1. Post #81
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    personally I would prefer the states to decide to what degree they each are taught (Even though it should stay out of schools and in churches) but I have a feeling some schools would end up treating one of the other in the same fashion Colored schools were treated and neglected in the Civil Rights era.
    Federal Regulation? People tend not to like that. Precedents to set a standard? in the past it hasn't worked.

    I for one want states to take care of education rather than the government though. Is that more of a republican or democrat view?
    States already do for the most part. The Dept. of Education isn't crafting curriculum or anything like that.

  2. Post #82
    Gold Member
    [sluggo]'s Avatar
    May 2010
    2,689 Posts
    Welfare, as in welfare specifically? Yeah, I'm calling bullshit right now, I've searched pretty extensively for unbiased statistics on social service fraud, and the closest one I got was one for Unemployment Insurance, and that was less than a 2% fraud rate.

    http://waysandmeans.house.gov/legacy...2/6-11find.htm

    "1.9% of total UI payments for that year, was attributable to fraud or abuse within the UI program. By any standard, these figures add up to a lot of money. That is why the Department of Labor has been hard at work on the problem."

    Edited:


    The reason people call you names for what you say is because this is the usual chain of events:
    You: "welfare is bad, it creates dependency and why should we give people money for doing nothing?"
    Others: "Can you cite a source that states this?"
    You: Either you stop posting or post something that isn't logically sound, ala Fox News.
    Citing a source for welfare dependancy, and that you get money for nothing, is like citing a source that the WW2 happened.

  3. Post #83
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    Citing a source for welfare dependancy, and that you get money for nothing, is like citing a source that the WW2 happened.
    well then it should be very easy to cite a source but yet you have issues with it

  4. Post #84
    Gold Member
    [sluggo]'s Avatar
    May 2010
    2,689 Posts
    well then it should be very easy to cite a source but yet you have issues with it
    Well, what do people do to earn welfare money? Absolutely nothing.

  5. Post #85
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    Well, what do people do to earn welfare money? Absolutely nothing.
    well i personally prefer the more logical "view each person on their own" but if you wanna be that collectivist about it.

    i mean people don't do anything to earn streetlights, police departments, or water either yet for some reason we have that.

  6. Post #86
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Well, what do people do to earn welfare money? Absolutely nothing.
    Except have physical/mental issues or is taking care of someone with physical/mental issues. Yea I didn't realize being on welfare is something so amazing it needs to be earned. Your really suggesting people who can't get a job should starve? You should put that quote as your title.

  7. Post #87
    Gold Member
    [sluggo]'s Avatar
    May 2010
    2,689 Posts
    Except have physical/mental issues or is taking care of someone with physical/mental issues. Yea I didn't realize being on welfare is something so amazing it needs to be earned. Your really suggesting people who can't get a job should starve? You should put that quote as your title.
    No, I think that money I earn is mine. Not other peoples. Especialy when they did nothing to earn in.

    Private charities, and even state run programs will feed, and house the very poor. They don't need a cent of my money, unless I wish to give it to them.

    Imagine if you were next to some homeless guy, and suddenly someone pulled a gun on you, forcing you to give whatever percent of you money to the homeless person for no reason. It is the same when the goverment does it, just they will send you to jail, not shoot you.

  8. Post #88
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    It is the same when the goverment does it, just they will send you to jail, not shoot you.
    except you wouldn't earn any money if there wasn't a social contract for a variety of reasons.
    if you drive to work other people paying the taxes for the road maintenance allowed you to go to work. if you use public transportation you used other people's money to use it. a job you worked at is likely there due to incentives or contracts given from other people's money that you benefited from.

  9. Post #89
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Private charities, and even state run programs will feed, and house the very poor. They don't need a cent of my money, unless I wish to give it to them.
    Even though they didn't in the past when regulation and taxes were far lower? You have no basis for this argument.

  10. Post #90
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    No, I think that money I earn is mine. Not other peoples. Especialy when they did nothing to earn in.

    Private charities, and even state run programs will feed, and house the very poor.
    You really think charities will be able to get enough money to feed and house all those who can't get a job? You're dreaming, they can barely feed the homeless let alone the millions they are going to have to house and clothe. You really don't think you owe society a few dollars to keep people from having to hunt for survival. I'm sorry but a government without taxes is impossible.

