Class warfare!! let's lynch the 1%!!!

Tanfan! wrote:


What's your solution to poverty? Kill them?  Idiot

  

Bee started this idiocy and it appears he's found a playmate

WCS wrote:

Huh?

GRR Spartan wrote:

  

Bee started this idiocy and it appears he's found a playmate

The idiocy is the straw man that was proposed and that you attempted to validate by your response to that straw man. Bottom line is that tTito is correct. There is an undercurrent within the poor community that is influencing a culture of apathy and hopelessness. Unfortunately, people who want to turn a blind eye to these growing influences and want to pretend it doesn't exist create straw man arguments to mock anyone who does want to have an honest conversation about them.

Welfare is not a solution to poverty. It is only supposed to aid and help provide temporary relief to those who need it. There are many inputs that make up the solution to poverty, and an economic policy that enables all producers in this country is an essential component.

There is a global concern to this issue...when the United States begins to allow the UN to begin taxing its citizens in an effort to redistribute wealth away from this country, the people who will be hurt the most are this country's poor. A portion of everyone's income/wealth will be confiscated...a person who makes $5k/year is in the top 35% globally. Elysium isn't about the 1% vs the 99% of this country...it's about the rest of the world vs the citizens of all industrialized nations, including the perceived poor of our nation.

WCS wrote:

The idiocy is the straw man that was proposed and that you attempted to validate by your response to that straw man. Bottom line is that tTito is correct. There is an undercurrent within the poor community that is influencing a culture of apathy and hopelessness. Unfortunately, people who want to turn a blind eye to these growing influences and want to pretend it doesn't exist create straw man arguments to mock anyone who does want to have an honest conversation about them.

Welfare is not a solution to poverty. It is only supposed to aid and help provide temporary relief to those who need it. There are many inputs that make up the solution to poverty, and an economic policy that enables all producers in this country is an essential component.

There is a global concern to this issue...when the United States begins to allow the UN to begin taxing its citizens in an effort to redistribute wealth away from this country, the people who will be hurt the most are this country's poor. A portion of everyone's income/wealth will be confiscated...a person who makes $5k/year is in the top 35% globally. Elysium isn't about the 1% vs the 99% of this country...it's about the rest of the world vs the citizens of all industrialized nations, including the perceived poor of our nation.

It's not the poor that are creating the apathy. It's everyone on both extremes throwing their vitriolic shit at each other, leaving reasonable people stuck in the middle to just get out of the way. It's to the point that I just assume every single word out of everyone's mouth is meaningless hyperbole. At this point, apathy is the answer.

It takes an astounding level of detachment from reality to believe that any significant portion of this country actually enjoys being on food stamps or welfare. Wake the F up. Please don't let everything you learn about those who are poor come from Rush Limbaugh.

If only conservatives would spend just a fraction of the time they dedicate to demonizing poor people and instead look at the millionaires and billionaires that thrive on corporate welfare and skirting their taxes then maybe we could actually make a dent in the debt they portend to care so much about. The Welfare Queen myth is nothing but a smokescreen to divert attention away from the real abuses and wasting of money that is actually statistically significant.

Bizarro Fletch wrote:It takes an astounding level of detachment from reality to believe that any significant portion of this country actually enjoys being on food stamps or welfare. Wake the F up. Please don't let everything you learn about those who are poor come from Rush Limbaugh.

If only conservatives would spend just a fraction of the time they dedicate to demonizing poor people and instead look at the millionaires and billionaires that thrive on corporate welfare and skirting their taxes then maybe we could actually make a dent in the debt they portend to care so much about. The Welfare Queen myth is nothing but a smokescreen to divert attention away from the real abuses and wasting of money that is actually statistically significant.

It also takes a lot of disillusionment and belief in what CNBC has to say, to not see that lots of people choose food stamps and welfare over working for a living.

Anyone who thinks there is a statistically significant number of people out there who choose food cards and assistance haven't ever been in a situation where there are continually more month than money available.

Bee and others can live in their fantasy land and vote for pols who make their bones by berating the poor. It doesn't take away from the fact we have many fewer jobs than in the past, those jobs often pay less than the jobs available a decade ago and if you are 50 or over good luck making it past the optical scanners.

WCS wrote:

I agree with your thoughts on unemployment. This should have been fixed by now. Obama is touting his economic policies as trickle up, but those types of policies don't do anything but hurt the upper middle class and wealthy...and don't do anything to support the poor. He believes that by hurting the well to do, that somehow those not fortunate will magically do better. Instead, his policies make the poor more dependent on government aid.

The economic policies that are proven to work to support the poor are the policies that uplift everyone. By increasing production across the country throughout every tax bracket, everyone benefits, especially the poor.

Unfortunately, people rather see people with higher income levels suffer, than see the poor have opportunities for better lives.

It's funny to read your final paragraph and then see that you whined about strawman arguments in your next post.  

You'd rather believe that anyone who supports progressive tax structures and assistance for the poor just wants the rich to suffer.  It's easier for you when you keep it on an emotional level.  

