Support NeoGAF

[shanshan310]

Seems to me like he's always making dishonest arguments that fit his agenda then acting evasive and stubborn when challenged. If you enjoy that fair enough, I just find it frustrating to read. I like the guy outside of threads like these though.

Yeah, the guy is either a troll or stubborn to the point of complete moronicness. Either way he doesn't seem worth arguing with =/

 

[Alpha-Bromega]

Yeah, the guy is either a troll or stubborn to the point of complete moronicness. Either way he doesn't seem worth arguing with =/

here's a trick; don't reply! it's like a petulant child who needs attention, which is what it is, so don't give it attention. it's completely your fault if it ruins your thread because you gave it attention it so desperately desires. I have the child on ignore but i can still see you trying to scramble rational thoughts against it... don't try. You're the fool in the end.

 

[Wazzim]

Yeah, the guy is either a troll or stubborn to the point of complete moronicness. Either way he doesn't seem worth arguing with =/

He is a lawyer, he is trained to make you furious of his dismissing of arguments, evasions and factually stating of his opinion. It's a cool guy, stubborn as hell but a good member to have around.

 

[Kabouter]

I think this thread has had more than enough discussion as to the merits of Manos as a poster. Back on topic.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

He is a lawyer, he is trained to make you furious of his dismissing of arguments, evasions and factually stating of his opinion. It's a cool guy, stubborn as hell but a good member to have around.

That's very kind of you. Thank you very much.

 

[7aged]

I have health insurance through my job and pay a good loan rate. I also don't pay absurdly high taxes and garbage VATS.

You will find that your insurance is little comfort. A lot of medical bakcrupcies in the US are from people who were insured but reached their policy limit.

 

[Barrett2]

I actually think that might be the hardest part for me in a hypothetical move to Europe. While I would enjoy universal healthcare, and wouldn't necessarily mind paying a little more tax in return, the goddamn VAT would kill me. After having access to so many cheap consumer products in the US.

 

[Neo C.]

Then why does Europe find it having to cut back more and more on their benefits? It seems all these great benefits where in the end unsustainable, thus requiring cuts, unless your Germany and can just lean on Greece and certain other Euro countries to prop up your exports.

Because neoliberalism. Instead of increasing the taxes, the governements rather cut the benefits. Fortunately, the left parties are gaining more power with a few exceptions (Spain and Greece).

 

[shanshan310]

I actually think that might be the hardest part for me in a hypothetical move to Europe. While I would enjoy universal healthcare, and wouldn't necessarily paying a little more tax in return, the goddamn VAT would kill me. After having access to so many cheap consumer products in the US.

As a side note, is it true they don't add tax onto the price tags of things over there? It seems kind of confusing.

Also if goods cost higher it probably means your wage is better, so it all works out ^^

 

[Des0lar]

I actually think that might be the hardest part for me in a hypothetical move to Europe. While I would enjoy universal healthcare, and wouldn't necessarily mind paying a little more tax in return, the goddamn VAT would kill me. After having access to so many cheap consumer products in the US.

Higher cost of living comes with higher average wages. I'd guess you could probably afford kore in Europe being poor, than in America.

 

[Pennywise]

As a side note, is it true they don't add tax onto the price tags of things over there? It seems kind of confusing.

Also if goods cost higher it probably means your wage is better, so it all works out ^^

In Germany it's already included in the price and you can see it on the bill as well , the exact amount.

 

[Dr. Feel Good]

Yeah well you only need about €786,000 to equal $1,000,000. So obviously it's easier.

 

[shanshan310]

In Germany it's already included in the price and you can see it on the bill as well , the exact amount.

oh, I meant in the US

The German way is the same as here (Aus), which makes the most sense from my point of view.

 

[Dr.Guru of Peru]

Meaning it never hit the us nearly as bad, since we moved away from European style benefits in the 1980s and 1990s. The benefits in Europe where a weight around it's neck. Too much weight kept being added recently.

Nothing you're saying makes any sense, except for the thing about weights around the neck being heavy.

