6 ms·
Almost 90M American Adults Struggle to Make Ends Meet, Census Says
- 0zemp2c 3y ago[flagged]
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoAren’t your teachers paid locally? You might just live in a really bad state/or county, but the people vote for the local officials that align with their spending priorities.
- 0zemp2c 3y agoThe Dept Of Education could trivially distribute $100 bln to supplement teacher comp... No matter where you live in the US, your teachers are underpaid, no one has brag points If you need more examples of how the Federal government could distribute $100 bln to elevate parts of the US above third world standards, use your imagination
- quickthrowman 3y agoTrivially? Their entire budget was $174B in FY 2023 [0], it’s not trivial to get a split Congress to increase education funding by 57%. The executive branch can’t just unilaterally decide where to spend money, they spend money that Congress allocates. [0] https://www.usaspending.gov/agency/department-of-education?fy=2023 https://www.usaspending.gov/agency/department-of-education?f... I am not arguing against increasing teacher compensation, I’m just explaining why it isn’t trivial to address it.
- woooooo 3y agoIf we had our priorities in order it would be trivial. One fewer carrier group would probably cover it with no loss to national security. Also worth noting that an extra 100B of deficit is no big deal as long as it only buys unproductive weapons.
- o1y32 3y agoI am just seeing a bunch of talking in this HN thread, which is honestly a waste of time. Anyone who actually wants to see some change, please call your local politicians to increase the budget on schools instead of posting useless comments here.
- woooooo 3y agoVouched to reply, I have tried local politics, the local politicians don't have the money. It's all in Washington.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- jandrewrogers 3y agoIn what way are teachers underpaid? They make the average wage for someone with a college degree in the US. That aside, per the OECD the US already spends far more per student than the rest of the developed world — how is spending even more going to improve anything?
- seanmcdirmid 3y agoThe department of education has minimal resources and control of public education in the states. Education is mostly paid for via property taxes, and to federalize education funding would entail sending those taxes to Washington DC to redistribute to schools. Conservatives would hardly be happy with that. The Washington state Supreme Court in 2013 decided that education funding in the state should be more equitable, so now Seattle sends part of their property taxes to poorer districts in eastern Washington, who otherwise would have cheaped out on education because conservatives don’t believe in higher taxes to fund it (but have no problem receiving subsidies from richer liberal areas). Teachers in the Seattle area also aren’t really underpaid. Not making FAANG salaries, but most clear $80k.
- garciasn 3y agoThere are ~4MM teachers in the US. 117B / 4MM is around $30K. Will +$1,500 ($125) over 20 years help them make ends meet? How about $3,000 ($250/month) over a decade? Maybe it will! But, maybe just maybe, you should be complaining to your local officials and fellow constituents who continue to shirk tax increases and levy approvals instead of HN.
- Ancalagon 3y agoWhat are you even saying? $30k per teacher per year would be life-changing for teachers who currently need food banks and buy supplies for their classrooms.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> $30k per teacher per year The Ukraine aid isn't “per year” (and its largely loans that have to be repaid) and it largely isn’t current expenditures but transfers of very much nonfungible equipment from US inventories, so splitting the total amount among current teachers doesn’t result in a per year figure for sure, and it doesn't really produce any meaningful figure. I mean, if you really wanted to split what Ukraine is getting among US teachers instead, it would be each teacher getting something like a 1/100 share of a used HIMARS launcher and $30k of debt.
- mindslight 3y ago> it would be each teacher getting something like a 1/100 share of a used HIMARS launcher and $30k of debt That would be remarkably on brand.
- arp242 3y agoThe previous calculation wasn't $30k/year, but $30k over 20 years, or $1.5k/year. That's a lot less significant. The point they were trying to make is that these are structural issues that are not going to be solved with a bit of extra cash that's currently going to Ukraine and that a more significant and structural improvements need to be made. In short: I think you actually agree with the previous poster, at least in broad lines.
