why are fast food joints blamed for their employees lack of managing money? (unemployment, Glenn Beck)
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.
And the article mentions four kinds of people on welfare. One is "people who see it as normal" which is what I assume you're referring to with that statistic. Yes, it's too high a percent. No, I don't know exactly how to fix that -- but I'm pretty damn sure it's not with a lot of platitudes like "keep your legs together" and "you're poor because you lack ambition."
I don't share those last two views. Those "hindsight views" don't help. Perhaps they have ambition but lack a chance and their only option is taking the "handouts" because no there's "no hand ups"
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen
It also talks about three other classes: children, those in a temporary crisis and those trapped in the system.
That the article did. Obviously, it wasn't a PC as other but they did mention four cases that are needed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen
We should also be trying to fix it for those trapped in the system -- that's where the car and phone come it. But cons throughout the country and in Congress are absolutely convinced that those things are just greed on the part of poor people, so I don't see how we fix that problem with the that mindset so prevalent.
I agree. The issue there is waste and fraud in these programs for various reasons.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen
As for children, extreme cons say life's tough, too bad, so sad. The less extreme fall back on "the parents shouldn't have had sex" -- surely an unrealistic demand to make of millions of human beings if I ever heard one.
You wont get me to disagree that we shouldn't give the kids a fighting chance. I am just against the parents who stay on for five or more years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen
What I'm asking is, how much time is enough? Who draws that line? What data and experience do we draw on to decide?
Obviously the five years number I would say is much too much. Now do I have data, experience and power to draw that line. NO. However, I think it is wrong to have a bulk of population on ACDF being on there for at least two years.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen
"The left wants it expanded …" But that kind of black-white, anti-Democrat thinking isn't helpful at all. I'd say that "the right wants it slashed" is an exaggeration too, but the Ryan budget would do just that, and that's hardly some fringe element talking there.
But the problem is most people on C-D (the loudest ones) are on the far sides of the spectrum who can't compromise. Just like those in Washington.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen
We need debate and compromise, not campaign slogans like the ones posted here ad nauseum. "Welfare is for leeches." "Poor people are parasites." The 1% completely supports the entire country of moochers."
The problem is too many people on here (myself included in some ways) drink too much kool-aid and don't think for themselves.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jmqueen
Are you prepared to discuss without sweeping generalities about the left and people on welfare? Few cons on here are.
Yeah if we can have the facts and no spin from both sides. I am willing to have a real discussion without these generalities. Unlike those in DC.
I am willing to have a real discussion without these generalities. Unlike those in DC.
Actually, now that I've asked the question, and you've responded, I'm not sure that's allowed here on CD.
Thank you for your thoughtful responses, though. From your initial post, I took you for someone who had nothing but sweeping generalizations and Rushisms. A pleasant surprise.
Edited to add:
Quote:
Originally Posted by stan4
Because of exactly what we have now - an enormous population of overgrown children who can barely wipe their own butts masquerading as "adults."
I'm taking a post out of context here, but, here it goes.
Quote:
A job is based on what the skill pays, flipping burgers is a minimum skill job - the pay equals it.
True. But there are people out here in America who have nothing more than a HS education, some not even that due to circumstances at home or in the neighborhood they live in. These people will be stuck in min wage jobs forever because lack or education, and lack of experience in another trade, and lack of training.
When most roads and infrastructure were constructed in America's early days, inexperienced people were put to work digging by hand, and later trained on the job for tasks that required at least some experience. A heavy equipment operator doesn't just jump into a road grader or a bulldozer and start operating it, he or she started at the bottom, probably digging with a shovel, possibly helping set survey stakes, possibly helping set concrete forms, and then gained experience and knowledge by on the job training with someone who was willing to take the time to teach these people.
Actually, now that I've asked the question, and you've responded, I'm not sure that's allowed here on CD.
Thank you for your thoughtful responses, though. From your initial post, I took you for someone who had nothing but sweeping generalizations and Rushisms. A pleasant surprise.
Edited to add:
Case in point.
