Tippmann Pneumatics Inc. Homepage
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

Interesting Thought

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
Author
Dune View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
<placeholder>

Joined: 05 February 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 4347
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dune Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:16pm
Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

Originally posted by Akhmed Akhmed wrote:

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:


Please explain. When I go to a hospital in a rough area, the waiting room is full of people without health insurance. But our current laws say we must treat them to a extent. Or people on foodstamps, I have seen that personally, working at a grocery store. And they don't have stamps anymore, it like a debit card hahahaha! These people are a joke.

Akhmed, tell your family to get off welfare, I don't feel like paying for your food etc.

Where even to begin...

Did you ever attend a public school?

Benefit from police presence?

Drive on a public road?



I believe in taxes dumbass. But I don't believe our taxes should go to people who are too lazy to work etc. Please tell me why I'm wrong, obviously I don't know what I'm talking about seeing I'm not on welfare or any government assistance. But it sounds like you have PHD on this subject, from personal experience?

I'm gonna have to go with Clark here. You have seemed to single handedly generalize the entire group of people who receive assistance from the government. How you equate food stamps to TANF to the WIC program to a number of other programs is beyond me. Furthermore, to exclaim that they are all "too lazy to work" shows me that the very essence of your argument is based on some neo-con ideal and general stereotype about goverment assistance. Step back, do some research, then argue against it, because the last thing you really want to do is get your ass handed to you in a debate with Clark because all you wanted to do is take Sean Hannity's opinion for gold.

Back to Top
Zata View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member


Joined: 07 April 2008
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 1403
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Zata Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:22pm
Its hard to separate the people who can't find work/don't make enough money, from those who won't look for work, and abuse drugs.
Back to Top
Akhmed View Drop Down
Member
Member

(Akhmed is not his real name)

Joined: 13 May 2008
Location: Iraq
Status: Offline
Points: 272
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akhmed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:24pm

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

Any government funding for those who "can't" something. I.E. Can't afford health insurance, can't afford drug treatment etc. Needs to be cut from our our government spending. 

You say you believe in taxes - but what do you think taxes are for?

They exist SPECIFICALLY to provide government funding those those who "can't" something.

Public schools exist because most people cannot afford private schools.  Public police exists because most people cannot afford personal security guards.  Public roads exist because most people cannot afford to build their own.

Each of those things exist in private form - there are private schools, police, and roads.  Yet we have decided that it is for the betterment of society to have this type of welfare, where we provide this benefit "for free" to all, regardless of the amount of taxes they pay.

The very purpose of taxation is to redistribute wealth.  That's what taxes do.  You may disagree with some particular application, but to bluntly say that we should subsidize "stuff" that people cannot afford tells me that you do not understand taxes as well as you think.

You say you are not on any government assistance, when you obviously are - we all are. 



Edited by Akhmed - 23 August 2008 at 9:25pm
"Virtue is more to be feared than vice, because its excesses are not subject to the regulation of conscience. "
Most awesome site EVAR!
Back to Top
impulse! View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Guested - Repeat Offender

Joined: 05 September 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 1715
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote impulse! Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:26pm
TANF: Basically their trying to get away from the "welfare" stereotype. But I don't believe in it, if you have children and can't afford to raise them, tough <poopy>.

WIC: Don't get knocked up, keep your legs closed.


Edited by Rambino - 23 August 2008 at 9:28pm
Back to Top
Dune View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
<placeholder>

Joined: 05 February 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 4347
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dune Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:29pm

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

TANF: Basically their trying to get away from the "welfare" stereotype. But I don't believe in it, if you have children and can't afford to raise them, tough <poopy>.

WIC: Don't get knocked up, keep your legs closed.

Maybe in your perfect world that would work. However, not everyone was raised the way you were and shouldn't be punished for that either. WIC is a great program because of it's regulations, and what Tommy Thompson did with "welfare" in Wisconsin was also impressive. It's not really what you think it is.

Back to Top
impulse! View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Guested - Repeat Offender

Joined: 05 September 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 1715
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote impulse! Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:33pm
Originally posted by Akhmed Akhmed wrote:

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

Any government funding for those who "can't" something. I.E. Can't afford health insurance, can't afford drug treatment etc. Needs to be cut from our our government spending. 

