Is the American Dream Dead?

[volinbham]

The average American can't compete with machines, cheap labor from other countries or large corporations that control 90% of the country's wealth. Some undoubtedly can, but the working/middle lower class have less of a chance to earn a livable wage compared with earlier in our country's history. Once we reached the west coast and cheap land became scarcer, resources became much harder to come by. How can a small business owner compete with Wal Mart when it sells things cheap as dirt thanks to its exploited workforce (just 1 example). Many Americans represent that exploited workforce that slaves away for that worthless check, and many aren't as fortunate as you to be able to make a decent living. Some can, but it's far from being as easy as thought of in the AD.

I don't think you realize how little people used to have. My parents are from lower working class and they had very few of the conveniences, possessions, food, etc. that the working poor have today.

 

[BigPapaVol]

I don't think you realize how little people used to have. My parents are from lower working class and they had very few of the conveniences, possessions, food, etc. that the working poor have today.

Period. Americans were by and large broke. My parents grew up on farms with nothing but ehat they could grow to sell and eat. Everyone they knew was the same and nobody whined about being poor or needing assistance. They simply worked.

The idea that industrialization hasn't helped is just senseless, unless you're lobbying for a reboot to gorilla lifestyle.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[utgibbs]

Period. Americans were by and large broke. My parents grew up on farms with nothing but ehat they could grow to sell and eat. Everyone they knew was the same and nobody whined about being poor or needing assistance. They simply worked.

The idea that industrialization hasn't helped is just senseless, unless you're lobbying for a reboot to gorilla lifestyle.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Again, you mistake gifts of the Enlightenment with "gifts" (sic) of industrialization.

Nobody whined because

Everyone they knew was the same

Equality matters. Inequality matters.

A return to a modernized Jeffersonian agrarian ideal is not a bad direction IMHO. It's certainly worth a look.

 

[utgibbs]

Easier to say it's hard and call the problem a systemic one. It's what Lenin would do.Posted via VolNation Mobile

Where in the world did you get this stupid question or the idea that I hinted at such? Are you just making crap up so you can give us another spiel about obscure reading and idiotic socialist drivel.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

:dunno:

Speaking of obscure reading, I just finished "To the Finland Station" for the first time. How apropos!

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

 

[volinbham]

A return to a modernized Jeffersonian agrarian ideal is not a bad direction IMHO. It's certainly worth a look.

How will you thin the population so there will be enough food? Or do you plan to let starvation thin the herd?

 

[NEO]

Again, you mistake gifts of the Enlightenment with "gifts" (sic) of industrialization.

Nobody whined because Equality matters. Inequality matters.

A return to a modernized Jeffersonian agrarian ideal is not a bad direction IMHO. It's certainly worth a look.

So you're pro farm but anti industry?

 

[Electric Orange]

I'm not trying to say oh woe is me, the sky is falling. I was just tryin' to get some feedback from people who've seen more than me. I appreciate the feedback, it gives me some hope.

 

[Electric Orange]

YouTube - Hank Williams jr - The American Dream

 

[NEO]

I'm not trying to say oh woe is me, the sky is falling. I was just tryin' to get some feedback from people who've seen more than me. I appreciate the feedback, it gives me some hope.

You can still make a crap load of money in the country.

Truth is, you can make more now than ever. The difference is the low end jobs are all heading over seas or outsourced to temp agencies in the US.

The top level jobs are still there though.

If you are honestly concerned about your future (which is smart) you need to look at your potential career and decide if this is something that could be outsourced or become no longer needed. It's not easy to do but it's a start.

 

[utgibbs]

How will you thin the population so there will be enough food? Or do you plan to let starvation thin the herd?

Since obesity is destined to be the #1 health epidemic, I think "thinning the population" would have a lot of incredible benefits! lol:

Mind you, obesity is a function of Capitalist industrial agriculture. Cheap food = energy dense excess junk we feed to the poor. Why do strawberries cost more than cheese doodles? Oh, right....

 

[utgibbs]

So you're pro farm but anti industry?

Interesting question. On the surface you would have to say - how can you be anti-farm? (But read Richard Manning's most excellent "Against the Grain" for an anti-farm view).

Again, I have discovered the confusion regarding "de-industrialization" in a debate with volinbham. I have internalized these things, so I understand why there might be some problems.

De-industrialization is not about returning to the Stone Age (remember, I'm the board's only proponent of the gifts of the Enlightenment). It's about the concentration and centralization required in either Capitalist or Socialist Industrial economies. It's about a return of real value and quality instead of the relentless push for more and more cheap tat. It's about overcoming a frame of mind which enshrines concentration and centralization.

 

[droski]

Since obesity is destined to be the #1 health epidemic, I think "thinning the population" would have a lot of incredible benefits! lol:

Mind you, obesity is a function of Capitalist industrial agriculture. Cheap food = energy dense excess junk we feed to the poor. Why do strawberries cost more than cheese doodles? Oh, right....

statistically the poor are the fattest percentage of our population. clearly not many are food poor as you say. 50 years ago it woudl be laughable to find a fat poor person. but hey you are right. obviously you are poor in this country if you can only afford the 32 inch flatscreen rather than the 50. it's all relative right?

 

[BigPapaVol]

statistically the poor are the fattest percentage of our population. clearly not many are food poor as you say. 50 years ago it woudl be laughable to find a fat poor person. but hey you are right. obviously you are poor in this country if you can only afford the 32 inch flatscreen rather than the 50. it's all relative right?

it has nothing to do with their general education levels, lack of personal discipline or decision making. It's about the cost of strawberries vs Cheeze-its.

