Yes, you did. According to you, most Mexicans are doing quite well and simply choose to live the way that they do due to "cultural differences". If this were in fact true, they would not have the issues that they do and the number of them trying to get here would be much less.
Most no, but 40% is still damn high and if those figures were reported to that site by the Mexican Government, then I suspect that number to be much higher than that.
LOL, another statement that you cannot possibly hope to back up. This is your opinion Miles and nothing more.
I would say that the higher percentage are exactly that but why are there so many of them Miles? Are you saying that Mexicans are typically stupid or lazy? Is that part of the cultural differences that you keep talking about?
Title of the chart on the 1st page reads "Population below median income". I said median TBone.
Wrong. Each country may or may not even have a poverty level THEY compute. It's only meaningful if you have something to relate it to. Whats considered poverty in the USA may not be poverty elsewhere. In the USA theres scores of people below the poverty level whom have cable TV and Internet. Different cultures TBone. Something you just can't grasp.
Exactly, yet there is a federal poverty level used for determining things such as social services available even at the state level.
Thats true. Most Mexicans are doing well per their needs and culture. They're mostly happy, have roof over their heads and food on the table. You seem to feel most are dirt poor and the countries run down and corrupt.
Most of that 40% are not dirt poor, starving etc. Most in the USA below the poverty level are not dirt poor, homeless, starving etc. What does poverty mean to you TBone? What does it mean to the Federal Gov. whom sets the $ amount to define it?
It's your opinion that those coming to the USA represent a cross section of Mexico rather than the poor, under educated etc.
11 million (well thats just a guess, could be higher, could be lower, who knows) came here over a 40 year period. Whats the population of Mexico?
Who cares Miles. When you click on Mexico it says that 40% are below the poverty level.
Are you really serious? What a complete load of crap. Poverty has a definition Miles, go and look it up.
Once again, you prove yourself to be an idiot. While it may be true that the same standard of living in one area may be considered substandard in another, poverty is pretty much the same everywhere. When you cannot affors to feed your falily or provide for even basic needs, then you are in the poverty class and yes, there are levels of that as well.
LOL, if they can afford cable TV and internet connections then they are either not poverty level or are just stupid, much like yourself.
Yes they can but it is not exactly the same for every state or even for every reigon in each state.
TBone wrote: s Miles. When you click on Mexico it says that 40% are below the
What poverty level is that exactly? What does it mean in Mexico? How are these 40% living exactly? What do they have in the way of housing, food etc? I know you have a belief of dirt poor with little to nothing (maybe based on USA standards) but thats all it is, a belief.
The POVERTY LEVEL does not have an exact definition agreed to by every nation in the world in how they compute it. The poverty level the Feds in the USA set does not mean dirt poor and homeless without food etc.
Bull. In the USA people that earn the poverty level generally have a roof over their head, food and a car. You just cant seem to handle that.
When you cannot affors
Poverty 'CLASS'? That has nothing to do with the federal poverty level in terms of $'s. People in the USA at the poverty level arent necessarily dirt poor, without basic needs etc.
Then the federal Gov.'s poverty level figure must be wrong, or more likely you are wrong!
The federal poverty level is the same for all states and used to determine social services available even at the state level.
Once again Miles, you make statements that you can't possibly hope to back up. Even the links that you provide go against you.
How do you know? Did you interview the majority of the population?
I never said any such thing but they do have a much lower standard of living than we do and a large population at the poverty level and lower. You seem to be happy with the delusion that they want it this way but the numbers of them crossing the border say's something very different.
LOL, oh really! Care to back that up. Of course you don't because you can't.
Again, let's see you back that up. Sure, there are some scum that scam the system and many are not homeless or starving because of social programs but they are still dirt poor and are in many cases trapped by the very system that they now depend on not to be starving or homeless.
To me it means not having enough to meet even basic needs without being strapped down by some gubberment handouts and red tape. What does it mean to you Miles?
Probably the amount needed to just scrape by in the lowest cost area in the country.
I would say that it is much more likely to be closer to mine than yours but even if you are the one who is correct, why are there so many of them and if Mexico is such a booming place with free housing and health care, why would they rick it all to come here and why so many of them. You deleted the question the last time I posted it. How about answering it if you know so much about the country as you claim.
Once again, more meaningless numbers. Unless the flow has been the same every year for those 40 years, what exactly is your point?
Since their standard of living is so much lower than ours, I would say that their poverty level is also way lower than ours.
You make no sense at all Miles. First you say that their culture is the reason that they live at such a lower standard of living than that common in the US then you say that there definition of poverty is higher than ours or that they don't have one. Please list all of the countries that you can think of that actually have an economy even close to the size of Mexico's and don't classify a poverty level.
