This video about drove me crazy because it blames women especially for being destitute in old age, that they got that way because they were stupid about finances:
It is simply not reality as the vast majority of women, especially women who have never been married, have lived it. You can do all the right things and still wind up destitute. So many of these "how-to be financially stable" vids are by married people, who already have for the most part a big lifestyle and more options than never-married people. Even being married doesn't shield people from catastrophic illness or job loss. I completely disregard such advice as not only clueless, but cruel. Many, many people cannot EVER retire and must work until they can no longer do so. This is because pensions in the private sector (U.S.) have been eliminated in favor of do-it-yourself "savings plans" (401ks) which were NEVER designed to replace pensions, but loopholes in the federal ERISA law gave companies a way to destroy their pension systems. The vast majority of people can never, ever save enough on their own what an even small pension provides. For example, I have a $360 a month pension from a public employer (Nevada PERS). I would have had to save at least a couple hundred grand to tide me over for 30 or 40 years on that amount. Not realistically possible. The problem is systematic and not a problem of personal failure.
A lot of this advice comes from sources connected in some way to the financial services market, and of course they want you to spend money on their services by catering to your worst fears.
It is not the way of the real world. Pensions are necessary, yet they are rare outside the public sector in the United States these days.
I warned people about the 401(k) scam over 30 years ago because I did the research. Companies put them in and ditched the pensions because of cost. They shift the cost and the risk all on employees, who simply don't have the resources to fund an adequate retirement without decent pensions.
Showing posts with label poverty. Show all posts
Showing posts with label poverty. Show all posts
From "The Sexual Contract,"
one of the books I have been reading, and, because it is a typically dry academic work, I am taking my time reading it. Author Carole Pateman, who wrote this book back in around 1987 or 1988, stated what has long been known about the labor force:
That in a nutshell is why women fare horribly in old age. Unless they can prostitute themselves into marriage, they are going to be starved for jettisoning that mandate.
However, the family wage has always been as much an ideal as a reality. Many, perhaps most, working-class families have been unable to survive on the husband's wage alone, and, as feminists pointed out many years ago, not all male workers have families, while many women have had to support dependents, including aged parents. But precisely because the wage has been seen as a family wage, women's earnings have been regarded as a 'supplement' to a husband's wage. Women are assumed to be wives, and wives are assumed to be economically dependent on their husbands, obtaining their subsistence in return for domestic service. Therefore, wages have been sexually differentiated. Women workers are paid less than men--and so an economic incentive for women to become wives is maintained. The conviction that a 'wage' is what is due to a male breadwinner, was nicely illustrated as recently as 1985 in the United States, in the claim that 'women have generally been paid less [than men] because they would work for lower wages, since they had no urgent need for more money Either they are married, or single and living at home, or doubling up with friends.'(page 138)
That in a nutshell is why women fare horribly in old age. Unless they can prostitute themselves into marriage, they are going to be starved for jettisoning that mandate.
Widows Aren't the Whole Story, Folks
It is a falsehood these days that women facing poverty in old age are widows who are "suffering" because they took care of kids and helped their aging parents. WHY is this lie allowed to stand? 40 or so years ago, women did drop out of the labor force to care for kids and even their aging parents, but nobody but the wealthy can afford to take much time off of work these days.
The women MOST vulnerable to impoverishment in old age are never-married women. Their numbers are growing, but you wouldn't know it reading this here. The REASON they are vulnerable (and in fact all women regardless of marital status) has to do with the structure of the labor force; that is, the concept of the "family wage," a relic from the industrial revolution and embraced by labor unions in the 20th century that says that men are the providers and women are dependents. Because of this, according to the notion, men deserve higher pay because they have families to support (whether or not this is true with individual men), while women don't need the money the way men do because they are or will be supported by men. Men are the primary wage earners while women are secondary earners. This is a FACT and is demonstrated all across all occupations, and female-dominated occupations DENIGRATED in pay and prestige because of this ""family wage" notion. It lies at the heart of sex discrimination in the workplace. Never-married women face the worst prospects in old age because they make less money, they don't have a second income unless they shack up with a guy (and many do), they are almost always shut out of the real estate market unless they are born to privilege (if they can afford "homes" at all, they are mobile homes or condos, not stick houses) so they don't have that buffer, and they don't typically become beneficiaries in life insurance policies, unlike married women. They can't piggyback on a husband's Social Security, like widows and divorced women who have been married more than 10 years. They are totally screwed.
But hey, people will say, you could have gotten married...Well, what these people are saying is that women have to prostitute themselves for some man in order to survive. That is not an argument and pretty revolting. Women should be able to have lives independent of men and not be forced making poverty wages because of some outdated notion some man is supporting them. Women, regardless of marital status, need financial dignity and respect before and during old age.
