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.
By having less children, they will less likely to stay poor.
The unfortunate and the disabled should be taken care firstly by their parents and families, and of course the taxpayers, if needed, and only then they will lose the right to vote.
Why should people who are on public assistance have a say in how to spend other people's money? Again, we aren't solving problems if we don't hold people responsible - we are just enabling them to be poorer and poorer.
They would be less than citizens if we took away their voting and reproductive rights as you suggest.
Rich in what way? We are trillions in debt that we have no hope of paying off. Our government is basically broke and if not for the fact that we print the world's reserve currency, we would have gone the way Argentina went.
How rich would we be if our National Debt were zero?
They would be less than citizens if we took away their voting and reproductive rights as you suggest.
How would you prevent people, who don't pay taxes and are on public assistance, from voting to fund themselves and get even more public assistance?
How would you prevent people from having children that will certainly be on public assistance, a vicious cycle that they can't break? Is that more humane to create generation poverty and suffering?
An alternative is immediately put up their children for adoption or foster care - they basically lose their children forever. Is this alternative more humane?
How would you prevent people, who don't pay taxes and are on public assistance, from voting to fund themselves and get even more public assistance?
How would you prevent people from having children that will certainly be on public assistance, a vicious cycle that they can't break? Is that more humane to create generation poverty and suffering?
An alternative is immediately put up their children for adoption or foster care - they basically lose their children forever. Is this alternative more humane?
You don't. I don't believe that most of these people are useless no counts on their own accord. You provide assistance and opportunities for their advancement.
Nobody would call that "rich." That's still **** poor.
Rich means we have a 30% surplus in our budget each year while having the lowest tax rate in the world.
Go ahead and take that 30% surplus from the private sector and see how much richer we are at the end of the year. I agree with lower Federal taxes. That will enrichen us.
You don't. I don't believe that most of these people are useless no counts on their own accord. You provide assistance and opportunities for their advancement.
You don't. You educate.
Ridiculous.
How's that working out for us so far? We have been doing that for decades and we end up with more and more debt with no end in sight.
I am not saying those people are useless but when people can't even provide for themselves or contribute to our society, what would you call them? Democrat voters?
Go ahead and take that 30% surplus from the private sector and see how much richer we are at the end of the year. I agree with lower Federal taxes. That will enrichen us.
Private sector? You mean nationalize private properties? Many countries have done that many times - each time it ended in more poverty and unrest.
How's that working out for us so far? We have been doing that for decades and we end up with more and more debt with no end in sight.
I am not saying those people are useless but when people can't even provide for themselves or contribute to our society, what would you call them? Democrat voters?
It has worked out fine for me. As a doc I benefit from the deficit spending that HC requires. As a borrower and investor I make out nicely with low interest rates. As a student of modern money I have learned that our national debt is more related to our wealth, our money and our power and influence in the world.
So only liberals are poor, disabled or unfortunate? All it takes is conservatism, and all that just disappears?
I do understand why they tend to vote dem of course. Conservatives have tangibly little to offer.
Private sector? You mean nationalize private properties? Many countries have done that many times - each time it ended in more poverty and unrest.
To create a surplus, the money would have to come from the private sector.
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.
