Rep. George Cleveland, R-Onslow Doesn't Believe in Extreme Poverty in NC

[deacdiggler]

The reality is that at every step in the food chain of our society, from the wealthy executive, to the single mom, we are focused on only ourselves. For executives that means slashing jobs to boost bottom line, for a single mom that might mean continuing to have out of wedlock sex and having more babies. Selfishness is rampant and isn't going away. There is no political solution to this, that is the reality of it. We will continue to fight the same battles until our society unravels. That is the bare truth of it. It sucks, but we do our best for as long as we can....but no society is timeless. Look at our history. Every great civilization implodes from very common characteristics. American is not immune. Our country was great when men and women sacrificed for the common good. Now the only good that matters is our own good. Republicans don't have the answer, and neither do the Democrats. This is why I fit into neither party.

We need a change of heart as a society, not a change in political theory. Yes we can still choose to do the best we can with the choices we are forced to make, but in the end almost every choice is merely deciding between the lesser of two poor consequences. Do we give welfare? Yes, but the consequences are that you foster dependency. Do we withhold welfare and attempt to instill work ethic and responsibility? Yes, but the consequences are that little children go hungry and single moms that are there because they have a loser boyfriend can't provide for their family.

Hows that for a bummer of a post?

It may be a hard reality but I agree with you 100%. I'm adding your comments to my prayer list.

 

[Deacfreak07]

It is more expensive to work now with the costs of Childcare and healthcare. You can certainly argue, that those subsidies have created dependency, and that's a fair point. However, the reality is that the wages available to the poor often don't cover the costs of the expenses that they have subsidized without working. They simply make a sound business decision sometimes choosing not to work. If healthcare and Childcare are more affordable, it would make more sense for someone to take a job, any job. It's sad that we have an economy/environment that makes it too expensive to work. I think both parties share significant blame for this.

 

[PhDeac]

It is more expensive to work now with the costs of Childcare and healthcare. You can certainly argue, that those subsidies have created dependency, and that's a fair point. However, the reality is that the wages available to the poor often don't cover the costs of the expenses that they have subsidized without working. They simply make a sound business decision sometimes choosing not to work. If healthcare and Childcare are more affordable, it would make more sense for someone to take a job, any job. It's sad that we have an economy/environment that makes it too expensive to work. I think both parties share significant blame for this.

Great point. The private sector keeps child care and health care costs high and wages low because it's profitable to do so.

 

[truifh0]

I have a question. If a family of four is making $11,000 a year or less does that mean that both parents are unemployed or working a part time job? The reason I ask is that I don't think it is possible for a families income to be $11,000 a year or less if one or both parents are employed based on NC minimum wage laws. With that being said $15,000 to $30,000 a year still isn't much money for a family of four.

I agree with those that have said that throwing money at poverty isn't going to solve the problem and that we need to look at the underlying issues. Some solutions I would implement to help prevent problem are as follows:

1. Make economics and some sort of a personal finance or financial responsibility/planning class mandatory at the 9th grade level. If kids are going to drop out of high school they have almost no chance of making it and I think classes like these would help people understand how the economy works, how money works and how to manage it. Personal debt is a major problem in this country and is part of the reason people go into poverty to begin with.

2. Schools need to start talking about mapping out paths to success at an early level. By 9th grade, if not earlier, options need to be presented to kids whether it be college, technical college, trade school, etc. to show kids that there are multiple paths to getting an education and a job. A lot of kids think college is too expensive and rightfully so and just give up because they don't think they have viable options to be successful.

3. In school and/or after school mentor programs need to be established. One of the biggest reasons the cycle continues is because of a poor family life or unsupportive family. Most of the people that grew up in a poor family and made it did so because they had a stable family that actually cared about their well being. If that environment is missing at home, then it needs to be recreated somewhere else and the schools have the best opportunity to do this.

4. There needs to be a stronger emphasis on the consequences of behavior such as drug and alcohol abuse and sexual promiscuity especially without protection. I just don't think kids understand how being dependent on drugs and alcohol or having a child before you are emotionally and financially ready can diminish your chances for success drastically.