 

[Half and half]

As a side note, is it true they don't add tax onto the price tags of things over there? It seems kind of confusing.

Also if goods cost higher it probably means your wage is better, so it all works out ^^

Do you mean the wages are probably better in Europe? Definitely not in my industry (technology).

 

[el retorno]

I actually think that might be the hardest part for me in a hypothetical move to Europe. While I would enjoy universal healthcare, and wouldn't necessarily mind paying a little more tax in return, the goddamn VAT would kill me. After having access to so many cheap consumer products in the US.

This. I don´t know how I´d be able to keep up tech wise in Europe its crazy how expensive stuff is there. Going in to a game or electronics shop in Spain almost makes me cry. 60 euros for call of duty!? Thats 75$! Movies are about 10€ too which is like 13 to 14.

Not necessarily, the article notes that the main problem with mobility is in the top and bottom fifths. I think the title certainly fits with that.

This is probably the most interesting part of the problem and why I think a soultion is so hard to find in the current political process Is that as this article points out when much of middle class America hears republicans talk about the American Dream they believe it because it still does exist for them. They know people who have moved up and down due to their work.

The problem is that this doesn´t exist for the lower class and also they are much less likley to get involved in the political process that much to actually promote things that would help them (they are also struggling so they can´t get that involved even if they wanted) so its up to the middle and upper clases who see things from their point of view and project that on to those below them to promote the causes that would help them. "Hey I can do it why can´t you!" (Mano´s is one of these I think).

They obviously don´t because its really hard to see things from another point of view. How is most of GAF supposed to know how working 3 jobs feels like when most of them obviously have a good enough income to have a fast internet connection and a nice gaming habbit.

 

[coldvein]

the bootstraps.... the bootstraps!!!! they are falling apart.

 

[Divvy]

I actually think that might be the hardest part for me in a hypothetical move to Europe. While I would enjoy universal healthcare, and wouldn't necessarily mind paying a little more tax in return, the goddamn VAT would kill me. After having access to so many cheap consumer products in the US.

Wouldn't you save considerably more money from not having to pay for health insurance?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Higher cost of living comes with higher average wages. I'd guess you could probably afford kore in Europe being poor, than in America.

It's nullity if the difference in earnings is being removed in taxes and VAT.

Wouldn't you save considerably more money from not having to pay for health insurance?

Not if you already get it from your job.

 

[The Technomancer]

Nothing you're saying makes any sense, except for the thing about weights around the neck being heavy.

It wasn't the rampant corruption that did Greece in, it was providing healthcare and education to their citizens...

 

[Barrett2]

Wouldn't you save considerably more money from not having to pay for health insurance?

Well, i'd be paying more in federal tax as a way to pay for the healthcare, so I suppose it's circumstantial. Im' not sure how it all breaks down.

But that's definitely one thing the US has going for it. If you are a savvy shopper, you get crazy deals on so much stuff.

 

[Kabouter]

Not if you already get it from your job.

But you are paying more, because the United States has an incredibly expensive (per capita) healthcare system, something not reflected by an increase in quality over the systems in Western Europe or Canada.

 

[The Technomancer]

Well, i'd be paying more in federal tax as a way to pay for the healthcare, so I suppose it's circumstantial. Im' not sure how it all breaks down.

But that's definitely one thing the US has going for it. If you are a savvy shopper, you get crazy deals on so much stuff.

Sure, but not everyone can be a "savvy" shopper, and I think that its kind of Darwinian

 

[Pennywise]

This. I don´t know how I´d be able to keep up tech wise in Europe its crazy how expensive stuff is there. Going in to a game or electronics shop in Spain almost makes me cry. 60 euros for call of duty!? Thats 75$! Movies are about 10€ too which is like 13 to 14.

Sadly it's pretty common they just convert the price to €....but well there are plenty of ways to avoid it.
Simply by not buying it day 1 !

I guess it's just practice because no one ever said something until the internet made it possible to shop worldwide and compare prices.

 

[el retorno]

Higher cost of living comes with higher average wages. I'd guess you could probably afford more in Europe being poor, than in America.

