Welfare should be abolished

Page 3 of 5 [ 70 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

TheMachine1
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 11 Jun 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,011
Location: 9099 will be my last post...what the hell 9011 will be.

16 Aug 2007, 12:52 am

psych wrote:

Another dirty secret of capitalism is it really depends on population growth or it stagnates. So without a high enough birth rate and/or immigration rate you will see over all economic growth rate approach zero. The very system depends on a large number of new consumers buying products and new workers to keep wage inflation down. The very people getting welfare are providing part of the real stimulus needed to keep the economy moving.

Cyanide
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Sep 2006
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,003
Location: The Pacific Northwest

16 Aug 2007, 3:04 am

We shouldn't ditch welfare....but it should be better managed to keep the leeches that are out there from getting it, and stop rewarding people already on welfare for popping out more kids.
12% of the nation is below the poverty line....I shudder to think what would happen if we completely sacked welfare. Riots? Ooooh yeah. Violent Crime? Yes....a lot of it. More than the USA already has (which is already a bad bad figure)

Sacking welfare isn't going to get rid of the real problem, which is poverty. We need to put unemployed welfare people to work at the types of places where illegal immigrants thrive. If they don't want to pick fruit and pack meat? Take away their welfare.

The saddest part though, is that we only have a 4.8% unemployment rate, but we have 12% of our country in poverty. How did that come to be? Mr.Capitalist not paying his worker a decent wage? Lower class making too many kids? I'm guessing it's a mix of the two. Fix those two problems (the 2nd one would be harder), and poverty should be about gone I think. (https://www.cia.gov/library/publication ... .html#Econ if you're wondering where I'm getting my %age figures from)

Just like Social Security, we can't just take away welfare all at once. It has to be phased out, or else....well...chaos will ensue.

postpaleo
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 21 Feb 2007
Age: 74
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,134
Location: North Mirage, Pennsyltucky

16 Aug 2007, 4:12 am

The old addage used to be, people on welfare can't afford not to spend the money. Get it back into the system. While if you buy a tank with the money, it sits in a field and rusts, does nothing to add back into the system. It's pretty apparent most don't understand the limitions of what this "welfare" money can even purchase to begin with. I worked in a store, simple clerk, 7-11 kind of place. I know what they can get and what they can't. Perhaps it would be worth while for some to take a look at it. Did you know in my State, one can't buy a bar of soap with that money? Hell they don't even use real money anymore, it's plastic, no cash to go buy, *shudder* booze. But then maybe someone here works in a soap factory or a brewery? Well then if I did, I would be outraged that it wasn't coming in to help support my job. I mean after all if enough didn't, I might have to go on welfare, roflmao. Hell you couldn't support a decent drug habit or a good drinkers needs to begin with on what is allowed, even if they did give out cash. Ever wonder why the prison system is overloaded? It's 3 hots and a cot. Hellava way to survive isn't it. When your back is against the wall, you might be surprised at what you no longer fear.

War is good business and they know it. It's the machine, the military/industrial complex, President Eisenhower warned of it long ago. Keep the economic level down and what choice do some have to get an education, better themselves, get out of the poor class. Join the Army, it's the old economic draft. They weren't afraid to get rid of the draft, they knew it wasn't going away to begin with. Just harder to keep that draft going when the real purpose of that machine is clearer to see. So they raised the money incentive and lowered the standards to get in. In a way I see this as a good thing. The lifers don't like malcontents. We didn't follow orders all that well. Knew we weren't there for life and didn't give a damn about rank. The thougts of a real all professional army scares the liven s**t out of me.

Man another rant, this is just feeling to good. This could become a habit.

_________________
Just enjoy what you do, as best you can, and let the dog out once in a while.

Macbeth
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 27 May 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,984
Location: UK Doncaster

16 Aug 2007, 6:18 am

jrknothead wrote:

Um, todd, I hate to tell you this, but welfare accounts for maybe 3% of your tax bill...

The biggest chunk goes toward social security, the next biggest chunk goes to the military, then government workers get the next biggest chunk...

I'm guessing that you really don't know much about the welfare system... the truth of the matter is, able bodied unemployed people are not even eligible for welfare in the US... it goes mostly to pay single mothers, most of whom work but don't earn enough to feed their kids...

Would you feel better if you had to run a gauntlet of begging, starving children on your way to work, and got to save six dollars a week off your tax bill?

