100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: what we 'deserve' | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I hear Mexico is the place to go. Or, maybe Columbia.
Columbia? You must be kidding. On the 29th of June of 2012, Columbia, South Carolina experienced a high temperature of 109 degrees Fahrenheit. Why would anyone want to move to such a hot city? Not that Columbia! 
It's been that here to. I suggested Columbia cuz if you're over 30 you can't get a job. There is no public assistance. They are all out at street markets competing for pesos. In what city named Columbia can you not get a job if you're over 30, or has no public assistance or has street markets competing for pesos? Or did you simply misspell the name of the South American nation of Colombia? There is no letter "U" in the name of the South American nation of Colombia. You got my spelling error. Well, excuuuuuse me! 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I was at the grocery store a while back. As I got in line to pay for my meager amount of food, I noticed a lady in front of me and her cart was full. She was talking on her cellphone, laughing and such. As she was paying I noticed that whipped out the " old Lonestar EBT card". I was surprised because she was well dressed and didn't look needy. She paid, with the card and went on out. I didn't think much more until I noticed her outside loading her bags of groceries into a real nice late model Volvo car. She was still laughing and talking on her cell phone. I loaded my meager groceries into my beat up vehicle and left. Makes one wonder. 
Are you assuming that the card she used is a welfare-payment card? What if the card is for something else? Lonestar is Food Stamps and ebt. If the basket is full of food, junk food sodas or health value food, they use the Lonestar for food stamps. It's also a steakhouse. But I don't think she was paying with a steakhouse. No, Lonestar cards are fairly obvious and easily recognized as they are often used here. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, Except these are equal access items and don't go to individuals. Totally different. really? they dont go to military individuals? teachers? ,,,,,,, wonder where they put it all then,,,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not starting a new thread on this.
There are states that will introduce a reduction in the amount of time a person can sit on welfare. Michigan is one of them. There are other states that have no time limit. For the welfare-addicted, I will see if I can name those states in case your state wants to end your career.  
That was easy. Two States with no time limit are, Michigan and Vermont. OOOOOPS, Mich. governor signs 48-month welfare limit. Sep 6, 2011 Now, there's only Vermont. I predict States that pay higher welfare will see an influx of refugees fleeing other states. One state even said they don't want relocated residents because they can't afford their own citizens. _____________________________________________________________________ As of early 2002, most states had time limits that result in termination of families’ welfare benefits: 23 states had a 60-month termination time limit, and 17 states had a shorter termination time limit. In addition, 8 states and the District of Columbia had a time limit that reduces benefits or changes the form of benefits after the limit is reached, and 2 states had no time limit. Because the latter two categories include large states like California, Michigan, and New York, they comprise nearly half of the national welfare caseload. • All states provide exemptions or extensions from their time limits for certain groups of families, but the policies differ dramatically from state to state. The 60-month time limit on federal assistance applies nationwide, but not all families on welfare are subject to the limit. The survey of states found that about 55 percent of all families currently on welfare are subject to the federal 60-month time limit. Of those not subject to the federal limit, most are “child-only” cases, which now account for about one-third of the national welfare caseload. (In such cases, children are living with a parent or other relative who is not included in the welfare grant.) Most of the other families not subject to the federal time limit live in states that implemented their own time limits before 1996 and received waivers allowing them to delay implementation of the federal limit. |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Leigh2154
on
Tue 07/03/12 08:10 AM
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........ 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, Except these are equal access items and don't go to individuals. Totally different. really? they dont go to military individuals? teachers? ,,,,,,, wonder where they put it all then,,,
Everyone has gone to school and has access to it. Everyone is protected by our military. You use military inventions everyday. Velcro, microwaves, Canned food, penicillin. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Not to mention the government providing the military is in the constitution.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Tue 07/03/12 08:20 AM
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, Except these are equal access items and don't go to individuals. Totally different. really? they dont go to military individuals? teachers? ,,,,,,, wonder where they put it all then,,,
Everyone has gone to school and has access to it. Everyone is protected by our military. You use military inventions everyday. Velcro, microwaves, Canned food, penicillin. so what, Those who WENT to school also had parents that paid the taxes if they arent going NOW and have no kids,, why should they be forced to pay? you cant prove to me the military protects me in any way specifically...and why should I Be forced to accept their protetion? we use things created by people who were once on assistance everyday too,,, whats your point? mine is that everything we contribute comes back to us as a COMMUNITY even if we dont see an INDIVIDUAL gain,,,, 'other peoples kids' that we pay to educate (When we dont have our own) will grow up to be leaders of our communities 'other peoples kids' that we pay to feed,, will too,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Morally and economically, the welfare state creates an ever accelerating downward pull. Morally, the chance to satisfy demands by force spreads the demands wider and wider, with less and less pretense at justification. Economically, the forced demands of one group create hardships for all others, thus producing an inextricable mixture of actual victims and plain parasites. Since need, not achievement, is held as the criterion of rewards, the government necessarily keeps sacrificing the more productive groups to the less productive, gradually chaining the top level of the economy, then the next level, then the next. (How else are unachieved rewards to be provided?)