Not true. While yes higher cost of living comes with higher average wages those still are often much less than US wages.

For example in Spain the Average Wage is 18,723 (Disposable)

While in the US its 31,410

Other examples
Switzerland 24,715
France 26,416
UK 26,312
Norway 25,224

Some of this data is pretty old though

While yes you have to add in educational expenses and health care costs but you also have to remember that sales tax or VAT in the US doesn´t really go above 10% while in europe its 15 and up to 20% in some countries so your getting hit twice.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

But you are paying more, because the United States has an incredibly expensive (per capita) healthcare system, something not reflected by an increase in quality over the systems in Western Europe or Canada.

That said I can pick my own doctors and not have to pay even more for a private option (they way my plan is).

The fact my wife gets to have her delivery done by the OBGYN she is seeing is worth the extra money.

Sure, but not everyone can be a "savvy" shopper, and I think that its kind of Darwinian

If you consider the people on Fat Wallet and Slick Deals, Darwin may be trolling us all.

 

[Phoenician_Viking]

Now that is entitlement!

Free education and healthcare are basic human rights much like freedom of speech, and freedom of worship.

 

[dinazimmerman]

To play devil's advocate, there are some parts you should've bolded in the article that you didn't.

Like this one:

Some conservatives say this measure, called absolute mobility, is a better gauge of opportunity. A Pew study found that 81 percent of Americans have higher incomes than their parents (after accounting for family size).

This is elaborated on in another article by Scott Winship, who was quoted in the OP article,

One way to assess the extent of mobility is to ask whether people tend to be better off than their parents were at the same age — whether they experience upward absolute mobility. Research for EMP conducted by my colleagues at the Brookings Institution Julia Isaacs, Isabel Sawhill, and Ron Haskins shows that two-thirds of 40-year-old Americans are in households with larger incomes than their parents had at the same age, even taking into account the fact that the cost of living has risen. That’s pretty impressive, but it actually understates the improvement between generations. Household size declined over these decades, so incomes now are divided up among fewer family members, leaving them better off than bigger households of the past. Another EMP study shows that when incomes are adjusted for household size, four out of five adults today are better off than their parents were at the same age.

The finding of pervasive upward absolute mobility flies in the face of liberal accounts of a stagnant middle class. These accounts generally conflate disappointing growth in men’s earnings with growth in household income, which has been impressive. Growth in women’s earnings has also been impressive, but economic pessimists have twisted these bright spots to fit a gloomy narrative. They claim that household incomes have kept pace only because wives have been forced into work to make up for the shrinking bacon their husbands bring home. That ignores the long-term trend of women’s obtaining more education in industrialized nations around the world, presumably with an intention to put it to use in the work force someday. It also ignores the evidence that married men rationally chose to reduce their work hours as their wives increased theirs (even as single men continued working the same hours), and the fact that employment grew more among the wives of better-educated men than among the wives of less-educated men.

Source: http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/282292/mobility-impaired-scott-winship

You also forgot this part:

Even by measures of relative mobility, Middle America remains fluid. About 36 percent of Americans raised in the middle fifth move up as adults, while 23 percent stay on the same rung and 41 percent move down, according to Pew research. The “stickiness” appears at the top and bottom, as affluent families transmit their advantages and poor families stay trapped.

This fits nicely into a point I made in another thread: If you're the median household in the US, your disposable income (which remember does not take into account in-kind government transfers or consumption taxes) is at least as high as (often a good deal higher than) that of the median household in basically evey other country in the world. Even if you were to take into account in-kind gov. transfers and consumption taxes, I'm willing to bet the US would still rank pretty darn high in terms of median household disposable income.

On the other hand, if you pick a random household, its more likely to be poor, i.e. its disposable income is more likely to be less than 50% of the median household's disposable income, in the US than in essentially every other developed country. Of course, this measure of poverty is a bit controversial, since the richer the median household in the country is, the higher the poverty threshold, as well.