It is based on the level below what is accepted as the common standard of living. Since the common standard of living of many that you claim are fine and happy is way below that of ours, it only makes sense that the level that they refer to as poverty is also much lower than what we start it at. Sorry Miles, but all your cultural bullshit is comming back to bite you.
How would you know Miles? Do you have family that live that way as well or are you just referring to your employees. You are referring to the working poor and they are a step or two above true poverty.
You keep talking about the US, why is that? We are talking about Mexico and if their normal standard of living is somewhat lower than that in the US, the poverty level will be as well.
It's based on a dollar amount of wages that they are aware of and since our government always tries to make itself look better and take the easy way out, yea, they are probably wrong. If people are making money under the table to pay for these things or are living in government housing and eating from food stamps then they may be earning enough under the table or the housing might have a common cable connection and still be considered at a poverty level. Does Mexico have all of these social programs?
Never said otherwise. Of course Mexico has a lower standard of living. But that doesn't mean people aren't happy. They don't need the things we take for granted here in order to be happy. We're spoiled.
The US poverty level is $21,000 for a typical family. Certainly not much $'s but I know quite a number of families of 4 making about that and doing ok. They have an apartment, car and food. They're strapped and penny pinch on a daily basis but they do alright and are not dirt poor and starving and homeless nor are they on social handouts.
Who said booming? I never did. I simply stated that most in Mexico are not dirt poor, starving and homeless. Most do just fine for their needs.
In comparison perhaps but their needs and priorities are vastly different than ours. People need far less in Mexico in order to be happy.
I spend several hours a day doing volunteer charity work for numerous families in just such a situation. So yes, I most certainly do know. I would think you being the compassionate liberal would be doing even more and get to know the people you're guessing about.
They're smarter than the USA and do not believe in oppression through social handouts that have never done anything to reduce poverty. Yet they do have numerous social programs to help people to help themselves.
What people need and what they want are to very different things Miles. If people were just happy with what they need, there would be no rich people and greed would not exist. Just because they are used to living well below what we would consider poverty doesn't mean tha they want to stay that way. Are you happy now Miles? Are you still trying to grow your business to make more money? Why Miles?
That depends on their ambition and where they live miles. Sure, there are areas where you can survive on that level of income but they are trapped there. So much for freedom.
I don't think that they are overly happy about being 1 paycheck away from being on the street either. They may not have a bad attitiude and are trying to make the best out of the situation but I can bet that if an oppertunity would come up to double or even tripple their income, they would jump on it in a heartbeat. Just like the ones comming over here from Mexico.
Yes you did Miles. If most of the population is doing just fine for their needs, then the economy is booming. That is not the case there or even here right now. Your attitude is really why so many hate the rich as many of them have the same one. Just because people may smile sometimes when they are just getting by doesn't mean that they are happy with their situation or don't want anything more. Many of the people that you are talking about are not happy and are in fear of losing even the little bit that they do have and wonder if they can ever retire. This is NOT doing just fine and if the opportunity or even perceived opportunity to improve that situation appears, many are going to jump on it. It is not just the uneducated and lazy that are floodong our borders, it is the ambitious and the ones that want a better life and are willing to take the risk to achieve it as well and are probably the greater percentage now.
LOL, sorry Miles, but the right are the kings of hatred. Look what they did to this country now and what they did to Clinton out of nothing but fear. This country was and to a degree still is a laughing stock to many other countries due to that.
Oh yea, and the right always has, LOL! Sorry Miles, but it very much has to do with the right and the idiot that we have for a President.
Yea, right. How exactly are they going to do anything without spending money? I guess that you would rather do as our president does and just take the money away from those that need it the most like the billions he wants to take from Medicare and Medicade to fund his bogus war instead of raising taxes of those that can afford it the most. Since most of them are Republicans, they like you should be more than willing to support the war your God started.
I see. So they need liberals like yourself to keep telling them how miserable they are. Everyone strives for more. But they aren't miserable. They're generally happy. You seem to think everyone needs to live how we do in the USA or they can't possibly be happy. Sometimes I think they have the better life. Simpler, quieter and focus on the little things in life instead of cable TV and internet.
Sure the heck am. Enjoying life. Hope you are too.
You have a problem with growth? Oh ya, must be greed. No TBone, my salary has gone up an average of around 2-3% per year, often less than inflation. Companies growth has been 10-12% per year. But I'm sure you'll figure out a way that must be greed. Sigh.