  11. Post #91
    Gold Member
    [sluggo]'s Avatar
    May 2010
    2,689 Posts
    except you wouldn't earn any money if there wasn't a social contract for a variety of reasons.
    if you drive to work other people paying the taxes for the road maintenance allowed you to go to work. if you use public transportation you used other people's money to use it. a job you worked at is likely there due to incentives or contracts given from other people's money that you benefited from.
    I am aware that there is a huge amount of social things like roads, and public transportation. I am not arguing against things like that, what I am arguing against, is that people who did nothing for it, get my money. Why should people achieve success, by taking from the success of others, all of this while doing nothing to earn it?

  12. Post #92
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    I am aware that there is a huge amount of social things like roads, and public transportation. I am not arguing against things like that, what I am arguing against, is that people who did nothing for it, get my money. Why should people achieve success, by taking from the success of others, all of this while doing nothing to earn it?
    Because some people have basic empathy for those people and don't wish to see them fall through the cracks of society?

    And no, charities have not and will not support the poor to an extent that allows them to live in a real way.

  13. Post #93
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Why should people achieve success, by taking from the success of others, all of this while doing nothing to earn it?
    You heard it here folks sluggo is ok with the disabled to starve to death.

    But really a world where the poor and disabled can't get there needs would be bad on everyone. The poor would have to steal to survive and crime would raise to extremes.

  14. Post #94
    Gold Member
    [sluggo]'s Avatar
    May 2010
    2,689 Posts
    You really think charities will be able to get enough money to feed and house all those who can't get a job? You're dreaming, they can barely feed the homeless let alone the millions they are going to have to house and clothe. You really don't think you owe society a few dollars to keep people from having to hunt for survival. I'm sorry but a government without taxes is impossible.
    I want a program where the unemployed work. I want the unemployed to work the maintain roads, to build bridges, even to serve in the military. I then want anyone with the will to work to be able to have these jobs. I want the unemployed to earn money, not just take it.

  15. Post #95
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    I want a program where the unemployed work.
    You understand they are on welfare because they can't work right?

  16. Post #96
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    I want a program where the unemployed work. I want the unemployed to work the maintain roads, to build bridges, even to serve in the military. I then want anyone with the will to work to be able to have these jobs. I want the unemployed to earn money, not just take it.
    When the government employs the unemployed, that's called a public works program. You might remember this fellow FDR doing something like that.

  17. Post #97
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    Why should people achieve success, by taking from the success of others, all of this while doing nothing to earn it?
    well first of all no-one's achieving success when they get welfare.

    second of all generally a society that gives out welfare is better for everyone because the bullshit assumption is that people will go to work without welfare. that's not true. welfare doesn't last forever, it's a temporary crutch and what it does is it prevents society from falling into a deeper level of poverty which has huge strains for everyone.

    basically if other people's lives get fucked over because they have no money and can't get welfare, it'll reflect upon society itself and ruin your life as well. it's not even really your money considering you weren't 100% responsible for earning it but it's for the better common good if you A. keep some of the money you earned for yourself so you can re-invest and do whatever you wish to do with it and B. give some back to the society that allowed you to earn it.

    this line of thinking is all over the founding fathers' writings and manifesto's, some of them even suggesting what is essentially known as communism today with each family receiving land to work on and having all wealth reverted and distributed amongst small communities.

  18. Post #98
    Gold Member
    [sluggo]'s Avatar
    May 2010
    2,689 Posts
    You understand they are on welfare because they can't work right?
    Offer them a chance to work, and if they don't accept it, they just want to be freeloaders. I want an entirely optional, but entirely available program.

  19. Post #99
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    Offer them a chance to work, and if they don't accept it, they just want to be freeloaders.
    with the US's measly welfare program you have to have a job to even survive on welfare benefits

  20. Post #100
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    they just want to be freeloaders.
    Yep the brain damaged are free loaders.

  21. Post #101
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Offer them a chance to work, and if they don't accept it, they just want to be freeloaders. I want an entirely optional, but entirely available program.
    You don't understand the system at all, do you? It seems almost as if you think the poor just ask the government for a free check and there's no oversight, or job searching, or anything.