- vaidhy 3y agoThe truly sad part is that it is not one or the other. Inspite of all the talking points, govt can and does create money. The idea of a balanced budget is true for a business, not for the federal government. Obviously, there are side effects and you should not overdo it. Majority of states do not want to pay people for work and that is why we are in this situation. WA recently hiked the pay for teachers and other states can also follow the same if they desire. On the last note, most of that assistance went as equipment and armaments, not as cash.
- wilg 3y ago> Inspite of all the talking points, govt can and does create money. If you're talking about MMT as a solution, check again, it's pretty much discredited.
- vaidhy 3y agoMMT claims there are no limits. I do not claim so.. I believe there are side effects and a need for moderation. However, money is created out of thin air.
- dragonwriter 3y ago> MMT claims there are no limits. No, it doesn’t. The central claim of MMT with regard to fiscal policy is that the only real constraints on government spending balance are those resulting from the monetary impacts of, e.g., the net creation/destruction of money. That is very different from “there are no limits”.
- quickthrowman 3y agoThe US Government contributes about 8% of public school funding, the rest comes from about half local and half state funding. Look to your state and local governments as to why teachers aren’t paid enough where you live. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_school_funding_in_the_United_States https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_school_funding_in_the...
- clipsy 3y agoTurning arms and munitions that we’ve already manufactured and stockpiled back into money is surprisingly difficult.
- sieabahlpark 3y ago[dead]
- gumballindie 3y agoWhat gp fails to understand is that those 117b do exactly that - turn stock piles back into money. A lot of the money for ukraine actually goes back to us manufacturers and are not wired into ukranian banks. Furthermore by honouring treaties and standing up to bullies the us is gaining a lot of soft power. As a european i want to see more american products in europe and i most certainly will be a strong supporter of your country.
- phendrenad2 3y agoIf you have a bow & arrow, and you spent $1 for the arrow, and you fire it into the forest, how did you get your $1 back? This isn't a trick question.
- voakbasda 3y agoIf the us government owns the bow and arrow, it calls up the contractor that made the arrow and orders another one. The taxpayers foot the bill.
- klyrs 3y agoDo the taxpayers actually foot the bill? Or does the government print money, and recover taxes to prevent runaway inflation? And what happens if we stockpile munitions and don't use them? They age, get destroyed and replenished. The military is continually burning money to keep its stockpiles up to date anyway, and if we're sending stuff to Ukraine before it expires, that accelerates the replenishment, but I'd argue that it's better than the alternative.
- superchroma 3y agoWhy are you writing here instead of writing an email to your political representative?
- phendrenad2 3y agoWho says OP isn't? But also, spreading one's view of the world isn't futile.
- o1y32 3y ago[flagged]
- TheGigaChad 3y ago[dead]
- wilg 3y agoYeah, the government has to pay for multiple types of things. We also spend trillions a year in welfare and other programs to help Americans, in addition to expenses related to foreign policy.
- electic 3y agomost of the federal budget is actually used for entitlement programs.
- kzrdude 3y agoMilitary spending is also a "domestic jobs program" albeit I'm sure it's not as effective as alternatives where the material costs much less.
- m3kw9 3y agoYeah Ukrainian aid helps America being number 1 and keeps your dollars stay afloat. Don’t read other people’s one liners, it does sound good but it makes no sense to America in many ways to not help them. If they cower and not do enough, it will mess them up long term as the worlds number 1 power
- joshocar 3y agoTeachers are funded by local taxes, usually property taxes.
- smileysteve 3y agoCoincidentally, 1 US federal political party is opposed to both (even tax deductions for these teacher's expenses in favor of other tax deductions); while the other political party is in favor of both (even a child tax credit).