The women MOST vulnerable to impoverishment in old age are never-married women. Their numbers are growing, but you wouldn't know it reading this here. The REASON they are vulnerable (and in fact all women regardless of marital status) has to do with the structure of the labor force; that is, the concept of the "family wage," a relic from the industrial revolution and embraced by labor unions in the 20th century that says that men are the providers and women are dependents. Because of this, according to the notion, men deserve higher pay because they have families to support (whether or not this is true with individual men), while women don't need the money the way men do because they are or will be supported by men. Men are the primary wage earners while women are secondary earners. This is a FACT and is demonstrated all across all occupations, and female-dominated occupations DENIGRATED in pay and prestige because of this ""family wage" notion. It lies at the heart of sex discrimination in the workplace. Never-married women face the worst prospects in old age because they make less money, they don't have a second income unless they shack up with a guy (and many do), they are almost always shut out of the real estate market unless they are born to privilege (if they can afford "homes" at all, they are mobile homes or condos, not stick houses) so they don't have that buffer, and they don't typically become beneficiaries in life insurance policies, unlike married women. They can't piggyback on a husband's Social Security, like widows and divorced women who have been married more than 10 years. They are totally screwed.
But hey, people will say, you could have gotten married...Well, what these people are saying is that women have to prostitute themselves for some man in order to survive. That is not an argument and pretty revolting. Women should be able to have lives independent of men and not be forced making poverty wages because of some outdated notion some man is supporting them. Women, regardless of marital status, need financial dignity and respect before and during old age.
Life Can Be Shit Economically For Women Living Alone
It's all part of a rigged economic system, something I have written about for years on this blog and elsewhere. It has been fodder of feminist writing since the 1960s, but it bears repeating:
Most women do NOT take time off from the labor force in any significant way these days. Who can afford "caregiving" unless you are well-to-do? Any policy proposal talking about giving "credit" to people who do not need it is missing the point, to say nothing of the fact we women who have worked all our lives are being required to subsidize people who can afford to drop out of the labor force to "care" for relatives. The real reason women, especially never-married women, fare so poorly in middle and old age has to do with the concept of the "family wage." It is the notion that men are breadwinners and women are dependents. Men are seen as needing the higher pay because they have families to support, while women are seen as not needing the money as much as men because they have a man to support them. Women's pay is denigrated regardless of occupation, with women-dominated occupations poorly paid as compared to male-dominated jobs of the same education and skills. When women begin to dominate a male field, the pay and prestige go down immediately. That is because women are seen as "secondary" wage earners, and employers feel they in good conscience can underpay women because the difference is supposedly made up by a husband's salary (never mind the reality of millions of women there is no man in the picture). Furthermore, underpaying women helps "encourage" them to jettison independent living in favor of marriage. It reeks of prostitution rather than real choice. Our economic system is heavily rigged against women, especially women alone. If anything happens in terms of a job, everything they have worked for is gone overnight. There is no buffer of a man's income to cushion that blow.
More women are falling through the cracks, especially if they are past 55, which is considered past their expiration date in terms of being in the labor force.
A book I have started reading is a book I overlooked when it came out. It is called The Sexual Contract, published in 1988 and written by a now-retired UCLA academic, Carole Pateman. She was born in Britain in 1940. She is less well-known than other writers or feminists who have covered much of the same ground. In this book she wrote about this concept of the "family wage." Of course, it forms the basis of sex discrimination in the workplace. It cannot be denied. Despite gains by women over the decades, women are still heavily disadvantaged in the labor market. In fact, they are perhaps more dependent on men than ever (and vice versa) for a decent lifestyle thanks to outsourcing and destroying of well-paid, unionized jobs as pushed by the poisonous neoliberal ideology.
Anyway, I started reading Pateman's book. The book is a little bit dry, as are most academic works, but she makes a lot of good points.
Nothing has changed in the 30 years since it was published.
On a similar note, I went to a retirement planning seminar the school district's investment outfit put on, and the presenters were talking about all of the various things people need in order to have a decent retirement. Of course, I started Oregon public employment, part-time regular employment, when I was 59, so I will not be vested in Oregon PERS until 2019, when I am 64 years old. Maybe some district will hire me on a part-time certificated basis, as I do not want to work full-time anymore, but those jobs are extremely hard to come by. My pension would be much higher and I would not have to work as many years to get the monthly payout. Under NO circumstances do I want to ever have a cash payout. I have a monthly pension through Nevada PERS that I started taking five years ago. It isn't much--$318 a month and subject to WEP when I get Social Security next year--but after the third year of getting it I got annual COLA increases. By the time I hit 71, the small amount will start to snowball significantly when the 5 percent annual increase kicks in, assuming I don't kick off first. Similarly Oregon's would increase, but since I am on the Tier 3 program, it won't be quite as good as those who got on Oregon public employment and qualified for Tier 1 and 2 (people are designated a "tier" depending on when they were hired).
Anyway, there wasn't a whole lot that was relevant to my case. At one point the presenters talked about how 33 percent of the average retiree's income comes from work. In other words, those who are "retired" on the average cannot ever retire. I don't believe that many people are so lacking in interests and hobbies they are masochistic enough they want to remain in the labor force in some way.
Most of these people work because they have to.
Just like me, and I will likely have to until I can't physically do the work anymore.
