lets see gene haits that bush is president.

so gene blames bush for the fact that the sun is putting out more radiation than normal. thus causing global warming. so you see it is bushes fault.

Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Friday, August 03, 2007
“The Jobs that are being created are FOR THE POOR and with the wages that these jobs pay and the lack of benefits, anyone who gets these jobs will remain POOR!


How do you sleep at night, Col? I can tell anyone without a criminal record how to make $30-40,000 a year very quickly if they just SHOW UP TO WORK everyday. The common denominator I have found among the chronically poor is a high absentee rate from work. They can't make money if they aren't there to do it, and they won't advance unless they bring value to their employer!

We have NO OBLIGATION to buy X-Boxes for the lazy!”


If you believe a family or even a single person can live on $30,000 in many communities in this country you are out of touch. Where I live a VERY modest apartment is $900-$1,000 PER MONTH PLUS UTILITIES. The study I posted that was completed for the U.S. Conference of Mayors documented that the AVERAGE annual wage of the jobs created during the past several years was just over $34,000. That means many of these new jobs pay LESS then that and in fact many pay in the low to mid 20's. In addition, many do not include health coverage. If you consider that income a living wage I suggest you try and live in many communities on that amount!




Reply By: danielost Posted: Friday, August 03, 2007
This bridge was deemed problematic back in 1990. I fail to see the connection with Bush here.


lets see gene haits that bush is president.

so gene blames bush for the fact that the sun is putting out more radiation than normal. thus causing global warming. so you see it is bushes fault.


It was Bush that added $ 4 Trillion to our debt including a Trillion dollars that was wasted of his war!

and this has what to do with a bridge that was known to be substandard for 17 years how

Again, Col, you assert that I died years ago since I don't make $30,000. I just wish you'd have told social security so my wife and kids could collect survivor's benefits.

The FACTS are, many Americans CAN and DO live on $30,000 or less. A single person can live in virtually ANY community in this country on that wage. It is YOU who are out of touch, Col!

Your flipping CHARTS, GRAPHS, and POLLS ignore a simple fact: that there are MILLIONS living on a wage YOU have judged IMPOSSIBLE: you have no clue whatsoever, and are nothing more than a shameless troll!

ColClueless obviously never had Thoreau on his HS reading list!

BTW, Col...to repeat LW's oft repeated challenge:

If families can't live on $30,000 a year, SHOW ME THE BODIES! SHOW ME THE MILLIONS DEAD BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T EARNING A LIVING WAGE! You can't because it's untrue and you KNOW it!

In my area, the median income is below $30,000. Guess we're all just a buncha frickin' zombies, eh?

yup

I'll go for that. Its also true to say that lots of finger pointing and simplistic answers fly around at times such as this - usually prompted by individual preferred bandwagons. Leave that hanging there for the moment.

There is also, I would suggest a deeper issue at stake. Why do events such as these keep hitting us out of the blue? I may live in UK, but the systemic problems are the same. There is a line of thought that we need to take a look at ourselves alongside the immediacy of individual event solutions, as to why do they keep happening to the extent we are always taken by surprise? Where are the checks and balances that would give us warning of them, or of misdirected funding, or a shift in priorities not Voted for..... whatever.

There was a similar Bridges problem in UK about 10 years ago - although it did not surface in such a dramatic way, thank god, it was there. Turned out it was "Concrete Cancer", the more rapid deterioration of the concrete used in many bridges, than anticipated. They have sorted out most of the priority bridges now, but 10 years on they are still beavering away catching up on the lower priorities. Ok, they found the immediate solution, but why did it get to that stage, why didn’t we pick it up earlier and do something - not just bridges, other major disasters as well. Pointless continually "Fire Brigading" putting out Fires - find out the causes of the fires and put that out as well, ultimately we end up with less Fires.

Short discussion here:

Systemic Failure

Not popular with those who may want to continually run with their favorite bandwagon, and not a total solution in itself - but its not far off the latter.

Reply By: danielost Posted: Friday, August 03, 2007
It was Bush that added $ 4 Trillion to our debt including a Trillion dollars that was wasted of his war!