  22. Post #102
    Gold Member
    [sluggo]'s Avatar
    May 2010
    2,689 Posts
    Ok, let me finally address the disabled. People who are completely unable to work, would recieve there basic needs. But not wanting to work, and not being able are two different things.

    Edited:

    You don't understand the system at all, do you? It seems almost as if you think the poor just ask the government for a free check and there's no oversight, or job searching, or anything.
    Essentialy, yes.

    Tell me what you have to do I recieve welfare money?

  23. Post #103
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Ok, let me finally address the disabled. People who are completely unable to work, would recieve there basic needs
    You mean like most people on welfare? The reason people are on welfare is because they can't work. They are either mothers taking care of disabled kids or are disabled themselves or something else that makes work impossible. Welfare isn't where you go in and the government gives you money. Really welfare money is practically nothing and anyone who has the option to work does because even with a bad job your going to be making more then the average person with government support.

  24. Post #104
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Ok, let me finally address the disabled. People who are completely unable to work, would recieve there basic needs. But not wanting to work, and not being able are two different things.
    You are aware that welfare is for the working poor and disabled, and unemployment insurance is for the unemployed, right? I've already showed you the statistics about the low fraud rate in UI, so what is your objection?

  25. Post #105
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    Tell me what you have to do I recieve welfare money?
    hey no way mr. "recieve" if you wanna talk shit about welfare make sure you actually know something about it before spouting off.

    if you think you just go behind the state department office, give head, and fill out a form to receive benefits you're completely oblivious to reality.

  26. Post #106
    Hello, my name is Penis. Please refer to me as such. I'm totally cool with it.
    SPESSMEHREN's Avatar
    November 2009
    4,813 Posts
    hey no way mr. "recieve" if you wanna talk shit about welfare make sure you actually know something about it before spouting off.

    if you think you just go behind the state department office, give head, and fill out a form to receive benefits you're completely oblivious to reality.
    He's right, that doesn't get you welfare. That's how you get a job in state government.

  27. Post #107
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Essentialy, yes.

    Tell me what you have to do I recieve welfare money?
    Hahaha, oh wow. Again I'll tell you, welfare is for the working poor and disability is for the disabled. If you're working poor, you can't afford to take on another job to "pay off the welfare". If you're on unemployment insurance, that's finite and you have to submit job search reports to supervisors while on UI. I should know, my father was on it for quite some time.

    Edited:

    He's right, that doesn't get you welfare. That's how you get a job in state government.
    Don't be an idiot.

  28. Post #108
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    He's right, that doesn't get you welfare. That's how you get a job in state government.
    well your mom must have excellent job security then.


    no really though don't post if you can't add anything to the conversation.

  29. Post #109
    Hello, my name is Penis. Please refer to me as such. I'm totally cool with it.
    SPESSMEHREN's Avatar
    November 2009
    4,813 Posts
    Okay, I'll add to the conversation.

    I believe all welfare recipients should be subjected to random drug screening (including marijuana), and welfare money should not be used to buy alcohol.

  30. Post #110
    Derubermensch's Avatar
    August 2009
    1,267 Posts
    Even though they didn't in the past when regulation and taxes were far lower? You have no basis for this argument.
    Well, during the 80s when Reagan drastically cut welfare spending, private charity donations had gone up 55% than it had grown over the previous 25 years. And if you still have doubts, in 2009 net total of all money donated by the private sector to charitable causes added up to roughly $303.75 Billion. I would like to emphasize that I DO NOT hold high regard for Ronald Reagan.

    What I also find interesting is how people always want to relegate their responsibility to help the poor to the government. I worked at a soup kitchen in inner-city Cleveland for 2 months, what have YOU done to help the poor?

  31. Post #111
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    what have YOU done to help the poor?
    Pay taxes.


    But I did volunteer once or twice.

  32. Post #112
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    Well, during the 80s when Reagan drastically cut welfare spending, private charity donations had gone up 55% than it had grown over the previous 25 years. And if you still have doubts, in 2009 net total of all money donated by the private sector to charitable causes added up to roughly $303.75 Billion. I would like to emphasize that I DO NOT hold high regard for Ronald Reagan.
    And so what? What did those charities cover? Healthcare? Food? Housing? How many did they cover? Did they even make up the difference in those welfare cuts?