There are two kinds of need involved in this process: the need of the group making demands, which is openly proclaimed and serves as cover for another need, which is never mentioned—the need of the power-seekers, who require a group of dependent favor-recipients in order to rise to power. Altruism feeds the first need, statism feeds the second, Pragmatism blinds everyone—including victims and profiteers—not merely to the deadly nature of the process, but even to the fact that a process is going on. [A] real turning point came when the welfare statists switched from economics to physiology: they began to seek a new power base in deliberately fostered racism, the racism of minority groups, then in the hatreds and inferiority complexes of women, of “the young,” etc. The significant aspect of this switch was the severing of economic rewards from productive work. Physiology replaced the conditions of employment as the basis of social claims. The demands were no longer for “just compensation,” but just for compensation, with no work required. So long as the power-seekers clung to the basic premises of the welfare state, holding need as the criterion of rewards, logic forced them, step by step, to champion the interests of the less and less productive groups, until they reached the ultimate dead end of turning from the role of champions of “honest toil” to the role of champions of open parasitism, parasitism on principle, parasitism as a “right” (with their famous slogan turning into: “Who does not toil, shall eat those who do”). http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/welfare_state.html |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, This mentality is exactly what I am talking about...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve..Many DO do it by themselves Harmony!...The argument IS NOT about how tax dollars are spent, the argument is about "WHAT WE DESERVE"..... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
yes, people will find ways to bilk the system,, any part of the system we care to discuss, will have the frauds and crooks who bilk it
but, I just request of all those with these preconcieved ideas, to actually research the LEGAL AND BINDING Requirements of their state before they continut to besmirch people for needing help that they dont have the personal connections or resources to get otherwise the idea of “just compensation,” but just for compensation, with no work required is a huge STEREOTPYING ASSUMPTION of what people on these programs go through as I personally testified to, I had to 'work' just like I Did when I was a paid (valid?) citizen. The effort was no different. I just didnt have an actual EMPLOYER to give me a wage but I got compensated with access to basic needs,,, I suggest we all heed Leighs warning: ...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve.. and my addition nor do you know why or how they have come upon a time of need,,or what resources they have personally to get through it,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Tue 07/03/12 08:36 AM
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, This mentality is exactly what I am talking about...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve..Many DO do it by themselves Harmony!...The argument IS NOT about how tax dollars are spent, the argument is about "WHAT WE DESERVE"..... lol, wrong give me an example of someone doing it 'themself' and I promise you I can show where SOMEONE helped them,,,by giving them the opportunity, or the reference, or the resource,,,,or some other resource they may not have PERSONALLY had,,,, even your disabled friend, I imagine, received some RESOURCE to get her through the time it took to earn the proper certifications to type transcripts,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, This mentality is exactly what I am talking about...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve..Many DO do it by themselves Harmony!...The argument IS NOT about how tax dollars are spent, the argument is about "WHAT WE DESERVE"..... lol, wrong give me an example of someone doing it 'themself' and I promise you I can show where SOMEONE helped them,,,by giving them the opportunity, or the reference, or the resource,,,,or some other resource they may not have PERSONALLY had,,,, I call bull crap...No way can you check on EVERYONE...but then you already know this....LOL |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, This mentality is exactly what I am talking about...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve..Many DO do it by themselves Harmony!...The argument IS NOT about how tax dollars are spent, the argument is about "WHAT WE DESERVE"..... lol, wrong give me an example of someone doing it 'themself' and I promise you I can show where SOMEONE helped them,,,by giving them the opportunity, or the reference, or the resource,,,,or some other resource they may not have PERSONALLY had,,,, I call bull crap...No way can you check on EVERYONE...but then you already know this....LOL I dont need to check on everyone, IM using common sense and reason to have a job, SOMEONE Had to believe in you enough to give you the opportunity,,,,you didnt do it 'alone' to survive, you must pay the bills for the home you live in as well as the resources you work with that requires money, that either comes from a job, or a RESOURCE other than a job again, something SOMEONE ELSE FIRST AGREES To provide for you noone ACHIEVES In a vaccuum all alone, we all get some help , whether we all want to call it that or not,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, This mentality is exactly what I am talking about...