Explain to me the American mindset around work, entitlement, and earning

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who wanted to SAH and arranged my life in such a way to do that, I definitely don’t want to pay higher taxes to pay for other women to have free childcare and year long paid maternity leaves! Yes SAH is my choice, but why does my family have to pay another family’s daycare and long maternity leave?

I would argue it's the same consideration as public schools - plenty of people pay property taxes that go towards paying for the schooling of other people's children. We decided that an educated population is a public good.

Education is primarily funded at the local level giving citizens the ability to choose form a variety of taxing schemes and funding mechanisms. That you can move to Texas or Wyoming where tax policy is more aligned with your personal views is an important societal outlet. That’s not what people are pushing here.

Where and how childcare is funded is a tangential discussion. All states have compulsory schooling requirements paid by taxes. I am sure something similar in terms of fundingcan be put in place for childcare. I agree that it should be implemented at the local level rather than federal.

Its not tangential if 90% of it is being funded by the federal government. Whereas with schools, the local tax base determines both the cost and quality of the schools.

Again, the discussion is whether we as a society should provide certain social benefits, not how.

The how predicates the answer. No I do not want to fund extraneous social benefits that raise my federal taxes and provide no further benefits to myself or my family - just takes money for our pocket.

Police, fire, roads, health insurance, military are a common good. Susan sitting at home making formula at 3PM is not.

F*** you, I've got mine!

Nope, I paid for mine. Time for you to do the same.

I paid for mine too, thanks. Sounds to me like you lack the self-awareness and empathy to recognize that if a few things hadn't bounced your way, you'd be in the same boat as the hypothetical Susan you loathe.

Bounced my way? Nope. Making calculating decisions and planning for the family you want to have isn't luck. If you just randomly pop out three kids and expect the rest of taxpayer society to pay for them - you are the problem.

Born on third base thinking they hit a triple. Not an ounce of self-awareness. Sheesh.

No one wants to pay for you or your kids. Give it a rest.

Seriously, you don’t need to be smart or even have a college degree to see that having kids is expensive and a lot of work. It should be quite evident even to poor kids that the more kids in a family, the harder it is to work, to provide for everyone or to get ahead. And if you truly don’t know how babies are made, it should obvious enough after the first one. How do people have 3+ oops babies and say it with a straight face?

People who cannot delay gratification will never get ahead.

Here's a secret....people realize that BEFORE they have kids.

Plan accordingly.

Nobody chooses to be born.

Nope, but their parents choose to bring them into the world. Their job to fund them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you "happy to pay more taxes" should donate to charity. The rest of us are not "happy" to. We are stlll paying for aftercare, our own student loans, and saving for our own kids to go to college. Its not my responsibility to do that for other people too. But you are free to donate your money if you like!

You’re an idiot. You do realize that you wouldn’t have had to do any of this if there were higher taxes, correct?

Wrong. At our income we don’t[b]qualify for $hit. So my taxes will go up but I will get no additional benefit. Hard pass.

Currently, that is. You don’t seem to understand the term “universal” in “universal healthcare.”

And who is going to pay for this universal healthcare..... There is a solution already[b] get a job and you have healthcare next

Oh my gosh what a cute idea! You don't understand how many jobs in this country don't provide healthcare, or healthcare that a low wage worker can afford? Spoiled thing you are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You're projecting quite a few opinions. As the PP pointed out, there is already a substantial entitlement sector in the United States.

There's many different kinds of entitlements and just about everyone benefits from some entitlement to some degree. But I do imagine most people agree entitlements can only go so far. What people don't like are privileges. Forgiving student loans, for example, is a privilege rather than an entitlement.

"if we all just worked LESS, and produced less, consumed less?" = dramatic decline in most people's standard of living.

This is an extremely American-centric view of standard of living, or at least with respect to quality of life.

It would absolutely be better for the environment if we produced and consumed less of everything. A cleaner environment would unequivocally improve quality of life, and reduce costs elsewhere.

Same thing with reduced workload. If you work less and partake in more leisure and family activities, you will objectively be healthier, spend less on pills and medical procedures, and save more money as a whole.

In the big picture, I think the costs of overworking onto all of society outweigh the benefits of any extra innovation it yields.

Just look at the workday time creep. The American cultural norm used to be Nine to Five, like the Dolly Parton song. Then it became 8 to 6. Now it's basically 8 to 6 but you have to be available to stay late whenever needed and answer work emails off hours and on weekends. Your company owns you.

