The Trump Policy of Separating Families at the US Border

[redwood66]

I notice that my posts are sometimes misinterpreted. I am trying to get more precise, and I value this forum as a way in which I can practice and understand others better. I want everyone to know that, though I’m sometimes opinionated, sometimes impassioned to share ideas, it’s just expression, and not personal. I’m in no way judging anyone here. I know that we don’t really know each other and there is only so much one can gather about another from posts alone. Digression over!

This info is appreciated because I understand wholeheartedly how hard it is to mistake tone on the internet.

 

[Bluegemz]

This info is appreciated because I understand wholeheartedly how hard it is to mistake tone on the internet.

Exactly! And even more so because of how much people do care about these subjects, it’s easier to misunderstand. I take full responsibility for being vague or misleading at times.

Another quick disclaimer: many aspects of my opinion aren’t as rigid as they may seem, and in attempting to understand the views of others, I’m reexaming and further developing them. That’s what’s I value about this sometimes hard discourse. Thanks to everyone who participates!

 

[JPie]

I truly hope your outlook on the state of affairs gets better and I hope all the people who are miserable find peace somehow. No hand wringing or safe space needed for me.

The misery in the world isn’t caused by people who would see men like Trump for what he is and call it out. It’s caused by those who would gladly gaslight on his behalf and enable him by making asinine “both sides do it!” excuses.

I’m sure my outlook will improve once those people find the courage to be honest.

 

[redwood66]

The misery in the world isn’t caused by people who would see men like Trump for what he is and call it out. It’s caused by those who would gladly gaslight on his behalf and enable him by making asinine “both sides do it!” excuses.

I’m sure my outlook will improve once those people find the courage to be honest.

I wish you luck. We are probably done here. Have a wonderful day.

 

[Dancing Fire]

@Dancing Fire , I worked for 36 years and never needed to be on welfare. For 12 years I supported myself on very little money. I’ve always considered myself lucky that I didn’t need it and I’m very grateful that safety net is there for those who do need it.

Of course we need a welfare system for those who truly needed help but IMO these people shouldn't make a career out of collecting from the taxpayers. I have heard a too many times from these recipients saying "why should I work?" when I can get free housing and food stamps from the government w/o working. When I hear statements like these then you know there is something wrong with the welfare system.

 

[Dancing Fire]

A recent UN report revealed that we have the highest poverty rate of any first world country proportionally, and the highest incarceration.

I also know that it’s not as simple as saying that they should ‘just get an edication’. The system is rigged for the wealthy or talented to get an education.

If that is true then we as americans should encourage these Illegal immigrants not to enter the US. Why do you wanna see these kids suffer?

 

[Dancing Fire]

What has this got to do with anything? I'm a liberal and a high school teacher. I help provide a good education for a living.

b/c you were taught by liberal professors in college.
https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2016/12/20/liberal-professors/

btw; I have the greatest respects for all teachers.

 

[icy_jade]

Can someone explain to me how Melania and her parents came to be in the US? Are there different policies/quotas for migrants from European countries vs Mexico/South American countries/Asian/etc?

And in the US was there any debate over the president having a foreign born wife and in-laws and being so anti-immigration?

Just curious as only headline news appears locally, so maybe there was but I missed the news. (Her jacket was reported though)

 

[Maria D]

b/c you were taught by liberal professors in college.
https://www.bostonmagazine.com/news/2016/12/20/liberal-professors/

btw; I have the greatest respects for all teachers.

Is b/c shorthand for because? What question are you answering? The part of my post you highlighted isn't a question so I'm confused. Are you trying to explain where I got my liberal viewpoint?

For the record, my degree is in Chemical Engineering. I honestly don't know where my professors fell on the liberal/conservative spectrum. It's hard to inject your political persuasion into subjects like Differential Equations, Thermodynamics, Unit Operations and Colloid Chemistry. Those courses do help you become a keen critical thinker though!

edited to add: I have now clicked on your link. I subscribe to the Globe and read that article when it came out a couple of years ago. Very thought provoking! Did you read it?

