coming in, some of them need based, some of them merit based. At the end of the day, cost is prohibiting graduates from being more fruitful members of society. It’s also preventing many from even going to college to pursue degrees in fields they would excel in.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2019 12:35:24 GMT
I don’t think anyone should have to consult or whatever if they don’t want to. My point is that our generation is not likely to be able to retire at 65 without additional work because SS is not likely to be there for us to the same degree that it is for current retirees. We’re looking at other options and making the best of that because full retirement is not a likely financial option if we want to have anything left in our 90s or beyond. And I do worry about people my age working in the trades or other manual jobs that are not physically sustainable past a certain age (heck, I can make a strong argument that teaching is not physically sustainable). What are those folks to do when SS payments are cut or eliminated and their retirement savings run out? A lot of people my age are prioritizing their kids’ college over their own retirement because the kids simply cannot pay for it themselves. This is foolish, of course - but it’s reality for many working families. And it has always been the same. You are only feeling it because it is your current reality. My ex and I couldn't put our kids through college. They had to figure it out for themselves. Our parents couldn't afford to put us through either, nor could their parents (my former fil went from a 4th grade education to a bachelors, both of my grandmothers had a college education before federal financial aid existed for anyone. Middle class people simply didn't send their kids to college) The college dream only lived among the elite during those eras. But my grandparents did it. And they saved like crazy for their retirement years as did my parents. They didn't prioritize their kids futures above their own. I didn't prioritize my kids future above my own future. That is YOUR choice. Don't assume all retirees are counting solely on SS. Yes, some do but those that do were the low wages earners who literally had nothing to save. YOU do have something to save but are choosing not to. One way to lower cost of college is to stop making universities the major player in research. Put research in the market place. Research is what classifies the "top tier" universities above lesser known universities. Expect your kids to live at home for their associates instead of going to "boarding school" for four years. Expect them to start part time jobs in high school and save for their own future. College doesn't have to be finished in 4 years. Go part time, work part time. Teach them they won't start off at the same place in life they left home. My parents first house they bought for a family of 4 was a whole 600 square feet. Now young families expect to buy 2-3,000 square feet starter homes with high end kitchens. Hon, nowhere did I say we weren’t saving for our retirement or prioritizing their college above our retirement. We’re not prioritizing college over retirement. But many families are. And your comments show exactly what I’ve been saying - “my parents did it” and “we figured it out” show a fundamental lack of understanding of the degree to which college costs have risen relative to wages, and the the fact that stable middle class jobs mostly do not exist in this economy without college degrees. (Our starter home was an unrenovated 1974 split level in a shitty neighborhood. Maybe stop watching reality shows for what you think my generation “has” to have.) And you can frankly step off telling me what I should expect my kids to do or not do. There’s that hypocrisy. How about we expect that your generation should have saved better or worked longer so you don’t rely so much on my contributions, hmmm? Don’t like that? Seems unrealistic and heartless? That’s how your pronouncements about me and my kids sound and feel to me. We’re the ones actually raising kids in this economy with these costs. Instead of poo-poohing us, perhaps listen for a moment.
|
|
|
Post by lisacharlotte on Jul 1, 2019 12:43:10 GMT
Considering the tail end of boomers are just 61, a lot of them cannot retire at 65 either. They don't expect to be able to live off of SS, which is why they are still working "taking those jobs from younger workers." So, boomers are selfish because they expect to retire and live off of SS for 30 years or they won't give up work so younger generations can move into their management positions. Which is it? Also, the generalization that boomers are all republicans who don't care about the current cost of college or the planet is just a ridiculous statement. Talk about painting with a broad brush. Boomers are the generation that started the cultural revolution.
I'm Gen X and I have planned for my retirement because I know I cannot rely on SS. I did this without a degree and without any special skills or high paying career. Nobody forced anyone to get a degree they couldn't afford. Information on how much specific careers pay is available and has been for a long time. They will even break that down for you by location. Just because the cost of a four year degree has sky rocketed does not mean you are not responsible for figuring out how you're going to pay for it after graduation. If someone thinks educating themselves through grad school and leaving with crushing student debt in a career that tops out less than will afford them to live, save for retirement and pay back their loans, probably should have paid more attention in math class.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2019 12:52:02 GMT
Considering the tail end of boomers are just 61, a lot of them cannot retire at 65 either. They don't expect to be able to live off of SS, which is why they are still working "taking those jobs from younger workers." So, boomers are selfish because they expect to retire and live off of SS for 30 years or they won't give up work so younger generations can move into their management positions. Which is it? Also, the generalization that boomers are all republicans who don't care about the current cost of college or the planet is just a ridiculous statement. Talk about painting with a broad brush. Boomers are the generation that started the cultural revolution. I'm Gen X and I have planned for my retirement because I know I cannot rely on SS. I did this without a degree and without any special skills or high paying career. Nobody forced anyone to get a degree they couldn't afford. Information on how much specific careers pay is available and has been for a long time. They will even break that down for you by location. Just because the cost of a four year degree has sky rocketed does not mean you are not responsible for figuring out how you're going to pay for it after graduation. If someone thinks educating themselves through grad school and leaving with crushing student debt in a career that tops out less than will afford them to live, save for retirement and pay back their loans, probably should have paid more attention in math class. Well bless your heart. Who exactly do you think is going to teach the kids and nurse you in your old age if no one can afford college for degrees that don’t pay well?