 

[MG1968]

Since obesity is destined to be the #1 health epidemic, I think "thinning the population" would have a lot of incredible benefits! lol:

Mind you, obesity is a function of Capitalist industrial agriculture. Cheap food = energy dense excess junk we feed to the poor. Why do strawberries cost more than cheese doodles? Oh, right....

who's "we"?

nobody forces low income people to buy crap. If you had even the vaguest concept of personal responsibility, you would understand that.

 

[joevol320]

Since obesity is destined to be the #1 health epidemic, I think "thinning the population" would have a lot of incredible benefits! lol:

Mind you, obesity is a function of Capitalist industrial agriculture. Cheap food = energy dense excess junk we feed to the poor. Why do strawberries cost more than cheese doodles? Oh, right....

what about the humans that are killing the planet. I think the herd should be thinned by starting with the environmentalist whackos and the rest of the leftist. maybe you guys could reinact the Jim Jones movement.

 

[droski]

it has nothing to do with their general education levels, lack of personal discipline or decision making. It's about the cost of strawberries vs Cheeze-its.

i regurally make very high end meals that cost under $15 for myself and my wife (with usually enough left over for lunch the next day). and i buy fresh vegtables. it's really not that complicated. rice and beans aren't expensive. nor is turkey or chicken or canned tomatoes. i assure you i could eat very well on food stamps if i had to. my bro is 300+ pounds and poor and complains that he can only afford fast food. i've tried to educate him that healthy food is at worst the same price, but i don't think he wants to learn.

 

[BigPapaVol]

i regurally make very high end meals that cost under $15 for myself and my wife (with usually enough left over for lunch the next day). and i buy fresh vegtables. it's really not that complicated. rice and beans aren't expensive. nor is turkey or chicken or canned tomatoes. i assure you i could eat very well on food stamps if i had to. my bro is 300+ pounds and poor and complains that he can only afford fast food. i've tried to educate him that healthy food is at worst the same price, but i don't think he wants to learn.

bottom line, it's easy to make excuses for people who are too sorry to do it right, then assume that they need the government to help them get by.

 

[droski]

i fully support replacing food stamps with costco memberships and teaching people that the freezer isn't just there to keep your vodka cold.

 

[MG1968]

i regurally make very high end meals that cost under $15 for myself and my wife (with usually enough left over for lunch the next day). and i buy fresh vegtables. it's really not that complicated. rice and beans aren't expensive. nor is turkey or chicken or canned tomatoes. i assure you i could eat very well on food stamps if i had to. my bro is 300+ pounds and poor and complains that he can only afford fast food. i've tried to educate him that healthy food is at worst the same price, but i don't think he wants to learn.

I'm not trying to be the spelling police, but I've seen you misspell "regularly" like this on several occasions. Is there some kind of inside joke?

in another forum, I once showed how I could feed 8 people for about $25. Eating well is not hard nor is it expensive. People like gibbs want the government to have the power to force people to eat "nutritious" foods. It's all part of that single-payer health utopia they envision.

 

[droski]

nope. just very poor spelling. my dyslexia at work.

i had a super bowl party last sunday. made turkey chili. probably spent around $50 total and still had a bunch of chili left over.

 

[gsvol]

Can we survive Obama? Yes we can! All we need to bounce back is already in place Coach is Right

In fact the most recent Rasmussen poll tells us just 35% of likely voters think America’s best days are yet to come while an alarming 45% say we’ve seen our best days and have little to look forward to.
------------------------------

The facts say not only can we survive Obama’s assault on our freedoms and economy, but we are actually well positioned to because we are easily out producing China, our closest rival, by a very wide margin.

The most United Nations recent report on international economic data sets America’s manufacturing output at $2.15 trillion which is over 45% more than the output of China. Moreover, America produces 20% of all the world’s consumer goods.
-----------------------

It won’t be easy, but we can survive Obama and get our country back on track. Our children need not live in an America that is less than the country we have today.

 

[NEO]

Interesting question. On the surface you would have to say - how can you be anti-farm? (But read Richard Manning's most excellent "Against the Grain" for an anti-farm view).

Again, I have discovered the confusion regarding "de-industrialization" in a debate with volinbham. I have internalized these things, so I understand why there might be some problems.

De-industrialization is not about returning to the Stone Age (remember, I'm the board's only proponent of the gifts of the Enlightenment). It's about the concentration and centralization required in either Capitalist or Socialist Industrial economies. It's about a return of real value and quality instead of the relentless push for more and more cheap tat. It's about overcoming a frame of mind which enshrines concentration and centralization.

Ok, so at the end of the day you are an Isolationist who believes in self contained units within each country? You believe in staying local and working local?

 

[volinbham]

Again, I have discovered the confusion regarding "de-industrialization" in a debate with volinbham. I have internalized these things, so I understand why there might be some problems.

De-industrialization is not about returning to the Stone Age (remember, I'm the board's only proponent of the gifts of the Enlightenment). It's about the concentration and centralization required in either Capitalist or Socialist Industrial economies. It's about a return of real value and quality instead of the relentless push for more and more cheap tat. It's about overcoming a frame of mind which enshrines concentration and centralization.

you are speaking in abstract. "real value and quality vs cheap tat" are simply buzzwords in your presentation.

provide specifics - for example, how would we have affordable computers and Internet access without concentration of resources? as has been stated repeatedly you dismiss economies of scale with the waive of an epic facepalm.

you speak of conservation - concentration and centralization often preserves resources rather than endless duplication of effort.

your entire view of Health care rests on concentration and centralization and you've repeatedly argued that improves quality and efficiency.

 

[utgibbs]

who's "we"?

nobody forces low income people to buy crap. If you had even the vaguest concept of personal responsibility, you would understand that.

Of course we do.

We allow a system of industrial agriculture which produces cheap cheese-doodles instead of cheap strawberries.

I think someone needs to reevaluate their ideas of personal responsibility.