Motts growing nightmare

[Canceled2]

please note that I did not say MY TEA movement, I said OUR TEA movement. It belongs to those of us who are, as you have said, are comprised of numerous people with alot of different views but common themes.

OK, I accept the clarification.

That said, I don't look for any voice to be removed. Palin, Beck, Paul...they all have a public platform that resonates. They all have public recognition clout that can be helpful. Since I know you appreciate Judge Nepolitano, I am sure you can also appreciate his accomplishment of showing where unity exists from all views in the TEA movement, including Paul's and Palin's.

 

[SmarterthanYou]

OK, I accept the clarification.

That said, I don't look for any voice to be removed. Palin, Beck, Paul...they all have a public platform that resonates. They all have public recognition clout that can be helpful. Since I know you appreciate Judge Nepolitano, I am sure you can also appreciate his accomplishment of showing where unity exists from all views in the TEA movement, including Paul's and Palin's.

I do, it is my fervent hope that Palin and Beck don't end up using the platform to continue the mainstream GOP platform.

 

[Canceled2]

I do, it is my fervent hope that Palin and Beck don't end up using the platform to continue the mainstream GOP platform.

I don't think you could call ideas like Beck's "immediate defunding of public education" as further support of mainstream GOP. Or Palin's desire to get America back to common sense government and her willingness to go after corruption in the GOP as that of a mainstream GOP supporter.

Palin is no libertarian true, Beck is a self described pro-life libertarian, but more importantly the TEA party is not libertarian, republican, or democratic, it's instead grounded on the principle idea that smaller government serves best. A helpful voice in the TEA party is someone like Nepolotano to remind us of our common goal...smaller government, less taxation.

 

[Liberty]

Why are there such strong objections to working together and helping each other?

I'm not an ant.

I have to take care of myself first.

Working together under your reality means that I need a hand out.

 

[apple0154]

I have to take care of myself first.

That's precisely the problem. When one knows help is not available, should they require it, they are less likely to help others.

Working together under your reality means that I need a hand out.

Not at all. Working together is not a hand out.

 

[WinterBorn]

That's precisely the problem. When one knows help is not available, should they require it, they are less likely to help others.



Not at all. Working together is not a hand out.

I don't mind the idea of working together. I very much like the idea of having a safety net for our society.

What I do not like is taking more money from me, by force, for wasteful spending and corrupt politicians.

 

[Topspin]

Oh, I thought he had some plants that were struggling. I was going to help.

 

[Liberty]

That's precisely the problem. When one knows help is not available, should they require it, they are less likely to help others.

What business is it of mine, or yours what people decide to give. When gov't gets a hold of my money they generally waist it on themselves, and bureaucracies.

Not at all. Working together is not a hand out.

Lifers on welfare are not working together, or most likely not at all for that matter. They're sucking off my wealth.

 

[apple0154]

Lifers on welfare are not working together, or most likely not at all for that matter. They're sucking off my wealth.

The problem is welfare or government help is given after a person has lost everything resulting in the individual having lost their initiative, as well. Furthermore, the pittance given results in the individual living in abject poverty.

In some cases a person on welfare is prohibited from attending courses to upgrade their education. The reason stated is the government is not going to support someone going to school. The logic is absurd.

The same with unemployment insurance. While the obligation is to seek employment the individual could attend refresher courses or take courses to improve their chances of employment but that's forbidden.

The goal of government assistance should be to help the individual, not be a program loaded with restrictions and begrudgingly given. Rather than offered in the spirit of truly helping it becomes a battle between the person and the government. The truth is the government's goal is to do everything possible to deny helping.

 

[Topspin]

I'm not a welfare expert, nor do I know jack shit about it.
But I thought Clinton's reform eliminated the lifer syndrome? Are we still allowing able bodies more than a couple years of welfare vacations?

 

[apple0154]

I'm not a welfare expert, nor do I know jack shit about it.
But I thought Clinton's reform eliminated the lifer syndrome? Are we still allowing able bodies more than a couple years of welfare vacations?

Another strange thing about welfare is people's perception of it. If it is a "vacation" why aren't more people quitting their jobs and applying? If government assistance programs are so generous, if living on government assistance is such a great life, then no one should worry about losing their job.

 

[Canceled2]

Another strange thing about welfare is people's perception of it. If it is a "vacation" why aren't more people quitting their jobs and applying? If government assistance programs are so generous, if living on government assistance is such a great life, then no one should worry about losing their job.