Most women do NOT take time off from the labor force in any significant way these days. Who can afford "caregiving" unless you are well-to-do? Any policy proposal talking about giving "credit" to people who do not need it is missing the point, to say nothing of the fact we women who have worked all our lives are being required to subsidize people who can afford to drop out of the labor force to "care" for relatives. The real reason women, especially never-married women, fare so poorly in middle and old age has to do with the concept of the "family wage." It is the notion that men are breadwinners and women are dependents. Men are seen as needing the higher pay because they have families to support, while women are seen as not needing the money as much as men because they have a man to support them. Women's pay is denigrated regardless of occupation, with women-dominated occupations poorly paid as compared to male-dominated jobs of the same education and skills. When women begin to dominate a male field, the pay and prestige go down immediately. That is because women are seen as "secondary" wage earners, and employers feel they in good conscience can underpay women because the difference is supposedly made up by a husband's salary (never mind the reality of millions of women there is no man in the picture). Furthermore, underpaying women helps "encourage" them to jettison independent living in favor of marriage. It reeks of prostitution rather than real choice. Our economic system is heavily rigged against women, especially women alone. If anything happens in terms of a job, everything they have worked for is gone overnight. There is no buffer of a man's income to cushion that blow.
More women are falling through the cracks, especially if they are past 55, which is considered past their expiration date in terms of being in the labor force.
A book I have started reading is a book I overlooked when it came out. It is called The Sexual Contract, published in 1988 and written by a now-retired UCLA academic, Carole Pateman. She was born in Britain in 1940. She is less well-known than other writers or feminists who have covered much of the same ground. In this book she wrote about this concept of the "family wage." Of course, it forms the basis of sex discrimination in the workplace. It cannot be denied. Despite gains by women over the decades, women are still heavily disadvantaged in the labor market. In fact, they are perhaps more dependent on men than ever (and vice versa) for a decent lifestyle thanks to outsourcing and destroying of well-paid, unionized jobs as pushed by the poisonous neoliberal ideology.
Anyway, I started reading Pateman's book. The book is a little bit dry, as are most academic works, but she makes a lot of good points.
Nothing has changed in the 30 years since it was published.
On a similar note, I went to a retirement planning seminar the school district's investment outfit put on, and the presenters were talking about all of the various things people need in order to have a decent retirement. Of course, I started Oregon public employment, part-time regular employment, when I was 59, so I will not be vested in Oregon PERS until 2019, when I am 64 years old. Maybe some district will hire me on a part-time certificated basis, as I do not want to work full-time anymore, but those jobs are extremely hard to come by. My pension would be much higher and I would not have to work as many years to get the monthly payout. Under NO circumstances do I want to ever have a cash payout. I have a monthly pension through Nevada PERS that I started taking five years ago. It isn't much--$318 a month and subject to WEP when I get Social Security next year--but after the third year of getting it I got annual COLA increases. By the time I hit 71, the small amount will start to snowball significantly when the 5 percent annual increase kicks in, assuming I don't kick off first. Similarly Oregon's would increase, but since I am on the Tier 3 program, it won't be quite as good as those who got on Oregon public employment and qualified for Tier 1 and 2 (people are designated a "tier" depending on when they were hired).
Anyway, there wasn't a whole lot that was relevant to my case. At one point the presenters talked about how 33 percent of the average retiree's income comes from work. In other words, those who are "retired" on the average cannot ever retire. I don't believe that many people are so lacking in interests and hobbies they are masochistic enough they want to remain in the labor force in some way.
Most of these people work because they have to.
Just like me, and I will likely have to until I can't physically do the work anymore.
This Is My Situation Exactly
It doesn't take much, folks, to wind up like this woman, working until she is close to 80 years old.
A lot of people in this world have no clue what it is like to be a single woman over 60. It is basically a ticket to poverty to not have that working spouse.
She has more than I am going to get, since I am being fucked over because I have a tiny pension of $312 a month. See, I am subject to the terrible WEP because I worked in Nevada public employment.
My Social Security, while I will be forced to take next year, will be only about $725 a month. I will have to continue to work until I can't do it anymore.
The only way I won't collect SS at 62 is if I work full time, but that is a pipe dream at my age.
It took me FOUR goddamned years to get the classified, no benefits except PERS, school district job.
But see, it's her own goddamned fault, not the system that is rigged largely against single women and of people who have the unmitigated nerve to be over 55. She should have stayed married and would have had a secure future instead of wanting to be independent.
At least at one time she owned her own place. I doubt that is going to happen to me.
A lot of people in this world have no clue what it is like to be a single woman over 60. It is basically a ticket to poverty to not have that working spouse.
She has more than I am going to get, since I am being fucked over because I have a tiny pension of $312 a month. See, I am subject to the terrible WEP because I worked in Nevada public employment.
My Social Security, while I will be forced to take next year, will be only about $725 a month. I will have to continue to work until I can't do it anymore.
The only way I won't collect SS at 62 is if I work full time, but that is a pipe dream at my age.
It took me FOUR goddamned years to get the classified, no benefits except PERS, school district job.
Nearing 80, she suffers daily aches and pains — leg cramps and arthritis and weakness from low blood sugar. Big Foot has its own problems: The roof leaks, so do the pipes beneath the sink. The water pump feeding the shower and sink is failing. “One of us is going to give out first,” Westfall said with a laugh. “It’s either me or Big Foot.”
