Print

[lilly]

I never said that and you know it. 

Why do you continue to attack me, dude?  You realize I'm not going to let you get away with it, don't you? 

Hell, you attacked me when you were responding to someone ELSE!  Get a f**king life, will ya? 

Troll!!!  TOS violator!!!   

I'm not afraid to admit when I don't know something, and this is no different.  At one time, if I remember correctly, you could work for 90 days, and be eligible for unemployment for a certain period of time - NOT TWO YEARS!  As I said, I didn't know because I never had a claim, and I've never tried to get unemployment benefits.  Sounds like you have a lot of experience in that area, so from now on, I will defer to your expertise when it comes to not working.

Typical liberal.  You have to deliberately lie, defame and put down other people that don't agree with you, so you can try to convince people that you're right.


THIS is what I said originally:

Any self respecting business person should know what the unemployment laws are. Typical conservative attacking liberals for their own lack of knowledge.

It takes all of two seconds to find out the real deal, but I guess you are too damn lazy to do it yourself or you would rather perpetuate lies rather than find out what the truth is. Conservatives do that all the time too.

I brought up you because your conservative thinking falls directly in line with what I was talking about, and giving yet another example of you conservatives reporting things as "fact" when you don't have any.

Yes, I do know about unemployment laws and a whole bunch of other things than what you do, because I know how to educate myself and how to look things up.

You should try it.

[ducksoup]

I never said that and you know it. 

Why do you continue to attack me, dude?  You realize I'm not going to let you get away with it, don't you? 

Hell, you attacked me when you were responding to someone ELSE!  Get a f**king life, will ya? 

Troll!!!  TOS violator!!!   

I'm not afraid to admit when I don't know something, and this is no different.  At one time, if I remember correctly, you could work for 90 days, and be eligible for unemployment for a certain period of time - NOT TWO YEARS!  As I said, I didn't know because I never had a claim, and I've never tried to get unemployment benefits.  Sounds like you have a lot of experience in that area, so from now on, I will defer to your expertise when it comes to not working.

Typical liberal.  You have to deliberately lie, defame and put down other people that don't agree with you, so you can try to convince people that you're right.


THIS is what I said originally:

It took me some time, apparently because I am not an extremist conservative, to sort that out.  It was difficult seeing past the hatred, violent speech and bullying to what the actual message was.

It seems that a sentence with two parts, one part true (90 days as you showed you did say), and one part possibly not was made.  So, it seems that all of the going off like a nuke was because you feel you did not say 2 years.  Okay.  You did not say two years in that comment.  Perhaps next time some moderation is in order however.  It seems to this person to be overly dramatized for what it was.

However, the good side that I got is the agreement that the right focuses on just cuts to the poor and middle class is an agreement from you, since you didn’t comment on that and just the part you claim a lie.  It is also heartening that you do also agree that the military is far too bloated and must be reduced.  We are making progress toward something being done.

[lilly]

The two years comment was thrown in because within the last few years you were allowed up to 99 weeks of unemployment (5 weeks less than 2 years). That information too is readily available for those not too lazy to look it up.

[Monroe Native]

Lilly,

Nice rant about military spending.

It had nothing to do with answering my question, but nice rant.

Now would you care to tell me why Detroit is far worse off socially and economically now then when Lyndon Johnson launched his great society?

[ducksoup]

Lilly,

Nice rant about military spending.

It had nothing to do with answering my question, but nice rant.

Now would you care to tell me why Detroit is far worse off socially and economically now then when Lyndon Johnson launched his great society?

I find questions such as that to be very complex with multiple variables that make it very difficult to sort.

However, since you do claim it as the one and only reason I am interested in your supporting information.

What are the pendant on disability numbers for Detroit?

What are the monetary welfare from Michigan numbers for Detroit citizens?

How many in Detroit are Retired and on SS. 

how many work part time jobs in Detroit?

How many are collecting unemployment in Detroit?

How many have full time jobs in Detroit.