Shrugs. I've lived in different countries in different parts of the world and with different cultures. What you're imagining really doesn't exist. PEople work. They have to in order to live. It's that simple.

DP here - yes globally everyone needs to work. But the US is a rich country. Since we strive to lead on many levels why not make our society and even influence other countries ti do it differently? You are right - I totally agree that ironically the OP above can even suggest working less when you consider how many office jobs we have lol. Yeah so this is entitlement right here. Most places in the world work is not that "easy." But I'm also with you that as someone with an office job, it does such having to be on call it seems always.

I think you have to temper the reality if what's possible but wherever possible, less work is ideal. Not sure as a society it's worth striving to a model of work less but to encourage as much as possible of working smart(er)? Why not!!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who wanted to SAH and arranged my life in such a way to do that, I definitely don’t want to pay higher taxes to pay for other women to have free childcare and year long paid maternity leaves! Yes SAH is my choice, but why does my family have to pay another family’s daycare and long maternity leave?

I would argue it's the same consideration as public schools - plenty of people pay property taxes that go towards paying for the schooling of other people's children. We decided that an educated population is a public good.

Education is primarily funded at the local level giving citizens the ability to choose form a variety of taxing schemes and funding mechanisms. That you can move to Texas or Wyoming where tax policy is more aligned with your personal views is an important societal outlet. That’s not what people are pushing here.

Where and how childcare is funded is a tangential discussion. All states have compulsory schooling requirements paid by taxes. I am sure something similar in terms of fundingcan be put in place for childcare. I agree that it should be implemented at the local level rather than federal.

Its not tangential if 90% of it is being funded by the federal government. Whereas with schools, the local tax base determines both the cost and quality of the schools.

Again, the discussion is whether we as a society should provide certain social benefits, not how.

The how predicates the answer. No I do not want to fund extraneous social benefits that raise my federal taxes and provide no further benefits to myself or my family - just takes money for our pocket.

Police, fire, roads, health insurance, military are a common good. Susan sitting at home making formula at 3PM is not.

F*** you, I've got mine!

Nope, I paid for mine. Time for you to do the same.

I paid for mine too, thanks. Sounds to me like you lack the self-awareness and empathy to recognize that if a few things hadn't bounced your way, you'd be in the same boat as the hypothetical Susan you loathe.

Bounced my way? Nope. Making calculating decisions and planning for the family you want to have isn't luck. If you just randomly pop out three kids and expect the rest of taxpayer society to pay for them - you are the problem.

Born on third base thinking they hit a triple. Not an ounce of self-awareness. Sheesh.

No one wants to pay for you or your kids. Give it a rest.

Seriously, you don’t need to be smart or even have a college degree to see that having kids is expensive and a lot of work. It should be quite evident even to poor kids that the more kids in a family, the harder it is to work, to provide for everyone or to get ahead. And if you truly don’t know how babies are made, it should obvious enough after the first one. How do people have 3+ oops babies and say it with a straight face?

People who cannot delay gratification will never get ahead.

Here's a secret....people realize that BEFORE they have kids.

Plan accordingly.

Nobody chooses to be born.

Nope, but their parents choose to bring them into the world. Their job to fund them.

Well, I’m not interested in making kids suffer just because of who their parents are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who wanted to SAH and arranged my life in such a way to do that, I definitely don’t want to pay higher taxes to pay for other women to have free childcare and year long paid maternity leaves! Yes SAH is my choice, but why does my family have to pay another family’s daycare and long maternity leave?

I would argue it's the same consideration as public schools - plenty of people pay property taxes that go towards paying for the schooling of other people's children. We decided that an educated population is a public good.

Education is primarily funded at the local level giving citizens the ability to choose form a variety of taxing schemes and funding mechanisms. That you can move to Texas or Wyoming where tax policy is more aligned with your personal views is an important societal outlet. That’s not what people are pushing here.

Where and how childcare is funded is a tangential discussion. All states have compulsory schooling requirements paid by taxes. I am sure something similar in terms of fundingcan be put in place for childcare. I agree that it should be implemented at the local level rather than federal.

Its not tangential if 90% of it is being funded by the federal government. Whereas with schools, the local tax base determines both the cost and quality of the schools.

Again, the discussion is whether we as a society should provide certain social benefits, not how.