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

I just want to clear up a few things that I see are going thru threads here. My parents as well as many posters parents were immigrants who also had the "work ethic". My dad worked 16 hrs a day, and gov't assistance was beyond their thinking. Guess why? there was basically none. It was not until LBJ passed the Great Society in 1964 that we had Medicaid. There was always Public Aid, but that was quite minimal and it was thought the only blacks took it. You did have public housing projects that most people were scared of. Hospitals didn't at that time have to take indigent people But hospital and Dr bills were within reason, so that a family could call the doctor to the home and get paid in cash. People didn't have to have insurance. In fact, the social safety net has been added to and added to.

Now during that same time Education was considered the most important way to advance in America. Our schools and teachers were held in great esteem. In NYC higher education to colleges came with free tuition. California had the same system. Rich and poor took advantage. You had to have a B high school average to attend these schools. Later they had what was called open enrollment where you did not even need the B average. This was to get minorities enrolled. Then private universities had to, mandated by law, to diversify their enrollment. The structures are there for people to get ahead thru education. You have to walk thru the door.

There have been many, many Gov't helping hands. Some of the more important questions for me would be.
1.Why is medical care -Dr and Hospital so expensive?

2. What happened to our great schools. (this is a heartbreaker)

3. Why do people think throwing money at these things is the answer.?

More welfare programs aren't the answer for me. In the 60's no one would have thought working in a fast food joint would provide a living wage. (MDonalds wasn't in NYC) You are truly creating the haves and haves nots by even suggesting that Walmart, etc, ect, ought to be providing a living wage for families. Truly, the dumbing down of America. We have shown we are dumb enough now, lets act smarter. I know I agree more with DF on this score. It is in attitude. America became great on that work ethic. I'd like to see it restored.

Annette

 

[Dancing Fire]

edited to add: I have now clicked on your link. I subscribe to the Globe and read that article when it came out a couple of years ago. Very thought provoking! Did you read it?

Yes, sad but true. Most college college professors leans way left.

 

[Bonfire]

Hi,

I just want to clear up a few things that I see are going thru threads here. My parents as well as many posters parents were immigrants who also had the "work ethic". My dad worked 16 hrs a day, and gov't assistance was beyond their thinking. Guess why? there was basically none. It was not until LBJ passed the Great Society in 1964 that we had Medicaid. There was always Public Aid, but that was quite minimal and it was thought the only blacks took it. You did have public housing projects that most people were scared of. Hospitals didn't at that time have to take indigent people But hospital and Dr bills were within reason, so that a family could call the doctor to the home and get paid in cash. People didn't have to have insurance. In fact, the social safety net has been added to and added to.

Now during that same time Education was considered the most important way to advance in America. Our schools and teachers were held in great esteem. In NYC higher education to colleges came with free tuition. California had the same system. Rich and poor took advantage. You had to have a B high school average to attend these schools. Later they had what was called open enrollment where you did not even need the B average. This was to get minorities enrolled. Then private universities had to, mandated by law, to diversify their enrollment. The structures are there for people to get ahead thru education. You have to walk thru the door.

There have been many, many Gov't helping hands. Some of the more important questions for me would be.
1.Why is medical care -Dr and Hospital so expensive?

2. What happened to our great schools. (this is a heartbreaker)

3. Why do people think throwing money at these things is the answer.?

More welfare programs aren't the answer for me. In the 60's no one would have thought working in a fast food joint would provide a living wage. (MDonalds wasn't in NYC) You are truly creating the haves and haves nots by even suggesting that Walmart, etc, ect, ought to be providing a living wage for families. Truly, the dumbing down of America. We have shown we are dumb enough now, lets act smarter. I know I agree more with DF on this score. It is in attitude. America became great on that work ethic. I'd like to see it restored.