|
|
|
Post by lisacharlotte on Jul 1, 2019 13:01:47 GMT
So maybe I should just kill myself now so I don't get old and need nursing care because there will be no nurses in the future? Last time I looked, nursing paid really well. I don't suggest become a lawyer however, the student debt is crushing and they cannot afford nursing care due to the loans and lack of jobs.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2019 13:10:11 GMT
So maybe I should just kill myself now so I don't get old and need nursing care because there will be no nurses in the future? Last time I looked, nursing payed really well. I don't suggest become a lawyer however, the student debt is crushing and they cannot afford nursing care due to the loans and lack of jobs. Didn’t say that. All I’m saying is, maybe don’t begrudge the kids now who are trying to get an education and can’t afford it. We’re going to need educated professionals to take care of us in our old age. Nursing can pay well but doesn’t always - depends on the situation.
|
|
AmandaA
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 3,502
Aug 28, 2015 22:31:17 GMT
|
Post by AmandaA on Jul 1, 2019 13:13:09 GMT
Based on my own life experience... my parents (boomers) paid into social security their entire lives while simultaneously saving for their retirement and paying for my (gen x) college. Outside of the cost of their education compared to mine compared to my children (and really the cost of everything) increasing I fail to see how their situation is vastly different than mine and why I should hold any ill will against them for collecting from a system that they paid into. Add in that my father served our country in Vietnam and I feel like perhaps my life in many regards is far better than his despite how numbers may look paper. I like to think that I can value education and the need for reform without throwing them under the bus as the cause of the current issues. I feel like education costs are much like healthcare in that they are spiraling out of many peoples’ grasps, neither of which is going to be for the good of our society.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2019 13:18:43 GMT
Based on my own life experience... my parents (boomers) paid into social security their entire lives while simultaneously saving for their retirement and paying for my (gen x) college. Outside of the cost of their education compared to mine compared to my children (and really the cost of everything) increasing I fail to see how their situation is vastly different than mine and why I should hold any ill will against them for collecting from a system that they paid into. Add in that my father served our country in Vietnam and I feel like perhaps my life in many regards is far better than his despite how numbers may look paper. I like to think that I can value education and the need for reform without throwing them under the bus as the cause of the current issues. I feel like education costs are much like healthcare in that they are spiraling out of many peoples’ grasps, neither of which is going to be for the good of our society. Again - my only point in bringing up the boomers’ taking more than they put in is to highlight the hypocrisy of their general position regarding student loan forgiveness. I think we should all be concerned about what happens when no one goes into career that don’t allow them to pay off enormous student loans any more. What happens when we have a world full of defense attorneys, hedge fund managers and specialist surgeons but no teachers, GPs, social workers, librarians, psychologists, therapists, government workers, etc? How is that going to benefit any of us? What’s going to happen when a generation told to go into the trades develops a bad back and knees at age 50 and can no longer do plumbing? There seem to be a lot of folks here who only see the value of our social contracts as long as they’re the ones benefiting.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 16, 2024 1:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2019 13:33:29 GMT
And it has always been the same. You are only feeling it because it is your current reality. My ex and I couldn't put our kids through college. They had to figure it out for themselves. Our parents couldn't afford to put us through either, nor could their parents (my former fil went from a 4th grade education to a bachelors, both of my grandmothers had a college education before federal financial aid existed for anyone. Middle class people simply didn't send their kids to college) The college dream only lived among the elite during those eras. But my grandparents did it. And they saved like crazy for their retirement years as did my parents. They didn't prioritize their kids futures above their own. I didn't prioritize my kids future above my own future. That is YOUR choice. Don't assume all retirees are counting solely on SS. Yes, some do but those that do were the low wages earners who literally had nothing to save. YOU do have something to save but are choosing not to. One way to lower cost of college is to stop making universities the major player in research. Put research in the market place. Research is what classifies the "top tier" universities above lesser known universities. Expect your kids to live at home for their associates instead of going to "boarding school" for four years. Expect them to start part time jobs in high school and save for their own future. College doesn't have to be finished in 4 years. Go part time, work part time. Teach them they won't start off at the same place in life they left home. My parents first house they bought for a family of 4 was a whole 600 square feet. Now young families expect to buy 2-3,000 square feet starter homes with high end kitchens. Hon, nowhere did I say we weren’t saving for our retirement or prioritizing their college above our retirement. We’re not prioritizing college over retirement. But many families are. And your comments show exactly what I’ve been saying - “my parents did it” and “we figured it out” show a fundamental lack of understanding of the degree to which college costs have risen relative to wages, and the the fact that stable middle class jobs mostly do not exist in this economy without college degrees. (Our starter home was an unrenovated 1974 split level in a shitty neighborhood. Maybe stop watching reality shows for what you think my generation “has” to have.) And you can frankly step off telling me what I should expect my kids to do or not do. There’s that hypocrisy. How about we expect that your generation should have saved better or worked longer so you don’t rely so much on my contributions, hmmm? Don’t like that? Seems unrealistic and heartless? That’s how your pronouncements about me and my kids sound and feel to me. We’re the ones actually raising kids in this economy with these costs. Instead of poo-poohing us, perhaps listen for a moment. I am still in the work force and get accused of taking up a job so a young person can't have it. I expect to HAVE to work until my 70s. There are several people around me in their late 60s to mid 70s still working. Our university president just retired the past week at 75. kl Your 1974 starter home was the home my parents worked 20 years to be able to buy. And I am sure your kids don't expect to start out that small. Has nothing to do with watching tv (I don't) Has everything to do with the fact I DO work in a university and spend my day talking to the college age generation. They are expecting to start out in the newer housing areas. My 1996 home of 1400 sq feet is too old and too small. It has taken me my adult life to get here but they see it as beneath them. They also don't want to live in our least expensive old dorm because they would have to share a room. They have never shared a room in their life and don't expect to now. They want to live in the much newer modern dorm which is about 4 times the price of the old one. You aren't seeing your own hypocrisy.