The data to support this:

There's another part that I found interesting, as well:

The income compression in rival countries may also make them seem more mobile. Reihan Salam, a writer for The Daily and National Review Online, has calculated that a Danish family can move from the 10th percentile to the 90th percentile with $45,000 of additional earnings, while an American family would need an additional $93,000.

"It's harder to get rich here than in freaking France and Denmark" partly because being a "rich" American family requires far more income than being a "rich" Danish one!

Last part. You only bolded two of the seven possible causes for this lack of mobility. I've bolded the first five below:

The causes of America’s mobility problem are a topic of dispute — starting with the debates over poverty. The United States maintains a (1) thinner safety net than other rich countries, leaving more children vulnerable to debilitating hardships.

(2) Poor Americans are also more likely than foreign peers to grow up with single mothers. That places them at an elevated risk of experiencing poverty and related problems, a point frequently made by Mr. Santorum, who surged into contention in the Iowa caucuses. The United States also has (3) uniquely high incarceration rates, and a (4) longer history of racial stratification than its peers.

“The bottom fifth in the U.S. looks very different from the bottom fifth in other countries,” said Scott Winship, a researcher at the Brookings Institution, who wrote the article for National Review. “Poor Americans have to work their way up from a lower floor.”

A second distinguishing American trait is the (5) pay tilt toward educated workers. While in theory that could help poor children rise — good learners can become high earners — more often it favors the children of the educated and affluent, who have access to better schools and arrive in them more prepared to learn.

Causes (2), (4), and (5) are very important in my opinion, as they highlight one of the potential solutions to this problem: supplementing the child-rearing resources of disadvantaged families through iniatives like the First Five Years Fund (http://www.ffyf.org/). As clear from the initiative's name, the focus is on early childhood education. Some videos about the iniative: 1. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eis-CLs6ds8 2. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L8U96Q_x3qE 3. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XSqA2dkPc_I 4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4SB8svwf5uk (James Heckman talks) 5. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eAp1Q4ezAXY (another Heckman video).

I think it's critical to lessen the political influence of the economic elite and to fix the country's healthcare system (though not necessarily by copying the healthcare systems of other developed countries), but I don't think that doing so would by itself solve the country's poverty problem. Frankly, I think it would only reduce poverty by a minimal amount. Education reform is absolutely necessary, and we should give a high priority to early childhood education. Daron Acemoglu makes a similar point in this awesome interview:

If you’re looking at the average college graduate versus the average high school graduate, or the 90th versus the 10th percentile, then the things economists have emphasised – technology, globalisation, offshoring and outsourcing, changes in the supply of skills, et cetera – have played a major role and probably tell the bulk of the story. But if you want to understand the top inequality, why the top 0.1% – even more than what the 1% Occupy Wall Streeters are talking about – have been earning such huge amounts, then really you have to think about the social policy aspects of it and the politics of it.

...

[The Race between Education and Technology] is a really wonderful book. [It is a must-read for anyone interested in inequality.] It gives a masterful outline of the standard economic model, where earnings are proportional to contribution, or to productivity. It takes its cue from a phrase that the famous Dutch economist, Jan Tinbergen coined. The key idea is that technological changes often increase the demand for more skilled workers, so in order to keep inequality in check you need to have a steady increase in the supply of skilled workers in the economy. He called this “the race between education and technology”. If the race is won by technology, inequality tends to increase, if the race is won by education, inequality tends to decrease.

Source: http://thebrowser.com/interviews/daron-acemoglu-on-inequality

In other words, reducing the political influence of the top 1% is important, but if you want to reduce the huge gap between the poor and middle class -- a goal that's much more important in my opinion -- then we need to make sure education wins the race against technology!

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Free education and healthcare are basic human rights much like freedom of speech, and freedom of worship.

No, they aren't.

 

[The Technomancer]

That said I can pick my own doctors and not have to pay even more for a private option (they way my plan is).

The fact my wife gets to have her delivery done by the OBGYN she is seeing is worth the extra money.

...for you. Because you can afford it.

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

...for you. Because you can afford it.

Study hard and get a job, I mean that's not a troll, that's what I did.

