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)
 
Old 11-30-2016, 04:48 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,029 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13715

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by rosa surf View Post
Which is really stupid. They offer alot of healthcare services to uninsured students. I used them in college, they were a lifesaver.

I don't really care if the funding stops for abortion, but the funding for other services should continue.
There's a lot of private sector support for PP. Why can't it be funded via a private Foundation? For example, the Clinton Foundation has a lot of money. So does the Gates Foundation, and Bill Gates is a very strong proponent of population control.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:14 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,029 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13715
Quote:
Originally Posted by hothulamaui View Post
your understanding of "liberalism" is faulty. people of all political persuasion are on welfare right and left, including people with no political bent.
It's overwhelmingly Dems.
Quote:
[img][/img]
The politics and demographics of food stamp recipients | Pew Research Center

And...
Quote:
Source: University of Syracuse's Maxwell School's Campbell Public Affairs Institute

https://www.maxwell.syr.edu/campbell...rged_Data_Set/
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:18 AM
 
1,850 posts, read 820,901 times
Reputation: 815
I always like it when liberals claim that Republicans are the ones who are all getting government assistance. Then when I ask why Democrats are the ones who vote for it, they're like "uh .... uh .... well, I mean, we have to make sure Republicans still can get it because they don't know they want it .... uh ...." And then they pause to go get their degree from Harvard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:29 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,301 posts, read 26,217,746 times
Reputation: 15646
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
There's a lot of private sector support for PP. Why can't it be funded via a private Foundation? For example, the Clinton Foundation has a lot of money. So does the Gates Foundation, and Bill Gates is a very strong proponent of population control.
Title X was signed into law back in the 70's under Nixon to provide health care through low cost clinics, if they can provide the service to these people then what would your reason be for removing funding from just PP. Do you want to remove funding from the other non-PP clinics also?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:36 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,029 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundaydrive00 View Post
I'm just trying to figure out what exactly you are talking about. So you send money to the government, telling them to have it sent to poor people?

I want to say you are talking about taxes, but then it would seem you don't know how such things work if you want to claim that you personally have to send more money every time a "poor person" has a child.

I for one would rather see more of my tax money go to helping children pull themselves out from poverty instead of seeing it going to billion dollar companies. Why are these billion dollar companies more deserving of my money then an innocent child?
Because they provide jobs, and their profits go to fund American workers'/retirees' pensions and retirement accounts.

Are you aware that American workers and retirees have $27 Trillion invested in their pension/retirement accounts? As shareholders, it is they who get the profits and any increased stock valuations.
Quote:

$27 trillion in pension savings means lots of attention | Fiduciary Matters

Meanwhile, funding those in poverty is just throwing good money after bad. 70% of those born into poverty never rise above the poverty level, even as adults.

Only 30% of those born poor ever make it out of poverty
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:37 AM
 
27,307 posts, read 16,226,860 times
Reputation: 12102
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
Title X was signed into law back in the 70's under Nixon to provide health care through low cost clinics, if they can provide the service to these people then what would your reason be for removing funding from just PP. Do you want to remove funding from the other non-PP clinics also?
Yes.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:46 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,029 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13715
Quote:
Originally Posted by njquestions View Post
LOL, "the temporary help they need." You're always a source of comedy and laughter for me.
Yep. Just posted the statistic that 70% of those born poor never rise out of poverty, even as adults. They need lifelong taxpayer-funded artificial financial support.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:48 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,029 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13715
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sundaydrive00 View Post
I fail to see what is funny about giving someone temporary help.
Would you agree to making it STRICTLY temporary? Can we agree to, say, no more than 3 years total per one's lifetime?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:49 AM
 
Location: Long Island
57,301 posts, read 26,217,746 times
Reputation: 15646
Quote:
Originally Posted by T-310 View Post
Yes.
Well not a good idea but at least that would be somewhat rational.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-30-2016, 05:50 AM
 
Location: the very edge of the continent
89,029 posts, read 44,840,107 times
Reputation: 13715
Quote:
Originally Posted by southbel View Post
No issues whatsoever with Planned Parenthood. Just think they should be a charitable organization who gets funding from donations and not tax dollars. Actually, have that viewpoint for all charitable organizations. So, I would have no issues with cutting their federal funding.
Agree 100%. I've already suggested both the Clinton Foundation and the Gates Foundation as funding sources. Bill Gates is a very strong proponent of population control, so funding PP would be a no-brainer for the Gates Foundation.
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. The time now is 04:46 PM.

© 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