    A simply "charity donations went up 55%" means jack shit if the charities aren't providing essential services or have private interests of their own.

  33. Post #113
    Derubermensch's Avatar
    August 2009
    1,267 Posts
    Paying taxes is not you paying your dues. I'm fine with decentralized, pro-actively administrated local public charities, but it is irresponsible to think that you have payed your responsibilities to the poor through a federal income tax that would have been forcibly subjected to you either way.
    (Directed at imasillypiggy)

    And Megafanx, I find that infinitely ironic because I could make the same argument against welfare payments.

  34. Post #114
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    I believe all welfare recipients should be subjected to random drug screening (including marijuana), and welfare money should not be used to buy alcohol.
    which would solve what exactly?

  35. Post #115
    Gold Member
    Boba_Fett's Avatar
    August 2007
    9,187 Posts
    Okay, I'll add to the conversation.

    I believe all welfare recipients should be subjected to random drug screening (including marijuana), and welfare money should not be used to buy alcohol.
    I personally think it should be given away only towards only necessities. I know a guy who was on welfare that ended up using some of the money to buy a flatscreen TV, and my uncle used welfare money to buy heroin.

  36. Post #116
    Awesome Member
    Dennab
    January 2006
    40,350 Posts
    What I also find interesting is how people always want to relegate their responsibility to help the poor to the government. I worked at a soup kitchen in inner-city Cleveland for 2 months, what have YOU done to help the poor?
    working at a fucking soup-kitchen for 2 months isn't going to solve the problem of people lacking healthcare. a state-run healthcare system does.

  37. Post #117
    MEGA SENPAI KAWAII UGUU~~ =^_^=
    Megafan's Avatar
    September 2008
    14,608 Posts
    And Megafanx, I find that infinitely ironic because I could make the same argument against welfare payments.
    At least government is supposed to be accountable to the citizenry. Private charities are not.

  38. Post #118
    Gold Member
    Canesfan's Avatar
    July 2005
    1,404 Posts
    You must have been living under a rock for the 8 years under bush. not even those in particular. The whole 'you're with us or against us' attitude.

    When you had shit like this daily:

    (And his whole rant against Hollywood)

    Plus if you recall entire protests with poorly spelled signs declaring liberals to be traitors.

    It was very, very prevalent.

    I don't see how you get that conclusion but no, I hate 4chan and everything it represents.
    Whoa whoa whoa haha are you serious? There is a MASSIVE difference between supporting Bush and supporting the military. That "proof" from a TV program is about supporting the military. I see everyone that doesn't support the military as unpatriotic and i'm not ashamed to admit it. You don't have to like where they've been sent or why they've been sent there, but that's not under their control. The military, aka the people that put their lives up for our country, should be unabashedly supported through everything. I'm not talking about being proud of the inevitable douches in the military that commit random acts of violence and give the military a bad name, but the military as a whole.

    There is NO reason to not support the men and women of the military. They do what they're told in service of the country. If you're going to not support something, look at the politicians. If you'd read what I said earlier you'd see even I don't support the current wars in Iraq/Afghanistan and yet i'm still a conservative. But I will always support the military 100%.

    And yeah, there are people that go around saying liberals are "traitors" but they're a minority. How is that any worse than people like you running around yelling how ALL conservatives are racist, bigoted idiots?

  39. Post #119
    imasillypiggy's Avatar
    December 2009
    8,851 Posts
    Paying taxes is not you paying your dues. I'm fine with decentralized, pro-actively administrated local public charities, but it is irresponsible to think that you have payed your responsibilities to the poor through a federal income tax that would have been forcibly subjected to you either way.
    (Directed at imasillypiggy)
    I actually am poor. I probably got way more in charity/government help then I will ever give. So yea i'm definitely not saying people shouldn't give to charity. But I know its not going to cover what the disabled/poor need like charity and government combined.

  40. Post #120
    Derubermensch's Avatar
    August 2009
    1,267 Posts
    Or we could actually solve the problems behind our healthcare market instead of masking it by spreading the payment for it. Get the government out of the doctor-patient relationship, grind down on so called "intellectual rights", and allow for nationwide competition among healthcare providers. Even so, churches and charity treatments have always been there for the poor.
    directed at Thisisspain, fast moving thread this evening.