|
|
|
Post by iamkristinl16 on Jul 1, 2019 13:34:01 GMT
Considering the tail end of boomers are just 61, a lot of them cannot retire at 65 either. They don't expect to be able to live off of SS, which is why they are still working "taking those jobs from younger workers." So, boomers are selfish because they expect to retire and live off of SS for 30 years or they won't give up work so younger generations can move into their management positions. Which is it? Also, the generalization that boomers are all republicans who don't care about the current cost of college or the planet is just a ridiculous statement. Talk about painting with a broad brush. Boomers are the generation that started the cultural revolution. I'm Gen X and I have planned for my retirement because I know I cannot rely on SS. I did this without a degree and without any special skills or high paying career. Nobody forced anyone to get a degree they couldn't afford. Information on how much specific careers pay is available and has been for a long time. They will even break that down for you by location. Just because the cost of a four year degree has sky rocketed does not mean you are not responsible for figuring out how you're going to pay for it after graduation. If someone thinks educating themselves through grad school and leaving with crushing student debt in a career that tops out less than will afford them to live, save for retirement and pay back their loans, probably should have paid more attention in math class. I am someone that has a master's degree in a field that is not valued and does not pay much (mental health field). I didn't take out loans for my undergraduate work, but I did take them for my graduate. I am still paying on my loans, even though they are much less than what my colleagues are coming out of graduate school with. I will also have kids going to college soon. I agree that some have not thought things through very well--private school for both undergraduate and graduate, with TONS of loans. I don't think it is a matter of not paying attention in math class. It is a matter of going into a field that you like without really having a grasp of the pay, or lack thereof. When I was in college, I don't think I had any inkling of what I would be getting paid when I was done. My mom was a HS guidance counselor and my stepdad a school psychologist. I think I figured that I would make the same amount as them. Wrong! Especially without a graduate degree. I worked for three years before going to graduate school. I worked FT in my field but also was a waitress because I couldn't live on my own with just the job in my field. Anyway, now I sometimes wish that I had paid more attention to the potential pay, the type of lifestyle I wanted, etc. However, if people only looked at the pay that they will get when they are finished with college, we would have the problem of over saturation of some fields and not many in others. But it is getting too expensive to get a degree in a lot of fields.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2019 13:51:14 GMT
Hon, nowhere did I say we weren’t saving for our retirement or prioritizing their college above our retirement. We’re not prioritizing college over retirement. But many families are. And your comments show exactly what I’ve been saying - “my parents did it” and “we figured it out” show a fundamental lack of understanding of the degree to which college costs have risen relative to wages, and the the fact that stable middle class jobs mostly do not exist in this economy without college degrees. (Our starter home was an unrenovated 1974 split level in a shitty neighborhood. Maybe stop watching reality shows for what you think my generation “has” to have.) And you can frankly step off telling me what I should expect my kids to do or not do. There’s that hypocrisy. How about we expect that your generation should have saved better or worked longer so you don’t rely so much on my contributions, hmmm? Don’t like that? Seems unrealistic and heartless? That’s how your pronouncements about me and my kids sound and feel to me. We’re the ones actually raising kids in this economy with these costs. Instead of poo-poohing us, perhaps listen for a moment. I am still in the work force and get accused of taking up a job so a young person can't have it. I expect to HAVE to work until my 70s. There are several people around me in their late 60s to mid 70s still working. Our university president just retired the past week at 75. kl Your 1974 starter home was the home my parents worked 20 years to be able to buy. And I am sure your kids don't expect to start out that small. Has nothing to do with watching tv (I don't) Has everything to do with the fact I DO work in a university and spend my day talking to the college age generation. They are expecting to start out in the newer housing areas. My 1996 home of 1400 sq feet is too old and too small. It has taken me my adult life to get here but they see it as beneath them. They also don't want to live in our least expensive old dorm because they would have to share a room. They have never shared a room in their life and don't expect to now. They want to live in the much newer modern dorm which is about 4 times the price of the old one. You aren't seeing your own hypocrisy. So I’m supposed to apologize because we didn’t find a 600 sf 1950s bungalow to start out in? Frankly, that neighborhood had gentrified and was out of our price range. A 1974 house complete with harvest gold appliances and orange tile in 2000 was no fancy accommodation, particularly when you took in the gunshots audible from just north of there every night. Yes, middle class standards of living have changed and are different than when you grew up. That said, my experience with the current generation of college students is very different than yours. Maybe because we live in a diverse urban area. They tend to prioritize things like walkability over fancy finishings. Suburban McMansions are not on their wish list.
|
|
pyccku
Pearl Clutcher
Posts: 2,817
Jun 27, 2014 23:12:07 GMT
|
Post by pyccku on Jul 1, 2019 14:07:23 GMT
One thing I definitely see a shortage of in the future is teachers. The education requirements insist upon a 4 year degree and often more - when I started, we had to finish 36 additional credit hours OR get our master's, just to stay employed. Luckily it was still fairly cheap back then.
