The history of immigration in this country is as good as any for yeilding keys to societal advancement. The catalyst is education and the desire to better the lives of their children. However, at some point around the 3rd or 4th generation in the US, that intial drive and value system gets diluted or lost by increased wealth and comfort.

No offense taken.:D

Quite true what you've said. It's not just about equal opportunity, but being willing to get off your keister and take advantage of that opportunity.

My old elementary school principal said many years ago that if he were in charge of HS curriculums, some form of basic economics would be manadatory for all students - not national or world-level economic theory - but the basics they'd need to know to run their own households and plan for the future - how to balance a checkbook, setting aside money for monthly bills, calculating interest payments and total payoffs on home mortgages, understanding retirement and 401K plans and compound interest, etc, etc.

I grew up listening to my grandparent's, parents, aunts and uncles, tell tales of what they had to go thru to survive the Great Depression. And my parents and I had to go thru the malaise and hardships of the economic downturns of the 70's and early 80's. My first two or three years in the Navy as a junior enlisted, when I was getting paid the princely sum of $250 every two weeks.

That taught me some hard economic lessons. I realized that the only certain way I was going to have anything better was to put in the effort and earn it, to plan for where I wanted to be in the future.

Part of the reason many of the younger generations never learned these lessons might be the prolonged boom economy of the 90's - at the time touted as the "new economy" and that recessions and depressions were a thing of the past - only to realize in hindsight that it was fed by many of the same mistakes and shenanigans that led to the Depression of the 30's, along with a few new twists such as "debt derivatives" - such that they bought the bull and came to believe that a good job and a comfortable lifestyle was their birthright, not something that had to be earned.

I would hesitate to use "lazy" or "lack of work ethic." While maybe technically true, many of these kids and young adults are just products of their environment presented to them by their parents, grandparents, neighborhoods, etc. They may not know any other way. It's easy to finger point at the kids or the schools. But if a parent discourages accomplishment, either directly or just by example, how can we ever expect those kids to break the cycle and succeed (how ever you want to measure that) on their own?

I have had some success changing the father's view I mentioned in my example, probably since I see him every day and his kids are about the same age as my oldest two. We talk about our kids, how school is going, etc. It has taken several years before he stopped perceiving educational achievement as a negative and started talking about their successes with me. I don't know if that is the same with parents of other school kids, their family, friends outside of work.

Many of these kids and their parents have no contact outside of their usual environment which may not be entirely positive. Mentoring programs can be and are often successful, when there is someone who sees the value in getting those kids a positive influence. How do those kids who don't have a positive influence get the message that they can do better?

That's a nice chart, but it only covers the last 30+ years. I suspected that if you actually go back 40 or 50 years, the effective rate on top income earners would be double what it is now, and I was right:

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=106

Granted the site is biased, but I suspect neutral sources would show similar figures. Hence, its little wonder that the top 2% want to hold on to their ultra low tax rates, despite the country's budgetary pressure on necessary SS and medical. There is a historical precedent for higher effective rates.

There are many indicators that the socioeconomic fabric and average living standard started to decline in this country during the 1970s. Coincidence?

Say we raise taxes on the Top 2% to 60-70-80% of their income. Then what do we do when that revenue barely makes a dent? We move down to the Top 3%, same result. At the Top 5% you're already into non-"millionaire" territory and there still isn't enough revenue to keep up with expenditures. So it becomes Top 10% and you're into middle class territory. And so on.

Sure the Top 2% has a lot of power. But the support for holding taxes comes from a lot further back in that pecking order. It's not that there's support for the "super rich" for those opposed to increasing taxes, it's that they know they're next in line when there's still not enough revenue coming in since every expenditure, including defense, has become an entitlement and there's no will to cut them.

From the Wall Street Journal (I know, I know. If you've got a different source that claims otherwise, I would love to see them.):

Man...does that EVER explain perfectly most welfare bums I have ever known.

And show graphicly the complete inability for some people to comprehend things beyond what THEY feel entitled to for free.

Keep in mind that they are allowed to vote:eek:.

I could not agree more.

Back when I use to teach I would tell my students, 20 year-olds, "I'm sorry for the terrible damage that my generation has done to this nation. I realize you have been brain-washed and are ill-prepared for your future."

Some of us aging-boomers are trying to undo that damage.

And even worse....breed.

Yes I agree, He should become the Anti-Koch's and start the new foundation for progressive change.

Don't worry about referencing WSJ. That data is all over the place. If all of the income of the top 1% or 2% was taken it still would not put a dent into the problem.

There is a problem with taxing high-wage earners that is never stated. These people, in general, are smart problem-solvers. You give them dis-incentives and they will withdraw.

This is the essential segment of society that supplies the vision and structure for everyone else. Disincentives these people and you gut the core of your nation.

This is where I'm at. Up till Jan 2011 I always had a six figure job with all the stress and bs that goes along with it. I finally got tired of all the expenses associated with staying on that rat race treadmill and decide to stay off of it when I was laid off in Jan. I did take unemployment for three months while getting my feet on the ground. Thankfully, I owe just the basics in regards to my living expenses. It is quite easy to live cheap where I live:). The wife continues to work as a nurse and will retire from that (after 27 years) in a couple years after the step daughters finish up with college.

Life has never been better than it is right now:).

Yes, the gov is drowning in red ink, and we have already proven that the country runs just fine even if it shuts down for a few days (such as during the snow storms). I hope a balanced budget amendment becomes reality - then the hard choices will have to be made on both sides of the balance sheet.

Yup.