The how predicates the answer. No I do not want to fund extraneous social benefits that raise my federal taxes and provide no further benefits to myself or my family - just takes money for our pocket.

Police, fire, roads, health insurance, military are a common good. Susan sitting at home making formula at 3PM is not.

F*** you, I've got mine!

Nope, I paid for mine. Time for you to do the same.

I paid for mine too, thanks. Sounds to me like you lack the self-awareness and empathy to recognize that if a few things hadn't bounced your way, you'd be in the same boat as the hypothetical Susan you loathe.

Bounced my way? Nope. Making calculating decisions and planning for the family you want to have isn't luck. If you just randomly pop out three kids and expect the rest of taxpayer society to pay for them - you are the problem.

Born on third base thinking they hit a triple. Not an ounce of self-awareness. Sheesh.

No one wants to pay for you or your kids. Give it a rest.

Seriously, you don’t need to be smart or even have a college degree to see that having kids is expensive and a lot of work. It should be quite evident even to poor kids that the more kids in a family, the harder it is to work, to provide for everyone or to get ahead. And if you truly don’t know how babies are made, it should obvious enough after the first one. How do people have 3+ oops babies and say it with a straight face?

People who cannot delay gratification will never get ahead.

Here's a secret....people realize that BEFORE they have kids.

Plan accordingly.

Nobody chooses to be born.

Nope, but their parents choose to bring them into the world. Their job to fund them.

Well, I’m not interested in making kids suffer just because of who their parents are.

Who is suffering? Kids in this country get free meals, healthcare and schooling regardless of who their parents are.

[Anonymous]

democrats = modern day slavery trying to keep people poor. Then they throw them some money to get their votes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who wanted to SAH and arranged my life in such a way to do that, I definitely don’t want to pay higher taxes to pay for other women to have free childcare and year long paid maternity leaves! Yes SAH is my choice, but why does my family have to pay another family’s daycare and long maternity leave?

I would argue it's the same consideration as public schools - plenty of people pay property taxes that go towards paying for the schooling of other people's children. We decided that an educated population is a public good.

Education is primarily funded at the local level giving citizens the ability to choose form a variety of taxing schemes and funding mechanisms. That you can move to Texas or Wyoming where tax policy is more aligned with your personal views is an important societal outlet. That’s not what people are pushing here.

Where and how childcare is funded is a tangential discussion. All states have compulsory schooling requirements paid by taxes. I am sure something similar in terms of fundingcan be put in place for childcare. I agree that it should be implemented at the local level rather than federal.

Its not tangential if 90% of it is being funded by the federal government. Whereas with schools, the local tax base determines both the cost and quality of the schools.

Again, the discussion is whether we as a society should provide certain social benefits, not how.

The how predicates the answer. No I do not want to fund extraneous social benefits that raise my federal taxes and provide no further benefits to myself or my family - just takes money for our pocket.

Police, fire, roads, health insurance, military are a common good. Susan sitting at home making formula at 3PM is not.

F*** you, I've got mine!

Nope, I paid for mine. Time for you to do the same.

I paid for mine too, thanks. Sounds to me like you lack the self-awareness and empathy to recognize that if a few things hadn't bounced your way, you'd be in the same boat as the hypothetical Susan you loathe.

Bounced my way? Nope. Making calculating decisions and planning for the family you want to have isn't luck. If you just randomly pop out three kids and expect the rest of taxpayer society to pay for them - you are the problem.

Born on third base thinking they hit a triple. Not an ounce of self-awareness. Sheesh.

No one wants to pay for you or your kids. Give it a rest.

Seriously, you don’t need to be smart or even have a college degree to see that having kids is expensive and a lot of work. It should be quite evident even to poor kids that the more kids in a family, the harder it is to work, to provide for everyone or to get ahead. And if you truly don’t know how babies are made, it should obvious enough after the first one. How do people have 3+ oops babies and say it with a straight face?

People who cannot delay gratification will never get ahead.

Here's a secret....people realize that BEFORE they have kids.

Plan accordingly.

Nobody chooses to be born.

Nope, but their parents choose to bring them into the world. Their job to fund them.

Because unplanned pregnancies never happen?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As someone who wanted to SAH and arranged my life in such a way to do that, I definitely don’t want to pay higher taxes to pay for other women to have free childcare and year long paid maternity leaves! Yes SAH is my choice, but why does my family have to pay another family’s daycare and long maternity leave?