You are guilty of what you just accused me of...funny, eh?
If you're not worried about crime, poverty and all the other things that people's bad decisions create in Cleveland, then I can't help you. Perhaps you live in a gated community.
I work hard for my money, too. But I'm damned if I want my community to turn into, say, Detroit, just so I can tell myself how awesome I am for making the "right" decisions. I want better for my family. That's why I'm willing to bite the bullet and pay taxes without whining about it incessantly, and referring to my fellow citizens as "leeches" and "parasites."
As for the money running out … we have crime, poverty and a thousand other problems right now. I'm personally not convinced that the money's going to run out, and even if it is, that's in the future. And there won't be a future if we can't fix the problems that "bad decisions" create every day.
I'd rather do something to fix things now, instead of preaching to an Internet audience about morality and worrying about a future that will be questionable at best.
I like that you use Detroit as an example when the only reason Detroit is like that is BECAUSE they've spent the last 50 years electing Democrats and handing out tons of welfare to create a population that is unable to take care of themselves.
Not worried about the money running out? Oh good, because neither was Detroit. And then it did run out (right before they declared bankruptcy)...
Also before you ad hom attack me based on my location ("what would I know about it?"), I just moved from Michigan (where I lived for 28 years) to Maine this August, so I know what's up with "the D".
Meanwhile, Grand Rapids elects people like Justin Amash and promotes individual responsibility... and is the most prosperous city in the state.
I like that you use Detroit as an example when the only reason Detroit is like that is BECAUSE they've spent the last 50 years electing Democrats and handing out tons of welfare to create a population that is unable to take care of themselves.
Also before you ad hom attack me based on my location ("what would I know about it?"), I just moved from Michigan (where I lived for 28 years) to Maine this August, so I know what's up with "the D".
Meanwhile, Grand Rapids elects people like Justin Amash and promotes individual responsibility... and is the most prosperous city in the state.
So? What's your response to my actual point?
How would you fix Detroit? By leaving town and posting on Internet forums about "individual responsibility?" Do you have anything positive to offer besides platitudes?
By the way … how does a politician "promote individual responsibility?" Standing on a soapbox in front of slum housing, berating the "parasites?" Walking the halls of abortion clinics telling women they should keep their legs closed? Or does this wonder of wonders have any actual solutions, other than cutting all spending on social services?
I like that you use Detroit as an example when the only reason Detroit is like that is BECAUSE they've spent the last 50 years electing Democrats and handing out tons of welfare to create a population that is unable to take care of themselves.
Also before you ad hom attack me based on my location ("what would I know about it?"), I just moved from Michigan (where I lived for 28 years) to Maine this August, so I know what's up with "the D".
Meanwhile, Grand Rapids elects people like Justin Amash and promotes individual responsibility... and is the most prosperous city in the state.
One party rule is NEVER a good thing. There has to be checks and balances. Cleveland has had the same problem. The good thing is they recently took down 2 main figure heads in the Cleveland political scene for fraud, and racketeering along with a slew of others. We're not Detroit quite yet, and things are looking up as there is a lot of development going on downtown. However; there are still a lot of issues to fix, such as reducing crime, poverty and the poor status of the city schools. Not to mention making it a more business friendly environment to attract new business, and so that businesses don't pick up and leave. If those issues aren't fixed, aside from the transient population of the 20 somethings and 30 somethings moving downtown, or to other trendy areas of the city, it will continue to lose middle class people and won't attract middle class families to live there.
And intelligence, education, home situation, access to transportation, physical health, mental health …
Nah. Let's just stick with ambition. It's so much more simplistic and useless.
There's always one of you that someone like myself has to point out to others as being nothing more than a defeatist and an apologetic.
You are bigoted towards those you attempt to excuse as being less fortunate and by being less fortunate you are automatically given a pass to become wards of the state.
This is the self fulfilling prophecy that is set in motion within the confines of the ivory towers of liberal discourse and vomited on to the little people like yourself.
You have inhaled the vomit and have swallowed the pill and in doing so have exposed yourself as the charlatan you are.
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.