I think you're barking up the wrong tree... if you want a lower tax bill, complain about wasteful spending in government... like the 20 billion they spend every year to put pot smokers in jail... or the trillions they spend fighting wars in countries that don't stand a chance of ever invading us... or the huge amount they spend running public service ads telling kids not to be cyberbullies... farm subsidies... pork barrel spending projects...

I imagine the stationary bill for a country the size of the US is proabbly higher than its welfare spending. All those paperclips and letters and memo's.... people never seem to look at the percentages before they moan about taxation.

_________________
"There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart,
that you can't take part" [Mario Savo, 1964]

Izaak
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Jun 2007
Age: 44
Gender: Male
Posts: 981
Location: Perth, Western Australia

16 Aug 2007, 8:23 am

This is a pretty enjoyable thread. You guys are hilarious. As someone who ticked yes I was just wondering who the other guy was?

I assume it is todd, but his posts don't appear for me so I don't want to go out and make that call just yet. All that are coming up for me are the replies to his posts it seems.

Anubis
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Sep 2006
Age: 136
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,911
Location: Mount Herculaneum/England

16 Aug 2007, 8:29 am

Awesomelyglorious wrote:

skafather84 wrote:

how about we fire politicians and just completely overhaul DC with people who are actually intelligent and care about people and not just themselves?

Where can we get people with both characteristics who would take the job? If they are intelligent then they are likely vicious machiavellians, if they are caring then they are probably also negligent ret*ds who area used by the former. Politics is politics, it will be won by those who are good at it.

Not true. There are politicians who are a combination of the two, but they generally get placed with the bad bunch due to public distrust. You need to be really good, intelligent, and strong willed to be a benevolent politician, though there may be times when even the most goodwill is overruled by neccessity, and the most intelligent decisions are overruled by goodwill. You simply can't place politicians as intelligent and machiavellian, or caring and stupid, it's just an unfortunate political majority.

_________________
Lalalalai.... I'll cut you up!

psych
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,488
Location: w london

16 Aug 2007, 8:43 am

I wasnt represented in the poll, so couldnt vote.

I think Todd would do well to consider the origins and set-up of the shambolic conspiracy known as the world-banking & monetary system. The idea that people in trailer parks are even remotely responsible for his sense of 'not getting his dues' is silly when you look at the bigger picture.

anyhoo - must go, i have an important appt. (passing out drunk whilst watching daytime TV)

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

16 Aug 2007, 9:15 am

Anubis wrote:

It is a majority by far though, and most people of any sense know that it is a majority of politicians by far. If it is continually a majority of the politicians, then my claim still has some weight and power. As I stated, politics is politics, and if a person with the desirable traits doesn't act upon these traits, then what is to prove that he has them?

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

16 Aug 2007, 9:19 am

psych wrote:

I dont think money or tax is a good indicator of how much someone contributes to society.

For instance, a friendly welfare recipient with a 'good samaritan' mindset is a better member of society than someone who works for monsanto, or an aggresive scam salesman.

Actually i could spend all day listing examples of ppl in the higher tax rates that are socially parasitic. But its a sunny day here in the projects & i need to get wasted & be socially menacing to random taxpayers in the park

That really depends on the monsanto worker really. Given that it is a science corporation, I would think that they have some people who do research and important research. Really though, the only thing holding back money as a good indicator are externalities and market imperfections, and I think it is a very hard case proving that those are so overwhelming as to prevent the use of money as a good measurement. The real question is one of measuring social parasite really, a lot of people misuse the term. I am not saying the prior examples are not correct, but to claim that they are a large percent seems ridiculous.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

16 Aug 2007, 9:21 am

BazzaMcKenzie wrote:

I blame McDonalds "Restaurants"

see the correlation:

UK Violent Crime Rates
http://www.crimestatistics.org.uk/

(break in trendline due to change in collection methods)

Either McDonalds, or else the tree-hugging lesbian types dabbling with social engineering in the government. I don't think human nature has changed much in the last few millenium, its the influences on parents, not the parents themselves

I don't think McDonalds really would have so much of a cultural impact. It is just a fastfood place. There needs to be more than correlation, otherwise this idea has no more merit than the relation between pirates and global warming found by the FSM people.

Pandora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,553
Location: Townsville

16 Aug 2007, 9:23 am

Yes, it is an ignorant and uniformed opinion that people on welfare are automatically parasites.

_________________
Break out you Western girls,
Someday soon you're gonna rule the world.
Break out you Western girls,
Hold your heads up high.
"Western Girls" - Dragon

Todd489
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 24 Jan 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 997

16 Aug 2007, 9:23 am

Anubis wrote:

It doesn't a hurt a millionaire to have 40% tax put on their earnings, as they still have plenty to invest in markets and spend on the most expensive lifestyles.