I would argue it's the same consideration as public schools - plenty of people pay property taxes that go towards paying for the schooling of other people's children. We decided that an educated population is a public good.

Education is primarily funded at the local level giving citizens the ability to choose form a variety of taxing schemes and funding mechanisms. That you can move to Texas or Wyoming where tax policy is more aligned with your personal views is an important societal outlet. That’s not what people are pushing here.

Where and how childcare is funded is a tangential discussion. All states have compulsory schooling requirements paid by taxes. I am sure something similar in terms of fundingcan be put in place for childcare. I agree that it should be implemented at the local level rather than federal.

Its not tangential if 90% of it is being funded by the federal government. Whereas with schools, the local tax base determines both the cost and quality of the schools.

Again, the discussion is whether we as a society should provide certain social benefits, not how.

The how predicates the answer. No I do not want to fund extraneous social benefits that raise my federal taxes and provide no further benefits to myself or my family - just takes money for our pocket.

Police, fire, roads, health insurance, military are a common good. Susan sitting at home making formula at 3PM is not.

F*** you, I've got mine!

Nope, I paid for mine. Time for you to do the same.

I paid for mine too, thanks. Sounds to me like you lack the self-awareness and empathy to recognize that if a few things hadn't bounced your way, you'd be in the same boat as the hypothetical Susan you loathe.

Bounced my way? Nope. Making calculating decisions and planning for the family you want to have isn't luck. If you just randomly pop out three kids and expect the rest of taxpayer society to pay for them - you are the problem.

Born on third base thinking they hit a triple. Not an ounce of self-awareness. Sheesh.

No one wants to pay for you or your kids. Give it a rest.

Seriously, you don’t need to be smart or even have a college degree to see that having kids is expensive and a lot of work. It should be quite evident even to poor kids that the more kids in a family, the harder it is to work, to provide for everyone or to get ahead. And if you truly don’t know how babies are made, it should obvious enough after the first one. How do people have 3+ oops babies and say it with a straight face?

People who cannot delay gratification will never get ahead.

Here's a secret....people realize that BEFORE they have kids.

Plan accordingly.

Nobody chooses to be born.

Nope, but their parents choose to bring them into the world. Their job to fund them.

Because unplanned pregnancies never happen?

9 months of 'unplanning' is 9 months to prepare.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you "happy to pay more taxes" should donate to charity. The rest of us are not "happy" to. We are stlll paying for aftercare, our own student loans, and saving for our own kids to go to college. Its not my responsibility to do that for other people too. But you are free to donate your money if you like!

You’re an idiot. You do realize that you wouldn’t have had to do any of this if there were higher taxes, correct?

Wrong. At our income we don’t[b]qualify for $hit. So my taxes will go up but I will get no additional benefit. Hard pass.

Currently, that is. You don’t seem to understand the term “universal” in “universal healthcare.”

And who is going to pay for this universal healthcare..... There is a solution already[b] get a job and you have healthcare next

Oh my gosh what a cute idea! You don't understand how many jobs in this country don't provide healthcare, or healthcare that a low wage worker can afford? Spoiled thing you are.

A little less than 160 million people get healthcare from work and most of those folks have no issues with the cost or coverage. Until those number drops there is no incentive for any politicians to change the current system.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Those of you "happy to pay more taxes" should donate to charity. The rest of us are not "happy" to. We are stlll paying for aftercare, our own student loans, and saving for our own kids to go to college. Its not my responsibility to do that for other people too. But you are free to donate your money if you like!

You’re an idiot. You do realize that you wouldn’t have had to do any of this if there were higher taxes, correct?

Wrong. At our income we don’t[b]qualify for $hit. So my taxes will go up but I will get no additional benefit. Hard pass.

Currently, that is. You don’t seem to understand the term “universal” in “universal healthcare.”

And who is going to pay for this universal healthcare..... There is a solution already[b] get a job and you have healthcare next

Oh my gosh what a cute idea! You don't understand how many jobs in this country don't provide healthcare, or healthcare that a low wage worker can afford? Spoiled thing you are.

A little less than 160 million people get healthcare from work and most of those folks have no issues with the cost or coverage. Until those number drops there is no incentive for any politicians to change the current system.

We have always had it though work. Every year, the plan gets crappier, the cost goes way up, and the employer pays even less. We notice, trust me.