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.
A nation is a family. You don't bad mouth your mother - father- brother or sister or your own children...No one is a worthless loser...even if they are you keep that to yourself...Americans seem to love calling each other scum- dirt bag - loser...etc....It does not serve you well as a national family- If someone is a loser- they are your loser.
America is absolutely chock -full of losers and deadbeats who'd rather not lift a finger to help themselves and instead rely on the American taxpayer to care for their every need, including food, housing, cell phones, medical care, etc.
Whenever these losers and otherwise useless people are mentioned by conservatives, the first to come to their defense is liberals with a myriad of excuses as to why we shoud all be caring, empathetic, and sympathetic citizens who willingly support the Social Safety Net Juggernaut™.
Hardly ever do we find a liberal who will forthrightly, and honestly, acknowledge that this country is full of deadbeat individuals who do not pay into the American system.
Why is this? Why is it that liberals won't for a moment acknowledge that YES there are millions upon millions of people in this country who are perpetual bad decision-makers and have no desire, will, or ability to change their worthless existence?
Who amongst you will stand up and defend America for once instead of defending the Lowest Common Denominator that's sucking your wallet dry without an ounce of remorse?
And somehow, your life is of more worth? Who are you to judge? This divisiveness in your very speech is symbolic to why you won't have an America to defend.
And they don't pay into the American system? Sales tax? State taxes? Payroll Tax? Did you foget about these?
No, I expect that person to either better themselves through career-advancement (yes, that does happen without a college education), or get a college education, or move out of a high cost of living area. It's uttlerly foolish to work in retail/fast food in a high cost of living area and wonder why a person can't make ends meet. It doesn't pass the common sense test and, if anything, should compel the person to do even better with their life.
Career Advancement takes money for college and smarts which not everyone has. How will they have money to move if they are poor? Just because you move to an lower cost area does not mean you can still make enough to live on.
Except for the profoundly disabled, most with that label can do "something". Unless a person is bound to bed 24/7 unable to use their hands they can work.
Whenever I hear about a panic attack all I can think about is that scene from airplane....
how come 40 years ago, nobody ever heard of a panic attack and now it's down-right "fashionable". Please. PLEASE.
20yrsinBranson
I suggest you walk in someone else's shoes before you make pronouncements like that. With today's technology you can be in an iron lung and still do work. Jean-Dominique Bauby had a stroke and was completely paralyzed except for one eyelid. The guy blinked that eye to write a book. He did "something".
Far from being too lenient, I think the disability rules today are too strict. Doing "something" doesn't mean you can get by. It doesn't take much to be a greeter at Walmart. But being a greeter at Walmart also isn't going to pay for food, rent, insurance, utilities, and transportation in today's economy.
There should be a point at which the things you can do narrows to the point where it isn't reasonable to expect the person to do it. Or the lengths to which the person has to go in order to function in the workplace are too much to expect an employer to accomodate or the person to go through.
Blindness I think is a good example. A blind person can work. There are jobs they can do. But I think their quality of life is such that we really shouldn't expect them to work if they don't want to. They've got it hard enough already just to live life day to day. I'm a conservative Republican, but I have zero problems with my tax dollars going to pay disability to a blind person.
conservatism is an exclusionary political ideology. This means that conservatives hate millions upon millions of their fellow citizens.
Except for being emotionally satisfying for conservatives who need an enemy of some kind, if we accept their premise as true then we cannot believe in democracy or democratic institutions.
A conservative society will inevitably sink into being an oligarchic/plutocratic state which will become more violent and less responsive to the needs of its citizens.
Once a government accepts the basic premise that many of its own citizens are beyond help are beyond giving a damn about and this is sanctioned by large segments of a society, that is the end of democracy in that society.
Because it's an absurd notion propagated by right-wing trolls?
60% of Americans depend on the government for some type of financial subsidy.
83 means tested welfare programs cost over $1 trillion a year.
Work requirement has been dropped from TANF and SNAP because min wage salaries can't support families yet these are the jobs people are taking.
Programs to help the poor have been hitting new highs with record number of enrollments over the past year.
I think it's more than just an "absurb notion" here.
Geezus H. Christmas. Does it occur to you that we are not talking about the disabled in this thread? Not a single shred of ire has been targeted towards children or disabled people. NONE
This is EXACTLY what I was talking about in the OP. Liberal obtusity knows no bounds.
Unbelievable!
And Willie Jones?
He seems to -exactly- fit who were are talking about in this thread.
Lived his entire life off government assistance. Every dime his family received was from the government.
And ended up contributing nothing back to society. Because of his choices.
Is he or is he not one of your worthless losers? Why or why not?
I funded 90% of my education by working menial jobs. Were you too good to work menial jobs?
When? In the 1970s, state universities were subsidized by the taxpayers by 75%. The student only had to fund 25%. That is largely reversed, states are funding at 25% rates now.
So, your menial job could no longer pay the tuition even at a state school they way it once could.
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.