"and this has what to do with a bridge that was known to be substandard for 17 years how "


IT has to do with wasting taxpayer money that is needed for things like repairing the infrastructure in our country. The waste is the $200 Billion in added interest Bush has added to the spending. If he had kept the budget like it was when he took over from Clinton, we would owe $4 Trillion less and have $200 Billion every year to do things like repair bridges, dame, Electrical Grid etc. In five years the interest Bush added will total a TRILLION dollars and guess what – IT DOES NOTHING FOR OUR NEEDS!!!

Keep defending the policies of Bush. You show how ignorant you are every time you post such dribble.

The FACTS are, many Americans CAN and DO live on $30,000 or less. A single person can live in virtually ANY community in this country on that wage. It is YOU who are out of touch, Col!

Well not in many sections of the country. A single person can EXIST in a one room hobble. More then one person without welfare can not live in $30,000 and as I said many of those jobs you talk about pay in the low to mid $20"s. The Average was only $34,000.

At the same time we pay tax dollars as Farm Subsidies to people with annual incomes of over $2 Million Dollars. How can you justify that?

Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Friday, August 03, 2007
ColClueless obviously never had Thoreau on his HS reading list!


And just what does that have to do with cost of living in places like Philadelphia, New York, Boston, and Chicago in 2007? When you have no rational answer you introduce irrelevant BS!

the economy that bush got from Clinton was in recession. the budget was hiding that fact until the end of that December. so no the budget wouldn't have been like it was when Clinton left office if bush had left everything the same.

i had this discussion with one of my passenger in January. she and her friend were anti bush too. she was blaming bush for the recession at that time. there was only one problem bush wasn't going to be in office for five more days. her friend had to finally agree with me that bush had nothing to do with that recession.

Reply By: Gideon MacLeish Posted: Friday, August 03, 2007
BTW, Col...to repeat LW's oft repeated challenge:

If families can't live on $30,000 a year, SHOW ME THE BODIES! SHOW ME THE MILLIONS DEAD BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T EARNING A LIVING WAGE! You can't because it's untrue and you KNOW it!

How can a family live on $30K when housing (rent and utilities) run about $1,200 per month (Suburban Phila. Area) ? Where is the $500-600 per month for health insurance? I guess if you do not eat or if you children are paid for by someone else.

The issue is not what is the cost of living but the fact we are ignoring the rebuilding of our countries infrastructure.

The Editorial Cartoon in the Philadelphia Inquirer today is a perfect description of what is wrong with Bush and his policies.

It shows Bush at the edge of the collapsed bridge. On the ground is rubble labeled Roads, Bridges, Health Care, Schools. Bush says, “Don’t Worry... The Funding For IRAQ And The Tax Cuts For The Rich Are Doing Just Fine!"

I don't. But then, you seem to ignore that fact.







It's not irrelevant, Col. I've LIVED in places like Chicago! On low wages, no less. Apparently roommates, thrift stores, and public transportation don't exist in your little world!



See, you say you aren't arguing socialism, yet this proves that is EXACTLY what you are arguing. You want the federal government to set the wages so that workers make enough to satisfy what YOU deem an appropriate standard of living. That's socialism, no matter how you want to spin it!



So, mr. King or irrelevance, since you hold your responders to a higher standard than yourself, I'll play your little game.



NYC: I found a 2 bedroom sublet in Brighton Beach for $1000/mo. The very people who make minimum wage, the young and unskilled, could easily double up and pay $500/mo per person. This is easily doable even on minimum wage, when you're holding down two jobs. I found several studios in a variety of ranges in the $850-1000 range...not doable on minimum wage, grant you, but 1. I highly doubt anyone in NYC is MAKING $5.85/hr; 2. Well under the threshhold of affordability for a $30,000/yr job (which you list as impossible). According to a wage calculator at (

WWW Link), a single person with no dependents will take home $2,070.83 per month with a $30,000 salary. This means that rent eats up 45-50% of their salary, which, granted means they aren't buying Beef Wellington for dinner, but hardly leaves them destitute.



New York's minimum wage is $7.15/hour. I could look up job listings for New York, but it's fairly obvious that, while they won't be living a caviar lifestyle, one on minimum wage COULD eke out a living in NYC.



