More jobs to break poverty cycle
Does anyone care that U.S. Rep. Jason Altmire is accepting a job in Florida? It seems to me that this state should have tried to keep Mr. Altmire here for all the years he gave to Pennsylvania.
Him leaving, just like so many of our young people, is a testament to where our jobs are — not here. Pennsylvania was a leader in jobs, especially here in Western Pennsylvania, but with regulations crushing the steel mills and coal industry, what's left?
Sixty or so jobs here and there, the 911 air wing, a mall or two with part-time jobs and utility companies farming jobs to low-paying contractors — it's tough to find gainful employment.
The president surely has a plan to save our youth from boarding the government train to dependence — the very same train that derailed us in the first place. Our children grow up watching their parents sit at home waiting for the check to come and complaining, “It's just not enough to live on.”
Is this what you are teaching your kids, a lifestyle of “living on the house”?
I would like to pose a hypothetical question: If people living below the poverty level are allowing their kids to continue in their footsteps, will there come a time when the 47 percent becomes 51 percent? At that time, who will fund their meager lifestyle and how will the government raise the money to support them?
As of now, we, the taxpayers, are having a bit of a rough time supporting them and the kids who think we owe them an entitlement or two.
So we need to find a way to sever dependence on the taxpayer-funded gravy train known as welfare and get people a job — yes, gainful employment, as foreign as it may seem.
In my day, I worked after school. In the summer, I worked for Frank Ross Produce and delivered newspapers. As an adult, I worked for 35 years supporting my family and I'm quite proud of that. Are you proud of your life so far?
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.