Annette

Really good post Annette. To add to the points you made.
The problems we face in our inner cities is a vicious cycle of failed schools and social programs. I live outside of Chicago, there are many many people who live on welfare generation after generation. Children raised by one parent or grandparent who can’t live on minimum wage and have no other options.. What are they supposed to do? Boys drop out of school. Selling drugs is much more lucrative. Gangs recruit these at risk youth. The gang problem is systemic and insidious. So who is going to create jobs for these youths that rivals the money and allure of gang culture? A multifaceted problem. We are circling the drain.

Edit to add, I apologize for contributing to carrying the conversation a little off course from the title of this thread.

 

[JPie]

Hi,
More welfare programs aren't the answer for me. In the 60's no one would have thought working in a fast food joint would provide a living wage. (MDonalds wasn't in NYC) You are truly creating the haves and haves nots by even suggesting that Walmart, etc, ect, ought to be providing a living wage for families. Truly, the dumbing down of America. We have shown we are dumb enough now, lets act smarter. I know I agree more with DF on this score. It is in attitude. America became great on that work ethic. I'd like to see it restored.

Annette

The "dumbing down" of America is in our willingness to believe that we live in a true meritocracy, and that you can work full time but you don't deserve a living wage if you don't have the wherewithal to bootstrap yourself into a cushy white collar job.

The real problem is corporate welfare. To use your example, when McDonald's doesn't pay their employees a living wage, employees turn to government benefits to make up the difference. Just how much does that add up? Take a look: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/bill...-for-the-rich-and-corporations_b_4589188.html

5. Subsidies to the fast food industry: Research by the University of Illinois and UC Berkeley documents that taxpayers pay about $243 billion each year in indirect subsidies to the fast food industry because they pay wages so low that taxpayers must put up $243 billion to pay for public benefits for their workers.

We could go back and forth for days on this, so let me cut to the chase:
1. Yes, I agree that throwing more money at welfare programs isn't the answer.
2. No, the problem isn't because welfare recipients are all lazy SOBs who'd rather milk the government teat. It's so much more complicated than that - race, gender, geographic location all come into play.
3. Will we come to an agreement anytime soon? Probably not.

 

[AGBF]

What are they supposed to do. Boys drop out of school. Selling drugs is much more lucrative. Gangs recruit these at risk youth. The gang problem is systemic and insidious. So who is going to create jobs for these youths that rivals the money and allure of gang culture?

Well, I don't see the answer as being to go back before the New Deal and stop welfare. Too many innocent people will suffer if we do. Too many innocent people are suffering now. Dialysis patients often cannot get transportation to treatment. No one knows what the poor go through except the poor.

In my opinion our society has gone from community oriented-at least in the small towns and in some small enclaves- to anonymous (see "The Pursuit of Loneliness"). And people worship money. Donald Trump and his flaunting of wealth is one thing that is wrong with this country. Worship of Hollywood celebrities is another. I think we need to see some church leaders who work with the poor and inspire young members of minority groups to be like them not for what they can offer materially, but what they can offer in terms of quality of life. We need real leaders. And I hope they will rise up from within the ranks of the poor communities and from good people among us.

AGBF

 

[Bonfire]

@AGBF I don’t think anyone here is proposing stopping welfare programs
I agree we need to make positive lasting change, whatever that entails. I’m going to say something that will Be unpopular. Barack Obama came from Chicago. Not originally but as a Senator. Before he was a Senator he was a “community activist “ in Chicago. As president he did very little to help here. Many are still sorely disappointed. Whatever the answer is it can only be arrived at through coming together. We Need leaders not partisan politics. I would love to see an independent come along and really turn things around.

 

[AGBF]

@AGBF I don’t think anyone here is proposing stopping welfare programs
I agree we need to make positive lasting change, whatever that entails. I’m going to say something that will Be unpopular. Barack Obama came from Chicago. Not originally but as a Senator. Before he was a Senator he was a “community activist “ in Chicago. As president he did very little to help here. Many are still sorely disappointed. Whatever the answer is it can only be arrived at through coming together. We Need leaders not partisan politics. I would love to see an independent come along and really turn things around.

