100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: New Right Wing Rhetoric | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Mon 05/30/11 08:52 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps. that doesnt pan out when you look at the unemployment rate since 'welfare' began, it hasnt really changed so much based upon people who receive it so much as it has changed with businesses hiring practices(sending jobs oversees, hiring illegal immigrants, computerizing) its hard to live off of welfare, whats given in most cases is a pittance and most people would probably rather have more if they could find EMPLOYMENT that would offer it i don't think any knows since it hasn't really been tried... all dems think the same way, just give them more...if people are getting a free ride, why should they stop the taxi? trust me , it aint free..lol the average american pays into the tax system(works) forty to fifty years out of their adult life,,, most companies had a RETIREMENT so people who devoted their life to working there would be ok when their fifty years of service were done ,,thats been largely decreasing most 'welfare' programs only allow participation for three to five years out of a LIFETIME since welfare reform so, paying in for fifty years, and borrowing for three, is barely even getting back your interest,,,, and hardly LIVING off of anyone else Sounds like you are talking about social security. Thats not just for 3-5 years. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
the whole point of the republicans view on this is the more you give people, the more they want and the less they try. if we were to cut down on some of these spendings, maybe people would try to go get a job, quit living off welfare, and not feel so at ease with food stamps. that doesnt pan out when you look at the unemployment rate since 'welfare' began, it hasnt really changed so much based upon people who receive it so much as it has changed with businesses hiring practices(sending jobs oversees, hiring illegal immigrants, computerizing) its hard to live off of welfare, whats given in most cases is a pittance and most people would probably rather have more if they could find EMPLOYMENT that would offer it i don't think any knows since it hasn't really been tried... all dems think the same way, just give them more...if people are getting a free ride, why should they stop the taxi? trust me , it aint free..lol the average american pays into the tax system(works) forty to fifty years out of their adult life,,, most companies had a RETIREMENT so people who devoted their life to working there would be ok when their fifty years of service were done ,,thats been largely decreasing most 'welfare' programs only allow participation for three to five years out of a LIFETIME since welfare reform so, paying in for fifty years, and borrowing for three, is barely even getting back your interest,,,, and hardly LIVING off of anyone else Sounds like you are talking about social security. Thats not just for 3-5 years. nope, talking about tanf/afdc/food stamps, that so many hardworking people find themself in need of,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
really - india has over a billion people, and they don't have the near social programs like here in the states, and they are the oldest and one of the strongest democracies on the planet... and you want to compare the republicans way with a dictatorship like Somalia? no wonder so many people think the "far-left" is so stupid, points like that prove it without a shadow of a doubt... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
really - india has over a billion people, and they don't have the near social programs like here in the states, and they are the oldest and one of the strongest democracies on the planet... and you want to compare the republicans way with a dictatorship like Somalia? no wonder so many people think the "far-left" is so stupid, points like that prove it without a shadow of a doubt... india is very impoverished, it would be a bad comparison to make comparing apples to apples would be comparing WESTERN countries with WESTERN countries, to see which policies work best with WESTERN culture,,, India DOES have social programs which have indeed reduced poverty there since they began,,,but even that would be not necessarily significant because of the major differences in culture and access to resources in general,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
really - india has over a billion people, and they don't have the near social programs like here in the states, and they are the oldest and one of the strongest democracies on the planet... and you want to compare the republicans way with a dictatorship like Somalia? no wonder so many people think the "far-left" is so stupid, points like that prove it without a shadow of a doubt... india is very impoverished, it would be a bad comparison to make comparing apples to apples would be comparing WESTERN countries with WESTERN countries, to see which policies work best with WESTERN culture,,, India DOES have social programs which have indeed reduced poverty there since they began,,,but even that would be not necessarily significant because of the major differences in culture and access to resources in general,,, i'll agree with that, but with over a billion people, and hundreds of different languages, it would break them to have anything close to our social programs.. but they still own a lot of the US, they are doing ok, economically, better than us at the moment... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no wonder so many people think the "far-left" is so stupid, points like that prove it without a shadow of a doubt...
