Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The yes or no portion of the question I don't find problematic. Only the additional commentary appended to each choice designed to 'lead' the reader into following a conclusion that follows from a premise. Only problem is, the conclusions are framed in the context of the system we have now. But what we have now are not the only options that can exist, from amongst the myriad philisophocal choices of how we view the ethics (and law) of land (read: different property rights paradigms exist which would largely dispense with having to be placed betwixt those two positions).
Last edited by FreedomThroughAnarchism; 03-17-2011 at 11:28 PM..
Obama & Bush gave away trillions to already obscenely rich, top 10% of Americans own 90% of national wealth or so. What to do, what to do? Let's eliminate all social support networks, turn country into a soulless, Right wing Darwinian Paradise in order to save a few billions on the poor and desperate. OK, imagine you did all of that, what's next? Since top 10% own most of the country, cutting income of the very bottom will not solve a squat, NOTHING, can you understand that? Seriously, you people on the right need your head checked, especially in lower income brackets. They manipulate you better then cow can manipulate her tail.
Obama & Bush gave away trillions to already obscenely rich, top 10% of Americans own 90% of national wealth or so. What to do, what to do? Let's eliminate all social support networks, turn country into a soulless, Right wing Darwinian Paradise in order to save a few billions on the poor and desperate. OK, imagine you did all of that, what's next? Since top 10% own most of the country, cutting income of the very bottom will not solve a squat, NOTHING, can you understand that? Seriously, you people on the right need your head checked, especially in lower income brackets. They manipulate you better then cow can manipulate her tail.
If we spend all of our money on eternal war, there's nothing left for anything else.
How do other countries support their citizenry? They do not have economies based on war and sucking up to the richest few percent.
Where do state and local governments get this money? More often than not, it's from federal government grants. You might as well just streamline it by giving the entire program to the feds.
Most people couldn't give two (&#^@* about the poor. They'd 'donate' their extra money from tax cuts to yacht manufacturers and stores selling large-screen TVs while their neighbors froze on the streets.
The more local something is run, the more efficient it is. 'streamlining' the process is NOT giving power to the feds. Look at the JIT philosophy of manufacturing. You make a greater number of smaller, more expensive plants, but it saves cost overall due to operational efficiency gains.
And you are wrong about 'most people'. People on this thread ARE 'most people' and obviously we all care. Most people are not as cynical as you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81
Section 8 doesn't give anyone anything. It allows people to rent an apartment or home for 30 percent of their household income. Income rises, rent goes up. Income goes up too much, find a market value abode.
That wouldn't do very well for a family of five, would it? And what would you do in three months if the head of household hasn't found work? Throw them all out into the street?
Sorry...section 8 DOES give people something. It gives them a place to live at a price dramatically below market value.
And why on earth wouldn't dorm-style housing work for a family of 5?
I personally do not think a person having a job or not, or having housing or not is the responsibility of the government. There are many private charities, family members, other means to receive help. Also, when a person knows they only have help for three months, they typically find a job in three months. People have a responsibility to themselves to help themselves. The onus is on the individual, not government.
There are some who CANNOT provide for themselves. We, as a humane society take care of our own. (except if you're unfortunate enough to be a human in the womb).
But I digress.
I'm all for helping the helpless. I'm totally against helping the clueless.
I don't like the idea of providing families with money to rent a home. However, I have no problem with housing projects. If you can't make ends meet, then you should be able to live in a government provided apartment building.
If you've ever visited a housing project, they aren't very nice, and the amount you pay is based on your income level. If you aren't trying to find a job, you have to prove disability or you aren't allowed to live there. Almost everyone that lives in the "projects" pays something.
There are some who CANNOT provide for themselves. We, as a humane society take care of our own. (except if you're unfortunate enough to be a human in the womb).
But I digress.
I'm all for helping the helpless. I'm totally against helping the clueless.
we absolutely should help those who cannot help themselves.
We as a society.
NOT we as a government.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