 

[el retorno]

Sadly it's pretty common they just convert the price to €....but well there are plenty of ways to avoid it.
Simply by not buying it day 1 !

I guess it's just practice because no one ever said something until the internet made it possible to shop worldwide and compare prices.

That´s true. The used prices weren´t so bad 9 to 15 euros for a year old game. And I´d imagen there are things like Steam and Gamefly type things which game make it much more affordable.

But things iPads are crazy 479€ for the base model? 600 dollars!

Though I´d imagen if I ever moved over there (Which I´d love to do, though not for the I hate America reasons) I´d buy stuff like that over in the States on visits and only buy things like Game systems over there due to region locking and what not.

 

[el retorno]

No, they aren't.

Education is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

Though I personally don´t think that extends to university. As a HUMAN RIGHT. A goal we should all strive for but not a Human right

And some sort of health care is implied by this though I think the US meets this.

Article 25
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

 

[coldvein]

Study hard and get a job, I mean that's not a troll, that's what I did.

aka bootstraps?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

Education is. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Declaration_of_Human_Rights

Though I personally don´t think that extends to university. As a HUMAN RIGHT. A goal we should all strive for but not a Human right

And some sort of health care is implied by this though I think the US meets this.

Article 25
(1) Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control. (2) Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.

I think it applies to basic education and also that a government shouldn't deny someone that, not that they have to provide them that.

 

[The Technomancer]

Study hard and get a job, I mean that's not a troll, that's what I did.

So why aren't the only people who currently can't afford healthcare unemployed?

 

[Kabouter]

No, they aren't.

You state it like it's a fact, when clearly, it isn't:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic,_social_and_cultural_rights

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

aka bootstraps?

Didn't you finally move out and get a job despite hardship? So it seems to work.

You state it like it's a fact, when clearly, it isn't:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic,_social_and_cultural_rights

As applied to the laws of the United States. Sorry I should have clarified that.

 

[el retorno]

I think it applies to basic education and also that a government shouldn't deny someone that, not that they have to provide them that.

(1) Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit. (2) Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace. (3) Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

That says the government must provide Education.

 

[HarryHengst]

Haha, oh wow, been a long time since i've seen someone trolling like Manos does. Awesome!

 

[dinazimmerman]

Are we really arguing about what constitutes a human right in this thread?

 

[Manos: The Hans of Fate]

That says the government must provide Education.

Ironically doesn't the Amish exception violate it then?

 

[el retorno]

You state it like it's a fact, when clearly, it isn't:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Economic,_social_and_cultural_rights

I always thought it was pretty funny how the US and the USSR had their different "Human rights" treaties with that being the USSR´s and the Civil and Political Rights being the US´s. Both obviously trying to say that something the other didn´t do was against "human rights."

It´s why I always go back to the basic UNDHR because its a little less free from the Socialism vs. Captialism. And the US never ratified the Economic and Social rights one. It did ratify the UNDHR though

Ironically doesn't the Amish exception violate it then?

No because if you read the whole thing its states

Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.

 

[Ripclawe]

Even by measures of relative mobility, Middle America remains fluid. About 36 percent of Americans raised in the middle fifth move up as adults, while 23 percent stay on the same rung and 41 percent move down, according to Pew research. The “stickiness” appears at the top and bottom, as affluent families transmit their advantages and poor families stay trapped.

so the real problem is at the bottom because there is no "problem" at the top and if you are born in the middle there is no law that says you should remain there.

As for the bottom, it goes deeper than just give them free this or that. Its also an attitude and community problem where just throwing more money and programs won't work.

I came to this country as a kid and for a few years had to go to a shit school in a shit area and most of the kids and their parents had shit characters. Call it a culture shock or whatever but no amount of shoving free programs at them would have changed them into productive members of society. It would have just passed with generations of being entitled.

You want upward mobility you better address the overall problem which is more than just shove more money at them.

 

[SHAZOOM]

Only when the baby boomers and the most brainwashed of their progeny are dead and gone, will America: The Religion have a shot at dying out.