She avoided disaster after the prime rib dinner by persuading the insurance company to space out her payment in installments. But then that same month, she was caught driving 43 mph in a 35-mph zone. The ticket: $300.
“I could just cry,” she wrote in her journal. “I won’t have earned $300 in all of May. If I can get it lowered to $150, it will still be more than my entire grocery budget. Don’t know how I’m going to manage it.”
But see, it's her own goddamned fault, not the system that is rigged largely against single women and of people who have the unmitigated nerve to be over 55. She should have stayed married and would have had a secure future instead of wanting to be independent.
At least at one time she owned her own place. I doubt that is going to happen to me.
Too Poor to Afford Section 8
My income is so low, and my expenses so much, I cannot even begin to use the Section 8 voucher that I waited nearly four years to get. I would still have to pay 200 a month out of my own pocket to pay toward rent, plus a deposit, while Section 8 paid the rest on an apartment that costs no more than $620 a month. I would also have to pay all of my utilities. It is absolutely impossible unless I gave up my mom's ring and coins, which I have been paying for storage these four years at two different pawnshops, and I won't do that.
Unfortunately, the 60 days will lapse before I ever get any kind of decent job up here. It's a bitch I will have to start the process all over again.
Thank you, you assholes at WCSD for ruining my life.
Unfortunately, the 60 days will lapse before I ever get any kind of decent job up here. It's a bitch I will have to start the process all over again.
Thank you, you assholes at WCSD for ruining my life.
99.9 Percent to Parasitical Billionaire: F*** You
These crooks don't even hide their contempt toward the people from whom they STOLE:
So we peons shouldn't complain because the destitute among us are still "richer" than slaves in other countries.
Oh, what a comforting thought, you worthless son of a bitch.
So we peons shouldn't complain because the destitute among us are still "richer" than slaves in other countries.
Oh, what a comforting thought, you worthless son of a bitch.
Sentimentality
Movies and television shows that have sad themes, especially those that are animal-related, always bring the tears to my eyes. They have since I was a young girl, and they continue to do so today.
Last night I was continuing to watch the fourth and final season of the classic television series, Route 66. While this season was somewhat weaker than the previous three seasons, mostly because of the awful two-part final episode where Tod (Martin Milner) gets married in a lame spy spoof, there still were some very good episodes. The one I watched last night had to do with poverty and domestic issues. The father of the household, played by Albert Salmi, never seemed to hold down a job because he thought he was better than the jobs he did, but he couldn't or wouldn't do anything to apply himself to make his life better for himself and his family. The family lived in a mobile home, which in those days really WAS a mobile home. The manufactured homes had wheels on them, so conceivably you could just have large trucks move them to another location (I am not talking about travel trailers or fifth wheels that you see today where one or two people might live in them). However, the home was crowded because there was the married couple and three kids, including an infant. The couple had an argument over the baby crying, so the older kids got the brilliant idea they were going to give their baby brother away so he would have a better life than what they had. However, they weren't very successful at this and had their brother stay at this empty house located in the Niagara Falls area.
Well, as you can expect, there was panic with the parents about what happened to their baby. The brother and sister continued to care for the baby over a period of a few days. Of course, Linc (Glenn Corbett) had to stick his nose into the situation, and he decided to follow the kids one morning to the house. He then tipped off the dad and brought him to the house, and what they overheard about made my eyes cry out. It was stinking sad. Of course it all ended well, and I probably shouldn't give the ending away, but I did, but I was bawling by the end of the episode.
Route 66 was a great series, one of the best ever.
Sadly, Albert Salmi didn't fare so well. His first wife was child actress Peggy Ann Garner, with whom he had a daughter, but the two split up. At around the time he made this episode, he married his second wife, Roberta Pollock Taper. He had two more daughters with her.
However, by 1990 he and his family had relocated to Washington state. He and his wife separated. Salmi's life apparently went into a tailspin, as he suffered from depression. Tragically he and his estranged wife were found dead on April 22, 1990, in a murder-suicide. He was 62, Roberta was 55.
Last night I was continuing to watch the fourth and final season of the classic television series, Route 66. While this season was somewhat weaker than the previous three seasons, mostly because of the awful two-part final episode where Tod (Martin Milner) gets married in a lame spy spoof, there still were some very good episodes. The one I watched last night had to do with poverty and domestic issues. The father of the household, played by Albert Salmi, never seemed to hold down a job because he thought he was better than the jobs he did, but he couldn't or wouldn't do anything to apply himself to make his life better for himself and his family. The family lived in a mobile home, which in those days really WAS a mobile home. The manufactured homes had wheels on them, so conceivably you could just have large trucks move them to another location (I am not talking about travel trailers or fifth wheels that you see today where one or two people might live in them). However, the home was crowded because there was the married couple and three kids, including an infant. The couple had an argument over the baby crying, so the older kids got the brilliant idea they were going to give their baby brother away so he would have a better life than what they had. However, they weren't very successful at this and had their brother stay at this empty house located in the Niagara Falls area.
