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.
Thats ONLY true if they go out and gain new employment at an increased wage, which would have happened has they gone out and got a school loan to become educated. Why is it always the taxpayers responsibility to educate the individual, and dont respond with "taxes" because we dont educate people in school to make them taxpayers..
""""Why is it always the taxpayers responsibility to educate the individual, and dont respond with "taxes" because we dont educate people in school to make them taxpayers..""
DUHHHHHhhhh! Yes, we DO!!!!
Do you really think an uneducated populace makes for a strong prosperous country?
The better the education the better the job, the better the job DUH, the higher the wages!!!! The higher the wages the more taxes, the more money spent which stimulates the economy.....good GAWD! Think beyond the end of your pennypinching fingers for a change!
It's the old story about giving a man a fish or teaching him to fish. You don't care for either scenario.
The old story about teaching the man to fish did not include teaching the man to take the fish off someone elses plate.
No one is denying the man the authority to go fishing, whats in dispute is the government taking a fishing rod off someone else to hand to this guy, so he can sleep all day and when he doesnt catch a fish, the government handing him a fish. After all, the one the rod was taking from now also needs a fish and you've taken the probem from one guy with no food and made it two..
In this case, I'd choose to give the fish, fish food, if you eat all of the fish before they reproduce, no one can fish, which seems acceptable to most liberals.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald
Your posts bear ample testimony to your lack of compassion for your fellow humans.
I have no compassion for a government that encourages people to work hard every day, take risks, and then takes their reward from them giving it to someone else who did not work for their money. I also have no compassion for individuals who think that others who fail can not learn a lesson from their failures and encourage them to succeed. I have absolutely no compassion for someone who does not learn from their mistakes, or for those individuals who are satisifed with their current status in life, but seem to find more than sufficient time to complain about who has more than them.
In order to want to succeed, sometimes you have to hit rock bottom. In america, no one seems to be able to accept that the rock bottom is there for a reason, but they surely dont mind looking and pointing fingers at the top as if they are to blame for the bottoms existance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cuebald
I'll tell you like I told my children - The next time you ride past a cemetery look across the grounds and see if you can tell who had money.
And if you ride past a cemetary, you cant tell who were killed by execution, murder, suicide, cancer, or age, so whats your point other than to tell me that your teaching your kids that its acceptable to not succeed because no one can tell the difference after your dead. I disagree, we can all name very rich individuals after their death because of their charitable contributions, Carnegie, Frick, even recent ones like Heinz, and alive ones like Gates and Buffet.. Can you list someone who received welfare in the cemetaries and how they have made the nation better for mankind?
Well, what are you proposing, mass starvation? The family will be repaying this money in the form of taxes, even if, contrary to what you stated, the new job only pays as much, or maybe even less, than the previous one.
Oh please, if you cant find a suitable job.. start your own company for gods sake.. Oh I know, that would be to much work..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
You are a beneficiary of taxes as well. You drive on public roads, no? If someone broke into your home, you'd call the police, no?
Dont be abserd, public safety is the job of government
Quote:
Originally Posted by Katiana
You may even check out books at the public library, or go work out at the local rec center.
You mean the libraries started by private donations like Andrew Carnegie, and the local rec centers which exist because someone usually donates the land and then they have fundraisers to build centers, or at the very least, they have special funding appropriation bills that the taxpayers CHOOSE to fund?
""""Why is it always the taxpayers responsibility to educate the individual, and dont respond with "taxes" because we dont educate people in school to make them taxpayers..""
DUHHHHHhhhh! Yes, we DO!!!!
Do you really think an uneducated populace makes for a strong prosperous country?
The better the education the better the job, the better the job DUH, the higher the wages!!!! The higher the wages the more taxes, the more money spent which stimulates the economy.....good GAWD! Think beyond the end of your pennypinching fingers for a change!
We educate children so they can grow up and get a job and be SELF SUFFICIENT, they are not educated to increase the tax base..
Bush cut Pell grants by $270 million for the 2004-2005 academic year.
Where do you get your news from?
Archived: President Bush to Propose Record $12.7 Billion for Pell Grants, Paige Says (http://www.ed.gov/news/pressreleases/2003/02/02012003.html - broken link)
Overall, the president's 2004 budget proposal increases the amount of financial aid available for postsecondary students to $62.2 billion, an additional $3.1 billion or five percent over the level requested in 2003. A record 9.2 million students and parents would be able to receive grants
Even in the smallest year the Grant proposal was nearly the same, 2005/2006, it wasnt cut
The Daily Texan - Bush's plan cuts grant funding (http://www.dailytexanonline.com/opinion/bush-s-plan-cuts-grant-funding-1.977792 - broken link)
PS, Pell Grants should be cut completely, then the cost of education would be reasonable.. The cost goes up every time PELL Grants increase even though Colleges are sitting on BILLIONS in cash..