You say you believe in taxes - but what do you think taxes are for?

They exist SPECIFICALLY to provide government funding those those who "can't" something.

Public schools exist because most people cannot afford private schools.  Public police exists because most people cannot afford personal security guards.  Public roads exist because most people cannot afford to build their own.

Each of those things exist in private form - there are private schools, police, and roads.  Yet we have decided that it is for the betterment of society to have this type of welfare, where we provide this benefit "for free" to all, regardless of the amount of taxes they pay.

The very purpose of taxation is to redistribute wealth.  That's what taxes do.  You may disagree with some particular application, but to bluntly say that we should subsidize "stuff" that people cannot afford tells me that you do not understand taxes as well as you think.

You say you are not on any government assistance, when you obviously are - we all are. 



You make a valid argument, but I don't believe in some area's that we have government aid for. Is that such a big deal to say? Yes I believe in that, but at the same time this should be different?

I do have to ask, if communism worked key word IF; would you live in a communism society? Where, all wealth is given out "equally" and no one was richer than another. Wouldn't everyones lives be fine and dandy? If you haven't read the book The Giver, i suggest reading it, it totally sold me on communism.....
Back to Top
Akhmed View Drop Down
Member
Member

(Akhmed is not his real name)

Joined: 13 May 2008
Location: Iraq
Status: Offline
Points: 272
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akhmed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:34pm

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

TANF: Basically their trying to get away from the "welfare" stereotype. But I don't believe in it, if you have children and can't afford to raise them, tough <poopy>.

See, the thing about TANF is that it is meant to keep the children going, not the parents.  Are you prepared to let children starve because they parents are out of work?

And speaking of out of work, can I assume that everybody in Flint, MI is out of work because of a city-wide epidemic of lazy, and not because GM shut down some factories?

And speaking of children - did you at any point get food, shelter, etc from your parents?  Did you pay them for it, or were you getting welfare?

"Virtue is more to be feared than vice, because its excesses are not subject to the regulation of conscience. "
Most awesome site EVAR!
Back to Top
impulse! View Drop Down
Gold Member
Gold Member
Avatar
Guested - Repeat Offender

Joined: 05 September 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 1715
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote impulse! Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:37pm
Originally posted by Akhmed Akhmed wrote:

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

TANF: Basically their trying to get away from the "welfare" stereotype. But I don't believe in it, if you have children and can't afford to raise them, tough <poopy>.

See, the thing about TANF is that it is meant to keep the children going, not the parents.  Are you prepared to let children starve because they parents are out of work?

And speaking of out of work, can I assume that everybody in Flint, MI is out of work because of a city-wide epidemic of lazy, and not because GM shut down some factories?

And speaking of children - did you at any point get food, shelter, etc from your parents?  Did you pay them for it, or were you getting welfare?



If the parents cannot afford to raise their kids, cps needs to take them away and put them in a group home. AKA orphanage. I will support that government aid.
Back to Top
Akhmed View Drop Down
Member
Member

(Akhmed is not his real name)

Joined: 13 May 2008
Location: Iraq
Status: Offline
Points: 272
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akhmed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:38pm

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

You make a valid argument, but I don't believe in some area's that we have government aid for. Is that such a big deal to say? Yes I believe in that, but at the same time this should be different?

We all disagree with with various spending programs, and those are good conversations to have.

But you need to have a reason.  "They are lazy" is not a reason.  So far all you have done is state that we should cut TANF/WIC, and presumably other unnamed state and federal programs, but you have not said why.

At the same time, you appear to be supporting other welfare programs like public schools (and presumably student loans/grants for college as well?), so you need to explain why one is better than the other.

If you cannot provide those reasons and explanations, then your opinion holds no sway.

"Virtue is more to be feared than vice, because its excesses are not subject to the regulation of conscience. "
Most awesome site EVAR!
Back to Top
Akhmed View Drop Down
Member
Member

(Akhmed is not his real name)

Joined: 13 May 2008
Location: Iraq
Status: Offline
Points: 272
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akhmed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:39pm

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

If the parents cannot afford to raise their kids, cps needs to take them away and put them in a group home. AKA orphanage. I will support that government aid.