Right now we need an army of lawyers to fight Trump's actions on behalf of the children who are separated from their parents. First things first.

Link...https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/25/...e-trump-asylum-family-separation-lawyers.html

 

[Dancing Fire]

Really good post Annette. To add to the points you made.
The problems we face in our inner cities is a vicious cycle of failed schools and social programs. I live outside of Chicago, there are many many people who live on welfare generation after generation. Children raised by one parent or grandparent who can’t live on minimum wage and have no other options.. What are they supposed to do? Boys drop out of school. Selling drugs is much more lucrative. Gangs recruit these at risk youth. The gang problem is systemic and insidious. So who is going to create jobs for these youths that rivals the money and allure of gang culture? A multifaceted problem. We are circling the drain.

Everything you said above is 100% correct but the far left don't wanna accept the truth or refuses to face the truth.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Ok, so what? Do you want some kind of medal?

Yup, I deserve one from the PSer liberals!. Please order one in 18K RG.

 

[partgypsy]

I do agree that the problem with inner city Chicago is a tough one, because it is multifaceted. You have cultural and economic problems that come together, so that there are generations of people who are not moving up.
My father was an immigrant in the 50's and 60's. He worked hard, working his way up. One thing was different, was that minimum or close to minimum wage jobs WERE enough to live on. Yes, working as a buser, dishwasher, or other type positions. Also there was a greater ability to work more hours to make more money. My sister is in this trap, where she has gotten part time jobs because that is the only job she could get. But when she tried to add a second part time job, the first job in some cases made it practically impossible by constantly shifting her work hours (Home Depot) and in the 2nd case basically fired her when she let them know as an honest employee she was working somewhere else on the weekend (she didn't typically work weekends for first job, and so was let go before there was any conflict).
I understand for employers who feel doing these odd shifts is beneficial to them, because they save on employee wages, but it makes many caught in a vicious cycle where they both don't make enough to live on the original job, but can't pick up additional work. And, the increase in all the part time and shift work means less people have any kind of benefits.
When my mother worked as a community college teacher, 90% of the faculty was full time staff and 10% were part time. When she retired it was basically the opposite, with 10% FT and the rest part time, which worked just under the legal limit for FT position, and accrued almost no benefits.
https://www.cnbc.com/2016/07/21/adj...mum-wage-is-worth-less-than-50-years-ago.html

 

[JPie]

@partgypsy your father and sister's experiences are a great example of the difference between "the good old days" and present day. The problem obviously isn't that your father worked hard and your sister doesn't. A lot of major corporations simply don't pay enough for people to live on, so sometimes the government makes up the difference through welfare, food stamps, subsidized health care, etc.

Republicans respond by decrying government waste despite being the party to run up deficits at a higher rate than Democrats since Reagan, and their base laps it up because they're 100% sold on this lie that Republicans are the party of fiscal responsibility (source: see below). The Republicans then leveraged that to pass the latest tax bill that will drive up our deficit to $11.7 trillion from 2018-2027 to give corporations more tax breaks and line the pockets of the rich even more. The scary thing about that projection is that it already accounts for the expected growth rate during that period. (source: Reuters)

Meanwhile, we're here squabbling about who's really working hard enough to deserve a living wage, and conservatives would gladly hold people to the standards of their youth three to four decades ago, possibly the last time that you could work full time at a blue collar job and expect to make a living wage.

Federal Deficit (source: Forbes)

Reagan

• Started Presidency: $965 billion
• Ended Presidency: $2.74 trillion
• Increased 184% or 13.9% per year

H.W. Bush

• Started Presidency: $2.74 trillion
• Ended Presidency: $4.23 trillion
• Increased 54% or 11.5% per year (only in office for four years)

Clinton

• Started Presidency: $4.23 trillion
• Ended Presidency: $5.77 trillion
• Increased 36% or 4.0% per year

W. Bush

• Started Presidency: $5.77 trillion
• Ended Presidency: $11.1 trillion
• Increased 93% or 8.5% per year

Obama

• Started Presidency: $11.1 trillion
• Ended Presidency: $19.85 trillion
• Increased 78% or 7.5% per year

President Obama’s debt actually grew at a slower annual rate than any of the Republican presidents even though there were events that negatively impacted the deficit that started before he became President. The Great Recession is probably the biggest of them as can be seen in the yearly deficit numbers.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

Great stats. This should be a dem issue for 2018 elections.