What is the median or average wage in Detroit?

For anyone to begin to understand such a position one must know the statistical figures.

[lilly]

Lilly,

Nice rant about military spending.

It had nothing to do with answering my question, but nice rant.

Now would you care to tell me why Detroit is far worse off socially and economically now then when Lyndon Johnson launched his great society?

I guess I will first have to ask, what does social security have to do with what is going on with Detroit?

If you are talking about the welfare system, it's a totally different argument. Perhaps you are confused between welfare and social security? Can't help you much there. Maybe you should do some research and try and figure that out.

Social security was designed to hep out those who are too old or otherwise unable to work. For the most part it has done what it was intended to do. But now people like yourself and Livewire (yes I mentioned you again because you stated that already in this thread, get over it). want to do away with it. You state we are spending too much money on these entitlement programs. You state that without them, people would plan better for their future so they wouldn't be so reliant on the government.

How many people are currently living from paycheck to paycheck? How do you expect them to plan to pay for their retirement for 30 years from now , when they are currently trying to figure out how to keep the electricity on and a roof over their heads?

I don't think you have ever had it rough, I mean really rough, in your whole life, and you have no idea of what a majority of people are going through. People are not as well off as you imagine them to be.

You got people on here crying about 2% of their check being gone. Not because they were using that money for investing, but because now they will have to tighten their belts even further.

I think you should go see an eye doctor, because you are having a distorted view of reality.

[Will Sweat]

Duck;

I think this "topic" has pretty much went off the rails but I like statistics and would offer this to your questions.

City of Detroit (2010 Census) information:

19.1% of City residents earn less than 10K
24.4% of City residents earn between 10 - 25k
18.9% of City residents earn between 25 - 40K
16.9% of City residents earn between 40 - 60K

Median Income in Detroit is 28,357.00 (MI total 46,144)

26.7% of City residents receive SSI
10.8% of City residents receive supplemental ssi (sometimes called SSDI).
11.4% of City residents receive public assistance
18.1% of City residents receive retirement income

69.9% of City residents have completed HS
39.6% of City residents have completed some college
16.1% of City residents have obtained a associates degree
11.0% of City residents have obtained a bachelors degree
4.2% of City residents have obtained a masters degree

Unemployment rate is 9.7% (final 2012) (MI total 9.3%)
17.9% of working age males are not in the workforce
21.6% of working age females are not in the workforce

Poverty Level is 26.1% (Michigan Total 10.1%)

Detroit is a complex issue of not just politics but must include education, employment (movement of manufacturing out of Detroit), transportation (19.4% of households have no vehicle), access to health care (and mental health services). 

Crime is also a topic that must be discussed regarding the City of Detroit and compared to the state of Michigan or national crime index, Detroit is above the state and national average in all crime index categories. 

Can't really answer the "part time" job with a good answer. 

Anyhow - back to the idea of the fiscal cliff . . . I think everything has to be considered for a cut.  Yes, this will be painful in the short term but it is something that will need to be done. 

Here is a couple of interesting sites for demographics if you are interested:

http://www.areavibes.com/detroit-mi/employment/

http://www.clrsearch.com/Detroit-Demographics/MI/

http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/26/2622000.html

http://doi.wayne.edu/pdf/kurt_metzger_-_demographic_presentationoct_2007.pdf

[Monroe Native]

I think you should go see an eye doctor, because you are having a distorted view of reality.

Who said ANYTHING about Social Security?

I asked:

Now would you care to tell me why Detroit is far worse off socially and economically now then when Lyndon Johnson launched his great society?

Would you care to answer the question?  Will addressed many of the statistics feeding the issue.  You on the other hand continue to evade and insult.

[ducksoup]

Who said ANYTHING about Social Security?

I asked:

Would you care to answer the question?  Will addressed many of the statistics feeding the issue.  You on the other hand continue to evade and insult.

The topic HAS been about ss for several pages.

To explore, for me anyway, one must also include the population in general and why we as a society are less well off than in 68.