It doesn't hurt a spider to pull off 40% of it's legs because spiders have plenty of legs. All spiders should have 3 or 4 legs pulled off and glued to worms who have no legs.

I don't care how many people it helps, it's still injust and I refuse to stand for it.

Pandora
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jun 2005
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,553
Location: Townsville

16 Aug 2007, 9:27 am

Would you sit instead?

_________________
Break out you Western girls,
Someday soon you're gonna rule the world.
Break out you Western girls,
Hold your heads up high.
"Western Girls" - Dragon

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

16 Aug 2007, 9:32 am

Quote:

Todd489: I find that f*cking insulting of you to consider people on welfare as leeches and parasites. I take it that you don't need a pension because of disability or assistance in trying to find a job. Your attitude is what got the bloody Nazis into trouble in the war. Wipe out all those who don't contribute.... Same as Hitler wanting to wipe out the Jews. What gives you the right to sit in your little Shangri-La and complain about others less fortunate than yourself when you have it so goddamn easy? Typical Conservative/republican attitude which, I don't mind telling you, is just why most of us OUTSIDE America think you are just a bunch of self-serving, arrogant power-hungry ego-maniacs out for World Domination. Thank Christ we are more civilized here and actually CARE about those less fortunate than ourselves. Oh, and by the way, I am on a disability pension, worked for 13 years before becoming redundant, and I am NOT leeching off the government; I am taking what I believe to be my rightful entitlements. Sh*t, I bet if I lived in America, i) I'd have Buckley's chance of getting work, because it seems that anyone employed there is working under crap conditions, and I'd expect to be able to earn enough to live (so no job offers); ii) no concessions for health or transport, because people with your attitude would make sure that someone like me had no entitlement to them and with no HMO or private cover I'd be f*cked; iii) I'd be more than likely killed by gang violence or some nutter going wild with a gun (although we won't go into that, that can happen to even Americans). If you are so fed up with the welfare system you have, then either get off your arse and campaign for a better system, or accept what you have and there is nothing you can do to change it and just improve what directly affects you. In the meantime, stop whinging about those less fortunate, because they are like that for a reason.

To call them leeches and parasites is more of a matter of factuality than insult though. It may be the insult to make the comparison but both receive without contribution. No, his attitude really isn't what got the Nazis into the war, what got them into the war was the attitude of attacking other nations, which is aggression rather than lacking compassion. It also is a very different attitude, the Jews are great contributors, they are just disliked as they are seen as evil and actively killed. He merely doesn't want to pay welfare, which can be viewed as cold but even if we take this to the extreme, letting someone die is different than killing them, at least as a mindset. Freedom of speech gives him that right, and his belief in his self-determination causes him to think that welfare is a violation of a right. Ok, those outside of America are a part of a different cultural idea, so what? I really think that even though we are at fault for not understanding your ways at times, you cannot be considered so much better as you do not understand our ideas either. Prove civilization. Why are these things entitled to you? You have every right to believe whatever you want, but there is always the question of why something is labeled as what you deserve, what you get but do not deserve, etc. As I see it, both sides have a right to argue on the matter for whatever position they like, but the real philosophical issues are skirted somewhat in these discussions as both sides think that they know absolute morality in many cases and are not afraid to use it to back their side, either by calling anti-welfare people heartless, or claiming that pro-welfare people are promoting theft or slavery(anti-welfare people usually hate taxes like hell).

psych
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,488
Location: w london

16 Aug 2007, 9:36 am

Todd489 wrote:

I don't care how many people it helps, it's still injust and I refuse to stand for it.

Do you mean your going to refuse to pay tax?

You must be self-employed then? I would have had trouble doing that when i was employed as they removed the tax before paying me. tbh i would not take lightly the thought of going to jail if i was in the US as ive heard their really tough over there.

There are many, many reasons to want to opt out of the federal system, so despite our differences i support and wish you well in this.

Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

16 Aug 2007, 9:41 am

TheMachine1 wrote:

I am not really that sure on the truth of that. There are some first world nations that still have good economies or fast growing economies with low population growth rates even negative growth rates. Not only that but there has to be a reason why that has to be considered true and I don't see it. I am not denying that population growth can have some benefits, but you state it is a matter of necessity and I don't see that, and such a claim would demand all sorts of exclusions from capitalism.

Page 3 of 5 [ 70 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Jump to:

Welfare should be abolished Post Reply New Topic

Welfare should be abolished