The labor market way back then was classified as skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled workers. There were also unions at the time and jobs that offered pensions at the time. What you are suggesting is that unskilled labor be paid the same as those semi-skilled or skilled workers(this did not include the professional classes). The answer is that people must learn new skills, taught in the schools, to be able to better support themselves. You want another feel good program. Everyone must make a living wage.(by your standards.) If part gypsy's sister needs two jobs to sustain herself then bless her heart for working them. That's a worker you want. But, it is unskilled labor.

Jpie, don't classify everyone by liberal or conservative. I am both. But I like to read your posts.

Annette

 

[JPie]

Hi,

Great stats. This should be a dem issue for 2018 elections.

The labor market way back then was classified as skilled, semi-skilled and unskilled workers. There were also unions at the time and jobs that offered pensions at the time. What you are suggesting is that unskilled labor be paid the same as those semi-skilled or skilled workers(this did not include the professional classes). The answer is that people must learn new skills, taught in the schools, to be able to better support themselves. You want another feel good program. Everyone must make a living wage.(by your standards.) If part gypsy's sister needs two jobs to sustain herself then bless her heart for working them. That's a worker you want. But, it is unskilled labor.

Jpie, don't classify everyone by liberal or conservative. I am both. But I like to read your posts.

Annette

If you read my posts carefully, I haven't suggested a single "feel good program" to date. I literally wrote above "Yes, I agree that throwing more money at welfare programs isn't the answer." I don't know what the answer is, but I think the only way we can even start to solve the problem is to stop blaming poor people for being poor. Not everyone is destined to be a CEO or even an office worker with a nice cubicle. We all benefit from people taking on blue collar jobs; where do you think we'd be without dishwashers at our favorite restaurants, garbage men to take away our trash, custodians in our office to clean our toilets, and the cashier to ring up your purchase at the grocery store? It's thoughtless and callous to tell these people that maybe they should've thought to put themselves through more school and have better work ethics when government policies have been destroying the middle class and tipping scales in favor of the rich since the '70s. That's not to mention the sad state of our schools, and the same teachers you count on to lift people up through education often aren't getting paid living wages themselves. Would you tell those school teachers that they really should better themselves and get another degree if they think they deserve a living wage?

As for my generalizations of Republicans and conservatives, it's in direct response to this. Taking the high road when certain posters behave poorly has certainly not curbed their behavior. I will respond in kind.

More historical background for you:

In the 60 years after World War II, the United States built the world's greatest middle class economy, then unbuilt it. And if you want a single snapshot that captures the broad sweep of that transformation, you could do much worse than this graph from a new Pew report, which tracks how average family incomes have changed at each rung of the economic ladder from 1950 through 2010.

Here's the arc it captures: In the immediate postwar period, America's rapid growth favored the middle and lower classes. The poorest fifth of all households, in fact, fared best. Then, in the 1970s, amid two oil crises and awful inflation, things ground to a halt. The country backed off the postwar, center-left consensus -- captured by Richard Nixon's comment that "we're all Keynesians now" -- and tried Reaganism instead. We cut taxes. Technology and competition from abroad started whittling away at blue collar jobs and pay. The financial markets took off. And so when growth returned, it favored the investment class -- the top 20 percent, and especially the top 5 percent (and, though it's not on this chart, the top 1 percent more than anybody).