- okamiueru 3y agoWhy is it I see this comment so often? It makes absolutely no sense to me. The US is overspending on a lot of things, and teachers struggling is also due to a lot of things. Way, way down on that list, is actually money being spent to help out in Ukraine. So, pardon my cynicism, but your type of comment seem to always trace down to foreign interest influence. Either be that Fox, Trump, or just straight up Russia. Focus on wealth inequality, systematic racism, etc, instead of one of the few actually valid and commendable efforts by US foreign military involvement. Especially those that probably end up net benefitting domestic US interests. I'd bet good money that you consume a lot of fox news. And, take this however your want. But, looking at the US from the outside, it truly is troubling because of the propaganda and lies that network spreads. It's doing what any opponent of the US could only dream of. And, I am sincere about this. I'm sure I might be suckered into it if roles were reversed.
- _kbh_ 3y ago> Why is it I see this comment so often? It makes absolutely no sense to me. Russia is making an effort to try and disrupt arms supplies to Ukraine using its intelligence agencies and trolls online to try and sway public opinion is why. Because they cannot effectively target them in Ukraine itself.
- teelelbrit 3y ago[flagged]
- TheGigaChad 3y ago[dead]
- charliea0 3y agoI’d be interested to see how this broke down by income decile. My impression is that spending usually expands to meet income. Americans have a lot of access to short-term credit and use that to cover unexpected expenses. Unfortunately, it looks like a bunch of Americans end up carrying debt month to month.
- jart 3y agoThat's the elephant in the room. There's a lot of people who struggle to sustain a bourgeois lifestyle. However for every American like that, there's an immigrant living in an expensive city making minimum wage who somehow manages to send 50% of their income back to old country.
- BobbyJo 3y agoIs that true? Or is this just hyperbole?
- _cenw 3y agoIt might be true in isolation (and for more middle incomes), but real income and especially buying power has declined a lot in the lower half of the population. It seems to be mostly people who had a chance to accumulate wealth during an economic boom that go on these "just cut the avocado toast" prescriptive rants.
- jfghi 3y agoPerhaps, but I think that the definition of bourgeois lifestyle has expanded to include those who simply have 2 children, rent a sfh and perhaps retire at some point.
- Kamq 3y agoIt has only expanded to mean that in the couple of most expensive cities to live in in the world. And, really, having a single family home in, say, the middle of new york city IS a marker of wealth. You're displacing however many people could live there if there were apartments.
- slaw 3y agoIt is not that people are making not enough money. It is prices in US are insane, especially housing.
- web3-is-a-scam 3y agoThat’s the same thing.
- slaw 3y agoIt is not the same if you can move out.
- Dudester230518 3y agoBut why?
- shrimp_emoji 3y agoNobody's building any where demand is highest because that will depreciate homeowners' assets.
- simonsarris 3y agoWhy do you say especially housing in the US? The price-to-income ratio for the USA is actually better, often far better, than every OECD country. In other words, as bad as you think it is in the US, its worse pretty much everywhere else. https://www.numbeo.com/property-investment/rankings_by_country.jsp https://www.numbeo.com/property-investment/rankings_by_count...
- slaw 3y agoAmericans spend 40% of their income for housing. Nigerians 20 times more. There is something wrong with your statistics.
- simonsarris 3y agoThat's not true. On average US households spend 30% or less of their income on housing according to both the census data and mortgage lenders. According to the census data, only 20% of US households spend 40% or more of their income on housing. That goes down to 13% for home owners. https://usafacts.org/data-projects/housing-costs https://usafacts.org/data-projects/housing-costs My stats (the property price index) are for property prices. It would be unsurprising if Nigerian home ownership rates are lower than US rates.
- friend_and_foe 3y agoWhat do we expect? We demonize saving as "hoarding", talk about "stimulating the economy" by increasing spending, then in the next breath describe the exact same phenenon in negative terms when we talk about people living paycheck to paycheck. We disincentivize saving systemically by debasing currency as a rule in order to disincentivize saving. When the money is cheap the people and the culture become cheap.