Well, as you can expect, there was panic with the parents about what happened to their baby. The brother and sister continued to care for the baby over a period of a few days. Of course, Linc (Glenn Corbett) had to stick his nose into the situation, and he decided to follow the kids one morning to the house. He then tipped off the dad and brought him to the house, and what they overheard about made my eyes cry out. It was stinking sad. Of course it all ended well, and I probably shouldn't give the ending away, but I did, but I was bawling by the end of the episode.
Route 66 was a great series, one of the best ever.
Sadly, Albert Salmi didn't fare so well. His first wife was child actress Peggy Ann Garner, with whom he had a daughter, but the two split up. At around the time he made this episode, he married his second wife, Roberta Pollock Taper. He had two more daughters with her.
However, by 1990 he and his family had relocated to Washington state. He and his wife separated. Salmi's life apparently went into a tailspin, as he suffered from depression. Tragically he and his estranged wife were found dead on April 22, 1990, in a murder-suicide. He was 62, Roberta was 55.
The Poor Are the Enemy
and must be beaten down no matter what the cost. At least that is what the elite financial class has been doing for the past thirty or so years. I was saying that thirty years ago that we are in a class war, and only the very ignorant can possibly believe otherwise.
It isn't just the poor who are beating savaged--it is also the middle and professional classes who are "getting it."
The country is run by and for parasites, the billionaire and Wall Street classes, who create nothing but steal from taxpayers and hoard everything thanks to buying off elected officials.
As we have seen, our D.C. politicians play this little game to con the public that they are doing things to "help" them. We have a totally batshit political party, the Republicans, who play the fools and come up with even more creative ways to sound outrageous. People get really upset with them because they think we are on the verge of ruination if these idiots keep getting elected.
Then the voters elect the "Democrats," who turn out to actually DO what the people who own the GOP want anyway. That's why I was so against Obama's nomination; I knew the guy was a fake from way, way back. The Democratic and Republican parties are nothing like they were 30, 40, or 50 years ago, even taking into account the racist Dixiecrats.
I dread next year's elections, certainly, but I dread 2016 even more. Now the media and her husband are trying to push Hillary Clinton, who already is too old for the job and reportedly has some health issues, to be the presidential nominee. If she gets it, she probably would get elected, but I have long since grown tired of the Clintons and especially of their Rubenite hangers-on who have helped sink this country's economy. The Clintons just need to retire and enjoy life and perhaps work at the presidential library in Arkansas or tinker with some charities. That's what Jimmy Carter has done. He's secure in himself, unlike Hillary's husband, who is so damned needy he has to have attention all the time, even if it is being the person behind Hillary's candidacy and presidency. He's high maintenance and alone is a full-time job, let alone have to take care of the United States' and world's problems. Hillary just needs to say "no" to him on the presidential gig.
Even worse, though, is the possibility of an outright fraud becoming the nominee like Cory Booker or Andrew Cuomo. So help me God I am finished with the Democratic Party for good if that ever happens.
It isn't just the poor who are beating savaged--it is also the middle and professional classes who are "getting it."
The country is run by and for parasites, the billionaire and Wall Street classes, who create nothing but steal from taxpayers and hoard everything thanks to buying off elected officials.
As we have seen, our D.C. politicians play this little game to con the public that they are doing things to "help" them. We have a totally batshit political party, the Republicans, who play the fools and come up with even more creative ways to sound outrageous. People get really upset with them because they think we are on the verge of ruination if these idiots keep getting elected.
Then the voters elect the "Democrats," who turn out to actually DO what the people who own the GOP want anyway. That's why I was so against Obama's nomination; I knew the guy was a fake from way, way back. The Democratic and Republican parties are nothing like they were 30, 40, or 50 years ago, even taking into account the racist Dixiecrats.
I dread next year's elections, certainly, but I dread 2016 even more. Now the media and her husband are trying to push Hillary Clinton, who already is too old for the job and reportedly has some health issues, to be the presidential nominee. If she gets it, she probably would get elected, but I have long since grown tired of the Clintons and especially of their Rubenite hangers-on who have helped sink this country's economy. The Clintons just need to retire and enjoy life and perhaps work at the presidential library in Arkansas or tinker with some charities. That's what Jimmy Carter has done. He's secure in himself, unlike Hillary's husband, who is so damned needy he has to have attention all the time, even if it is being the person behind Hillary's candidacy and presidency. He's high maintenance and alone is a full-time job, let alone have to take care of the United States' and world's problems. Hillary just needs to say "no" to him on the presidential gig.
Even worse, though, is the possibility of an outright fraud becoming the nominee like Cory Booker or Andrew Cuomo. So help me God I am finished with the Democratic Party for good if that ever happens.
Low-Wage America
More and more adults, even people who "should" be retired by now, are stuck in low-wage jobs that were never designed to be primary or family wage positions, thanks to our "elected" officials who decided to give away the store with trade agreements and other policies designed to destroy the middle class.