(source: The Atlantic)

 

[AGBF]

Families Belong Together Protests-Saturday, June 30​

If anyone is looking for a protest to attend on Saturday, this website will help you. I am still deciding on which one to attend.

https://act.moveon.org/event/families-belong-together_attend1/search/

 

[arkieb1]

Here's another viewpoint from someone outside the US, some of the most liveable and sustainable countries in the world ie some European nations, Australia, New Zealand all have higher paid much better welfare systems than you do. So the logical conclusion is that welfare isn't the issue, ie having welfare doesn't cause people by in large to stop working.

The issue in the US is, and has been for decades, the unfair distribution of wealth. Rich people live in a system that supports keeping them rich and the majority of the poor live in a system (that true some break out of but) compared to just a few decades ago I'd argue it is much harder now to escape the cycle of poverty and debt. The US used to be the land of the free the land of golden opportunity now as the statistics reveal especially for the poor that probably isn't so.

 

[Bluegemz]

Here's another viewpoint from someone outside the US, some of the most liveable and sustainable countries in the world ie some European nations, Australia, New Zealand all have higher paid much better welfare systems than you do. So the logical conclusion is that welfare isn't the issue, ie having welfare doesn't cause people by in large to stop working.

The issue in the US is, and has been for decades, the unfair distribution of wealth. Rich people live in a system that supports keeping them rich and the majority of the poor live in a system (that true some break out of but) compared to just a few decades ago I'd argue it is much harder now to escape the cycle of poverty and debt. The US used to be the land of the free the land of golden opportunity now as the statistics reveal especially for the poor that probably isn't so.

Totally agree. This is what I see happening too.

 

[smitcompton]

Hi,

The systems that you speak of Arkie 1 have been in place a long time. We went from an industrial and manufacturing society, which had good paying jobs, to a tech and service society, which on the one hand requires skill, the other not so much, thus a disparity in wages. One other system that comes to mind is marriage. and divorce. Divorce makes people poor. Single parent households have a difficult time .
The investor class has been expanded thru the years with 401Ks coming in the 1980's. More people participated in investing as the internet opened up. So the middle class does benefit.

The transparency of information does show that officers of corporations are paid extremely high wages in comparison to their workers. How this happened I don't know. They vote themselves shares of company stock and they keep getting richer. How you can get this to be redistributed I don't know. The recent tax cut was supposed to help workers. It didn't Most of the savings went to stock buybacks, and dividends for the shareholders.

Jobs have left the country for cheaper labor. I , like Tekate, have felt the defense budget must be reduced. There's money there. I don't blame people for being poor, but there has to be a way to bring people out of poverty, not create more welfare programs, except for National Heath care. Honestly, I thought after our peace with Russia in the 1980 we would have had healthcare. No more arms buildup. It didn't happen.

REdistribution of Wealth- what does it mean to you in real terms. How are you planning on doing it? Limit Exec pay?, cut the defense budget. Where is this money coming from.? Please tell me.

Annette

 

[AGBF]

My great-nephew e-mailed me to ask how my daughter and I were doing. I told him my news about the dog, but also said I hoped he and his partner would be at a rally against the separation of children and parents on Saturday. I know he is a Trump supporter, but I also love him to pieces. He is very kind and so is partner, who is a physician (an invasive cardiologist). I couldn't imagine that he could tolerate the reports from the border. They are living in Dallas, now, too.

To make a long story shorter, he was very, very ill-informed and wrote back to me telling me that Congress had passed a law ordering separation of children to prevent trafficking and to protect them from felons years ago; saying that the left were hypocrites not to have brought this up under Obama; saying that he loved the way AG Sessions was carrying out "the law"; and saying that my having said I couldn't be silent in the face of Trump's evil the way the Germans had been silent in the face of the Nazis' evil was "disgraceful". He said that Trump wasn't like the Nazis because he wasn't putting them in cages to kill* them. He informed me that our family had lost many members in the Holocaust.

Well, I have never been personally nasty to him before, but I was this time. This man has a master's degree. If he can't get his facts straight, how can we expect uneducated people to get them straight?
After he read my e-mail he must have done some research because he wrote back and admitted he had not fact checked what he had first written, but he also said he didn't want to discuss politics anymore because he didn't want to upset me.