And why is this a better solution?

"Virtue is more to be feared than vice, because its excesses are not subject to the regulation of conscience. "
Most awesome site EVAR!
Back to Top
Bunkered View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
What AM I smoking?

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5690
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Bunkered Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:39pm
As someone who lives by, and works in, Flint, I can say that there are PLENTY of people who are still unemployed not due to laziness, but due to pride.

They won't accept a low-paying, non-union job, which is basically the only thing in the area right now.

I don't have time to get in on the debate though.
Headed to work right now; time to go fund some welfare-recipients.
Back to Top
adrenalinejunky View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

strike 1 11/24/08 language

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4771
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote adrenalinejunky Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:43pm
Originally posted by Bunkered Bunkered wrote:

As someone who lives by, and works in, Flint, I can say that there are PLENTY of people who are still unemployed not due to laziness, but due to pride.

They won't accept a low-paying, non-union job, which is basically the only thing in the area right now.

I don't have time to get in on the debate though.
Headed to work right now; time to go fund some welfare-recipients.


very true...

personally, i think programs that provide assistance while setting people up with jobs would be much more benificial to society then just giving them a check or food stamps... and if they refuse jobs or are consistently unable to hold them down, THEN cut them off, and let them learn responsibility on thier own.
Back to Top
Akhmed View Drop Down
Member
Member

(Akhmed is not his real name)

Joined: 13 May 2008
Location: Iraq
Status: Offline
Points: 272
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akhmed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:48pm

Originally posted by adrenalinejunky adrenalinejunky wrote:

personally, i think programs that provide assistance while setting people up with jobs would be much more benificial to society then just giving them a check or food stamps... and if they refuse jobs or are consistently unable to hold them down, THEN cut them off, and let them learn responsibility on thier own.

And this is consistent with the thinking underlying many current "welfare" programs in the US, including TANF.  The old "dole" where you just get money forever with no requirements is long gone.

TANF is limited to 60 months of total lifetime benefits - hardly something to build a career on - and there are various job-seeking requirements as well.

There is certainly much to be desired on the effectiveness front, but clearly the underlying intent is one of getting people off welfare, not keeping them on.



Edited by Akhmed - 23 August 2008 at 9:48pm
"Virtue is more to be feared than vice, because its excesses are not subject to the regulation of conscience. "
Most awesome site EVAR!
Back to Top
adrenalinejunky View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

strike 1 11/24/08 language

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4771
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote adrenalinejunky Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 9:56pm
while 60 months isn't exactly a lifetime, it is an inexcusably long amount of time to be burdening society when it is not hard to find a job.

and while things are moving that way, i do personally know people who are collecting some sort of government aide that have absolutely no buisness doing so...

i just think the system could still use quite a bit more work...
Back to Top
Akhmed View Drop Down
Member
Member

(Akhmed is not his real name)

Joined: 13 May 2008
Location: Iraq
Status: Offline
Points: 272
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akhmed Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 10:21pm

Originally posted by adrenalinejunky adrenalinejunky wrote:

while 60 months isn't exactly a lifetime, it is an inexcusably long amount of time to be burdening society when it is not hard to find a job.

and while things are moving that way, i do personally know people who are collecting some sort of government aide that have absolutely no buisness doing so...

i just think the system could still use quite a bit more work...

I generally agree.  It benefits nobody to have people not working.

But on TANF - I don't want to appear to be defending this particular program, but there are further limitations beyond the 60 months, such as a requirement that you must have found work within 2 years. 