I saw nothing in Wills helpful post that would lead one to conclude that any of those factors are the sole cause.  Why do you feel that they are?

[Monroe Native]

The topic HAS been about ss for several pages.

To explore, for me anyway, one must also include the population in general and why we as a society are less well off than in 68.

I saw nothing in Wills helpful post that would lead one to conclude that any of those factors are the sole cause.  Why do you feel that they are?

If you care to open up the question as to why the population in general are less well off then 68 go for it.

I thought Detroit was a more containable problem statement, but if you want to expand on that I wouldn't object.

I never said any of Wills helpful post lead to any conclusions.  I don't feel they did lead to any conclusions.  I do say they show a trend, but I didn't declare there was a conclusion.

[ducksoup]

If you care to open up the question as to why the population in general are less well off then 68 go for it.

I thought Detroit was a more containable problem statement, but if you want to expand on that I wouldn't object.

I never said any of Wills helpful post lead to any conclusions.  I don't feel they did lead to any conclusions.  I do say they show a trend, but I didn't declare there was a conclusion.

It is my estimation that most have suffered declines since Johnson’s time.  Generally in any economic decline there is a downward pressure that disadvantages the poorer amongst us most.  It would seem that the decline in total is prevalent to an isolated area.

Why did you not choose Monroe as your case study as we all are more familiar with it?  The city has declined in wages etc as well.  Just as the general population of the country.   I suspect one could examine Oakland county, the richest county in the country and document economic declines.  The changes in such a place would obviously be far different in origin than in Detroit though.

I cannot see the trend you mention as it does not follow through years.  I notice that the median income is far lower than other parts of Mi.  I notice also that lower pay is more prevalent.  He did not give the SS or SSDI for the rest of Mi. to compare with.

It seems clear that you do see a correlation and I would like to hear what the support of it is.

[Monroe Native]

It is my estimation that most have suffered declines since Johnson’s time.  Generally in any economic decline there is a downward pressure that disadvantages the poorer amongst us most.  It would seem that the decline in total is prevalent to an isolated area.

Why did you not choose Monroe as your case study as we all are more familiar with it?  The city has declined in wages etc as well.  Just as the general population of the country.   I suspect one could examine Oakland county, the richest county in the country and document economic declines.  The changes in such a place would obviously be far different in origin than in Detroit though.

I cannot see the trend you mention as it does not follow through years.  I notice that the median income is far lower than other parts of Mi.  I notice also that lower pay is more prevalent.  He did not give the SS or SSDI for the rest of Mi. to compare with.

It seems clear that you do see a correlation and I would like to hear what the support of it is.

I think the declining incomes have been a factor in Michigan for the past 10 years or so, but the decline of our inner cities started while the income of the populace was still trending upwards.

I personally see the declining incomes as a different root cause then the decline of our city core areas.

[ducksoup]

I think the declining incomes have been a factor in Michigan for the past 10 years or so, but the decline of our inner cities started while the income of the populace was still trending upwards.

I personally see the declining incomes as a different root cause then the decline of our city core areas.

True, but the exodus of the middle class from Detroit over that time had more to do with the decline that was left than increasing dependence on government.

[lilly]

Who said ANYTHING about Social Security?

I asked:

Would you care to answer the question?  Will addressed many of the statistics feeding the issue.  You on the other hand continue to evade and insult.

make your own topic then

[Monroe Native]

True, but the exodus of the middle class from Detroit over that time had more to do with the decline that was left than increasing dependence on government.

I find it difficult to refute the first part of that statement.

I do think the flight that took place is a big factor of the fall of Detroit.

Once you removed the thriving middle class from the City there was a vacuum left.

What tried to fill that vacuum?  To me you lost role models and replaced it with several broken homes and government programs.  I know that is too general a statement.  I know there are strong families still in Detroit.  I know there are many volunteer organizations that do great work too. 

I think it is fair to say that Detroit went from being a prosperity center for the state to being a fiscal black hole.