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.
Lol, it is nice to see you are trying, however I am not talking about $50 vs a day's volunteering. I am talking about the people who donate $100/mo every month. THOSE people are needed more than volunteers. Go ahead and ask the directors of the charities where you work, you might be surprised at thier answers.
This frustates me to no end. If I donate $400/month to charity (and I do), I will NOT get anywhere near $400/month back as a tax break. To claim so shows ignorance to no end. If the money stopped flowing in, charities would stop functioning. How can liberals 'get the job done' at a homeless shelter when there is no money to pay for food and clothing? What would you rather have me do, work an extra couple of hours a week and donate $400/month that a charity can use to buy food for starving people, or should I leave work early, keep that money for myself and work serving food? the second will definately make ME feel better, after all, I am on the front lines, helping people! The problem is starving people don't need a friendly face, they need resources. They need food, clothing and shelter, which are things that cash can buy. The next time you serve food to someone, or work to build someone a house when their home was destroyed, just remember, it is evil conservatives like me who are sitting in an office working extra hours alone so we can write checks to give you the resources to do it. The ignorance you display exemplifies your hypocracy.
You think money fixes everything.
You do realize that these charities would not be able to operate without people volunteering to do the work?
This is really over the top. Someone donates their most precious resource, their time, and you denigrate them for it?
seriously, that is disgusting.
charities need both people's time and money. if we lost either thing at the charity where i work, we'd be gone. i think it's really foul to demean the good people who give their time to help others, just because you're trying to make a partisan political point.
don't get me wrong, getting money is wonderful, and it's great that people donate. but even $100 a month wouldn't pay for the time of our volunteer (the aforementioned o'reilly fan) who works full time for us during our busy season.
i love it the screams stop socialist behavior. 43 million americans and 21 million illegals = 19% of people living here ---no insurance.
of course when then the rich need a trillion to bail out the rich banks and auto industries
that be ok.
making a poor mexican person work 12 hrs cleaning your house and yard and then sleep in a canyon in the bushes after, that be ok.
making guys like me work serving your hamburger & fries and sleeping on the beach at night on a bedroll after or in my RV at the park i use to picnic at, that be ok.
but unions?? living wage?? housing your gardner???, huck you talkin like a dirty commie.
This is really over the top. Someone donates their most precious resource, their time, and you denigrate them for it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by newtoli
You think money fixes everything.
You do realize that these charities would not be able to operate without people volunteering to do the work?
I am not saying volunteering is bad. I am responding to the common liberal cry that anyone who wants to make money is evil. Many of us work hard to make money so we can do good things with it. It frustrates me that liberals call conservatives hypocrites when I see hypocritical actions on the liberal side as well. I merely picked one arena where I see hypocritical actions on the part of liberals, and was using that as a counterpoint to the proposed conservative hypocracy on the issue of medicare. I see many liberals who have flat screen TVs, new computers, new cars while there is poverty not too far away from them. I see that as hypocracy. My contention was if liberals are hypocrites, then they have no right to call conservaties the same. It is a 'casual arguement' in debating terms, however very valid in making a point.
I am not saying volunteering is bad. I am responding to the common liberal cry that anyone who wants to make money is evil. Many of us work hard to make money so we can do good things with it. It frustrates me that liberals call conservatives hypocrites when I see hypocritical actions on the liberal side as well. I merely picked one arena where I see hypocritical actions on the part of liberals, and was using that as a counterpoint to the proposed conservative hypocracy on the issue of medicare. I see many liberals who have flat screen TVs, new computers, new cars while there is poverty not too far away from them. I see that as hypocracy. My contention was if liberals are hypocrites, then they have no right to call conservaties the same. It is a 'casual arguement' in debating terms, however very valid in making a point.
I don't think donating one's time is hypocritical. A lot of people would rather just write a check than actually go to a soup kitchen and help prepare and serve food, for ex. as I have done. Actually, I do both; I have volunteered my time, and I have given money to various charitable organizations. Thank you very much.
For as much talk as there is about the "unsustainability" of medicare, it has sustained itself these 44 years.
Really?
"Our off balance sheet obligations associated with Social Security and Medicare put us in a $56 trillion financial hole—and that's before the recession was officially declared last year. America now owes more than Americans are worth—and the gap is growing!"
"President Obama got the sequence wrong by advocating expanding coverage before we've proven our ability to control costs," he says. "If we don't get our fiscal house in order, but create new obligations we'll have a Thelma and Louise moment where we go over the cliff."
"Our $56 trillion in unfunded obligations amount to $483,000 per household. That's 10 times the median household income—so it's as if everyone had a second or third mortgage on a house equal to 10 times their income but no house they can lay claim to." John Fund Interviews David Walker: The Deficits Are Coming! - WSJ.com
i love it the screams stop socialist behavior. 43 million americans and 21 million illegals = 19% of people living here ---no insurance.
of course when then the rich need a trillion to bail out the rich banks and auto industries
that be ok.
making a poor mexican person work 12 hrs cleaning your house and yard and then sleep in a canyon in the bushes after, that be ok.
making guys like me work serving your hamburger & fries and sleeping on the beach at night on a bedroll after or in my RV at the park i use to picnic at, that be ok.
but unions?? living wage?? housing your gardner???, huck you talkin like a dirty commie.
I think most logical people agree that healthcare reform is needed. But lets be clear: no one is making a "poor Mexican person" work 12 hours a day and relegating them to sleep in a canyon. As far as i'm concerned, I don't really care if a "poor Mexican person" works 12 hours per day and sleeps in a canyon if they're an illegal immigrant. In fact, my arguments for and against UHC don't even assume illegal immigrant coverage. Let them operate in the shadows until they learn that we are a nation of laws.
Punishing private business and rewarding illegal migration are sure-fire ways to get the conservative faction riled up and against any liberal legislation that promotes such. Just as a certain Congressman said the other day, the GOP will delegislate UHC when they are back in power if the liberal left insists on trudging that slippery, and very wrong, path.
you are saying that volunteering is less good than giving money. you're trying to say that liberals are more selfish than conservatives because they volunteer rather than giving money (based on your personal experience, no less). that is ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by hnsq
I am responding to the common liberal cry that anyone who wants to make money is evil.
"Our off balance sheet obligations associated with Social Security and Medicare put us in a $56 trillion financial hole—and that's before the recession was officially declared last year. America now owes more than Americans are worth—and the gap is growing!"
"President Obama got the sequence wrong by advocating expanding coverage before we've proven our ability to control costs," he says. "If we don't get our fiscal house in order, but create new obligations we'll have a Thelma and Louise moment where we go over the cliff."
"Our $56 trillion in unfunded obligations amount to $483,000 per household. That's 10 times the median household income—so it's as if everyone had a second or third mortgage on a house equal to 10 times their income but no house they can lay claim to." John Fund Interviews David Walker: The Deficits Are Coming! - WSJ.com
I take it you advocate going over the cliff.
If I didn't have to go to work in a couple hours (to provide health care to kids), I'd do some research on that, but the article you cited is an opinion piece.
This is the type of evidence that you can't even force-feed the liberal set. They will have none of that. Obama is God, Pelosi and Reid are superhuman, and the rest of the know-it-all Democratic Congress have all the bases covered and utopia is just around the corner. Yep.
Maybe those insurance companies should have gotten competitive
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.