After my husband was layed off from a company that brought him and 350 other families down from NYC. He tried to find another job here in Tampa, but has had only 1 interview. Unemployment services has funding for re-education so he can better his changes to find another job. This is thanks to Obama.
Our Cobra payments are going to be $1,800 a month, but thanks to Obama, they will only be $600 a month.
What a terrible thing! He must be a socialist.
Hey, don't let the nasty repub hatemasters get you down!
They don't realize that that's one of the reasons they haven't won an election lately SHHHH, don't tell 'em!
Hey, don't let the nasty repub hatemasters get you down!
They don't realize that that's one of the reasons they haven't won an election lately SHHHH, don't tell 'em!
Good luck to you and your husband !!
I know full well that the Republicans lost the election because the Democrats did a better job at buying votes. Shhh, dont tell anyone else but buying of votes dont make those who vote for your "man" look smart, especially considering that the votes are bought with a loan that need paid back, most likely by the very same individuals who were bought.
Example: Seniors who will not receive their SS increase for the next 3 years.. yeah, I'm sure they are loving that..
All of that ignores the fact that Obama didnt create the program the OP is talking about, but shhh, dont give credit to the Republicans for supporting it while Clinton threatened to veto it.. shhh, dont want to mix facts in with your non stop ranting with hate..
We have already and if he finds a job, will continue to pay back the money from paying taxes. We do have savings, but don't want to loose every penny so that he could go back to school. He has tried finding work and continues to look. There just isn't any jobs for what he does at his skill level.
If you were out of a job, would YOU take unemployment benefits? Would YOU pay back what you got from them? If you knew the only way you could get a job was to go back to school. Would you be happy to pay $5,000 when you still have a family to support, mortage to pay?
My husband has worked for 35 years. He has paid his taxes that pay for these programs. I think he has well earned what he is receiving from the government.
I would like to see what you would do in similar circumstances. Maybe you have a job and you can very comfortably look down at us and judge what we are doing. We wouldn't take welfare, but if it means being homeless, yes, I would take welfare.
We have already and if he finds a job, will continue to pay back the money from paying taxes. We do have savings, but don't want to loose every penny so that he could go back to school. He has tried finding work and continues to look. There just isn't any jobs for what he does at his skill level.
translation: "you expect ME to pay for our own schooling?"
Quote:
Originally Posted by annaegel
If you were out of a job, would YOU take unemployment benefits? Would YOU pay back what you got from them? If you knew the only way you could get a job was to go back to school. Would you be happy to pay $5,000 when you still have a family to support, mortage to pay?
First, unemployment benefits need to be returned to the state level, with the federal government getting their hands completely out of it.. That being said, I thought you just said your husband will get a better job from this, now your complaining about a mortgage to pay, which is it.. increased pay so you can afford the mortgage and return the "welfare" or the status quo?
Quote:
Originally Posted by annaegel
My husband has worked for 35 years. He has paid his taxes that pay for these programs. I think he has well earned what he is receiving from the government.
I didnt realise we could specify where we wanted out tax money to go to. Must be a fortune teller if your husband was able to put asside his taxes to fund this program and not things like national security, police, fire etc..
Quote:
Originally Posted by annaegel
I would like to see what you would do in similar circumstances. Maybe you have a job and you can very comfortably look down at us and judge what we are doing. We wouldn't take welfare, but if it means being homeless, yes, I would take welfare.
many americans face the similar situation, I myself did 6 years ago, I became self employed, never looked back, relying on the government to do something that you just admitted you could have done yourself in the first paragraph shows how these programs are abused. The government is a SAFETY NET, not a means of support..
You wouldnt take welfare, but you just did
p.s. the criticism isnt directly towards you, its towards people like you who think that things like this is an entitlement, that this isnt welfare, that programs like this are even the responsiblity of a federal government, but the attacks from me towards you primarily came when you gave Obama credit for a program that has been in existance for 10 years, a program that Clinton threatened to veto..
Yes, be thankful for programs like this but you better darn well be thankful to the GOP, thats who put this welfare program into place..
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.
