I don't like paying for the welfare queens/kings in the projects (Time: to buy, taxi)

[treemoni]

Originally Posted by EJ3791

I'm just trying to understand your argument. What I've gotten out of your comments so far is that:

(1) the rich should pay higher taxes than they do now because they can afford to;

(2) the rich's taxes not being high enough somehow shifts a burden to middle income people, who therefore pay more in taxes than they can afford; and

(3) for some unknown reason, this means that we shouldn't be concerned about problems with social welfare spending and poverty.

Correct! Where should I send your prize?

ETA

We should most definitely focus on social welfare and poverty, just not the "abuse" because it pales in comparison to the abuse that's crippling our country--abuse engineered by people with means. More means than anyone can ever use in a lifetime.

[EJ3791]

Originally Posted by Idon'tdateyou

And I'm supposed to feel sorry for these freeloaders who choose not to better themselves because? Once again there is McDonalds for these folks.

Whether or not you feel sorry for people is on your own conscience, but what you're saying is pretty reductive. As others in this thread have said, people don't really choose not to better themselves- they often grow up in situations where they it's hard to make the right choices, or even see that the right choices are realistic options. People in a lot of different situations receive various forms of public assistance. Some are suffer a setback and need help getting back on their feet, some actually are "freeloaders" who are gaming the system, such as abuse of unemployment and SSDI, but a lot are working poor who are just stuck it in a situation where they can't take jobs that warrant a living wage.

Helping people who can't help themselves is just an obligation we have as a society. For people who can help themselves, I have no problem helping them to do so through social welfare programs, provided that's what such programs actually do. Unfortunately, that hasn't been the case for the most part. Measures like the EIC, the child tax credit and 1990s reform of AFDC were promising steps toward restructuring our approach to helping people help themselves, but we haven't been able to get much done since then. It's like we ran out of will to follow through with reform and we ended up setting the problem of underclass dependency aside, allowing it to spread into the working class.

It's more about the principle than the money at this point. Right now it's a manageable public expense, although if it keeps expanding, it won't stay affordable. What's more to the point is that, while many people may need help at some point, it's degrading for people to be stuck in dependency, and it's bad for society to have too many people in that situation, especially when it's coming at the expense of a healthy working class.

[EJ3791]

Originally Posted by treemoni

Correct! Where should I send your prize?

ETA

We should most definitely focus on social welfare and poverty, just not the "abuse" because it pales in comparison to the abuse that's crippling our country--abuse engineered by people with means. More means than anyone can ever use in a lifetime.

Well, okay.

I don't agree that the rich should pay more in taxes because they can afford to. Ability to pay should be one of many factors we consider in appropriate levels of taxation, but that's an involved discussion that I won't get into unless you feel like it.

I don't agree that the tax burden is being shifted from the rich to the middle. If that were true the tax rates paid by the middle would increase, but that has not been the case- middle income tax rates have been gradually decreasing for a long time. What's actually happening is that burdens are being shifted from the present to the future through deficit spending.

Abuse of social welfare is pertinent because it facilitates people getting stuck in dependency, which has negative consequences for a lot more real people than a few rich guys exploiting some business expense rules in the Internal Revenue Code or buying government surplus fuel below market price.

There is plenty of abuse by people at the top, but it's more about power and influence than wealth per se. It's a problem, but I don't see how it's crippling our nation. In any event, I wouldn't put the income class distribution of the tax burden anywhere near the heart of our problems.

[jwaiter]

Kill kill kill kill the poor!

[baileyvpotter]

Originally Posted by Idon'tdateyou

And I'm supposed to feel sorry for these freeloaders who choose not to better themselves because? Once again there is McDonalds for these folks.

Originally Posted by cubssoxfan

And once again, you are making an assumption about the people interviewed in the story. Nowhere did I read about the how, when, where, why and what regarding their need to be on housing assistance. All it discussed was the where. Since there are many stories of solidly middle class people who lost their homes and bank accounts during the Great Recession, it is foolish to assume these people are "welfare Queens". Maybe they are, maybe they aren't. But since you did not base your rant on a story that proves they are; all your ranting is just hot air/empty words because you are working on an ASSumption.

Originally Posted by Mr. Opinionated

And aside from what appears as jealousy, the above shows and g good example of the lazy-minded generalizing that is used to bash people who are in need. To assume that they somehow do not deserve assistance based on the fact there are bad examples among them, not unlike just about any other sector of life. Profiling is profiling. Just as because one not might not percieve themselves as receiving assistance does not make them any more morally decent.

For the OP, perhaps you are just luckier in life than those "freeloaders" as you refer to them?
Your comments don't sound very Christian. Maybe you should re-educate yourself about the
fundamentals of Christianity and the Catholic Church.

[urza216]

Originally Posted by jwaiter

Kill kill kill kill the poor!

Dead Kennedys reference is win.

[noid_1985]

[LT445]

The posters on City Data often complain about these types of posts and thread, yet this thread gets big ups from all the complainers.

[nearnorth]

Originally Posted by LT445

The posters on City Data often complain about these types of posts and thread, yet this thread gets big ups from all the complainers.

It was also dead for four days, finally. Did you really have to bring it back?

It's worth looking at the OP's posts in the Relationships forum to see that her contempt for humanity extends far, far beyond just the poor, BTW. Her apparent disdain for life is nearly chet everettian in scope.

[LT445]

Originally Posted by nearnorth

It was also dead for four days, finally. Did you really have to bring it back?

It's worth looking at the OP's posts in the Relationships forum to see that her contempt for humanity extends far, far beyond just the poor, BTW. Her apparent disdain for life is nearly chet everettian in scope.

I wanted to comment on it, so that's why I bumped it up. If the thread would have been on a previous page, I would not have bumped it up. I apologize to the administrators if I broke a city data board policy by commenting on a thread.

Some of you moan and complain about other posters giving their opinions, but this thread exuded pure hatred and the OP got several co-signs. To me it appears some of you are hypocritical.