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.
No we dont. the intent of a basic income is to take care of the poor. The vast majority of folks discussing basic income mean for it to replace food stamps, tanf, section 8 etc. Your argument is not factually based. You are misrepresenting the vast majority of people who discuss this idea.
but you forget that you are talking about the federal government here. they are not going to shut down agencies just because they set up basic income guarantee. section 8 housing will still remain in effect, chances are so will food stamps, and other government agencies. the feds wont reduce their size, they will increase it.
Fact it is an individuals responsibility to provide for themselves. We do not subsidize them because they in most cases make poor life choice and not cannot cope with the stress and emotional issues being broke causes.
Really? Soooo the people I know on disability for example....one slipped, fell down 3 stories at a worksite and broke his back....poor life choice obviously.
Ones...crazy as a bean bag full of ferrets. Poor life choices obviously
Ones...got something neurologically wrong. Starts twitching and having seizures randomly, and occasionally cant remember where she is. Poor life choices obviously.
My taxes help provide for all of these people. And one of them I provide housing for as well. Now do I know some folks who are what you describe? Oh yeah! But they are the minority. We as a society have chosen to help these people. I for one like that a lot. Too bad you don't.
but you forget that you are talking about the federal government here. they are not going to shut down agencies just because they set up basic income guarantee. section 8 housing will still remain in effect, chances are so will food stamps, and other government agencies. the feds wont reduce their size, they will increase it.
Again, why? Theres no reason for those to exist. Your claim not withstanding any attempt to pass anything like this would in fact MANDATE the closure of these agencies. Thats the point.
You're misrepresenting a argument based upon your fantasy of how government will function.
Its like if the government decided that the coast guard and the navy were to be merged....you'd claim that the coast guard wouldn't merge, and would still exist, that the navy would only get bigger.
In Washington, or at least the Puget Sound, if the police respond to a domestic violence call, they will confiscate any gun the people own, and it takes a court order to get them back. It has proven to reduce domestic violence deaths in the state.
Why didn't they confiscate the kitchen knives also? Or the screw driver set in the tool box? So they confiscate the military surplus rifle that was passed down from grandpa but leave the bayonet that attaches to it behind?
lol can some say "anti gun agenda" masked as fighting domestic abuse
And why is it if cops are called to a domestic abuse call SOMEONE has to get arrested? Can you say excuse to "feeding the law enforcement and government coffers"
And who benefits from all this the most? Well...
Anti gun people do
government employees do
lawyers do
jeez they above usually vote democratic party hmmm...
Sigh. Oh look! We should start paying people less because its paying them to stop hitting women! OMG!
A interesting way to look at your argument (or any argument in general to see if its dumb) is to turn it around and observe it from the other side.
And please, don't be making excuses like "the dude is jacked in the head". It sounds like you are justifying domestic violence. Its an excuse. How dare you make it sound like its not someones fault for hitting a women.
Hmm..emotionally biased arguments are fun. I see why you tried to do one. Might I suggest working at getting better at it?
Jacked in the head as in the money isn't the problem aka unable to control his rage. These are defective human beings. Absolutely should be punished there is no excuse for dv at all. This is not emotionally based it's common sense thinking. If anyone is being emotional it's you wanting to feel all warm and fuzzy cause you think you are providing for someone
Jacked in the head as in the money isn't the problem aka unable to control his rage. These are defective human beings. Absolutely should be punished there is no excuse for dv at all. This is not emotionally based it's common sense thinking. If anyone is being emotional it's you wanting to feel all warm and fuzzy cause you think you are providing for someone
so we should punish someone for being unable to control themselves because they are as you say "jacked in the head"?
LOL. OK.
Sorry but no, we punish people because they CAN control their actions but choose not too. your argument is that they cannot because they are defective. By your argument we should just punish the mentally handicapped.
I do love how you try to turn it into a emotional argument over and over. First im saying this because I think we should pay people to stop DV, now its about me wanting to feel warm and fuzzy. Can't make up your mind? Maybe next it will be because of my hatred for America?
Why didn't they confiscate the kitchen knives also? Or the screw driver set in the tool box? So they confiscate the military surplus rifle that was passed down from grandpa but leave the bayonet that attaches to it behind?
lol can some say "anti gun agenda" masked as fighting domestic abuse
And why is it if cops are called to a domestic abuse call SOMEONE has to get arrested? Can you say excuse to "feeding the law enforcement and government coffers"
And who benefits from all this the most? Well...
Anti gun people do
government employees do
lawyers do
jeez they above usually vote democratic party hmmm...
.......because a gun tends to be the most commonly used weapon in domestic violence murders.......I guess it is better for spouses to murder each other by gun.
Again, why? Theres no reason for those to exist. Your claim not withstanding any attempt to pass anything like this would in fact MANDATE the closure of these agencies. Thats the point.
You're misrepresenting a argument based upon your fantasy of how government will function.
Its like if the government decided that the coast guard and the navy were to be merged....you'd claim that the coast guard wouldn't merge, and would still exist, that the navy would only get bigger.
no i am representing my argument based on how government DOES function. when was the last time that government actually eliminated a department? fact is they havent, well not since the early 1920s when harding actually did REAL spending cuts and eliminated a lot of government.
and you analogy, though a bad one would in fact be true. the coast guard would merge with the navy, as a department of the navy, and in fact the navy would get bigger because they would not cut the deep water fleets just because they added the shallow water navy.
Except for the fact that it has reduced the number of domestic violence deaths in the state. Guns make murdering a partner much, much easier.
Well, you have never seen "rage" obviously if you believe that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robertfchew
You are paying them in hopes they stop hitting women. The dude is jacked in the head he will hit the woman if he has 10 bucks in his pocket or 1000. So simple. World doesn't work all nice and pretty like you want.
.......because a gun tends to be the most commonly used weapon in domestic violence murders.......I guess it is better for spouses to murder each other by gun.
If the gun isn't there, they will just use another means. You all just don't understand "rage". And, with the illegal entry, guns come in all the time and are readily available so taking away the neighbor's guns, he knows where to get another stash.
The agenda here is about gun-control (making us sheepeople) not domestic violence and death. At least those using the abused to push their agenda, gun control, could have done is learned more about domestic violence before moving forward.
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.
