Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-07-2013, 07:02 AM
 
4,130 posts, read 4,451,376 times
Reputation: 3041

Advertisements

If there was an IQ test for government support, the people who spend their days writing manifestos will be forced to find work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-07-2013, 07:57 AM
 
Location: Bella Vista, Ark
77,772 posts, read 104,356,591 times
Reputation: 49248
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
We have no nation if we refuse to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. People do not determine their IQ's. If a low IQ means they can't find work, society owes it to them to take care of them.
this may be true, but do you have a clue how many people are being supported by you and me, that could take of themselves if the money was cut off. If nothing else, all government programs should be limited, after a certain number of kids: How about no increases in food stamps, welfare checks etc. after 2 2 kids. Meaning of course, the funds do not increase after 2 kids, but stay the same. I was in a WalMart in NM one time and there was the family: mommy and 3 kids, with daddy. Mommy was using food stamps for the herself and kids; daddy was using them for himself. Whatever the situation, probably not married is my guess, there were 2 adults, both getting government aid. Don't you think this should be stopped?

BTW, even people with low IQs can get work. it might not be much and yes, if the IQ is really low, they do need help, but don't think they can't work. We all know situations were they can and do.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 10:02 AM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,077 posts, read 10,670,902 times
Reputation: 8793
Quote:
Originally Posted by BentBow View Post
The weak & freaks, will always pull down the herd, unless they get culled from the herd.
I've never seen a more succinct statement of the immorality of the right-wing and other antisocial forces seeking a voice in our society, today.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 10:09 AM
 
Location: Central Maine
4,697 posts, read 6,431,229 times
Reputation: 5046
Quote:
Originally Posted by hawkeye2009 View Post
Which do we choose? Placating liberals now, ensuring the demise of the nation? Or acknowledging reality and stop supporting self destructive national policy?
Gee, that's a tough question.

I wonder - what would Jesus do?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 10:41 AM
 
Location: Pacific NW
9,437 posts, read 7,341,115 times
Reputation: 7979
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler View Post
We have no nation if we refuse to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves. People do not determine their IQ's. If a low IQ means they can't find work, society owes it to them to take care of them.
The problem is we have far to many people who WILL not take care of themselves soaking up resources that should be for those who CAN NOT take care of themselves.

The US is headed down the Idiocracy path. Idiocracy (2006) - IMDb


Idiocracy - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 10:50 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,536,408 times
Reputation: 22473
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ghostrider275452 View Post
People with any semblance of intelligence will only have as many children as they can afford, people of low intelligence will have as many children as the welfare system will pay for and at this point there is no limit. The kids are nothing more than cash cows for these single mother parents, raised in the street to become criminals and we now have a generation of idiots who do not want to learn or work. The public school system has had to dumb down the curriculum for these morons and many still graduate illiterate and dumber than a box of rocks. A program(welfare) that was started with good intentions has become a way of life for some and it is coming back to haunt us. When in Gods name will we ever learn that giving people free stuff creates absolutely no incentive to do anything with ones life. I fear that the stupid will soon out number the smart people in this country and we will have a nation of people that are capable of doing nothing but drooling and dependent entirely on handouts. Thank you Lyndon Johnson for a legacy we will never shed.
Yes. A system that actually rewards irresponsible breeding is the problem.

Of course the less motivated to work types will drop out or graduate from high school if it's easy enough, and see that there's a very easy way to never have to work a job. Have babies. Each baby brings in a bigger housing subsidy, more food stamps, more WIC coupons, and for 5 years, there is free cash money rewards. It costs them nothing at all -- Medicaid is completely free, no co-pays like insurance or Medicare.

Even foreigners have caught on -- get here illegally, drop a baby and they can expect easy legal status and all the handouts. Much easier than having to get skills and learn English, a very easy way around the laws.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 10:56 AM
 
47,525 posts, read 69,536,408 times
Reputation: 22473
Quote:
Originally Posted by GreenGene View Post
Gee, that's a tough question.