As Janis says, Freedoms just another word for having nothing left to lose. I know many at around the poverty level that I envy. They are quite happy. Happier than many middle and upper class. You seem to live in a materialistic world and can't imagine how people could be happier enjoying the little things in life. They dont have nor necessarily want cell phones, cable tv, etc. You must think the Amish are miserable and need your liberal help.
Huh? Um, if you say so Tom!! Can anyone translate this rhetoric??
Clinton deserved it. No president should lie under oath to a grand jury no matter what the circumstances are and people like you make excuses for him to do so. I know you loved Clinton but he was horrible. The economy had nothing to do with any thing he himself did. And it was a doomed economy anyways no matter what your liberal bandwagon rhetoric says.
Too bad. Clinton sold us out to China and N. Korea and you just shrug your shoulders and laugh at that. It's a sad day when politicians sell out to other countries out of fear of being laughed at.
lol, everythings the rights and Bush's fault. Geez Tbone, typical liberal to always blame others. The Dems have not delivered on their promises. They have made no attempt to. Heck, they blasted Bush at his budget cuts wanting to spend even more. They campaigned to get the budget cut...ya, it's Bush's fault they wish to spend considerably more than he does.
Huh? I see. The way to make things right is to spend more money. Good grief. Only in a liberals world!! The Dems Pelosi and company campaigned to CUT spending. They named several areas they wished to trim from the budget. Yet, they did the opposite. They wanted to increase the budget considerably. Your ilk blasts Bush for spending too much then rants that to make things better we need to spend more. Too funny.
The war isn't part of the Budget the Dems wish to increase. No matter where you make cuts somebody isn't going to like it. Yet the Dems capaigned to do just that and then reversed once they got into power and you sit here and defend them on both what they campaigned on and what they are doing. To faced Tbone!
How do you know this Miles? The fact is that you don't and I would say that many of them are not happy. Sure, many if not most can find some joy in their lives but that far from makes them truly happy. Safety and security are two main points that allow people truly happy and living paycheck to paycheck does neither.
LOL, I never said any such thing and not everyone is living in the US all that well either. However, basic needs are pretty much the same for everyone and despite your bullshit, that is not the case there or here for everyone and here is still better than there.
And what exactly is stopping you from doing just that Miles???
Yes I am and thank you for asking as this is exactly my point. You are happy now and I bet that you were happy before you had the nice house, the summer cabin, the new cars, the boat, and everything else that you now have and yet, you continue work to have more. You may claim that it is our culture but in reality, it is just human nature.
Not at all Miles but if you are already happy, what is the point? Seem like enough and even more than enough is still now enough for you. What makes you think that they are any different.
You are a bit paranoid Miles. My point is that even though your company is doing well, you continue to work to make it bigger. As I said Miles, this is human nature and the people of Mexico are also human and despite you complete bullshit, also strive to better themselves.
LOL, yea, sure. If that were the case Miles, what is stopping you from joining them?
I guess that you have now defined liberal as someone who cares, much unlike yourself and if that's the case, then yea, I'm a liberal and proud of it. But you are still the definition of the typical ignorant and greedy right that thinks the rest of the world is just stupid. There is a huge difference between having toys lile cell phones and cable and having enough money to put food on the table and a few dollars in the bank. You keep making the claim that the people that come here are un and under educated and the primary reason for that is that parents have to send those kids to work to put food on the table and the social program that you mentioned was put in place to combat that very thing. Sorry Miles, but the more you say, the more you prove what you don't know.
Perhaps they can after they sort threw the bs and spin in the crap you typed above.
Oh please Miles, more right wing bullshit. Why was he even asked that? What purpose did it serve? You would have done exactly the same thing and just about everyone on the planet knows that the whole thing was a setup. The right was scared to deth of him becaused during his term, he more than proved that the right was completely full of shit and Bush more than proved it.
Doomed in what way? More right wing crap.
How exactly did he sell us out and what exactly should he have done?
Yep, they have been the ones in power for the longest for the last 12 years.
Sorry Miles, but that's the way of the right as well and they are much better at it.
See what I mean. You are convinced that they have made no attempts but seem to ignore the fact that Bush did'nt veto a single bill until the Dems took control of congress. Sorry Miles, but as usual, you are wrong again.
Because most of Bush's budget cuts are aimed at the poor and social programs as well as state aid.
No, thew wish it spent differently but we are locked into a war that will take years to get out of and wars cost money.
Once again, your ignorance more than shows itself. The way to make things right is to spend the money where it is needed. Unfortunantly, we are locked into billions of wasted spending in a war that never should have happened.
LOL, lets see you back up this complete bullshit. The areas that they wished to trim th budget on are the very ones that the pinhead threatened to veto and then blame them for stopping progress.