But young people now have seen that teaching is not a lucrative career, and most of the young teachers I know will be paying off student loans for many years to come. Our starting salary is somewhere around $42K, median is somewhere around $56K. Why would anyone who could do anything else choose to be a teacher? If you have the brains to learn computer science, engineering, programming, etc. the pay will be MUCH better than teaching, so we are going to lose a lot of people who might have gone into teaching to those fields.
I've been a teacher for 24 years now. I'm lucky in that I got in when getting a master's was still affordable. I'm at the top of the pay scale in my district, and it's the best-paying district in my state. I enjoy my job and I'm good at it. BUT...I'm also really good at using computers to do things. I am comfortable with a bunch of Adobe products. I've done web design in my spare time for about 15 years now. I've dabbled in programming and have no doubt I could be successful at it if I chose to spend the time learning it and working on projects. If I were going to college now instead of 30 years ago, there is no way I would be a teacher, because the money simply isn't there. And I get it - nobody goes into teaching for the money. But the country NEEDS teachers and will continue to need teachers. If the best and brightest all steer clear of teaching, who will go into the field? Up until now, it was a job that didn't pay well, but that you could at least make a middle class living from. Now most younger teachers have a side hustle or two. NONE of the ones I know went into teaching because they were hoping to supplement their Uber income some day - they went into teaching in the hopes that they would at least be able to have a secure and stable life with enough money to maybe someday buy a house or have a family.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2019 14:40:24 GMT
One thing I definitely see a shortage of in the future is teachers. The education requirements insist upon a 4 year degree and often more - when I started, we had to finish 36 additional credit hours OR get our master's, just to stay employed. Luckily it was still fairly cheap back then. But young people now have seen that teaching is not a lucrative career, and most of the young teachers I know will be paying off student loans for many years to come. Our starting salary is somewhere around $42K, median is somewhere around $56K. Why would anyone who could do anything else choose to be a teacher? If you have the brains to learn computer science, engineering, programming, etc. the pay will be MUCH better than teaching, so we are going to lose a lot of people who might have gone into teaching to those fields. I've been a teacher for 24 years now. I'm lucky in that I got in when getting a master's was still affordable. I'm at the top of the pay scale in my district, and it's the best-paying district in my state. I enjoy my job and I'm good at it. BUT...I'm also really good at using computers to do things. I am comfortable with a bunch of Adobe products. I've done web design in my spare time for about 15 years now. I've dabbled in programming and have no doubt I could be successful at it if I chose to spend the time learning it and working on projects. If I were going to college now instead of 30 years ago, there is no way I would be a teacher, because the money simply isn't there. And I get it - nobody goes into teaching for the money. But the country NEEDS teachers and will continue to need teachers. If the best and brightest all steer clear of teaching, who will go into the field? Up until now, it was a job that didn't pay well, but that you could at least make a middle class living from. Now most younger teachers have a side hustle or two. NONE of the ones I know went into teaching because they were hoping to supplement their Uber income some day - they went into teaching in the hopes that they would at least be able to have a secure and stable life with enough money to maybe someday buy a house or have a family. My husband left teaching when it was evident that we could not make our student loan payments and build any kind of decent life for ourselves and the kids we hoped to have on two teachers' salaries. Things have not substantially improved since then; in fact, adjusted for inflation, teachers in Texas actually make less now than we did then. DH basically started over, worked in the telecom and auto industries for a while, and then paid his own way through an online MBA program while working full time. It was a shame - he really had a passion for working with underprivileged middle school students and was very good at it. Things have only gotten worse. The ed "reformers" would rather turn teaching into a profession done by bright-eyed, poorly trained TFA fellows for a couple of years before finding a "real" job, than to face the disparity between what it costs to obtain a teacher's license and what one can reasonably make as a teacher. Every teacher I know either has a side hustle or is like me, married to someone who earns a lot more.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 16, 2024 1:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2019 14:46:01 GMT
One thing I definitely see a shortage of in the future is teachers. The education requirements insist upon a 4 year degree and often more - when I started, we had to finish 36 additional credit hours OR get our master's, just to stay employed. Luckily it was still fairly cheap back then. But young people now have seen that teaching is not a lucrative career, and most of the young teachers I know will be paying off student loans for many years to come. Our starting salary is somewhere around $42K, median is somewhere around $56K. Why would anyone who could do anything else choose to be a teacher? If you have the brains to learn computer science, engineering, programming, etc. the pay will be MUCH better than teaching, so we are going to lose a lot of people who might have gone into teaching to those fields. I've been a teacher for 24 years now. I'm lucky in that I got in when getting a master's was still affordable. I'm at the top of the pay scale in my district, and it's the best-paying district in my state. I enjoy my job and I'm good at it. BUT...I'm also really good at using computers to do things. I am comfortable with a bunch of Adobe products. I've done web design in my spare time for about 15 years now. I've dabbled in programming and have no doubt I could be successful at it if I chose to spend the time learning it and working on projects. If I were going to college now instead of 30 years ago, there is no way I would be a teacher, because the money simply isn't there. And I get it - nobody goes into teaching for the money. But the country NEEDS teachers and will continue to need teachers. If the best and brightest all steer clear of teaching, who will go into the field? Up until now, it was a job that didn't pay well, but that you could at least make a middle class living from. Now most younger teachers have a side hustle or two. NONE of the ones I know went into teaching because they were hoping to supplement their Uber income some day - they went into teaching in the hopes that they would at least be able to have a secure and stable life with enough money to maybe someday buy a house or have a family. Historically, teachers were actually slaves. They were the the gentry of a population defeated in war and taken into slavery. From there it became women's work which was not expected to support a family but at best to supplement a husband's income and be a way to meet a man who was going to make more. The woman would then have a job that matched her children's schedule. But, yes, I agree to cost of becoming a teacher far outstrips the wages unless one chooses to go to a non-competitive university and live with parents while going to school. We do need to pay our teachers better as the current expectations. ETA: my paternal grandmother was a school teacher in the 1940-60s. She never expected to earn enough to buy a house or raise a family. It was a supplemental income to granddad's farming. The current advice to follow your heart without paying attention to expected salary is really really bad advice. We also need to make changes to what is available. There needs to be suitable housing being built that is affordable, not all super huge new housing developments. But smallish to mid sized homes for young families. It is a total societal change that needs to take place. Not just pay off debts created by choices people are making. If you are going to make $40,000 to 50,000 don't rack up $150,000 in debt just because you can borrow that much. Pick a regional university or even college to earn that bachelor. Just as an aside, you know all of those kids getting a million dollar financial aid? The are tying up aid so that it can't be distributed to other students.