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve..Many DO do it by themselves Harmony!...The argument IS NOT about how tax dollars are spent, the argument is about "WHAT WE DESERVE"..... lol, wrong give me an example of someone doing it 'themself' and I promise you I can show where SOMEONE helped them,,,by giving them the opportunity, or the reference, or the resource,,,,or some other resource they may not have PERSONALLY had,,,, even your disabled friend, I imagine, received some RESOURCE to get her through the time it took to earn the proper certifications to type transcripts,,, Yes, you imagine...but you really don't know do you...You're just h*ll bent on justifying forced handouts.....lol,lol,lol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, This mentality is exactly what I am talking about...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve..Many DO do it by themselves Harmony!...The argument IS NOT about how tax dollars are spent, the argument is about "WHAT WE DESERVE"..... lol, wrong give me an example of someone doing it 'themself' and I promise you I can show where SOMEONE helped them,,,by giving them the opportunity, or the reference, or the resource,,,,or some other resource they may not have PERSONALLY had,,,, I call bull crap...No way can you check on EVERYONE...but then you already know this....LOL I dont need to check on everyone, IM using common sense and reason to have a job, SOMEONE Had to believe in you enough to give you the opportunity,,,,you didnt do it 'alone' to survive, you must pay the bills for the home you live in as well as the resources you work with that requires money, that either comes from a job, or a RESOURCE other than a job again, something SOMEONE ELSE FIRST AGREES To provide for you noone ACHIEVES In a vaccuum all alone, we all get some help , whether we all want to call it that or not,,, More bull crap....lol |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Tue 07/03/12 08:43 AM
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, This mentality is exactly what I am talking about...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve..Many DO do it by themselves Harmony!...The argument IS NOT about how tax dollars are spent, the argument is about "WHAT WE DESERVE"..... lol, wrong give me an example of someone doing it 'themself' and I promise you I can show where SOMEONE helped them,,,by giving them the opportunity, or the reference, or the resource,,,,or some other resource they may not have PERSONALLY had,,,, even your disabled friend, I imagine, received some RESOURCE to get her through the time it took to earn the proper certifications to type transcripts,,, Yes, you imagine...but you really don't know do you...You're just h*ll bent on justifying forced handouts.....lol,lol,lol nope, just hell bent on destroying the idea that there is anyone who doesnt or hasnt required 'help' at some point in their life,,,or that it makes them less 'deserving' than anyone else,,, oh, and thst stereotype that because welfare doesnt successfully avoid any fraud , its therefore a mere 'handout' |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
They don't contribute and saying working welfare recipiants contribute is not a valid arguement anyway....If a person who works can still qualify for welfare they are "contrubuting" very little or, in in most cases, nothing to the program.... Or, as Harmony said earlier, they are even getting money back.... Some facts...Welfare DOES foster dependence, it DOES compel people who work give money to people who don't work.... The real question is ethical..Are we morally "bound" to help the less fortunate?...OR....Is the real truth that someone else's need is not an automatic claim on those without need?.... I don't think most people take issue with helping those less fortunate, I think people take issue with government coercing them into supporting the poor...What gives government that right?...By what right do you use force to transfer money from those who have it to those who don't?... The old and tired arguement that all people have a right to life does not mean welfare is intended to provide a means to sustaine life to those who can't or won't...The right to life means every person has the right to take what ever life sustaining measures necessary as long as they do not violate the rights of others... Since you can't force people to be moral, you cannot defend welfare as a right to life....Welfare is nothing more than stealing property from one person and giving it to another....It should be abolished because helping people is a personal choice not a political policy..... Welfare mentality addicts will always defend their drug. Little history on welfare. I was there though part of the beginnings. Once upon a time, Churches and civic organizations would go around and gather unsellable food items and distribute them to needy folks. Then, one day, the mean, old, greedy, ogre Corporation woke up and saw his pile of gold wasn't coming in as large as it used to. So, he, along with some ogre friends, Congress, came up with a plan to make Corporate ogre's gold pile large again. They passed laws taxing the humble citizens of the land. They were much more humble and naive back the because the news stations were not allowed to show the true faces of the ogre Congress or ogre Corporations. The taxes stopped the of free food to Churches and other organizations that fed the poor and needy. The ogre Corp commanded that all foods that didn't sell be either returned to process for other things like pet foods, fertilizers, etc. Or dumped into the dumpsters. One day, an innocent ogre employee reported that he has seen people diving into