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.
I don't have a problem with people using safety nets. You get disabled during work, you ought to be compensated, I agree. You pay in to the unemployment fund when you work, if you lose your job you should be able to get some of that money while you look for work.
The problem is some people start treating safety nets like safety hammocks. I have no problem lending a hand to those in need, be it directly or through taxes, but I do have a huge problem with leeches sucking up money from the system because they choose not to work.
Sometimes an ice cold heart is a good anecdote to getting taken advantage of...
Here is the funny part: "One can see this division in something as simple as the denigration of the term "liberal," the "L" word, with its attendant idea that to be compassionate, caring and tolerant — virtues that had been celebrated, if only via lip service, by most Americans — is really to be mush-minded, weak and, more concretely, willing to give taxpayer largesse to the undeserving and lazy."
This poor misguided blogger is confusing charity with spending other people's money.
Conservatives and Libertarians give billions to charity. That's true compassion. When you give of your own resources, that's caring for others.
Taking other people's money and giving it to someone is not charity and is not compassion and is not caring.
The I, ME and MINE generation speaks. All for ONE and none for anyone else.
That is a great foundation for a moral society. As any worshipper of the God of Greed - Mammon.
You have it backwards. The people you refer to give billions to charity. Productive and ambitious people have always supported the unfortunate among us.
You should not confuse socialism with charity. Spending other people's money is not charity and is not compassion.
Libertarians seem to ignore human nature, plus they see everything as business oriented. Sort of like Karl Marx, I'd add. Anyway, to a Libertarian, businesses won't pollute, b/c it would be bad for business. Businesses would treat employees well, because not to do so would be bad for business. ETC. Never mind that we have many examples of just the opposite in our history.
Good morning,
There is a provision for enforcing pollution control in their platform.
Quote:
2.2 Environment We support a clean and healthy environment and sensible use of our natural resources. Private landowners and conservation groups have a vested interest in maintaining natural resources. Pollution and misuse of resources cause damage to our ecosystem. Governments, unlike private businesses, are unaccountable for such damage done to our environment and have a terrible track record when it comes to environmental protection. Protecting the environment requires a clear definition and enforcement of individual rights in resources like land, water, air, and wildlife. Free markets and property rights stimulate the technological innovations and behavioral changes required to protect our environment and ecosystems. We realize that our planet's climate is constantly changing, but environmental advocates and social pressure are the most effective means of changing public behavior.
Typical conservative denial of reality. The wealth redistribution of capitalism (funelling upwards to a few rich people) is going on right now. There has been no "Marxist redistribution of wealth" for the past 30 years. Data on wealth distribution shows that.
Thats fine if your definition of morality is the Prince John system of taxation where workers become increasingly productive, only to remain poor.
The problem is, it won't work for America in the long run.
You realize that money is "funneling" upwards is due to the government's intervention into the economy right? Government "do good" policies create opportunities for fat cats to feed from the public trough.
You stated that conservatives and libertarians don't like the American worker.
That wasn't what I meant to say; I made the sentence too convoluted. My bad. What I wrote was: "Conservatives and Libertarians don't like the American worker (who has lost immeasurable ground in the past 40 years with stagnated wages and lost benefits) being robbed of so much of their own earnings."
Take the parenthesis portion out of the sentence, since that was a description of the American worker (in other words, "the American worker, who has lost immeasurable ground in the past 40 years with stagnated wages and lost benefits"). The sentence then reads: "Conservatives and Libertarians don't like the American worker being robbed of so much of their own earnings."
This is how I should have written it: "Conservatives and Libertarians don't like the fact that the American worker is being robbed of so much of their own earnings. The American worker has lost immeasurable ground in the past 40 years with stagnated wages and lost benefits."
Thank you for pointing out when I am not being clear, and I don't mean that in a sarcastic way.
A charitable contribution by rich conservatives is a contradiction in terms. The only things they contribute to are things that support increased greed.
Considering of who robbed the American worker of his wages and benefits excusing conservatives and libertarians is a major whopper. Who took the workers compensation? The corporations and politicians that have systematically destroyed unions, off shored their work and destroyed their savings with stock and housing bubbles. The goal is to destroy any economic or political power of anyone but the connected wealthy.
To understand the unending economic warfare you have to know who your enemy is and why they are winning. The workers are not winning but the rich very much are.
You have it backwards. The people you refer to give billions to charity. Productive and ambitious people have always supported the unfortunate among us.
You should not confuse socialism with charity. Spending other people's money is not charity and is not compassion.
Yes. When will they realize it is not their money to give!
Not Yours To Give - Colonel Davy Crockett (http://www.juntosociety.com/patriotism/inytg.html - broken link)
A charitable contribution by rich conservatives is a contradiction in terms. The only things they contribute to are things that support increased greed.
Considering of who robbed the American worker of his wages and benefits excusing conservatives and libertarians is a major whopper. Who took the workers compensation? The corporations and politicians that have systematically destroyed unions, off shored their work and destroyed their savings with stock and housing bubbles. The goal is to destroy any economic or political power of anyone but the connected wealthy.
To understand the unending economic warfare you have to know who your enemy is and why they are winning. The workers are not winning but the rich very much are.
Good afternoon,
If workers don't like the current path of the system, they need to force their unions to purchase companies for their benefit. Instead of complaining about "fat cats", corporations and politicians, they need to use their "collective power" and buy their own auto company, steel mills, factories, health care companies, etc so they will have "secure" jobs until the end of time.
When it boils down to it, a company is created for the purpose of making profit, not creating jobs. They are not non-profits or social organizations. A worker is nothing but someone who rents his or her time for profit. If neither are happy with the arrangement, they should part ways and do something else that fits their goals. (Or, negotiate terms both can live with).
How exactly do the workers own their jobs? How is something stolen from them, when they agree to enter into these jobs, invest in these stocks, and buy these houses? Are you saying that "workers" are not smart enough to make their own decisions and change with the times? Why are we all fine with companies being forced to change with the times, taxes, and regulations, but for some reason "workers" should receive more compassion?
A smart worker would take the approach I did and opt out of the system and create my own job, my own retirement path that's independent of the stock market, and don't buy housing outside of their means, etc.
I'm surprised you feel this way since most people with your line of thinking have a globalist mindset. Aren't you happy that people in other part of the world now have the ability to compete for jobs and raise their standards of living?
Last edited by Freedom123; 05-23-2011 at 01:24 PM..
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.