Because it really is a religion. And it sez that if you fail in America, you fail because you're just not American enough. It's nice, tidy, and compliments American style MegaJesus Christianity, which helps reinforce the mentality that all problems in life are rooted in insufficient piety and lack of faith in the unifying dream of society.

Kaijima, you are my favorite poster on Gaf. Here AND on Gaming-side.

 

[Kabouter]

so the real problem is at the bottom because there is no "problem" at the top and if you are born in the middle there is no law that says you should remain there.

I think there is a problem at the top, an extremely high percentage of people born into the top remaining there indicates a system that is not as meritocratic as it perhaps should be.

 

[dinazimmerman]

so the real problem is at the bottom because there is no "problem" at the top and if you are born in the middle there is no law that says you should remain there.

As for the bottom, it goes deeper than just give them free this or that. Its also an attitude and community problem where just throwing more money and programs won't work.

I came to this country as a kid and for a few years had to go to a shit school in a shit area and most of the kids and their parents had shit characters. Call it a culture shock or whatever but no amount of shoving free programs at them would have changed them into productive members of society. It would have just passed with generations of being entitled.

You want upward mobility you better address the overall problem which is more than just shove more money at them.

Yeah, the article also mentions that immigrant mobility is not measured in the statistics cited.

And in some sense, you're right that there's no problem at the top. No one resents Steve Jobs and Bill Gates for their riches, for example. But in another sense, you're wrong, given that the super-rich have acquired an inordinate amount of political influence in recent years. This is inefficient, unfair, and prevents democracy from working properly.

I also agree that the solution isn't shoving money at poor people. It's helping poor parents raise their children right. There are some links to videos about an iniative that attempts to do this in my lengthy post earlier in the thread.

EDIT: Also, no one reads my posts in these threads. T.T

 

[Wazzim]

so the real problem is at the bottom because there is no "problem" at the top and if you are born in the middle there is no law that says you should remain there.

As for the bottom, it goes deeper than just give them free this or that. Its also an attitude and community problem where just throwing more money and programs won't work.

I came to this country as a kid and for a few years had to go to a shit school in a shit area and most of the kids and their parents had shit characters. Call it a culture shock or whatever but no amount of shoving free programs at them would have changed them into productive members of society. It would have just passed with generations of being entitled.

You want upward mobility you better address the overall problem which is more than just shove more money at them.

The problem at the top in the US is that they don't help the bottom. Tax the top more and use the money to help the poor people have a better life.

And no that doesn't mean just shoving money in their hands, you could use the money at the top to create a better education system, better environment etc etc Every little bit will help evolve the community, just because you got out of it doesn't mean you can say 'fuck them'.
That will lead to a better culture and will make the difference between the top and the bottom much smaller than it is now.
Yes we help people with their healthcare, with their unemployment but that will create a better society. We have already tried the 'I can do it, so can you. Deal with it.' in the time of the Industrial Revolution, didn't work out so well.

(This is of course seen in the perspective of someone who wants to help people that are in worse conditions than himself)

 

[Kabouter]

Yeah, the article also mentions that immigrant mobility is not measured in the statistics cited.

And in some sense, you're right that there's no problem at the top. No one resents Steve Jobs and Bill Gates for their riches, for example. But in another sense, you're wrong, given that the super-rich have acquired an inordinate amount of political influence in recent years. This is inefficient, unfair, and prevents democracy from working properly.

I also agree that the solution isn't shoving money at poor people. It's helping poor parents raise their children right. There are some links to videos about an iniative that attempts to do this in my lengthy post earlier in the thread.

EDIT: Also, no one reads my posts in these threads. T.T

I do, don't worry. It's just that when I (largely) agree, there isn't much to respond to.

 

[el retorno]

The problem at the top in the US is that they don't help the bottom. Tax the top more and use the money to help the poor people have a better life.

While I don´t disagree with the statement to tax the rich more (I think everyone should be taxed a bit more) the Rich already pay a giant amount of the current help to the poor. I think much of it is that its the middle class who are never touched and treated as a third rail.