Biggest Pis Off's

People on ON Works get their eye exams for free/dental for free. While people working without benefits have to pay for these services.

I am lucky to have all these items paid for by benefits.

But in my office every single youth is on ON Works and scamming them and they get everything for free. Now some people need public assistance and its justified but a big percentage of those folks are losers, milking the system, on dope/booze and are going nowhere in life.

Yet they get services for free.

Sucks to be working, middle class and the basic fabric of our society.

If you like, I can go into how you are likely not middle class, but part of the majority that calls themselves middle class to avoid the reality of the situation. If you consider yourself part of the fabric of society, you are not middle class.

Yeah, I'm an anthro major.

So what is middle class then?

I'm a two income, professional jobs , have a home, 2 dogs, no big bills (not car/not furniture/not credit cards) I own everything in my home outright including my vehicles. I help low income families (occupation)

I am part of the fabric of our society, I work, I pay taxes, I went to college & university, I have RRSP's. All those things Canadians are supposed to strive for.

My POINT IS, is that I have done what every person should do and have achieved what most parents want for their child to be, and we get screwed as those on services get things for free.

If you don't think that is happening then you live in a world of texbooks and not in the real world.

I work with the scum of the earth (sexual offenders, pedophiles, murderers, arsonist etc....) And I can tell you that they all scam and get things for free, while others who work low wage jobs with no benefits have to pay for stuff which scammers get for free.


"like, I can go into how you are likely not middle class, but part of the majority that calls themselves middle class to avoid the reality of the situation."

I'm curious to hear your definition of "middle class" if you have the time to explain it.

I rant on because a few of the people I assist could use these same services for free but cant as they work and make just enough money so they dont qualify they cant even afford a glasses appt.($69 for an appt now), never mind glasses. They could use a free handout but they recieve the shaft instead. Does one get milk, bread, pay for heat, or do they see everything blurry?

Well, if you think about it, the lowest annual wage is $0, the highest is likely in the billions (Gates and all those winners of capitalism aka assholes). Most people that consider themselves part of the middle class are those that live in the suburbs, have the white fence, 2 yellow labs, 2 kids and make, lets say $50000 annually.

Don't get me wrong. The definition of middle class to most people is very much those characteristics. This is simply due to the nature of capitalism. To believe you are have little to no power and exist in a low class bracket would be to admit you are a failure of capitalism. There is nothing wrong with this. The way Capitalism works, you have winners and losers. You can't have all winners. Is $50000 the median of 0 and 1000000000??? In some places, you'd be considered wealthy. Here, you are a speck of dust on a stain. It's all about scale quite frankly.

For example, using some stats that I just googled, one person living in a city of 500000+ and making less than $18,841 is considered living under the poverty line. They still pay taxes and all those wonder things. If that same person made $25,000, they would not be in the same class bracket. However, the difference between $18,841 and $25,000 is substantially less than $18,841 and $50,000. Compare that to someone making $400,000. They are still nowhere near the highest grossing individuals, yet are considered rather wealthy.

The true middle class, and those that hold any real power however minimal it may be, do not live in the suburbs. They live in penthouses and mansions. The highest class is relatively rare and pretty hard to define.    

Hope that all makes sense for a 5 minute underground rant.

Oh, and the only thing that really pisses me off is people that walk side by side really slow and I can't get around them.

Your just using terms and statistic to prove your point. (being a smart ass, which I am too)

I think you know what I meant by saying middle class. You simply took the meaning literally which is what most people who are textboox savy and yet street smart stupid (not meaning you are stupid) would do. (being very general/stereotypical)

But my point is people who scam the system are getting services, and supports for free while those that work pay for everything and can sometimes miss out on the services which we support through our taxes. (glasses, teeth, start up funds, etc...)

Yep, it's true. Shit happens.

I don't really mean to be a smartass in this situation. It's just I've been institutionalized to look at the underlying reasons that such problems exist. For every problem, there is a reason it exists. Then again, there are always exceptions. Violent crime might be a reaction to social realities, but there are also individuals who are simply batshit insane.

I'm actually a little honoured you might include me in the textbook smart category. I actually took anthro to avoid buying textbooks. 

Welcome to socialism in Canuckistan!

I think your argument is flawed GNM. The numbers of people making
"likely billions" is very, very small. That's the fallacy of socialism/
communism. It's the belief that there's all these millionaires and
billionaires that are out there screwing the system and if we could just
tap into thier pocketbooks, there would be no poverty/crime/etc. The
numbers just aren't there.

