Senator Obama on Fox News Sunday (April 27 2008)

[kaydee457 13]

Um...get an education and earn 6 figures? Pray tell where I, a public school teacher with a Master's Degree, can get one of those jobs!

Sure, I could switch occupations and earn more money, but I believe strongly in what I do. Not that I would mind getting compensated more for it!

Well, get an education whereby you have a skill-set that's valued and in demand. Unfortunately it's not about "Masters Degrees" but having skills that are in demand.

If you have a Masters in Business, and there's a glut of people with similar skills, then likely you're not going to make a lot of money......

This isn't something that's new. It's been this way for the past 40 years that I've been in the workforce.....

I'll tell you another Professional discipline that's saturated and that’s people with degrees in Law.

We have some here working as essentially clerks for they have no skills germane to our business.

Common misconception is that a Law Degree is a ticket to prosperity. Not so!

So, I'll modify my statement to say that you should pursue an education that'll give you a skill set that's in demand.

You might think that because you have a Masters Degree that you can simply "switch occupations and earn more money' this isn't alway's true. If you have no viable skills in the occupation you seek then frankly, you're not going to get the job, or minimally you'll be given an entry level position.

These are hard fact of life that most professionals have difficulty absorbing.......

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Teachers are not in demand?

I don't know about that - but they do however get paid a pittance which is frankly criminal.

I'm not sure I'd have the gall to suggest that a person in a low paying occupation does not work hard or that their low pay implies that are some sort of failure - it isn't really that simple. There are plenty of industries that require highly qualified people - but which are traditionally low paying. Teaching is one, publishing is another. As is journalism.

Edited April 28, 2008 by Number 6

[SnowyTater 0]

Yeh basically all career pursuits I'm interested in

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

The senior editors at my company probably aren't making much more than $50K in base salary.

Of course there's no shortage of freelance work...

[GaryC 7]

Teachers are not in demand?

I don't know about that - but they do however get paid a pittance which is frankly criminal.

I'm not sure I'd have the gall to suggest that a person in a low paying occupation does not work hard or that their low pay implies that are some sort of failure - it isn't really that simple. There are plenty of industries that require highly qualified people - but which are traditionally low paying. Teaching is one, publishing is another. As is journalism.

Then I guess it comes down to personal choices then doesn't it? If you want to be a teacher and you see that teachers don't make much then you are making a choice to do something you like rather than something that makes a lot of money. The same goes with any other profession. 35 years ago I made a choice, I love electronics, and I started down that path knowing (at that time anyway) that I would always be a "TV repairman". But it was something I enjoyed so I did it. Then came the boom in electronics and I was positioned for better and better paying jobs. Finally, after 35 years of busting my azz and sacrifice I am now at that magical $70K point. So what happens? Obama tells me I am "rich" and I should be paying more taxes to help those that make less than I do? How is that fair? Most of my life I have lived far below the median income and had to struggle just to get by. Now at the latter part of my working life, when I can finally start enjoying the fruits of a lifetime of work some idiot that thinks I am rich wants to take it away from me. I have never drawn from the government hand-out well in my life. I worked a very long time to get where I am at and I have overcome more hardships than most. To hear someone that was handed his education like Obama tell me that I am not paying my fair share really burns me. Obama can kiss my azz.

[kaydee457 13]

Teachers are not in demand?

I don't know about that - but they do however get paid a pittance which is frankly criminal.

I'm not sure I'd have the gall to suggest that a person in a low paying occupation does not work hard or that their low pay implies that are some sort of failure - it isn't really that simple. There are plenty of industries that require highly qualified people - but which are traditionally low paying. Teaching is one, publishing is another. As is journalism.

Firstly, I’m going to preface this with the fact as you travel through years in the workforce you should make more money, especially those that are degreed. So if you make less than 100k a year and you’re 35 then, come’n dudes.dudess’. you shouldn’t be at that level anyway at your age unless you’re an extrodinary “star”.

If you’re 58 YO as I am and you are degreed and you don’t make more than 100k then, well, I don’t know what to say…………

Now, if you want to be indignant about what's been fact for as long as I've been in the workforce.....It's no secret that a person that pursues a career in teaching, humanities, history, basket weaving, etc, or any other degree that is non-technical in nature, that, er, frankly equates to no real tangible technical skill, has limited job potential. If you’re a person that is one that wishes to pursue these careers out of love or duty, then you accept the fact that you’ll never get rich from these occupations. If not then you’re probaly delusional or you have a good case to sue your HS counselor!

As we all know, but some will indignantly deny, traditionally pursuing these educational skills are considered (by most) relatively unremarkable and, are, ….umm, sort of easy to achieve, and subsequently many people have these "skills" listed on their resumes when entering the job market.

What I say is statistically true although I'm not going to bother citing a source. It's intuitively obvious and just a fact of life. It's a lot easier to get a degree in English Lit than Medicine, or Engineering......The degree of difficulty is profound between these examples.

The dems purport to make all of us the same regardless of skill and wish to dictate parity with workers having skills up and above those mentioned previously, and they do this via union activism, amongst other methods.

That's the democratic strategy and has been so for the past half century.

And yes, those that make <100k/year (depending on age, and where you live!) are probably deadbeats......

What the democrats attempt to do is have the factory worker in Toledo achieve parity with the engineer in Chicago.

