[Cont.]
Now if the cost of infrastructure doubles every 10years, then we'll save in the long run making an effort to build national infrastructures now rather than wait.
It keeps people useful, and learning new skills, no matter what automation occurs this safeguards human usefulness.
And it stops people - from falling down a downward spiral in their lives, when they can't find work.

This way, we'll build a Straight Road National highway from Darwin to Perth going through every Capital City, including HSR and Road; Power, Water (connecting dams, Internet, Oil and Gas (The Aussie Silk Road) and we'll build those Thorium Power Stations; Solar Farms, and a Superport in Darwin and prepare for the Asian Century like we already should have. Then we'll build an inland route.

And all these Socialist Jobs, will help to Provide Capitalist Jobs and business opportunities (including Co-Ops)

And this is why I support Medicare, because I believe our system of government should be refined, not cannabalised.
And why I think the whole Capitalism V's Socialism thing is stupid.
There's a better way, we need to refine it.

BTW, US spends $250 million a day on wars...
That's why they have no money to educate the kids, because they're a war economy.

Lies, damned lies and statistics.

There is relative poverty and absolute poverty.

The poor in the US are poor relative to the rich in the US. But they aren't absolutely poor. Indeed using the articles statistics, which I don't think are right but whatever, this poor family of four are richer than 60% of the world's population. And if you took into account things like food vouchers and other welfare, they be richer (relative to the world) than that again.

The way poverty is calculated means there will always, ALWAYS, be poor in the US and elsewhere irrespective of how wealthy those poor are.

But this is just a way for the anti-US crowd to whine some more.

Hilariously the author is also upset that the US is building a fence. One wonders why, if things are so bad in the US for the poor, so many people want to sneak in. Don't the fools know how bad it'll be for them once they get to experience US 'poverty' (sarc off).

mhaze

More Mexicans are actually leaving the US than entering it. Between 2000 and 2014, on rounded figures, 870,000 Mexicans entered the US, whereas 1 million Mexicans returned to Mexico from the US. (Pew Research)

By way of comparison, between 1995 and 2000, 2.9 million Mexicans entered the US, due mainly to the economic devastation caused by NAFTA - especially in rural areas. So, not only are more Mexicans leaving the US than entering it, the number of Mexicans wanting to go to the US at all has dramatically dropped. That seems to say a lot more about the US in recent decades than about Mexico.

In regard to poverty figures, that 'family of four' may earn more actual money than 60% of the world's population, but that doesn't make them 'richer'. A lot depends on the relative cost of living, especially housing, healthcare and education.

Killarney,

The comparisons between countries is done using Purchasing power parity (PPP) such that the sort of issues you raise about 'cost of living' doesn't apply. It remains a fact that the poor in the US are better off than more than half the planet and better off than the middle and even upper-middle classes in many other nations. Which is why the US remains the destination of choice for those best described as economic refugees.

The official figure show that the trade of people between Mexico and the US is roughly equal. But even those compiling the numbers recognise that the calculation is problematic since so many people enter illegally.

But that's only half the issue. The illegal movement of people across the US southern boarder is much more than just Mexican nationals but includes aspirants from a range of other central and southern American nations. Hence the wall.