In todays society, you're average household income is around $50,000.
People making approximately $50,000 to 100,000 pay the bulk of
Canada's taxes. Which makes for people who eventually come to the
conclusion that thier isn't much incentive to succeed/excel when the
person doing very little with thier life is compensated through the re-
distribution of wealth programs, tax breaks, etc, while he/she seems to
be spinning thier wheels financially.

Sorry, got off on a tangent. :-(

A quick question; why are "Gates and all those winners of capitalism
aka assholes" ?? Why do you assume this? Jealousy? Envy? Just
repeating what your Liberal professors spew in University?

I'm not attacking you, I'm just asking because you obviously used a
computer to respond to this post. I suspect you drive a car or use mass
transport, live in a home, watch t.v., eat food, etc; all created by the
"winners of capitalism".

To answer the OP. My biggest piss off is the misandry in todays society.
Men are treated like garbage who can do no right. Women are treated like
princesses that can do no wrong.

The resulting laws, education system, attitudes, etc is disgusting.

haha, I wasn't calling them assholes in my voice, but most people do. I wasn't even arguing against captialism, I'm very much for capitalism. I'm one of the losers of capitalism myself, but I'd rather drive a Honda Civic than farm potatoes. Every form of government has it's problems, but as far as I can tell, capitalism seems to be the least flawed.

Hell, I needed to get a MRI done for fights and I couldn't get an appointment until August 28th (even with the help of my varsity doc). God damn socialism. I might just get one done when I'm in Cali. 

Seriously though, I love getting into debates like this. Here's a new topic:

The whole AIDS red-campaign (Ipods and all those other red products) has spent more on advertising than it has collected for donation to AIDS research and treatment.

In this regard, Mr. Gates is perhaps the most generous man going, as he donated billions to the cause. 

Sorry GNM, I misunderstood. :-)

And yes, I love intelligently debating as well.

I learned a long time ago that its better to work the systems than get worked by the system.

Generally, I would agree with people who say things change one person at a time. Unfortunately when politicians are involved, thats not really the case.

"Is $50000 the median of 0 and 1000000000??? "

It sure as hell could be.  Double check what the word "median" means.  It means that there is the same amount of numbers above it as below it.  The mean on the other hand, is a different story.  The mean would be artificially increased by such a high number. 

Suppose you take the following 5 numbers:  (10 000 30 000 50 000 100 000 1 000 000).  The mean is 238 000, whereas the median is 50 000.  To me, using the median makes a hell of alot more sense in trying to decide what "middle class" is than using the mean.  The median takes into account "outliers" such as billionaires and produces a figure that is representative of what the majority of society actually make.

My guess would be that the "median" for this country is right around $50 000.  That means that there's about the same amount of people making more than $50 000 as there is making less than $50 000.  The "mean" might be a little higher, but who gives a shit?


Wonder what the mode would be?

I am going to offend some people with this piss off for sure. Another one is the way property taxes go up, and up as cities expand into rural areas. These folks desreve the same services as the urban homeowners but due to garbage hauling, water/sewage system expansions etc..., everyone pays for it. Stupid I know but there are plenty of homes for sale in the city (new/used).

I am just tired of property taxes going up and not getting anything in return for it.

Your stats suck.

Generally something like a socio-economic bracket would be determined by a standardised measurement, and I am pretty sure that an income of 50 000 would determine you as being middle class if you run the numbers.

Lets not debate unless you can back it up with real numbers that would actually stand up to scrutiny.

I think you were missing my general point. The term "Middle Class" as we know it has roots in the sprawl of suburbia post WWII. People didn't want to identity themselves as working class, even though that was exactly what they were. The working class lived in the city, the middle class lived on the outskirts. You had a couple decades with a booming economy driven by consumerism. To admit you were less important than you were was to admit that you didn't have what it took to be a part of it. By owning your new home, you *had* to buy all the wonderful gadgets along with it. This was around the same time that credit became a necessity of life. Even now, how much do people actually own? You may live in your house for 30 years before it is actually yours. I do not have anymore power in the political system than someone working 2 night shifts a week at 7-11 (although that would be a sweet gig, Dr. Pepper Slurpees galore), even though I may make a bit more. We both work for someone else, who is employed by someone even higher up.

If you read my  post, I agreed that the definition of middle class in our culture is exactly what many of us are living. I never argued that the common definition didn't exist, but rather it is historically inaccurate. The problem is the definition was created to cloud the reality of us identifying with a working class. The fact the government uses the definition could very well be a case of hegemony. The crazy part is many of the working class factory workers are making a hell of a lot more than I ever expect to make.

The numbers have very little to do with it, other than the enormous gap between wages. I'm not arguing economic theory, rather social theory.