Boston: Again, several studios for $875-1200. A little higher, but easily doable within the $30,000 window. I found 2 bedrooms starting at $1200 ($600 apiece for two roommates). Massachusetts's minimum is $7.50/hour, but hold on to your hats, boys and girls! Postpone that move to January and you get a 50 cent raise!



Philadelphia: The following excerpt is from rent.com:



All the good living and job opportunities to be found in Philadelphia come at a price, though; the overall cost of living in Philadelphia is 27% above the national average, and apartments for rent are no exception. In fact, Philadelphia has the most expensive apartments in Pennsylvania, with median rents at $650 per month. In "Center City," located in Philadelphia's downtown, one-bedroom apartments go for $650-$850 per month, while two-bedroom apartment rentals go for $1,000 and up. Rents tend to be slightly less expensive for apartments in other, less popular areas of the city



so, again, two bedrooms can be found for about a grand. I'm seeing a trend here.



Minimum wage in PA is $6.25/hr



Chicago: I found apartments in Wrigleyville starting at $675 for studios. Same pattern, same story as all of the above.



Minimum wage in Illinois: $7.50/hr



One of us ISN'T talking out of our arse here. Can YOU guess which one?

Bush is the greatest supervillain who ever lived. He's omnipresent, omniscient, and omnipotent...why, YOU'VE made a God out of Bush, NOT the conservatives, Col!

“Boston: Again, several studios for $875-1200. A little higher, but easily doable within the $30,000 window.”

You are not to keen with numbers. At $1,200 per month plus $250 for utilities, $17,400 of the $30K is spent JUST on housing. YOU live in a DREAM world. Yes I know about public Transportation and it is very expensive. Where is the money for health, car, and other insurance? Where is the money for food? Where is money for transportation and clothing?

your rich you want the rich to pay so pay.



of course it will only be a living wage until prices go up, gene.

Reply By: danielost Posted: Saturday, August 04, 2007
You are not to keen with numbers. At $1,200 per month plus $250 for utilities, $17,400 of the $30K is spent JUST on housing. YOU live in a DREAM world. Yes I know about public Transportation and it is very expensive. Where is the money for health, car, and other insurance? Where is the money for food? Where is money for transportation and clothing?


"your rich you want the rich to pay so pay."

You are not to bright. The Rich I am talking about have incomes several times my income. I am NOT in the top 10%. Returning to the pre 2000 tax rates means a top bracket of 39% and a few % more on Dividends and Capital gains. That will not harm the rich but will prov ide badely needed revenue to help balance the budget.

However this Blog is about are refusal to deal with the crumbling infastructure in this country. Ignoring it will not solve the problem.

Right, Col. Again, I'm dead because I can't live on my salary. Can you PLEASE let the Social Security Administration know this so my family can begin collecting survivor's benefits? I find it compelling you used the HIGHEST of the two numbers to make your estimates, Col. When you are on a budget, you look for the LOWER priced apartments. And I also must note that in EVERY real estate market where I've lived, I have been able to find apartments for LESS than the prices quoted in rental guides. I was just using this for a guideline.

So, CORRECTING your figures, at $875 per month plus $250 per utilities (I won't dispute the utility figures, although those, as you must know, are highly variable as well), $13,500 of your $30k is spent on housing.

I'v e made out sample budgets before to show it can be done, col. I'm not doing it again. If so many Americans cannot live on the salaries that these same Americans are making, SHOW ME THE BODIES! Until you produce the bodies, col, your arguments have no merit whatsoever!

YOUR NUMBERS are not in agreement with the costs where I live in PA or in Florida. DREAM ON-- You may be able to live at you’re location but in many areas a family CAN NOT EXIST on 25-30K and that is what many of the great new jobs Bush brags about are paying.

THIS BLOG IS ABOUT our INFASTRUCTURE!!!!!!

This is flat out, blatant BS, Col. Families DO live on those wages. If they don't, SHOW ME THE F---IN G BODIES!

You are alleging that families are dying en masse in these locations, COL. SHOW ME WHERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(before you say you're not alleging they are dying, "can not exist" = "dying"!)

As for this blog, my comments are relevant because they point out a repeated pattern of pathological lying on your part, Col. You are a liar and the reason your books don't sell is because even the most FAR LEFT liberal doesn't want to be associated with your half truths, PT Barnum sensationalism, and outright lies!

Anyone can write a book, Col.