Assuming you can even get ONE job in this shithole of an economy, let alone multiple jobs, you have no time to do anything but work until you drop dead:
Assuming you can even get ONE job in this shithole of an economy, let alone multiple jobs, you have no time to do anything but work until you drop dead:
In 2008, when he was 53, Mr. Shoy lost his job driving forklifts at a warehouse on Long Island owned by the Waldbaum’s grocery-store chain. His salary at the job, which he had had for more than 20 years, was $22 an hour, and came with overtime and benefits, he said. His wife, Elana, worked as a waitress until three years ago, when she tore a ligament in her knee and had to quit. In 2003, before any of that had happened, the couple bought a house for more than $500,000 — a comfortable three-bedroom on a quiet street in Middle Village, Queens.
Now the house is almost empty, devoid of furniture except for a couch, a table and the bed wedged between them in the basement, where Mr. Shoy sleeps these days, alone. Two months ago, his wife and children — Eduardo Jr., 22, and Leslie, 19 — moved to Pennsylvania, where Leslie plans to enter college next year (with the help of financial aid) and where Eduardo Jr. works in a warehouse for Amazon.com. Mr. Shoy has remained behind, doing what he calls “the bachelor thing — working,” until he manages to sell the house that he can no longer afford.
I Might Have to Get Rogaine
after reading some of the comments following this piece about all of the economic "horrors" of single women who make it to old age.
Hell, the author comes across as an even bigger idiot than the commenters with her opening paragraph. She sounds like a clueless trust fund baby.
Poverty has nothing to do with how "savvy" an "investor" you are--it has everything to do with the worsening standard of living for everybody. It's basically out of your control. Horatio Alger is a myth.
In ten years, there will be articles whining about how destitute men will be in old age because that is the trend NOW.
I was totally disgusted with a woman who claimed she was one of those destitute women because she relied on a man to "take care of her":
My response:
Women don't "choose" to be low-paid given this sexist job market. However, women are catching up with men economically because MEN'S standard of living is going down the toilet.
It won't be long before everybody is poor except the billionaires and hedge fund crooks who are dictating national policy.
Hell, the author comes across as an even bigger idiot than the commenters with her opening paragraph. She sounds like a clueless trust fund baby.
Poverty has nothing to do with how "savvy" an "investor" you are--it has everything to do with the worsening standard of living for everybody. It's basically out of your control. Horatio Alger is a myth.
In ten years, there will be articles whining about how destitute men will be in old age because that is the trend NOW.
I was totally disgusted with a woman who claimed she was one of those destitute women because she relied on a man to "take care of her":
I am not surprised, sadly. All too many women of this generation discussed still planned on being take care of by a man. All too many women of this generation chose low paying jobs that may not have even offered benefits. All too many women of this generation never learned about money management and preparing for one's financial future. I know, because I'm one of them. I pray for our younger women to educate themselves about their finances . . .choose to be a principal, not a teaching assistant . . . Work as a store manager, and not a clerk. Go for those higher paying jobs and have confidence in your abilities! Most of all, learn to take care of yourself. Mr. Right may never come along, or Mr. Right may one day, unfortunately, turn into Mr. Wrong, and take his money and benefits with him. Be self-sufficient!
My response:
Baloney. That generation of women has mostly died off. The ones coming into retirement NOW are baby boomers--age 65 now means these women were born in 1948--and were the first generation to benefit from gains in women's status. That has been taken away because of neoliberal economic policies which have destroyed pensions, destroyed high-paying jobs, and have destroyed lives.
Women don't "choose" low-paying jobs. That is utter nonsense.
Financial planning to ward off poverty is garbage, and your denigration of traditional women's work is offensive. There are virtually NO high-paying jobs left in this economy. Your post is sexist, cruel, and devoid of any concept of reality. If you are really telling the truth about your status, you are a minority of the "elderly" population today. The fact you claim women "choose" low-paying jobs makes your post highly suspect.
Women don't "choose" to be low-paid given this sexist job market. However, women are catching up with men economically because MEN'S standard of living is going down the toilet.
It won't be long before everybody is poor except the billionaires and hedge fund crooks who are dictating national policy.
None Dare Call It Gangsterism
This country is completely, and totally screwed up when you have a handful of filthy rich people whose combined wealth is greater the the GNP of entire countries and a massive number of people on the brink of destitution.
This is entirely the fault of Washington politicians who, over a period of thirty years, have deliberately screwed over the American people in an attempt to repeal the twentieth and now twenty-first centuries.
It's nothing but gangsterism, pure and simple.
_____
This is entirely the fault of Washington politicians who, over a period of thirty years, have deliberately screwed over the American people in an attempt to repeal the twentieth and now twenty-first centuries.
It's nothing but gangsterism, pure and simple.
_____
Economic Outrages
The whole point to cutting unemployment benefits is to CREATE more poverty and force wages and salaries of those still working to even lower levels in order to compete with the third world.
_____
And even though we have a "Democrat" in the White House, despite or because of it (since he is actually a puppet for the elites who control both political parties) we have even worse poverty and lower living standards.
Just try and absorb that information about the top 400 richest. When individuals have more money than the GNP of entire countries, that should be an alarm bell something the hell is wrong.
Remember these superrich are that way because of Washington policies that shifted the tax burden away from them to the rest of us.
_____
_____
And even though we have a "Democrat" in the White House, despite or because of it (since he is actually a puppet for the elites who control both political parties) we have even worse poverty and lower living standards.