|
|
moodyblue
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,191
Location: Western Illinois
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 21:07:23 GMT
|
Post by moodyblue on Jul 1, 2019 15:23:40 GMT
I am not a fan of just erasing student loan debt, BUT I could support debt relief - lowering interest rates, allowing loans to be modified, forgiving some loans in exchange for something (working for nonprofits, working in careers where there is a shortage or areas where needs are great, military or volunteer service, etc.).
The cost of college is insanely high now. We need to figure out how to make it more affordable, as well as non-college training for jobs. I do not think it should be FREE for all as some political candidates propose - I am not sure that people value what is given free as much as what they have to work and pay for. I do support conditions - like good/decent grades, attendance, etc., when getting loans or grants. I think people need to have some skin in the game; what’s given freely without strings can be abused or not valued enough to put in real effort. And I don’t think people should choose college just because "it's free" if they don’t have a real interest in it.
As far as the other arguments going on in this thread - I won’t collect any of the Social Security I paid in years ago from another job because of the pension offset setup in Illinois (generally speaking, teachers don’t get SS in this state; we get a pension from the state, but even if you have paid into SS through other jobs, you won’t collect any of it). I have taught for 41 years, and I’m sure the district would be happy if I retire now instead of next year, because they could get out from under my salary and pay for two younger, less experienced teachers. I also don’t get to collect any of the Social Security my husband paid in for over 40 years. He only got two years of payout before he died in January and I got the grand lump sum of $255 in death benefits. He certainly didn’t receive even what he paid in, and I can’t get any survivor/spousal benefits either. So not every Boomer is milking the system for way more than they contributed.
And for the record, I’m a Boomer who is a liberal Democrat, and does not generally like the attitude of "I got mine; you get yours."
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 16, 2024 1:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2019 16:02:06 GMT
So maybe I should just kill myself now so I don't get old and need nursing care because there will be no nurses in the future? Last time I looked, nursing payed really well. I don't suggest become a lawyer however, the student debt is crushing and they cannot afford nursing care due to the loans and lack of jobs. Didn’t say that. All I’m saying is, maybe don’t begrudge the kids now who are trying to get an education and can’t afford it. We’re going to need educated professionals to take care of us in our old age. Nursing can pay well but doesn’t always - depends on the situation. I can’t decide what has pissed you off more. The fact not everyone agrees a college education is a must and therefore not treated with the reverence you think they should be or that people are retiring before you think they should. The facts are, I believe, you don’t need a college degree to be part of the middle class. There those who work in construction and small business owners who don’t necessarily need a college degree to be successful and be part of the middle class. Baby Boomers do understand the cost of everything is going up. We see it everyday, and because of our ages we remember what things cost back then. The last house my parents bought in 1960 cost $16,000. When my dad died a couple of years ago, even after the Great Recession, the house was worth well over $500k. I remember when gas was $.60 a gallon. Everything has gone up and it has for decades so it stands to reason that so would the cost of education. And it all comes down to choices. Choices that have nothing to do what any generation did in the past or what they do in the future. The reality is, people can be successful with out a college degree. Having said that, I don’t disagree that the cost of a college education should come down. But that becomes a double edge sword because cutting cost often involve cutting or freezing salaries. This idea that those who retire at 67 or 70 and start to draw SS then have 20-30 years of vacation time is not realistic. My dad did, he retired at 65 and dies when he was 94. He was lucky, he was active until the last couple of years, but his final years were hell for him. But I can also give you a list of people who didn’t quite make it to retirement and they die. Or those who do have one or two good years then they die or their health tanks. There is so much truth in the saying “growing old is not for the weak.” None us, despite our best laid plans, know what is going to happen to us tomorrow. This is especially true as we get older. Or as this his rubber stamp says “ Getting older is just one body part after another saying “Ha ha, you think that is bad? Watch this.” So no, I don’t think the student loans should be wiped out. The decision was made to take out the loans, no one was forced to, in spite of what you think. Because of that they need to be paid back. At really low interest rates. I support making community colleges free as long as that includes trade schools. The idea that retirees get 20-30 years of vacation time is unrealistic. While some may live for 20-30 years after retiring it really boils down to the quality of life they have. The reality is, most retirees are lucky if they get a few good years before their bodies start telling them “yea good luck with that”.
