|
Inmate Central Inmate Central, where civil and family-friendly discourse about off-audio topics (other than religion and politics) is welcome. |
|
|
|
Inmate Central Inmate Central, where civil and family-friendly discourse about off-audio topics (other than religion and politics) is welcome. |
|
In Reply to: RE: Giving money to people posted by rivervalley817 on July 25, 2020 at 19:42:19:
Well I think the biggest problems are twofold1) mental health
2) drug addictionAs a teacher in Canada - you see all kinds of students and on parent teacher night I can tell you - when you see the parents - you get a helluva lot of perspective on why the kid is the way they are.
I suspect most people who fall on the Conservative Republican spectrum didn't have a tough upbringing and grew up in upper middle class homes.
An example - I was teaching grade 7 my first practicum. The lesson had a theme about stealing and lying are wrong and it's important to follow the golden rule.
This lesson was an add on because the one autistic boy in the class had had his bike stolen by other students.
So the school system is trying to teach that stealing is wrong. Meanwhile the classroom teacher tells me that the boy who stole the bike serves as his dad's ride along. His dad burglarizes homes and the boy's job is to sit in the car as lookout.
How well do you think our lesson on stealing is wrong will work when his dad is engaging him in thefts?
We have students who go to the corner of the class - pull down their pants and take a dump. Because that's how it is at home.
People have no idea of how brutal these kids have it because they, like me, grew up in better parts of towns or cities to loving relatively well off parents with IQs in 130 range.
So these kids have mental trauma - then they get onto drugs - hell many from their parents.
They don't know how to function in a society.
Conservatives tend to dismiss any liberal idea because they just want to stick it to a liberal.
The liberal wants to help the drug addiction out of a sense of morality and ethics to try and help people. So they're called bleeding hearts.
And that gets us nowhere. I have often told liberals that if they want to convince a conservative of anything NEVER EVER make a plea to morality ethics or empathy or sympathy - you will be called an SJW if you try.
So I say you should always try and talk to them in terms of Money. If you can convince a conservative that he will spend less money or even make a profit by funding a policy you have a pretty good chance of changing their minds.
Take free education that Inmate51 hates because it's socialism. Well he doesn't seem to hate the socialized police force, the socialized fire department, the socialized highway department, socialized K-12 education, Libraries, military etc.
Socialized is simply an insurance policy. Every Western industrialized country has these programs to varying degrees. The term is a term.
If you want convince someone on the conservative side for instance that University should be tuition free - you need to convince them with financially plausible arguments and with some facts and figures.
A plausible argument is this:
is it better to have a man with University degree in mechanical engineering than a person with no degree working at Walmart and collecting tax subsidized food stamps?
Logically - you determine what the economic impact this person will have on the US economy. Let's say the government elects to pay $60,000 of tax payer money for this man. He gets his degree at 25 years old and gets a job at $80,000 a year and tops out at $200,000. He works for 40 years earning a total of $7,000,000. Paying tax - let's assume 15% income tax. He has now paid a little over $1 million in taxes - more than offsetting the $60,000 the government paid educating him.
Plus, given his wealth he has purchase a nice home and maybe 10-15 cars over his working life - using the money in society to help all the various businesses along the way.
This man - given his job and his wealth has been able to attract a higher quality woman who is also educated and money savvy. Who also pays taxes.
Sliding universe version of this guy is the one who can't afford university and is virtually unemployable beyond low level grunt work. So now this fellow is making minimum wage not earning enough to both pay rent and eat - so now he needs all sorts of government hand outs. So working say 60 hours a week at min wage let's say a yearly income of $25,000 times 40 years he earns $1,000,000 and pays $150,000 in tax.
So circle back to the $60,000 University investment from government in his education - the net gain back in tax revenue is $850,000 over 40 years.
But remember version 1 man also buys a lot of things and helps the economy - while version b of the man buys next to nothing so no infusion into the economy AND he draws a whole lot of government services - food stamps - rent subsidies.
Worse - version B man may be more apt to comiting crimes or protesting and vandalising - so the $150,000 the government makes off of him over 40 years could be wiped out and then some - to possibly costing the government that $150,000 plus $150,000 more! Person B is net negative to the country.
Moreover - the world is competitive - in a meritocracy - you want the BEST people to get into university and the best person for the job because you have to compete with people from other countries where in those countries you get to university based on you academic skills. If your country is not letting those best people in but only letting in the rich then yes they paid for their spot but they may be dumb as bricks.
Education is an investment in business the same way every audiophile on this board makes an investment in their stereo. People here buy audio equipment at prices far higher than the stereos that Walmart sells - because we want a quality stereo.
Well we want to compete in the world economy we need to be smarter and better than the graduates from other countries. They are giving out free education and to get in you MUST have the academic merit to do so - it is merit based to get into their universities. Countries that don't do that are allowing many of the better students not to be able to get in and allowing dummies with money to buy their way in.
Of course the US has grants etc for the best and brightest - that is good - but it probably needs to extend to the next level down. Getting my sliding doors person to be a Mechanical engineer than a Walmart greeter.
LASTLY: I can't fully answer this question because I am in talks with a film director to get one of my ideas on this subject into a Television Series. He has pitched it to some higher ups and is consulting a few writers to see what they can do with it. I pitched it more as a way to solve the drug problem and he felt it could be made into a series. The chance this will come to fruition is of course very low - but nevertheless it's still pretty cool to even get to the pitching stage. And my friend is involved with soon to be released Trial of the Chicago 7 written and directed by Aaron Sorkin. So hey you never know.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Giving money to people - RGA 07/25/2020:41:07 07/25/20 (1)
- Wonderfully well-stated. Nt. - MWE 20:59:45 07/25/20 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