Just thought you should know that trying to sound intelligent and using insults is counter productive. People wont take you seriously if you can't make a point without insulting. India is an unfortunate example. There's money being made there off the backs of the more fortunate poor people who perform the jobs that Americans should be doing. I think the country that you want to project on America would be Hong Kong. It's a veritable Banker's and traders' paradise. Tons and tons of money being made. Unfortunately, both Hong Kong and India have two of the worst disparity of wealth (Gi NI) in the civilized world. This is not my idea of a good economy. Perhaps it's all those lazy, shiftless no-goodniks who refuse to go out and get jobs. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
no wonder so many people think the "far-left" is so stupid, points like that prove it without a shadow of a doubt...
Just thought you should know that trying to sound intelligent and using insults is counter productive. People wont take you seriously if you can't make a point without insulting. India is an unfortunate example. There's money being made there off the backs of the more fortunate poor people who perform the jobs that Americans should be doing. I think the country that you want to project on America would be Hong Kong. It's a veritable Banker's and traders' paradise. Tons and tons of money being made. Unfortunately, both Hong Kong and India have two of the worst disparity of wealth (Gi NI) in the civilized world. This is not my idea of a good economy. Perhaps it's all those lazy, shiftless no-goodniks who refuse to go out and get jobs. and Somalia is? did you think the comparing republicans to Somalia is in intelligent comparison? it is funny how your using third world dictatorships and communist countries as a comparison, and then throw out the democratic countries...in college, we called that making an irrational appeal, and it seems that liberals are quite good at that, it also happens to run the same fence as lying, because it is not exactly being honest. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
Funny how old people tend to think they know what other people are talking about. I never said it was welfare though I believe it was originally called "taking" from one of the original posters. The reason I said it sounds like social security because she mentioned working for 50 years. I don't know many people who worked 50 years and on welfare etc. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
third world dictatorships
Oh, oh. I'm not sure where this kind of information comes from. Somalia has had no central government since 1991, dictatorship or otherwise. I quick check of an encyclopedia of your choice would help to prevent mistakes like this. It took me about 2 minutes. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
Funny how old people tend to think they know what other people are talking about. I never said it was welfare though I believe it was originally called "taking" from one of the original posters. The reason I said it sounds like social security because she mentioned working for 50 years. I don't know many people who worked 50 years and on welfare etc. I see I referenced FIFTY years because thats the average time that a us citizen works in their LIFETIME(forty to fifty years), paying IN TO THE SYSTEM my point being that if they need some help from that system they basically 'invested' in and will continue to 'invest' in, for three years out of that fifty,,, its hardly an occupation or LIVING off of others,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
isn't it funny for people who have secure jobs(in their own minds)think this way about "takers".
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
Funny how old people tend to think they know what other people are talking about. I never said it was welfare though I believe it was originally called "taking" from one of the original posters. The reason I said it sounds like social security because she mentioned working for 50 years. I don't know many people who worked 50 years and on welfare etc. I see I referenced FIFTY years because thats the average time that a us citizen works in their LIFETIME(forty to fifty years), paying IN TO THE SYSTEM my point being that if they need some help from that system they basically 'invested' in and will continue to 'invest' in, for three years out of that fifty,,, its hardly an occupation or LIVING off of others,,, The OP didn't say living off others he said takers. Yes they are taking not giving at that point. So what? I was working since about 16 and paid taxes and at 1 point I was unemployed. While I was working I was giving but while I was unemployed I was taking. It may have only been a few months and I received less than what I gave over the years but I was still taking at that point in time. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
Funny how old people tend to think they know what other people are talking about. I never said it was welfare though I believe it was originally called "taking" from one of the original posters. The reason I said it sounds like social security because she mentioned working for 50 years. I don't know many people who worked 50 years and on welfare etc. I see I referenced FIFTY years because thats the average time that a us citizen works in their LIFETIME(forty to fifty years), paying IN TO THE SYSTEM my point being that if they need some help from that system they basically 'invested' in and will continue to 'invest' in, for three years out of that fifty,,, its hardly an occupation or LIVING off of others,,, The OP didn't say living off others he said takers. Yes they are taking not giving at that point. So what? I was working since about 16 and paid taxes and at 1 point I was unemployed. While I was working I was giving but while I was unemployed I was taking. It may have only been a few months and I received less than what I gave over the years but I was still taking at that point in time. thats what im talking about, i was maternity leave 3 times and i earned less than a third of what i would have made at work....not enough to survive on thats for sure....and certainly nothing close to what i had contributed since i started working when i was barely a teenager. why dont we not qualify illegal immigrants for welfare or their many children they push out during their illegal stay, thay would fix our budget crisis pretty quickly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sounds like you are talking about social security. It's disheartening to know that our education system has done such a poor job that there are people who think of Social Security as a welfare program. It is an insurance program. Since the establishment of the Social Security Trust fund, I have been paying not only for the retirement benefits of my parents, but for my own, as well. That's just a fact.