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Jul 1, 2019 16:32:11 GMT
Didn’t say that. All I’m saying is, maybe don’t begrudge the kids now who are trying to get an education and can’t afford it. We’re going to need educated professionals to take care of us in our old age. Nursing can pay well but doesn’t always - depends on the situation. I can’t decide what has pissed you off more. The fact not everyone agrees a college education is a must and therefore not treated with the reverence you think they should be or that people are retiring before you think they should. The facts are, I believe, you don’t need a college degree to be part of the middle class. There those who work in construction and small business owners who don’t necessarily need a college degree to be successful and be part of the middle class. Baby Boomers do understand the cost of everything is going up. We see it everyday, and because of our ages we remember what things cost back then. The last house my parents bought in 1960 cost $16,000. When my dad died a couple of years ago, even after the Great Recession, the house was worth well over $500k. I remember when gas was $.60 a gallon. Everything has gone up and it has for decades so it stands to reason that so would the cost of education. And it all comes down to choices. Choices that have nothing to do what any generation did in the past or what they do in the future. The reality is, people can be successful with out a college degree. Having said that, I don’t disagree that the cost of a college education should come down. But that becomes a double edge sword because cutting cost often involve cutting or freezing salaries. This idea that those who retire at 67 or 70 and start to draw SS then have 20-30 years of vacation time is not realistic. My dad did, he retired at 65 and dies when he was 94. He was lucky, he was active until the last couple of years, but his final years were hell for him. But I can also give you a list of people who didn’t quite make it to retirement and they die. Or those who do have one or two good years then they die or their health tanks. There is so much truth in the saying “growing old is not for the weak.” None us, despite our best laid plans, know what is going to happen to us tomorrow. This is especially true as we get older. Or as this his rubber stamp says “ Getting older is just one body part after another saying “Ha ha, you think that is bad? Watch this.” So no, I don’t think the student loans should be wiped out. The decision was made to take out the loans, no one was forced to, in spite of what you think. Because of that they need to be paid back. At really low interest rates. I support making community colleges free as long as that includes trade schools. The idea that retirees get 20-30 years of vacation time is unrealistic. While some may live for 20-30 years after retiring it really boils down to the quality of life they have. The reality is, most retirees are lucky if they get a few good years before their bodies start telling them “yea good luck with that”. In your hurry to be offended, you have completely missed the point I've tried repeatedly to make. I don't care when you or anyone else retires. Do it as quickly as possible, with my blessing. But at least acknowledge that you're living at least in part through the contributions of those of us still working. And consider that when you're quick to judge our financial decisions or those of our children, who are simply trying to build a good life an increasingly difficult world. You might want to read up on how the wealth gap now exists between those who have a college degree and those who do not. While my parents' generation may have made a middle class living doing construction or working in a factory or civil service job, that does not often happen now. People without a college degree are falling increasingly behind and falling out of the middle class. So you can say that it's a "choice" to take on college debt, but it's not really any more, unless you're fine with increasing levels of poverty. You've said repeatedly that you oppose wiping out student debt because you'd rather see programs that benefit all people than those that benefit a few. All I'm saying to you is that social security is a program that benefits a few people, relatively speaking. My generation will not benefit from it the way yours has, if we get to draw payments at all. We expect to be entirely on the hook for our own retirement. And that's fine, we've planned for that ... but please don't sit there and tell me that programs that benefit only some are wrong when you yourself are benefiting from such a program. That's all.
|
|
|
Post by FuzzyMutt on Jul 1, 2019 17:17:17 GMT
That is a ridiculous statement. I should go into debt so that those who work in those jobs still have a job? Vacation spots will survive. I hear people who complain about the cost of their children's education talk about buying $100 eye cream or facials and designer handbags. It is about realistic choices. Life is not fair. Everyone does not get a trophy whether they win or lose. If your parents screwed you I am sorry that happened but it is not up to me to pay for that. Having said that, education costs are way, way too much but so are a lot of other things. ETA I am assuming your parents paid for your sister's education. If that is not true excuse the assumption. I'm guessing her sister was given grants grants grants and programs and programs because with a baby she was then emancipated and the absolute ridiculousness of factoring parents income (but not requiring it) into student aid is no longer a factor. Just like my nephew was given a full ride scholarship (tuition and dorms) at a 4 year school because my sister is super low income. Well. On paper. Her boyfriend has lived in her house for over 6 years, but... of course that income isn't figured into the household income. Speaking of that sister... she had my nephew at 17 and attended a four year school. Of course she took out loans to be able to buy cars, and (modest) vacations. She lived off that money for 4 years. Tuition was paid for her (of course! She was a teen mom!) but she has loans that she's never paid on from those years. Oh, and she works in a minimum wage job... Never has used that degree. My son, on the other hand, qualifies for no need based aid. I make slightly less than the median household income in my town. I am NOT wealthy. I am still recovering from a homeownership disaster a few years ago. Low pressure septic failure that ended up costing me over $35000. If I were low income, my previous county had a "program" and would have paid for it. I paid for my education by enlisting in the military. I'll be able to help my son to some degree, and he'll live at home for at least the first two years, but it really makes my blood boil that my nephew got a full ride, due to his mom's poor choices, whereas I "did everything right" and my son is penalized for it. But, I'm getting used to it, and it won't shock me if somehow there is forgiveness in the future. I missed the housing bubble programs by just a few years. And I will have in the mean time been forced to dedicate my income and his income to his college costs. I'm guessing he'll have modest loans that I'll help him pay for. Then there will be student loan forgiveness. Oh, and before yall have time to "bootstrap shame" me, and call me salty.. My nephew dropped out after a year and a half.