Welfare lifestyles tend to be generational. People who have known nothing else tend to gravitate to it. These are kids who grew up seeing their parents not work and take aid, deal drugs for extra money...basically work the system; food stamps; medical; financial aid; cheap housing- People who are raised in a home with a good work ethic tend to repeat that. Of course this is not an absolute, but statistics show that this is mostly accurate.

 

[Liberty]

The problem is welfare or government help is given after a person has lost everything resulting in the individual having lost their initiative, as well. Furthermore, the pittance given results in the individual living in abject poverty.

In some cases a person on welfare is prohibited from attending courses to upgrade their education. The reason stated is the government is not going to support someone going to school. The logic is absurd.

The same with unemployment insurance. While the obligation is to seek employment the individual could attend refresher courses or take courses to improve their chances of employment but that's forbidden.

The goal of government assistance should be to help the individual, not be a program loaded with restrictions and begrudgingly given. Rather than offered in the spirit of truly helping it becomes a battle between the person and the government. The truth is the government's goal is to do everything possible to deny helping.

You know,,,, Babies are born into welfare, knowing nothing else.

Restrict someone from welfare, and they will get out of poverty quicker.

Give someone welfare and they may never get out of poverty, and they will be weaker because of it.

Let churches and charities help people with the money I give freely. Not the government who takes it against my will.

 

[apple0154]

Welfare lifestyles tend to be generational. People who have known nothing else tend to gravitate to it. These are kids who grew up seeing their parents not work and take aid, deal drugs for extra money...basically work the system; food stamps; medical; financial aid; cheap housing- People who are raised in a home with a good work ethic tend to repeat that. Of course this is not an absolute, but statistics show that this is mostly accurate.

I agree, however, government assistance does nothing to incentivize those "kids". Their life has been a struggle since day one.

With booze and drugs and broken homes those "kids" knew nothing but fighting for basic survival. Their education suffered. Then, at 18 or 21, we expect them to make a 180 and become hard working citizens?

 

[apple0154]

You know,,,, Babies are born into welfare, knowing nothing else.

Restrict someone from welfare, and they will get out of poverty quicker.

Give someone welfare and they may never get out of poverty, and they will be weaker because of it.

Let churches and charities help people with the money I give freely. Not the government who takes it against my will.

I always find it funny when people comment on how welfare and other government programs are detrimental to those receiving help. Invariably it boils down to those who are expected to help not wanting to part with their money.

 

[Mott the Hoople]

I don't mind the idea of working together. I very much like the idea of having a safety net for our society.

What I do not like is taking more money from me, by force, for wasteful spending and corrupt politicians.

Well who does? Fact is, taxation is at historic lows. If we wish to keep it that way we need to give up on some spending. What are you willing to cut spending on? Defense? Social Security? Infrastructure? What program or service near and dear to you are you willing to cut back on or do with out?

 

[Liberty]

I always find it funny when people comment on how welfare and other government programs are detrimental to those receiving help. Invariably it boils down to those who are expected to help not wanting to part with their money.

Don't forget those who have nothing to give, but still have taken from them what they don't have to give, with penalties to answer for, if they come into conflict.

I don't hear any out cry's for their rights from your logic.

Tell me. Do you have a right to anything you own? Do you have a right to property in any kind of way?

 

[Canceled2]

I agree, however, government assistance does nothing to incentivize those "kids". Their life has been a struggle since day one.

With booze and drugs and broken homes those "kids" knew nothing but fighting for basic survival. Their education suffered. Then, at 18 or 21, we expect them to make a 180 and become hard working citizens?

Not all of them have "bad" homes apple...just non incentivised ones...but yeah, throw drugs into it and it's another entire layer of dysfunction.

Welfare is not good, it's addictive. Welfare was our nations early public employee plan...now those jobs are permanent, pay more are unionized and have more security then many of their private counter parts and public welfare is now unrelated to work...bad.

 

[apple0154]

Don't forget those who have nothing to give, but still have taken from them what they don't have to give, with penalties to answer for, if they come into conflict.

I don't hear any out cry's for their rights from your logic.

If they are unable to give what is expected then they would be receiving help.

Tell me. Do you have a right to anything you own? Do you have a right to property in any kind of way?

Sure, people have a right to ownership. They also have an obligation to help others.

For generations people were born and lived their lives in the same community. Over time, each person contributed. It balanced out, more or less.

Today, people frequently move. They don't have a chance to contribute to their community. That is where taxes enter the picture.

 

[Canceled2]

Sure, people have a right to ownership. They also have an obligation to help others.

Government should have no right to force one man to be anothers keeper...what we have is government playing the role of the church and they suck at it.