Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#1
Cameron should follow Obama`s example in the last 18 months of being a Prime Minister......
President Obama vows to address gap between rich and poor
Calling on Congress to raise minimum wage, the President says it's time to reduce the gap between the rich and poor that was recently cited by the Pope.
"This income inequality is most pronounced in our country," Obama said. "And it challenges the very essence of who we are as a people."
President Barack Obama turned his focus Wednesday to the pocketbook issues that Americans consistently rank as a top concern, arguing that the dream of upward economic mobility is breaking down and the growing income gap is a "defining challenge of our time."
"The basic bargain at the heart of our economy has frayed," the president said in remarks at a nonprofit community center a short drive from the White House in one of Washington's most impoverished neighborhoods.
The president vowed to focus the last three years of his presidency on addressing the discrepancy and a rapidly growing deficit of opportunity that he said is a bigger threat than the fiscal deficit.
Read more:
http://www.wjla.com/articles/2013/12/president-obama-vows-to-address-gap-between-rich-and-poor-97680.html#ixzz2maeMRoMT howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
not before time either, the abject poverty that many live in over there is unacceptable with many hard working people on the minimum wage barely able to feed themselves or pay for a prescription when they are ill.
the american dream is mostly a thing of the past with very few people from a poor background breaking through in the world of commerce.
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#3
Income inequality is no problem and for as long as people are individuals, have their own motivations, their own abilities - or lack of them, then income inequality is not only natural it is also right.
What is important is opportunity. People should have the opportunity to exploit whatever talents they have to improve their lot and pull themselves up their bootstraps. That is where government should focus.
Plenty of people have left school with no qualifications and do well, I include myself in that. It is down to the individual to help themselves and usually, it is the dead hand of big government that gets in the way with excessive tax, stultifying rules, infuriating red tape and a benefit system that disincentives people to get out and work.
Government should confine itself to giving hands up - not hands out - then get out of the way letting us get on with our lives.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#4
we shouldnt leave people to starve or choose between that and heating
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#5
A good education and the will/desire to get-on will help anyone.
Many children don't have a good role-model to look up to, but being positive and staying at school is the key - to freedom. Freedom from poverty, freedom to live and work where ever you want to.
I couldn't agree more with the phrase "a hand-up is more important than a hand-out". Being dependant on the State doesn't help anyone long-term.
Roger
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#6
Keith Sansum1 wrote:we shouldnt leave people to starve or choose between that and heating
Nobody is saying it is.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#7
the main problem in the states is that unless a child has access to good education they have little or no chance of being successful.
the better off parents make sure of this whereas the less well off have no chance of doing the same, i think this is what obama has to address.
Guest 725- Registered: 7 Oct 2011
- Posts: 1,418
#8
Yes We can't.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#9
These must be a basic facts that you cannot argue with:
1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity.
2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.
3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else.
4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it!
5. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them, and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for, that is the beginning of the end of any nation.
Roger
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#10
what about those who do work hard and still stay in poverty, the united states has millions of them?
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#11
along with the uk,where millions are in the same boat.
John Buckley
- Registered: 6 Oct 2013
- Posts: 615
#12
Just for Philip!
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#13
howard mcsweeney1 wrote:what about those who do work hard and still stay in poverty, the united states has millions of them?
Howard.
Are you speaking of relative poverty of absolute poverty?
These are very different things and we should not tolerate the latter. But the former is a different thing and there will always be those who are worse off than others. What I do dispute though is that someone who works hard, is reliable and trustworthy would 'stay in poverty' if we had the kind of prosperous economy I am after. Of course, stupid government interventions such as the minimum wage does help keep people on low pay, locking them into it with no-where to go.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#14
Hadn't realised "mad" magazine was still going john an essential read when i was a teenager - hard to believe that alfred e neuman is still going strong.
nice to see him blacking up on the front cover.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#15
i am still talking about the states barry - the subject of this thread, there have been many reports of people working full time there and not being able to pay for a prescription and qualifying for food banks.
that is absolute poverty not the relative equivalent.
John Buckley- Registered: 6 Oct 2013
- Posts: 615
#16
Yes Howard, you mean that you cancelled your subscription? The annoying thing is that he doesn`t seem to have aged any! Unlike us!
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#17
in the real world barryw,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#18
Keith - if the real world had anything to do with and socialists understood economics then they would not be socialists.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#19
no barry under this government its heat the house or eat and freeze.nothing to do with socialisam.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#20
unfortunately barry, like most political anoraks, surrounds himself with fellow travellers so he and others communicate via hackneyed cliches.
applies to the left as it does the right and they are all completely out of synch with the population.
