The Curse of Poverty

apple0154 said:
Actually, I paid taxes on it. The government knows who needs the help better than I. It's fine to give to local charity but maybe there's a poorer person in another community.

Speaking with a friend of mine at the time he said I must be upset having to pay all that tax. I replied, "Why? I didn't even work for the money."
Click to expand...

That wasn't what I said.

Since you didn't earn that profit, why did you keep it?
 
apple0154 said:
Why would no one have anything if everyone had something unless you believe the world can not support the people who are here in which case we may as well just let them struggle on their own and give them nothing. What is the point of any kind of aid? Why keep them alive at all? Seems like it's just dragging out their suffering.
Click to expand...

What?
 
apple0154 said:
Why did government cut welfare rolls back in the 90s if they had a voting block? Why do governments impose so many restrictions on eligibility if they want everyone collecting benefits?

Your arguments don't make any sense.

As for

It is the people. Well, those folks who don't give a damn about anyone else.

Didn't you follow the HCR debate? Why were people against others getting medical coverage?

HCR. Unemployment. Welfare. It's all the same when it comes to helping others. The convoluted policies are the result of compromise.
Click to expand...
And now you fall back on the typical liberal lies and bullshit. Since when does "not using THAT method" mean "not at all"?

Did YOU actually follow the HCR debate, or did you just read/listen to the side you agree with, and ignore anything else? Most people agreed that the health care system needs fixing. The disagreement was/is the best methods to do so. Just because we disagree with government being the primary provider, believing it is a bad idea in the long term, does not mean we don't want all people to have access good health care. In fact, from our POV, it is the desire for all people to have access to GOOD health care that we object to government being the central theme.

That holds true for welfare and other assistance for those in need. You make bullshit blanket statements how anyone who does not agree 100% with liberal philosophy on the issue of welfare and health care "does not care about others." It's a lie. And by all indications, you are not so stupid as to not KNOW it is a lie.

Why do you ALWAYS have to end up repeating these same old dull fucking lies?
 
apple0154 said:
Why would no one have anything if everyone had something unless you believe the world can not support the people who are here in which case we may as well just let them struggle on their own and give them nothing. What is the point of any kind of aid? Why keep them alive at all? Seems like it's just dragging out their suffering.
Click to expand...
You're right. Let's just VX 3/4 of the world. That should give us another hundred years before population pressures threaten us again.
 
apple0154 said:
Actually, I give three shits about poverty worldwide. Well, maybe not three. To paraphrase Mr. Carlin the week-end is coming. :)

I's not just poverty, Dixie. Poverty leads to discontent and discontent leads to angry people and considering the weapons available changes have to be made.
Click to expand...

You're totally wrong. These are just justifications given to you so you think destroying your own people makes you noble and enlightened.
 
apple0154 said:
What kind of silliness is "We cant fix the world"? Of course we can and we better do it.

It will take adjustment and it will take time but it has to be done.
Click to expand...

You're delusional. and you believe fixing the world involves destroying the lives of americans. You don't care at all about poverty in america. You beleive it's necessary. This the nature of your malignant brainwash.
 
Good Luck said:
You keep pulling up the same strawman: "denying assistance is not the answer".

Show me ONE place where I indicated that denying assistance IS the answer.


What percentage of the population are small business owners? And what percentage are regular recipients of government assistance? If you don't know, use your own sources to look it up.

Guess which faction the government program trappers are going after? (Hint: recipients of assistance are significantly the larger group - again, BY DESIGN.)

The threat of denying assistance is part of the trap. "Oh, NO, you can't be on U/I and go to SCHOOL/TRAINING!!" Why? Because the person might actually make themselves re-employable, and no longer need the government for their daily bread.

You are correct that the idea is to disallow people to better themselves. But you are aimed at the wrong people who do not want that to happen. Think about it. What does the average tax payer want in government assistance? What has been the watch word for assistance programs for several decades now? "Hand UP, not hand out!" Yet the DESIGN of the programs is the latter, while DELIBERATELY designed to diminish the former! Do you REALLY think it is the PEOPLE who are demanding this? IF so, you are way out of step with reality.

Suppose we had assistance programs which actually helped people better themselves so they are more employable at better paying jobs. Do you really think the tax payers would OBJECT to assistance that did this? Do you think the average small business owner would support or oppose programs that encouraged people to go out and support themselves as much as possible, then filled in the gaps between the individual's income and expenses? OF COURSE they would support such programs. Contrary to the mad wailing of people like evince, the average business owner, the average fiscal conservative, even the average wealthy person (AVERAGE, not the Darwinian extreme) do not begrudge a helping hand to people in need. What IS objected to is a system that perpetuates the situation.

So WHY is it the vast majority of programs are designed so as to DISCOURAGE people working to become self sufficient? It is NOT due to the demands of the PEOPLE, not even small business owners, and not even the rich (unless the rich person is also an elected government official). The people, from conservative to liberal WANT the "hand up, not hand out" programs, and we get "hand out, and don't you dare try to do better" programs instead. If it's not the people asking for the programs we have, WHO IS?

Think again: what happens when millions of people find themselves dependent on government assistance at election time? What is one of the central themes of democratic campaigning? "Vote for us or THEY'LL CUT YOU OFF!!" Again, the THREAT of losing assistance unless you do as GOVERNMENT says. Result: a solidly entrenched (enslaved) voting block.
Click to expand...

well stated... everyone should read this as many times as it takes to sink in.
 
Apple believes in welfare for americans, but jobs for the chinese. That's pretty odd.

Why doesnt he want to fix the globalization problem and just provide jobs to americans?

He's a traitor.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top