|
|
|
Post by ajsweetpea on Jul 1, 2019 17:33:57 GMT
I was reading an article and in part, it said people who don't pursue the military, a trade program or college, following high school are much more likely to be financially unstable than those who do, which makes sense to me. However, the cost of college keeps on rising and rising. I feel like when I went, although expensive, it was more manageable, especially if you went to school in the state you lived in. Now, even local colleges are ridiculously expensive... one of the state schools here (public university, not private) costs $38K if you live on campus. To me, that is not affordable. I also think Generation X has some unique challenges that Boomers didn't have to deal with. (NOT saying things were easy for Boomers!) For example, many of us are saddled with the cost of very high health insurance fees. I remember when I first started working full time (about 20 years ago), I paid nothing out of pocket for my insurance plan and had low co-pays and prescription costs. A trip to the emergency room was a $50 co-pay. I remember being outraged when my husband started a new job back in the day and they said it would cost us $80 per month for our insurance plan. Now I would turn cartwheels if that was all we had to pay! I seriously think we would be in a much better place now in being able to help our kids with college if we weren't paying close to $1000 per month just to have insurance! I also need medications and it's not unusual for me to pay a $90 co-pay per month for one medication, on top of the insurance costs! And that's one of three prescriptions I need.
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Jul 1, 2019 17:51:12 GMT
That is a ridiculous statement. I should go into debt so that those who work in those jobs still have a job? Vacation spots will survive. I hear people who complain about the cost of their children's education talk about buying $100 eye cream or facials and designer handbags. It is about realistic choices. Life is not fair. Everyone does not get a trophy whether they win or lose. If your parents screwed you I am sorry that happened but it is not up to me to pay for that. Having said that, education costs are way, way too much but so are a lot of other things. ETA I am assuming your parents paid for your sister's education. If that is not true excuse the assumption. I'm guessing her sister was given grants grants grants and programs and programs because with a baby she was then emancipated and the absolute ridiculousness of factoring parents income (but not requiring it) into student aid is no longer a factor. Just like my nephew was given a full ride scholarship (tuition and dorms) at a 4 year school because my sister is super low income. Well. On paper. Her boyfriend has lived in her house for over 6 years, but... of course that income isn't figured into the household income. Speaking of that sister... she had my nephew at 17 and attended a four year school. Of course she took out loans to be able to buy cars, and (modest) vacations. She lived off that money for 4 years. Tuition was paid for her (of course! She was a teen mom!) but she has loans that she's never paid on from those years. Oh, and she works in a minimum wage job... Never has used that degree. My son, on the other hand, qualifies for no need based aid. I make slightly less than the median household income in my town. I am NOT wealthy. I am still recovering from a homeownership disaster a few years ago. Low pressure septic failure that ended up costing me over $35000. If I were low income, my previous county had a "program" and would have paid for it. I paid for my education by enlisting in the military. I'll be able to help my son to some degree, and he'll live at home for at least the first two years, but it really makes my blood boil that my nephew got a full ride, due to his mom's poor choices, whereas I "did everything right" and my son is penalized for it. But, I'm getting used to it, and it won't shock me if somehow there is forgiveness in the future. I missed the housing bubble programs by just a few years. And I will have in the mean time been forced to dedicate my income and his income to his college costs. I'm guessing he'll have modest loans that I'll help him pay for. Then there will be student loan forgiveness. Oh, and before yall have time to "bootstrap shame" me, and call me salty.. My nephew dropped out after a year and a half. While I am a staunch Democrat and lean far left socially, I am not now nor have I ever been for rewarding bad choices in life. In my own family I have three cases of living on welfare for generations, breeding without the means to support the offspring and working the system. On the other hand I believe in helping those who make mistakes and then go on to help themselves. Those that take help from the taxpayers should be made to give back in some way. Welfare should be a temporary helping had not a life style. It is a flawed system and needs a major overhaul. No excuse for giving a free education to unwed mothers who are living a comfortable lifestyle by not marrying the boyfriend who lives in. I have seen that in my own family and it makes me furious.
|
|
|
Post by FuzzyMutt on Jul 1, 2019 18:22:45 GMT
femalebusiness ... we don't often agree-if ever lol... BUT word for word your post directly above! Well.. tbh except the democrat part. I do lean left socially.
|
|
|
Post by kelbel827 on Jul 1, 2019 18:39:55 GMT
My student loan payment was at one time 1700 a month. I didn’t even make that much. The company refused a income based payment. My credit is shot. I’ve been out of school for 18 years and I still owe 18,000.
If I had been able to declare bankruptcy, my credit would have already recovered.
I knowingly took out loans and understood they needed to be paid off. My problem is no one would work with me.
Large companies declare bankruptcy, and then continue to operate. Car manufacturers got a bailout. Regular debt can be written off but not student loans.