Despite more than four years of so-called “recovery,” American society remains plagued by mass deprivation and entrenched poverty. The “recovery” under Obama is limited to the wealthy and the super-rich, who have recovered all of the losses they suffered in the immediate aftermath of the Wall Street crash of September 2008 and grown richer than they were before the financial crisis. Social inequality has deepened as a result of policies designed to further redistribute wealth from the bottom of society to the top.
On Tuesday, one day before the release of the Census Bureau report, Forbes magazine published its annual list of the 400 richest Americans. The combined wealth of these 400 individuals rose substantially from the previous year—from $1.7 trillion to $2.2 trillion. This staggering figure is equal to 12 percent of the total annual gross domestic product (GDP) of the United States and two-thirds of the tax revenues collected in the US in 2013.
The personal holdings of this modern-day aristocracy are sufficient to cover the total deficits of the federal, state and local governments of the US, with many billions to spare. Their $2.2 trillion is greater than the wealth of the bottom 50 percent of Americans—150 million people. It is larger than the GDP of such countries as Italy, Canada and Mexico.
Just try and absorb that information about the top 400 richest. When individuals have more money than the GNP of entire countries, that should be an alarm bell something the hell is wrong.
Remember these superrich are that way because of Washington policies that shifted the tax burden away from them to the rest of us.
_____
Thank You, Bill Clinton,
for your stupid, shortsighted triangulation bullshit that began the irreversible slide into extreme poverty faced by millions upon millions of people who have little recourse now.
It was more important to you, Mr. Clinton, to beat the GOP at their own game and use the poor as pawns in your welfare "reform" scheme rather than actually stand up for what was right. In your cynical calculation, the poor had nowhere else to go in terms of voting, so why not screw them over, even though many in the middle class would eventually wind up in the same boat?
Now since the economy has tanked and has NEVER recovered because Congress and Obama won't do shit about it, the misery index* (a term that was used a lot during the Carter years of high inflation but appropriate here) has now reached into the stratosphere.
The report mentioned in the article is here and will make your blood boil.
*--Since we really haven't had much in the way of high inflation over the past thirty years, a new definition of the "misery index" is in order. I would define it as human misery going way up when our elected officials do absolutely nothing to correct a worsening economy.
It was more important to you, Mr. Clinton, to beat the GOP at their own game and use the poor as pawns in your welfare "reform" scheme rather than actually stand up for what was right. In your cynical calculation, the poor had nowhere else to go in terms of voting, so why not screw them over, even though many in the middle class would eventually wind up in the same boat?
Now since the economy has tanked and has NEVER recovered because Congress and Obama won't do shit about it, the misery index* (a term that was used a lot during the Carter years of high inflation but appropriate here) has now reached into the stratosphere.
The report also explores long-term unemployment and the increase in extreme poverty. There were 4.8 million workers in the US in 2012 unemployed for more than six months. That year, half the unemployed in Michigan were in this category.
The report’s authors note: “While the Great Recession era has ushered in a prolonged period of high unemployment, its real legacy may prove to be the unprecedented duration of unemployment spells: the average spell was 38.1 weeks as of December 2012.” This has increased the number of people in the US in extreme poverty, struggling to survive on practically nothing.
The researchers also point to the trend to shift already drastically inadequate government-funded income support from the unemployed to those working low-wage, part-time and temporary jobs—most of the new jobs being created in the US. The minimum wage is a poverty wage, still $7.40 an hour, about half what has been computed as a living wage.
The report mentioned in the article is here and will make your blood boil.
*--Since we really haven't had much in the way of high inflation over the past thirty years, a new definition of the "misery index" is in order. I would define it as human misery going way up when our elected officials do absolutely nothing to correct a worsening economy.
One Thing Our Betters Don't Talk About
If the elites talked at all about the massive number of poor whites, many if not most of whom were in the middle class, it would expose how flawed capitalism is.
It also undercuts their clever and often successful attempts to pit one group against another while they continue to steal from us and raid the U.S. Treasury and state and local governments.
It also undercuts their clever and often successful attempts to pit one group against another while they continue to steal from us and raid the U.S. Treasury and state and local governments.
Actually It Is a Result of Excellent Planning
if 4 out of 5 people report having lived at or near poverty sometime in their lives. Eventually it will be 99.9 percent. It's "excellent" planning by the gangsters running our economic policy so that we are all living in third world conditions.
Snip:
A society with a tiny number of obscene rich and everybody else poor cannot be sustained without bloodshed. The U.S. is just about at the tipping point.
The election of a fake Democrat guaranteed we'd be on the brink of ruin. The gangsters control both political parties, and there is NOBODY out there who is defending the masses whose message isn't being buried under tons of propaganda.
Snip:
The figures reported Sunday are only the latest in a string of indices released this year pointing to the growth of social despair and destitution. Among those aged 35 to 64, suicides soared nearly 30 percent between 1999 and 2010, according to figures released in May by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. More people in the US now commit suicide than die in car accidents.
More than 16 million children in the US, 22 percent, live in families whose income is below the federal poverty line, according to the National Center for Children in Poverty. The United Nations Children’s Fund released a report in April showing that, among developed countries, children living in poverty in the United States rank 26th worst out of 29. Only children in Lithuania, Latvia and Romania are more impoverished. And children in Greece, which is gripped by massive government austerity policies, rank 25th most poor, above children in the US.