t's never been tried Basically, what we hear promoted from the extreme right is pretty much what Somalia has. I don't think we want to be "trying" extreme radical experiments with the future of 300 million people. History makes it pretty clear that the most successful countries are also the most liberal.
Funny how old people tend to think they know what other people are talking about. I never said it was welfare though I believe it was originally called "taking" from one of the original posters. The reason I said it sounds like social security because she mentioned working for 50 years. I don't know many people who worked 50 years and on welfare etc. I see I referenced FIFTY years because thats the average time that a us citizen works in their LIFETIME(forty to fifty years), paying IN TO THE SYSTEM my point being that if they need some help from that system they basically 'invested' in and will continue to 'invest' in, for three years out of that fifty,,, its hardly an occupation or LIVING off of others,,, The OP didn't say living off others he said takers. Yes they are taking not giving at that point. So what? I was working since about 16 and paid taxes and at 1 point I was unemployed. While I was working I was giving but while I was unemployed I was taking. It may have only been a few months and I received less than what I gave over the years but I was still taking at that point in time. thats what im talking about, i was maternity leave 3 times and i earned less than a third of what i would have made at work....not enough to survive on thats for sure....and certainly nothing close to what i had contributed since i started working when i was barely a teenager. why dont we not qualify illegal immigrants for welfare or their many children they push out during their illegal stay, thay would fix our budget crisis pretty quickly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
every year at tax time, the government are TAKERS too,, but why divide people that way when EVERYONE has to be both a taker and a maker at differing points,,,
its a way to villainize and divide instead of finding a way to make a BALANCE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
mightymoe
on
Tue 05/31/11 12:21 PM
|
|
third world dictatorships
Oh, oh. I'm not sure where this kind of information comes from. Somalia has had no central government since 1991, dictatorship or otherwise. I quick check of an encyclopedia of your choice would help to prevent mistakes like this. It took me about 2 minutes. still have to lie, huh... saving face? lol, its what you libs do best... from wiki... On October 14, 2010, diplomat Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo was appointed the new Prime Minister of Somalia. The former Premier Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke resigned the month before following a protracted dispute with President Sharif over a proposed draft constitution.[128] |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
third world dictatorships
Oh, oh. I'm not sure where this kind of information comes from. Somalia has had no central government since 1991, dictatorship or otherwise. I quick check of an encyclopedia of your choice would help to prevent mistakes like this. It took me about 2 minutes. still have to lie, huh... saving face? lol, its what you libs do best... from wiki... On October 14, 2010, diplomat Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo was appointed the new Prime Minister of Somalia. The former Premier Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke resigned the month before following a protracted dispute with President Sharif over a proposed draft constitution.[128] yeah they have had a parliamentary form of government since 2004. I guess the lib site that was checked stopped updating in 2000.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
third world dictatorships
Oh, oh. I'm not sure where this kind of information comes from. Somalia has had no central government since 1991, dictatorship or otherwise. I quick check of an encyclopedia of your choice would help to prevent mistakes like this. It took me about 2 minutes. still have to lie, huh... saving face? lol, its what you libs do best... from wiki... On October 14, 2010, diplomat Mohamed Abdullahi Farmajo was appointed the new Prime Minister of Somalia. The former Premier Omar Abdirashid Ali Sharmarke resigned the month before following a protracted dispute with President Sharif over a proposed draft constitution.[128] yeah they have had a parliamentary form of government since 2004. I guess the lib site that was checked stopped updating in 2000.. just seemed weird that a nation would not have a government... but it looks like the muslims are trying to take control, and the natives are trying to not let that happen...it was a communist country, then went democratic for a while, now it seems to be turning into a muslim state, from what i read |
|
|
|
|
