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.
Everyone should get one vote, period. Though I agree that there are some "welfare" abuses (lazy people that never want to work, single mothers knocked up as teens then living off the system, and many more, and what about the handicapped?), they are not the only ones on welfare.
Many very proud members of generations of highly contributory working and middle class people are joining the ranks of the poor for many reasons.
1): unemployment, lack of jobs, jobs which are only part-time and don't pay a living wage
2): exorbitant medical bills due to inflation, lack of affordable insurance, etc.
3): loss of equity due to the housing plunge, stock market crisis, investments going down the tube, and higher cost of living
There are some real disaster stories, even by folks that were once fairly affluent by most standards, and now they have to live on food stamps.
It's the economy... and the system that now favors the upper class and corporations who have bought out the politicians, and now there is a lot less opportunity (even with a college degree). You can't deny that for a minute.
All this thread has shown me is how heartless, cold, selfish and twisted some conservatives really are. It has literally made me physically sick that there are Americans who feel this way about their fellow countrymen.
I can honestly say that I would much rather live in Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Burma or Vietnam than in the far-right's version of "America." I would rather be killed than have my rights -- or the rights of my friends and neighbors -- stripped because of not having enough money or not fulfilling the perverse demands of the so-called "hard-working" far-right elitists.
I'm sorry Frank, those people are apparently less than human and should be forced to starve to death. They should have had the sense not to get sick or lose their job or believe their real estate agent when they said they could afford a house on their income!
Oh, they also all can't keep their pants on and have too many children. We just have to make sure we keep comparing poor people and those on welfare to animals as often as possible so that we can justify stripping their right to vote from them!
You are utterly insane, but I don't have time to keep posting, today was the first time I ever posted here, and it's futile...
About us:
We had our mortgage paid off for 10 years on a house worth over 200k
We have no kids, we are in our 50's
We were making over $80,000 combined in 2009
We had a house on the hill in the woods with acreage so we didn't even see any neighbors
What happened due to the economy:
Kids just out of college took away our clients offering cheap rates
We couldn't find any new clients
We moved out of state and bought a 50k house
We had to sell all our investments
We may be just now selling the old house now at less than half value due to the market flooded by foreclosures, if not, we will be foreclosed, and it's been on the market for a year
We lived on all our liquid assets for almost a year and can't find decent income
So now we're broke and applying for food stamps
BS, the ones not paying much of anything into the system are the ones mostly bilking it.
Are you seriously suggesting that middle and upper income voters do not try to get the maximum in benefits from the government themselves? Voters vote in their own self-interest. Who do I think will best represent me? Who can do the most for me/the country as I see it? Which of these candidates will deregulate more to ensure I maximize my company's profits?
Quote:
You are utterly insane, but I don't have time to keep posting, today was the first time I ever posted here, and it's futile...
Sorry, Poe's Law. I don't remotely believe any of what I wrote in that post, I was being sarcastic. However, there are posters in this thread who are making those arguments earnestly, and I agree with you, it is utterly insane, anti-American and pretty much inhuman.
You broke it. Voters might demand it, but they don't vote for appropriations bills. Only Members of
A. House of Representatives
B. Senate
C. Members of various State Legislatures.
Perhaps Civics 101 would help you.
Wow, way to pick and choose who to insult. I was responding to a poster who said, "It is true that the lazy in this country tend to vote themselves the treasury." Are you going to suggest that this poster take a Civics 101 course? Course not, he's on your "team."
Voters elect the representatives who vote on appropriations bills of course. And all rational voters will vote in their self-interest.
I do not favor a caste system or poll tax. So yes, the recipient class should be allowed to vote.
Fascinating concept, though. One year, you're gainfully employed and considered a person of political knowledge and as having worthwhile input. Add one economic deroute, and all of a sudden you're in the "recipient class" and, as such, will have no worthwhile input on the country's future.
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.
So true!