No shit sherlock, but Bush has no trouble cutting the Medicade and Medicare budjets to fund it as well as many other social programs.
Sadly, many of Bush's cuts will cause much more harm then people just not liking it.
Any way that you want to spin it, when the Dems try, Bush just veto's or threatens to veto if it reaches his desk.
How do you know the Tom? Fact is you don't. You guess as you always do.
Yes, they need liberals to tell them they are miserable and what they need to be happy. Typical liberal absurdity at its worst.
Now just why would I do that Tom? I do so to be able to give more to others. Something a 'compassionate' liberal can't comprehend. I've spent almost 30% of my own money out of pocket directly helping others. That doesn't include donations to charity groups. How are you doing? Oh ya, I must be greedy too as you say so often.
As I said Miles, this
I strive to give to others. Always have, always will. Try it Tom. It's very rewarding.
No Tom that would be you who thinks others are stupid. You think they need you to tell them they're not really happy.
Because he was being investigated for sexual harassment. He was asked to show what kind of a character he truly is and that he had a habit of such behavior.
Setup? Clinton had scores of women accusing him of improper behavior long before he got into the WH. The guy was pure scum in this regard and you declare him innocent? He admitted it in the end at least in one case. So now you feel he's innocent against all the other women who accused him? Good grief.
Economists had predicted a collapse before Clinton even left office. The economy did start down in his last year.
Sorry Miles, but what I said is far more sensible than what you have. I do have friends in this situation and while they do see many of the joys in life, they also face the very real fear of losing everything sonce they have little to fall back on and the worries of how to get their kids into a good college. Sorry Miles, but most in this situation face these same challenges and fears and that is not true happiness.
They need that about as much as you telling them that they are. Sorry Miles, but it works both ways and if they are so happy and you are so envious of their lifestyles as you claim, what is stopping you form joining them.
LOL, please Miles, just about everything else that you say in here says something very different.
Let me ask you something Miles, do you claim any of that money as tax deductions?
It's not what I say Miles, but what you say. You keep saying that anyone working in unskilled labor shouldn't even make enough money to live. You also plan on continuing to pay yourself your full salary until either your company goes under or you die. Yea, that's real giving. Sure, you have all of the right wing justifications for doing it but it still equates to selfishness, any way you try and spin it.
Again Miles, what you are saying here differs greatly from everything else that you say.
And you seem to think that they need you to tell them that they are.
Like I said, more right wing bullshit. Funny how that investigation didn't begin until AFTER the white water attempt failed and since Monica never issued a complaint, why did they ask???
LOL, yea, right and look at the character of the women making the claims.
Who said anything about him being innocent but when you look at the character of the women who accused him....
Yes it did, right after the first debate. But even after Bush's massive tax cuts, the economy still did crap unless you want to include the housing bubble which did a lot for me but screwed many people and will continue to do so for years to come.
Thats the USA, not Mexico. The USA isn't Mexico. You have friends, I work with these people weekly. Wonder why so few liberals just say rather than do but thats a different issue!
I don't tell them a thing. They tell me. It's you trying to tell them they're really miserable in typical liberal fashion and how your absurd liberalism can 'save' them from such misery. You're sounding like a liberal politician.
Sorry
My folks did and in time I may do the same. They went from a 4000sf home on 2 acres to a 1200sf home on 1/8 acre. They went from a new airplane and 2 Cadillacs to a 1998 CTD and a 2002 Explorer. They could have more if they wanted but they don't want it and don't need liberals like you telling them that they do.
Oh ya? Tell me Tom, how many hours a week to you spend directly helping and working with others outside your own family (not just donations, but time). Compassionate liberalism involves getting others to pay and give and never themselves.
Ya, its always all about deductions huh? So I give 30% out of my own pocket. Tell me Tom, how much money does that generate for me? Sorry Tom, it doesn't generate me money, it costs me money. But go ahead and not give to others so you can't be accused of a tax write off. Good grief, what a sorry reason not to give! In reality Tom, to answer your question, NO. I can't deduct 30%. Most of it is NOT to charitable organizations. It's directly to people I work with and help. Dang 'compassionate' liberals.
Never said that. I said minimum wage shouldn't be set as such nor should a Walmart door greeter be paid as such etc. Your view is that people should be paid based on need and not abilities. Theres a social and economic system with that mentality..know what it is Tom?
You have never been able to explain why investing in my own company and retiring on its returns is bad. You have told me I should invest in other companies (stocks etc.). Why other companies and not my own?
Bull. I have always said I give considerably as many conservatives do. Liberals are all talk....talk with other peoples money and not their own.
Again, they tell me and I leave it at that. I do not tell them anything. But you sure seem to!
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.