"Virtue is more to be feared than vice, because its excesses are not subject to the regulation of conscience. "
Most awesome site EVAR!
Back to Top
BARREL BREAK View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Prettiest Princess in all the lands

Joined: 08 September 2003
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 10707
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote BARREL BREAK Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 11:17pm
Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

If you haven't read the book The Giver, i suggest reading it, it totally sold me on communism.....
Oh, hey, I remember second grade too!
Back to Top
GI JOES SON View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Got me flowers for my birthday

Joined: 10 July 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4944
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote GI JOES SON Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 23 August 2008 at 11:40pm
so ah. the end of the world must be coming, cause i agree with clark on this one...taxes are imporant, but it sure does suck seeing how much they take out of your pay check 

but, i do also agree while taxes are important, so are drug tests. i know a few people who've been on disability from the state for years now from a car a ccident that prevents them from working, yet they're constantly working on pretty laborious tasks out in their yard. not that a drug test would do anythign fkr that as much as a random check up on a person would, but along the same lines...mooching the system to get something
Back to Top
adrenalinejunky View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

strike 1 11/24/08 language

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4771
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote adrenalinejunky Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2008 at 2:35am
Originally posted by Akhmed Akhmed wrote:

Originally posted by adrenalinejunky adrenalinejunky wrote:

while 60 months isn't exactly a lifetime, it is an inexcusably long amount of time to be burdening society when it is not hard to find a job. and while things are moving that way, i do personally know people who are collecting some sort of government aide that have absolutely no buisness doing so... i just think the system could still use quite a bit more work...


I generally agree.  It benefits nobody to have people not working.


But on TANF - I don't want to appear to be defending this particular program, but there are further limitations beyond the 60 months, such as a requirement that you must have found work within 2 years. 



again, its better then nothing, but 2 years? if you cant find a job for 2 years, you arent really looking...

Originally posted by GI JOES SON GI JOES SON wrote:

so ah. the end of the world must be coming, cause i agree with clark on this one...taxes are imporant, but it sure does suck seeing how much they take out of your pay check but, i do also agree while taxes are important, so are drug tests. i know a few people who've been on disability from the state for years now from a car a ccident that prevents them from working, yet they're constantly working on pretty laborious tasks out in their yard. not that a drug test would do anythign fkr that as much as a random check up on a person would, but along the same lines...mooching the system to get something


while i do have problems with people taking advantage of the system, there are some ailments that can prevent people from being able to hold a job while still being able to work sometimes...
Back to Top
White o Light View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member
Avatar
Guested. blatant pornographic post

Joined: 12 June 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2772
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote White o Light Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2008 at 3:12am
Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:


Originally posted by Akhmed Akhmed wrote:

Originally posted by impulse! impulse! wrote:

Any government funding for those
who "can't" something. I.E. Can't afford health insurance, can't afford
drug treatment etc. Needs to be cut from our our government spending. 


You say you believe in taxes - but what do you think taxes are for?


They exist SPECIFICALLY to provide government funding those those
who "can't" something.


Public schools exist because most people cannot afford private
schools.  Public police exists because most people cannot afford personal
security guards.  Public roads exist because most people cannot afford to
build their own.


Each of those things exist in private form - there are private schools,
police, and roads.  Yet we have decided that it is for the betterment of
society to have this type of welfare, where we provide this benefit "for
free" to all, regardless of the amount of taxes they pay.


The very purpose of taxation is to redistribute wealth.  That's what
taxes do.  You may disagree with some particular application, but to
bluntly say that we should subsidize "stuff" that people cannot afford
tells me that you do not understand taxes as well as you think.


You say you are not on any government assistance, when you obviously
are - we all are. 

You make a valid argument, but I don't
believe in some area's that we have government aid for. Is that such a big
deal to say? Yes I believe in that, but at the same time this should be
different?I do have to ask, if communism worked key word IF; would you
live in a communism society? Where, all wealth is given out "equally" and
no one was richer than another. Wouldn't everyones lives be fine and
dandy? If you haven't read the book <span style="font-style: italic;">The
Giver, </span>i suggest reading it,<span style="font-style: italic;">
</span>it totally sold me on communism.....


If a book written on a middle school level sold you on anything... gg.
Back to Top
adrenalinejunky View Drop Down
Platinum Member
Platinum Member

strike 1 11/24/08 language

Joined: 10 June 2002
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 4771
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote adrenalinejunky Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 24 August 2008 at 5:12am
way to further the discussion with a meaningfull addition white-o-light.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 10.03

This page was generated in 0.094 seconds.