 

[Wrangor]

I think the best chance we have at changing the heart of America is by instituting mandatory service at the age of 18, that can be postponed by college, but never exempted. Choose the military, social service, or education - but you must serve for the greater good at a young age and realize that we are all in this together.

 

[Deacfreak07]

I think the best chance we have at changing the heart of America is by instituting mandatory service at the age of 18, that can be postponed by college, but never exempted. Choose the military, social service, or education - but you must serve for the greater good at a young age and realize that we are all in this together.

Hear, hear!

 

[truifh0]

I think the best chance we have at changing the heart of America is by instituting mandatory service at the age of 18, that can be postponed by college, but never exempted. Choose the military, social service, or education - but you must serve for the greater good at a young age and realize that we are all in this together.

George H.W. Bush would concur. I should have put something about learning the importance of serving others and giving back as well.

 

[TexasDeac10]

I think the best chance we have at changing the heart of America is by instituting mandatory service at the age of 18, that can be postponed by college, but never exempted. Choose the military, social service, or education - but you must serve for the greater good at a young age and realize that we are all in this together.

But what about the person who genuinely despises the government and America? What role is left for them? Do they just enroll and then fight against "the man" from within by showing up to work late, or shirking their duties as a soldier? Creating this giant program of indoctrination doesn't seem to fix anything. Rather, it stifles dissident voices.

 

[PhDeac]

But what about the person who genuinely despises the government and America? What role is left for them? Do they just enroll and then fight against "the man" from within by showing up to work late, or shirking their duties as a soldier? Creating this giant program of indoctrination doesn't seem to fix anything. Rather, it stifles dissident voices.

Private education.

 

[Wrangor]

But what about the person who genuinely despises the government and America? What role is left for them? Do they just enroll and then fight against "the man" from within by showing up to work late, or shirking their duties as a soldier? Creating this giant program of indoctrination doesn't seem to fix anything. Rather, it stifles dissident voices.

That is why you have different tracks. If the person genuinely despises government, then have them serve on the social services side. Get them involved in a non-profit, something...not everyone is going to like doing it. The point isn't that we will all sing kumbaya...the point is that everyone needs to see beyond their own selfish personality and give for the greater good. The person you have described needs this more than anyone. Give back to your government, give back to humanity, or give back to the enrichment of young minds. Three tracks. Only the brightest would be eligible to go the education route after college, so our educational system would receive an immediate influx of young, cheap, intelligent labor. Some of those great minds might get the crazy idea to stay in education rather than go into banking, so we have a possibility of benefiting our educational system in the short term and long term.

Our social services and non-profits would get a massive boost of volunteer labor which would give us a better chance as a nation to fight huge issues like poverty, teen pregnancy, drug addictions, etc.... you need manpower, and young people are ambitious, fearless, and optimistic. You would also have people give service to the military which would give a greater percentage of our population a true appreciation of what it means be on the front line of American defense. It would also better prepare our country in case of a great war as we would have a larger percentage ready in some capacity (not that I think it is realistic, but it certainly doesn't hurt). You would also have some great minds in the military that might discover new methods, invent new capacities, etc....

The possibilities are endless, and while the cost would be astronomical, it would more than pay for itself over the long haul. If I were going to run for president, this would be my platform. I thought of this about a year ago, and then I saw that movie 'Ides of March' and they mentioned something kind of like it - which really pissed me off actually. It is a good idea, and it is feasible if someone had the balls to stand behind it. This is done in many other countries around the world in some aspect. We are really missing the boat. I would have been MUCH better off having served my country for 2-3 years after high school or after college.

I was a complete pissant when I went away to college, and the only reason I had some sense after graduating was because I met a really great woman who I had to shape of for.

 

[Wrangor]

Private education.

No - mandatory no matter your educational choice. Everyone with a birth certificate is enrolled. If you dodge, you get sent to some sort of labor camp where you can do some good involuntarily.

 

[PhDeac]

I was answer his question about what does somebody who doesn't like the government can do. You said education was an option and provide education falls outside the government.

 

[TexasDeac10]

Yea, it just seems to me that the problem with such a program is that it looks a lot like governmental indoctrination. It looks too much like Israel, the USSR, or some other country with state-mandated civil service that hasn't been kind to civil liberties.