The disastrous growth of poverty is taking place as the social safety net is being dismantled in the United States. As a result of the so-called sequester cuts, extended unemployment benefits have been slashed by up to 25 percent in some states, and hundreds of thousands of workers are being furloughed. Meanwhile Medicare and Social Security, which keep millions out of poverty, are on the chopping block in the budget proposals in Congress of both the Democrats and Republicans.
A society with a tiny number of obscene rich and everybody else poor cannot be sustained without bloodshed. The U.S. is just about at the tipping point.
The election of a fake Democrat guaranteed we'd be on the brink of ruin. The gangsters control both political parties, and there is NOBODY out there who is defending the masses whose message isn't being buried under tons of propaganda.
WHAT "Money"?
Unless you are in the top half of one percent in this country, it is almost impossible to "plan" for a "comfortable" retirement thanks to the worsening economy.
It's all a part of the plan to steal from the masses to enrich the tiny few and then blame the masses for their "poor planning" if they just happened to be left holding the bag.
How in the HELL can you plan so you don't "outlive" your money unless you DIE BEFORE you can retire, IF you can retire, or IF you can get a job after being kicked to the curb after age 50 so you CAN retire?
The article should be filed under "humor." It's pretty sick.
It's all a part of the plan to steal from the masses to enrich the tiny few and then blame the masses for their "poor planning" if they just happened to be left holding the bag.
How in the HELL can you plan so you don't "outlive" your money unless you DIE BEFORE you can retire, IF you can retire, or IF you can get a job after being kicked to the curb after age 50 so you CAN retire?
The article should be filed under "humor." It's pretty sick.
Gotta Keep Up With the Chinese
Pretty soon, we will all be making a dollar a day, and the rich will have EVERYTHING.
That's assuming people will ever be able to work again.
There is something truly evil about the neoliberal economic theories that have nothing whatsoever to do with reality. They only foster more human misery.
It's coming very close to bloodshed in this country. When millions discover they have nothing to lose, they WILL lash back against the parasites and criminals who are running this country into the ground.
Snip:
And if poverty-level wages and jobs aren't enough to satisfy these sadistic bastards, there's always prison labor.
That's assuming people will ever be able to work again.
There is something truly evil about the neoliberal economic theories that have nothing whatsoever to do with reality. They only foster more human misery.
It's coming very close to bloodshed in this country. When millions discover they have nothing to lose, they WILL lash back against the parasites and criminals who are running this country into the ground.
Snip:
Hardship is particularly on the rise among whites, based on several measures. Pessimism among that racial group about their families' economic futures has climbed to the highest point since at least 1987. In the most recent AP-GfK poll, 63 percent of whites called the economy "poor."
"I think it's going to get worse," said Irene Salyers, 52, of Buchanan County, Va., a declining coal region in Appalachia. Married and divorced three times, Salyers now helps run a fruit and vegetable stand with her boyfriend, but it doesn't generate much income. They live mostly off government disability checks.
"If you do try to go apply for a job, they're not hiring people, and they're not paying that much to even go to work," she said. Children, she said, have "nothing better to do than to get on drugs."
And if poverty-level wages and jobs aren't enough to satisfy these sadistic bastards, there's always prison labor.
The REAL "Budget" of McDonald's Workers
This link from CNN Money makes the fast food giant look like a bunch of idiots.
Note that most of those profiled don't have a second job, and no doubt most if not all of them have to "double up" or shack up with some boyfriend or girlfriend or spouse to make ends meet or borrow money from anybody who will loan them some.
One of several profiled:
Kind of looks like my "budget."
Note that most of those profiled don't have a second job, and no doubt most if not all of them have to "double up" or shack up with some boyfriend or girlfriend or spouse to make ends meet or borrow money from anybody who will loan them some.
One of several profiled:
Kind of looks like my "budget."
Apathy is the Ruination of the United States of America
The guy being interviewed is being a little bit too naive. It's going to take 25- or 30-percent unemployment and 75-percent poverty to get Americans' lazy asses off the couch and into the street.
Or that gas prices or food prices double.
Anything short of that, forget it:
The scary part is it could be the far right that could entrench itself further since there is no real "left" left and hasn't been since the early 1970s.
Or that gas prices or food prices double.
Anything short of that, forget it:
The scary part is it could be the far right that could entrench itself further since there is no real "left" left and hasn't been since the early 1970s.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Featured Post
The Good Die Young: James Dobson (1936-2025)
One of the leading figures of the religious right of the past fifty years, Dr. James Dobson, 89, reportedly died today. No cause of death ...
-
On a somewhat off track, Sovereignty has won the 151st Kentucky Derby for Godolphin Stable. Journalism, the favorite, came in second, whi... -
Sovereignty beat Journalism in this year's Belmont Stakes at Saratoga. It was a very exciting race. Rodriguez set the pace for the win... -
Journalism has won the 150th Preakness Stakes. It was an extremely tight far turn into homestretch. I am happy nobody was hurt, but I thin...