Democrats on GC

And some people can work and the government gives them aid.

The fundamental difference between Liberals and Conservatives is - Liberals see every new life as a potential problem and a burden. Conservatives see every new life as a potential source of creativity and wealth. Allow me to elaborate a little bit on that. When your view of your responsibility to your fellow citizen is to take care of them through government planning and government force, every new person born becomes another mouth to feed another person to educate another burden on the states resources. If you are a liberal you believe that resources are limited and there is only so much to go around. You see yourself or government policy as the arbiters of who gets what. A conservative understands that new wealth is created every time human creativity acts on a resource and is unlimited.

 

This is the argument I'm getting from you here: government shouldn't help, because the help might be abused by some.

By that sort of logic you shouldn't smoke weed just because you might abuse it.

 

I'm moderate. It's really the only way to be.

 

I know you're smarter than this. You have many more choices than the two-headed beast.

 

Yeah, but the choice to pretend that a member of the two major parties won't win isn't going to do much for you this year. But hey... who am I to judge?

 

Of course they're going to win. However, imagine if Greens, Socialists, Constitutionalists, and/or Libertarians were to receive double-digit support? That could put a scare into the establishment similar to what Perot accomplished in '92.

And you know, you do a good job trying to paint me as some bitter cynic, but voting for a major-party candidate really epitomizes hopelessness, apathy, and pessimism by the way you define it.

 

lol Paint you as a bitter cynic? That's what people tried to suggest Obama said about country folk. Where do you read into my hopelessness, my apathy, or my pessimism? I think most people on the forum would view me as having the opposites (whatever the hell those are).

If Perot scared people, 1996 made them feel young again.

 

Whose wealth? Its surely not the governments wealth, so why are they designated to decide what to do with that wealth, shouldn't that be up to the people that saved their money, risked investment, and worked their asses off to attain that wealth? The government creates this class envy mentality where all people assume people were born wealthy or that it just came easy to them, when rarely is that the case.

That's the whole point of my Ant and Grasshopper story, the ant busted his ass while the lazy ass grasshopper partied it up, so why should the ant be held responsible?

I'm in no way suggesting that all poor people are out partying it up instead of working hard, some people truly cant work for what ever reason. But there are lots of people on the welfare rules that are able to work.

I know of a guy, lives in the housing "dwellings" in town. He sales weed, some time i buy off him. He drives a hummer, its in his grandmas name i believe but he pays for it, pays 25$ a month rent for a 3 bedroom apartment, large flat screen, 4 kids all wearing expensive clothes and PDA's. This man gets cash, food stamps, free medical, etc. and there's absolutely no reason he cant work.

This is why the liberal method does not work.

Should we completely abandon the issue? No.

Should we overhaul it yes, but not by the liberal view of more entitlement programs and government control. Less government, and getting the people off of entitlement programs thru employment, even if "make work" jobs need to be created, in order to instill a sense of self worth in these people. Sitting on your ass stagnant and collecting a check does nothing for ones self worth and that amount of idle time just breeds problems.

 

Want to know what really touched me in your anecdote? How you blame people like this welfare-"abusing" weed dealer, who you use to obtain your weed! lol And then you say the system doesn't work. That's material for introspection in my opinion.

 

I occasionally buy a dime in very rare instances, But by doing that I'm in no way giving approval or helping him to rip off the system. The simple fact that i bought weed from him has nothing to do with the point i was making. The only reason i even stated it was to explain how i know the man.

 

I'm not a democrat, but I am voting for the democratic party this election. I can't stand the thought of putting another republican in our office for the next 4 years.

 

There are also lots of people who aren't capable of working. It goes both ways, really.

Since you felt obligated to share a story of a welfare abuser, I'll share a story of a man who got screwed over.

I know a guy real well. He's 49 years old, has two kids, and a shit load of health problems such as Hepatitis C, heart problems, anxiety, severe depression, diabetes, and he was on vicodin for a back problem which went from minor to severe. (Just to list some of the worst ones)

This man was an EXTREMELY hard worker. He is/was a maintenance man. He was very well at what he did. He didn't mind staying a few extra hours after a work day if someone needed help. He didn't mind going over to someone's house on the weekend to fix someone's plumbing problem FOR FREE. He didn't mind going to work on Saturdays (which he wasn't required to do AT ALL) but he did make sure it was okay with his kids first. Everything was going good two years ago until he made a health report against his boss, which got him fired. At the time he had a minor back problem in which he needed surgery, nothing big though. Fast forward about two years. All of his incoming money stops coming in. He gets shot down for social security TWICE. His minor back problem has become severe. The cartilage (I think that's what it is, don't hold me to it) between his 15th and 16th (pretty sure it's these two, it's right around there, though) disks on his spine has deteriorated and now these two disks are rubbing against each other. His leg, from his knee to his pelvis, is numb which makes it very hard to walk. His back is aching all the time. Even if he were able to work, no one would hire him because of all of his health problems.

SSI has shot down his requests TWICE. He has been to all types of local health clinics, even traveling an hour just to see if he can get a little bit of help. His medicine would cost him roughly five grand every time to fill up. To top this mans life off, he is completely broke.

So stoned budda, let me ask you these two questions.

What's more important, a greedy millionaire who could make a positive difference somebody's life or that poor man soon to be homeless who has made a positive difference in hundreds of peoples life?

What's more important, 200 people abusing the system or 100 people who desperately need the systems help?

 

Well first let me say if you read my post i said there are people who truly cant work for what ever reason and those people do deserve our help. For some reason i'm being attacked as if i said we should place the poor in work camps or some shit.

Now to answer your questions: Of course the man who made a positive difference is more important, and the 100 people who truly need our help.

I find it interesting that you placed the number of people abusing the system at 2:1 over legitimate welfare cases. The people ripping of the system are the problem not the people who are deserving. And i put politicians at the top of the list for people ripping off the system. Name me one program that the politicians have run efficiently? And you think these are the people that should be in charge of distributing money fairly.

I'm not against helping people but just paying someone to sit on their ass when they are capable of working does nothing but keep the poor impoverished.

I'm not debating the people who cant work, but if they are able they should be made to work for their food stamps and insurance and financial benifits. Hell i would mind paying high taxes if i actually thought it was going for the good, but when you see politicians lining their pockets and welfare recipients driving a nicer car than you it pisses you off.

 

You evil hate monger you! lol

 

Partisanship is the downfall of American society. A bipartisan societal scheme, in theory, would be a much more effective and beneficial alternative and view on the way different problems and events were handled. The greatest battle is achieving this, and that is why this statement will remain in the morass called "theory".