I wonder - what would Jesus do?
Why? We're not even allowing the Ten Commandments be posted in the schools. We're not allowing God or Jesus to be taught in the schools. Separation of Church and State you know.

Why are we teaching Darwinism if we don't allow it to play out? We're encouraging the least capable to breed, we're actually not taking care of the lower IQ types by encouraging them to have babies they could never support and cannot parent well.

We can take care of our least intelligent, but we shouldn't require they have babies. That's exactly how the system works.

Girl with IQ of 70, no babies -- she will have to work a menial job. Girl with IQ of 70 and babies, she will live a life of luxury, even be given a free cell phone, easy legal status and citizenship if she's from another country.

We should consider going back to poor houses where the least capable are given a dormitory style room and a common eating area and some oversight.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 11:04 AM
bUU
 
Location: Florida
12,077 posts, read 10,670,902 times
Reputation: 8793
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Girl with IQ of 70 and babies, she will live a life of luxury
Please provide details about this arrangement, preferably photos showing said girl enjoying the benefits of said luxury, so I can compare the alleged luxury against my own relatively modest level of comfort, to see if you're being truthful in your characterization or deceptive. Thank you.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 11:04 AM
 
12,268 posts, read 6,430,308 times
Reputation: 9417
Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Why? We're not even allowing the Ten Commandments be posted in the schools. We're not allowing God or Jesus to be taught in the schools. Separation of Church and State you know.

Why are we teaching Darwinism if we don't allow it to play out? We're encouraging the least capable to breed, we're actually not taking care of the lower IQ types by encouraging them to have babies they could never support and cannot parent well.

We can take care of our least intelligent, but we shouldn't require they have babies. That's exactly how the system works.

Girl with IQ of 70, no babies -- she will have to work a menial job. Girl with IQ of 70 and babies, she will live a life of luxury, even be given a free cell phone, easy legal status and citizenship if she's from another country.

We should consider going back to poor houses where the least capable are given a dormitory style room and a common eating area and some oversight.
First of all, if you want a religious govt. there are several muslim countries that would welcome you.
Secondly, anyone who thinks that a woman has babies to get a bigger welfare check has never taken care of a child. Not even for a day.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-07-2013, 11:33 AM
 
Location: Laurentia
5,580 posts, read 7,976,264 times
Reputation: 2442
Quote:
Originally Posted by EmeraldCityWanderer View Post
If there was an IQ test for government support, the people who spend their days writing manifestos will be forced to find work.
Ah, but writing manifestos is so much fun .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haakon View Post
The problem is we have far to many people who WILL not take care of themselves soaking up resources that should be for those who CAN NOT take care of themselves.
I disagree with "the poor are lazy" generalization, but the distinction you draw is a critical one.

Quote:
Originally Posted by malamute View Post
Why? We're not even allowing the Ten Commandments be posted in the schools. We're not allowing God or Jesus to be taught in the schools. Separation of Church and State you know.
If you add a state/education separation to the church/state separation, that takes care of the whole problem. I find nothing lacking in non-religious education myself, but to each his own.

Quote:
Why are we teaching Darwinism if we don't allow it to play out? We're encouraging the least capable to breed, we're actually not taking care of the lower IQ types by encouraging them to have babies they could never support and cannot parent well.
Evolution (or Darwinism if you're old-fashioned) is merely a description of what occurs in nature, not a prescription for social policy, any more than the law of gravity means we should let people fall to their death. I'm opposed to Social Darwinism myself, but the point is that even if it is the best social policy it has nothing to do with the science of evolution.

Quote:
Originally Posted by gmagoo View Post
First of all, if you want a religious govt. there are several muslim countries that would welcome you.
I think he wants a Christian government, not a Muslim one.

Quote:
Secondly, anyone who thinks that a woman has babies to get a bigger welfare check has never taken care of a child. Not even for a day.
I lump that in with ignorant assumptions about anchor babies. However, I'm sure there are a few people out there stupid enough to do just that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top