 

[deacdiggler]

Look at it as earning thos civil liberties. I have give that concept zero thought but it seems appealing to have to earn some of your rights in this way.

 

[Wrangor]

I was answer his question about what does somebody who doesn't like the government can do. You said education was an option and provide education falls outside the government.

Gotcha...or they can do social service which is not government related. Plenty of non-profits that would qualify that would help the common good and have nothing to do with government.

 

[Wrangor]

Yea, it just seems to me that the problem with such a program is that it looks a lot like governmental indoctrination. It looks too much like Israel, the USSR, or some other country with state-mandated civil service that hasn't been kind to civil liberties.

It is definitely indoctrination. Indoctrination that we are all in this together and it is about time we started understanding that. No man is an island, yet we act as though we earn everything through our own effort. We don't. I am who I am as a direct result of the environment and parents that raised me. The more we understand that the American Dream is a farce, the better chance we have to survive as a nation. Personal responsibility without concern for the common good is worthless. Take care of yourself, and take care of your neighbor. It is a pretty easy concept. If you are in the military this is an understood concept. If you are serving the homeless this is an understood concept. If you are teaching 4th graders math this is an understood concept. If you are 19 years old and your parents are bankrolling your education while you party 20 hours a week you are not taught this lesson. If you are 23 years old and an investment banker you are not taught this concept.

Our entire system rewards selfishness - from our welfare system to our corporate structure. Is it any great wonder that the top 1% don't care about the bottom 99% and the bottom 50% look at the top 1% with disdain and jealousy? Changing the political structure won't bring about a change of heart. We have a chance if we flip the script for about 2-3 years during the most influential time in people's lives. You call it indoctrination, I call it exposure to the true reality. A fist united strikes a mean blow, and an open hand barely leaves a mark. We attack our daily lives as individual fingers and we wonder why we have no true power.

Sorry...you got me preaching....you see the point. Peace.

 

[PhDeac]

The pledge of allegiance or playing the national anthem before sporting events are indoctrination as well.

 

[PhDeac]

I agree with a lot of this, but at the same time, I wonder how many people would truly invest in a company that said in their prospectus: "we are not going to try to maximize our profits, but by investing in us you can feel good that your investment dollars are supporting American jobs. Rather than earning the 10% annualized return that you might get in other equities, we hope you'll settle for 4%. "

The way to solve this is to bring additional value for that US investment. People will pay a premium for a better product, but generally not all that much just to support an inefficient cost structure.

But that's the problem. Our system is slanted toward investment instead of work. Taxes are lower for investment. Investors earn profits from others work and then when the profits aren't high enough workers lose their jobs. There's got to be some happy medium between "workers unite" and our version of capitalism that enables people to make loads of money without working at all.

 

[seventwofour]

Statistically Republican voters give more to charitable causes than democrat voters.

What are the statistics when you take out donations to a church, mosque, etc.? Money going to pay a pastor's salary isn't doing much to promote economic uplift.

 

[TR1982]

But that's the problem. Our system is slanted toward investment instead of work. Taxes are lower for investment. Investors earn profits from others work and then when the profits aren't high enough workers lose their jobs. There's got to be some happy medium between "workers unite" and our version of capitalism that enables people to make loads of money without working at all.

This is all completely incorrect. Our system is heavily slanted the other way, towards maximizing employment. You say taxes are higher on employment, but there is no federal employment tax while there is a 15% tax on all capital gains, completely separate from the income tax. In addition, we offer subsidies that entice people to join the labor force. The Earned Income Tax Credit, TANF, etc. Further, it's not as simple as, "when profits aren't high enough, workers lose their jobs". How does that make any sense? Firms never hire workers that cost them money. The only situation in which they would lay off workers is if they faced an immediate liquidity or solvency crisis, and the only way that laying off workers would actually increase their profit margins would be if the firms took losses from hiring the workers to begin with. Usually this only happens when the government entices firms to make hires that wouldn't be profitable in exchange for certain benefits.

Regulations on investment are stringent, especially with the passage of Dodd-Frank and the coming implementation of the Volcker Rule. If you truly want to have a system that is slanted towards getting people to work, then you should be against Obamacare, Dodd-Frank, minimum wage laws, and unions.