I answered yes. I’d be willing to also say yes with strings.
|
|
sassyangel
Drama Llama
Posts: 7,456
Jun 26, 2014 23:58:32 GMT
|
Post by sassyangel on Jul 1, 2019 18:47:02 GMT
My student loan payment was at one time 1700 a month. I didn’t even make that much. The company refused a income based payment. My credit is shot. I’ve been out of school for 18 years and I still owe 18,000. If I had been able to declare bankruptcy, my credit would have already recovered. I knowingly took out loans and understood they needed to be paid off. My problem is no one would work with me. Large companies declare bankruptcy, and then continue to operate. Car manufacturers got a bailout. Regular debt can be written off but not student loans. I answered yes. I’d be willing to also say yes with strings. That’s awful. $1700 a month is a LOT, especially given you’re paying interest. Our system is not only sliding scale based on income, but would have allowed you to defer payments until you got back on your feet. It’s staggering there isn’t some protections there, for circumstances beyond a persons control.
|
|
seaexplore
Prolific Pea
Posts: 8,510
Apr 25, 2015 23:57:30 GMT
|
Post by seaexplore on Jul 1, 2019 19:06:36 GMT
One thing I definitely see a shortage of in the future is teachers. The education requirements insist upon a 4 year degree and often more - when I started, we had to finish 36 additional credit hours OR get our master's, just to stay employed. Luckily it was still fairly cheap back then. But young people now have seen that teaching is not a lucrative career, and most of the young teachers I know will be paying off student loans for many years to come. Our starting salary is somewhere around $42K, median is somewhere around $56K. Why would anyone who could do anything else choose to be a teacher? If you have the brains to learn computer science, engineering, programming, etc. the pay will be MUCH better than teaching, so we are going to lose a lot of people who might have gone into teaching to those fields. I've been a teacher for 24 years now. I'm lucky in that I got in when getting a master's was still affordable. I'm at the top of the pay scale in my district, and it's the best-paying district in my state. I enjoy my job and I'm good at it. BUT...I'm also really good at using computers to do things. I am comfortable with a bunch of Adobe products. I've done web design in my spare time for about 15 years now. I've dabbled in programming and have no doubt I could be successful at it if I chose to spend the time learning it and working on projects. If I were going to college now instead of 30 years ago, there is no way I would be a teacher, because the money simply isn't there. And I get it - nobody goes into teaching for the money. But the country NEEDS teachers and will continue to need teachers. If the best and brightest all steer clear of teaching, who will go into the field? Up until now, it was a job that didn't pay well, but that you could at least make a middle class living from. Now most younger teachers have a side hustle or two. NONE of the ones I know went into teaching because they were hoping to supplement their Uber income some day - they went into teaching in the hopes that they would at least be able to have a secure and stable life with enough money to maybe someday buy a house or have a family. People are not going into teaching because it's not valued. Teachers are bad mouthed and maligned ALL the time. Teachers are paid crappy (according to some they're paid too much because they ONLY work 10 months and have all kinds of time off) and have CRAZY demands put on them by PARENTS and ADMINISTRATION. Teachers can no longer just TEACH. They are expected to parent and put their students above their own family. I just mentioned to a friend that if I were starting out in my career (not 21 years in) I would ABSOLUTELY pick a different career. I didn't sign up to be berated by parents who think their children deserve to get a passing grade when their child can't even be bothered to fill in their math notes with the answers the class has generated that are ON THE BOARD written on their projected book. Like, ZERO effort required there- just copy the damn information. I didn't sign up to be bullied by other teachers because they disagree with my teaching and grading methodology. I signed up to teach, to work with kids, to help them learn complex information.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 16, 2024 1:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2019 19:35:04 GMT
A student loan is no different than any other loan except you end up with something that should benefit you at the end of it. Some career paths pay more than others and that should be taken into consideration by the person taking out the loan. And what you have to *sacrifice* because you have a student loan to pay off shouldn't matter.
There are things I want but I can't have because I have a house payment. I would like a new car, but I have kids in braces to pay off. I would like to have a larger house, but I am contributing to my mother's long term care needs. I would like to have my house cleaned, my nails done, and a weekly massage, but I don't get those things right now because I made other commitments with my money that I am responsible to follow through with.
Student loans are no different. You know when you take them out that you are going to have to pay them off. If it means you delay having children or you delay buying your dream house or dream car, then so be it. You can't have everything and you chose to finance an education. You knew what it was when you took out the loans and the taxpayer who is already making their own sacrifices that you have no idea about, shouldn't have to finance your education when they made other commitments that they are responsible for.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Jun 16, 2024 1:59:39 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 1, 2019 21:49:06 GMT
Because a government babysitter would be a better plan? Umm no. Who do you think government gets its money from? Yes, government controlled and operated would be far better. Private companies have one goal, profit at any and all expense of the poor and disenfranchised. That’s disgusting and sad all at the same time. Business (privately held business) is the backbone of this country. Profit is how employees are paid, innovation is created, advancements are funded and opportunities made.
|
|
|
Post by femalebusiness on Jul 1, 2019 22:20:19 GMT
Yes, government controlled and operated would be far better. Private companies have one goal, profit at any and all expense of the poor and disenfranchised. That’s disgusting and sad all at the same time. Business (privately held business) is the backbone of this country. Profit is how employees are paid, innovation is created, advancements are funded and opportunities made. These private businesses are sucking at the tit of the tax payer. Who do you think foots the outrageous bill for these private companies? We the people have no say after these private companies are given no bid contracts by the politicians that have been receiving their monies. It is graft plain and simple. If these facilities were run by the government there would be the same amount of jobs for people and they would still be paid for by the taxpayer. However, there would be some oversight and it would cost a whole lot less. Private business at this point and time in this country is taking the citizens to the cleaners.
|
|