the dumpsters and retrieving food. The first action the ogre Corp commanded was for the outlets to taint, (poison), the food. After some people got sick and some died, the lowly citizen sued ogre Corp. and the ogre fed fined them a meager amount and told them to stop. They stopped and now, today, all the outlets throw their unsellable meats and veggies into sealed dumpsters. The only people who can get to it are some of the brave employees who steal it from the ogre Corp. They risk their job and jail to do it. Ogre Corp and ogre Congress, including all of DC, are sitting fat. Laughing all the way to the bank while, the humble Tax Payer supports many who choose indulge in their welfare crack. Ex ogre Presidents and other ogre politicians live happily ever after The End ___________________________________________________________________ Welfare should be a moral obligation. Not a legal one. No more forced Welfare Tax! no more forced school tax either, while we are at it,, it shouldnt be a 'legal' obligation no more forced military pay (taxes) either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations no more forced infrastructure tax either, they shouldnt be 'legal' obligations people should choose to donate to schools if they are going to use them,,,see how many generations we will get through before we are overrun with embeciles.. people should choose to donate to military if they agree to having a military, ,, see how long those 'patriots' continue to serve.... people should also choose to donate to keeping up the roads and buildings,, see how long before we also 'look' like a third world country as our haves and have nots define a third world country divide,,, heck, we can cut the budget by 1/8 getting rid of welfare and another 1/4 by getting rid of military,,,,,thats a whopping 3/8 we should certainly have a better BUDGET , damn what kind of COUNTRY we are left with though,,lol when it happens ,I can move to any of the other WESTERN countries doing just as well and not GRIPING about taking care of their own,,,, What do schools, military, and infrastructure have to do with welfare?
the argument that being 'forced' to pay others with OUR money if we dont want to,,,the argument that some payments should be MORAL Decisions instead of obligationg can be applied to the military and public education as well.. perhaps some of us feel having weapons and going to war is a moral issue,, or educating children,,,,, perhapss some of us feel everyone should not be forced to contribute to the 'welfare' of the nations protection, or the 'welfare' of other peoples children being educated if we follow the example set by withdrawing mandatory support for feeding children , we can withdraw mandatory support for educating them ......surely... No, no, no Harmony...Your argument is void, empty...If you want to argue for welfare, do it...You don't need to use BS to make your point...The people contributing to your thread seem intelligent, concerned, engaged...Stop making this about feeding children...When you see people selling food stamps to get money to buy cigs and booze that argument sounds trite at best...The discussion is NOT about people being unwilling to help those that TRUELY need help, it is about "what we deserve" remember, you picked the topic....Stop trying to candy coat it...Stop trying to lump welfare in with everything every single tax dollar is spent on....IMO, you are just making the problems worse by pushing the idea that people who work should support people people who don't work because they have young children, or because they have children with fathers who don't pay, or because they are black, or because they are women, or because there is a recession, or because we tax people for schools, roads, bridges, military ...I know a woman who can't walk, she is paralized from the waist down, who makes a very good living typing medical transcripts from her home.....All she needed was a computer and some brain power........
nope, you are using THIEVES to justify Im not talking about thieves, Im talking about the predominant REASON and use for welfare which is to help people feed and take care of their families in hard times,,, I know people who get through tough times too, but guess what, they all used some HELP from somewhere,, regardless of how many stubborn people REFUSE To believe it people dont achieve in a vaccum, they have resources, assistance of some type,, although most never want to admit it and most prefer to claim they do it 'all by themself' when the argument is about what someones 'tax' money goes to, the relevant comparison is of other things 'tax' money goes to,,, This mentality is exactly what I am talking about...You have NO idea what people do, how they achieve what they achieve..Many DO do it by themselves Harmony!...The argument IS NOT about how tax dollars are spent, the argument is about "WHAT WE DESERVE"..... lol, wrong give me an example of someone doing it 'themself' and I promise you I can show where SOMEONE helped them,,,by giving them the opportunity, or the reference, or the resource,,,,or some other resource they may not have PERSONALLY had,,,, even your disabled friend, I imagine, received some RESOURCE to get her through the time it took to earn the proper certifications to type transcripts,,, Yes, you imagine...but you really don't know do you...You're just h*ll bent on justifying forced handouts.....lol,lol,lol nope, just hell bent on destroying the idea that there is anyone who doesnt or hasnt required 'help' at some point in their life,,,or that it makes them less 'deserving' than anyone else,,, Hasn't needed help, or hasn't needed a welfare check....? |
|
|
|
|