*Remember: my analogy was not that Trump was like the Nazis, but that being silent in the face of Trump's evil policy would be like the Germans being silent in the face of the Nazis' evil.

 

[arkieb1]

Hi,

The systems that you speak of Arkie 1 have been in place a long time. We went from an industrial and manufacturing society, which had good paying jobs, to a tech and service society, which on the one hand requires skill, the other not so much, thus a disparity in wages. One other system that comes to mind is marriage. and divorce. Divorce makes people poor. Single parent households have a difficult time .
The investor class has been expanded thru the years with 401Ks coming in the 1980's. More people participated in investing as the internet opened up. So the middle class does benefit.

The transparency of information does show that officers of corporations are paid extremely high wages in comparison to their workers. How this happened I don't know. They vote themselves shares of company stock and they keep getting richer. How you can get this to be redistributed I don't know. The recent tax cut was supposed to help workers. It didn't Most of the savings went to stock buybacks, and dividends for the shareholders.

Jobs have left the country for cheaper labor. I , like Tekate, have felt the defense budget must be reduced. There's money there. I don't blame people for being poor, but there has to be a way to bring people out of poverty, not create more welfare programs, except for National Heath care. Honestly, I thought after our peace with Russia in the 1980 we would have had healthcare. No more arms buildup. It didn't happen.

REdistribution of Wealth- what does it mean to you in real terms. How are you planning on doing it? Limit Exec pay?, cut the defense budget. Where is this money coming from.? Please tell me.

Annette

I agree with you on defence spending, there is this idea out there that if you stop somehow the US will fall behind in the arms race if there was a conflict so I'm not sure if that will change.

Australia has an election coming up towards the end of this year and the debates of better wealth distribution on both sides are in our media. The arguments are tax big businesses more and the arguments against that are that will slash jobs, giving tax concessions to large corporations it is argued will help stimulate the economy, our left side wants to tax small businesses more which I am opposed to, some want to tax the people more, some want to tax them less.

In Australia and again in more liveable countries everyone pays substantially higher personal taxes and all businesses pay a lot more taxes than you do. I think the personal tax thing which is on a sliding scale here, as it is in the US, is an unpopular idea in the US because your middle and upper classes don't like paying more taxes to help the poor and to put money into things like health and education and at a very real level politicians in your country that push that agenda are unpopular.

I do agree part of the reason you are no longer in the golden age of job growth is that manufacturing dried up, went offshore but on the flip side I agree with you that those jobs morphed into other jobs like things in service industries like dog walking and groomers, personal stylists, more cafes, nail bars, hairdressers, florists, things that make people's lives easier that in past decades people would not have thought to pay people for. And of course the technology sector has grown too. I think for a lot of white collared men particularly in rural areas jobs have disappeared, but more jobs are available for young women and both genders in cities in service industries, in the US those types of jobs are much lower paid jobs than in other parts of the world, indeed no doubt, I agree that is part of the problem.

Having higher minimum wages however, which would address that problem is another thing that your middle and upper class simply mostly don't like the idea of, this means in reality they have to pay more for those services and they are not used to that. People come to Australia and can't believe we don't tip our waitstaff for example. We don't need to tip, our minimum wage for those workers is a lot higher than yours.

I used to be a high school teacher, our teaching staff earn substantially higher incomes than yours. Our society not only has higher minimum wages and a much better safety net for the poor it puts a higher value on jobs like teaching, nursing and so on.

 

[Calliecake]

Only 6 of the children separated from their parents have been united. How on earth was it acceptable to separate these children and parents with no processes and procedures in place so they could easily be reunited? What kind of people think this is the acceptable thing to do with no thought on reuniting these famiies? These children were disposable to this administration. Sickening.

 

[Dancing Fire]

Hi,

REdistribution of Wealth- what does it mean to you in real terms. How are you planning on doing it? Limit Exec pay?, cut the defense budget. Where is this money coming from.? Please tell me.

Annette

Turn our country into a socialist country like Russia and Cuba.