It's Marxism and that's what the democratic party is all about in this century........

[SnowyTater 0]

....

[dalegg 143]

And yes, those that make <100k/year (depending on age, and where you live!) are probably deadbeats......

100K/year is the benchmark for deadbeat?!

[Dan J 277]

And yes, those that make <100k/year (depending on age, and where you live!) are probably deadbeats......

100K/year is the benchmark for deadbeat?!

I guess that makes 80-85% of the US deadbeats.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

In either case, Obama or Clinton it'll be deja vu....

Deja vu of the 90's where most Americans shared in the prosperity and productivity gains? Where the median income rose 11% rather than decreased 1% as it did under Bush? Cool. Sign me up for that deja vu. We all need it.

It's never a fair comparison to juxtapose the 90"s to the 00's....There was no war in the 90's (not that we weren't attacked time and again) and Clinton nearly ran the U.S. Military into the ground by under funding the U.S. Military under the guise of what he repeatedly said was "the Peace Dividend".

Keep in mind that the war that costs this country is the war that Bush chose to wage. The war that drains the military's blood and the treasury's coffers is one that he waged against a country that hasn't attacked us nor was going to attack us. While there will always be fanatics out there wishing and inflicting harm on others, make no mistake that we're at a costly war in the 00's solely because the fool at 1600 Penn Ave made it so.

Edited April 28, 2008 by Mr. Big Dog

[GaryC 7]

In either case, Obama or Clinton it'll be deja vu....

Deja vu of the 90's where most Americans shared in the prosperity and productivity gains? Where the median income rose 11% rather than decreased 1% as it did under Bush? Cool. Sign me up for that deja vu. We all need it.

It's never a fair comparison to juxtapose the 90"s to the 00's....There was no war in the 90's (not that we weren't attacked time and again) and Clinton nearly ran the U.S. Military into the ground by under funding the U.S. Military under the guise of what he repeatedly said was "the Peace Dividend".

Keep in mind that the war that costs this country is the war that Bush chose to wage. The war that drains the military's blood and the treasury's coffers is one that he waged against a country that hasn't attacked us nor was going to attack us. While there will always be fanatics out there wishing and inflicting harm on others, make no mistake that we're at a costly war in the 00's solely because the fool at 1600 Penn Ave made it so.

Your forgetting huge chunks of history there dog. Ok, if you want to say Iraq is a war we didn't need and was a choice then you may have your argument. I don't agree but I can at least see your side. But what happened on 9/11 and the resulting war in Afghanistan was a choice? Surely you jest. That had a huge impact on our economy that you just cannot ignore.

[kaydee457 13]

And yes, those that make <100k/year (depending on age, and where you live!) are probably deadbeats......

100K/year is the benchmark for deadbeat?!

A degreed person that's at the end of their career...as I said if you're 60-ish and you don't make 100k then you're definetly doing something wrong!

[GaryC 7]

And yes, those that make <100k/year (depending on age, and where you live!) are probably deadbeats......

100K/year is the benchmark for deadbeat?!

A degreed person that's at the end of their career...as I said if you're 60-ish and you don't make 100k then you're definetly doing something wrong!

I would go that far Kaydee. I am at the "end of my career" and I feel quite happy with my 70K income. It supports my family and I quite well and I am proud of myself for getting as far as I have.

[kaydee457 13]

And yes, those that make <100k/year (depending on age, and where you live!) are probably deadbeats......

100K/year is the benchmark for deadbeat?!

I guess that makes 80-85% of the US deadbeats.

You're cherry picking.......There are very few 30 YO's that are going to make six figures, although I do have a nephew and niece that live in NYC that do, but it's mostly a rarity. How much you make comes down to how old you are, your education level, skills, and also where you live......

Plenty of people in their 40's to 50's have a household of income of >100k........they're certainly far from "rich"....The democrats keep lowering the income level that they consider "rich".

[PlatyPius 5]

And yes, those that make <100k/year (depending on age, and where you live!) are probably deadbeats......

100K/year is the benchmark for deadbeat?!

A degreed person that's at the end of their career...as I said if you're 60-ish and you don't make 100k then you're definetly doing something wrong!

Well.....that's about the most ignorant thing I've ever seen written on VJ.

Many people never had the opportunity to go to college. Many people work jobs that they like, and they aren't high-paying ones. Many people do jobs that benefit everyone, but don't pay much. Many people live in areas where 100K just isn't possible no matter long you've worked at a job and advanced 'up the ladder'. The LAST thing I would call most of these people is "deadbeat".

Is the farmer who works 12 hours a day and makes maybe $30,000/year a deadbeat?

What about the 80 year old guy who has worked for one employer his entire life and makes $35K/year?

What about the guy who is working a job he likes, even though it pays less money?

What about the single mom working 2 jobs and bringing home $30K/year? Is she a deadbeat?

What about the age thing? Do you honestly believe that all jobs have a tidy little progression where you work, you stay there, you try hard, you get promotions, you make 100K/year? This isn't 1950 any longer, you know.... there is no such thing as job security these days. No more pensions, no more profit-sharing, no more dedication to employee or employer....If you can stay at an employer for more than 5 years, you're lucky.

Of all of the ridiculous, moronic, ill-informed, prejudicial, offensive things I've seen you post over the years; this one beats all.