The truth is that progressive tax structures and assistance for the poor are good for the economy.  We need more people spending more money; that's how opportunity is created.  Those at the top spend a smaller percentage of their income than those at the bottom do.  The food stamp program, for instance, is terrific for the economy: the money gets spent quickly, it gets spent locally, and there's very little fraud.  That money creates demand that benefits business and leads to greater employment.  

I occasionally hear people bitch about some random person they heard about who's on food stamps but has a sweet TV - as if that should eliminate someone from food stamp eligibility.  You know who I don't hear bitch about it?  People who sell TV's.  We need people to buy shit - it's that simple.

So if you want to talk about it, accept that there is more to the other side than wanting to hurt rich people.  Or you could just keep pretending so you don't have to think too hard.

Dolph Ziggler wrote:

It's not the poor that are creating the apathy. It's everyone on both extremes throwing their vitriolic shit at each other, leaving reasonable people stuck in the middle to just get out of the way. It's to the point that I just assume every single word out of everyone's mouth is meaningless hyperbole. At this point, apathy is the answer.

I agree...the poor isn't creating the apathy. It's the government policies that are holding these people down. When these policies enable dependency on welfare and destroy opportunities for economic mobility, that culture begins to be shaped.

WCS wrote:

I agree...the poor isn't creating the apathy. It's the government policies that are holding these people down. When these policies enable dependency on welfare and destroy opportunities for economic mobility, that culture begins to be shaped.

Could you illuminate us on what programs are "holding these people down"?

Should children of poor parents not eat? Should we expect people to live in the woods or in alleys in the elements? Should we bother to educate he poor since they are allegedly programmed to get help? How much dehumanizing treatment is required to break the cycle you purport exists?

GRR Spartan wrote:

Could you illuminate us on what programs are "holding these people down"?

Should children of poor parents not eat? Should we expect people to live in the woods or in alleys in the elements? Should we bother to educate he poor since they are allegedly programmed to get help? How much dehumanizing treatment is required to break the cycle you purport exists?

No those damn kids should know better and get off their eight year old asses!! Get to work and help these old farts feel better about the national debt number. Who cares if you're starving??

Pervis Muldoon wrote:

It's funny to read your final paragraph and then see that you whined about strawman arguments in your next post.  

You'd rather believe that anyone who supports progressive tax structures and assistance for the poor just wants the rich to suffer.  It's easier for you when you keep it in an emotional level.  

The truth is that progressive tax structures and assistance for the poor are good for the economy.  We need more people spending more money; that's how opportunity is created.  Those at the top spend a smaller percentage of their income than those at the bottom do.  The food stamp program, for instance, is terrific for the economy: the money gets spent quickly, it gets spent locally, and there's very little fraud.  That money creates demand that benefits business and leads to greater employment.  

I occasionally hear people bitch about some random person they heard about who's on food stamps but has a sweet TV - as if that should eliminate someone from food stamp eligibility.  You know who I don't hear bitch about it?  People who sell TV's.  We need people to buy shit - it's that simple.

So if you want to talk about it, accept that there is more to the other side than wanting to hurt rich people.  Or you could just keep pretending so you don't have to think too hard.

The food stamp program is a good program, but it should only be a temporary solution. It should not be the foundation of an economic policy. Policies that enable dependency on welfare hurt those in the program long term. Policies that facilitate and promote private production should be the foundation of our economic policy.

People forfeit all credibility in this matter when they talk about a growing welfare state as being a driver for economic mobility. These policies that enable welfare dependency only serve to oppress the poor...and since the poor is made up of non-whites by a near 85% clip, these policies are hurting people of color, not helping them.

GRR Spartan wrote:

Could you illuminate us on what programs are "holding these people down"?

Should children of poor parents not eat?  Should we expect people to live in the woods or in alleys in the elements?  Should we bother to educate he poor since they are allegedly programmed to get help?  How much dehumanizing treatment is required to break the cycle you purport exists?

Since you continue to depend on logical fallacies to support your point of view, either you're attempting to be sarcastic in an attempt to be humorous or you really aren't all that intelligent. I'm going to assume that you're just trying to be funny, because there aren't any smart people out there that believe that creating a state of welfare dependency actually results in economic mobility. Reasonable people understand that private production is the key to economic mobility and that welfare dependency is a key to in remaining in poverty.

Social programs are good for the country, but delivering policies that stifle private production and encourage dependency on welfare are ruinous to our society.

Cheese

WCS wrote:

The food stamp program is a good program, but it should only be a temporary solution. It should not be the foundation of an economic policy. Policies that enable dependency on welfare hurt those in the program long term. Policies that facilitate and promote private production should be the foundation of our economic policy.

People forfeit all credibility in this matter when they talk about a growing welfare state as being a driver for economic mobility. These policies that enable welfare dependency only serve to oppress the poor...and since the poor is made up of non-whites by a near 85% clip, these policies are hurting people of color, not helping them.

The "dependency" nonsense is just a marketing ploy. People who want to end welfare for the poor realized that they weren't swaying others by merely claiming that poor people are lazy and we need to swat them off the government tit, because there are a lot of people who think it's a bit heartless to just tell the poor to go **** themselves - so the marketing has changed to, "We shouldn't help the poor because it makes them dependent."

If welfare is so easy and profitable, why aren't you on it? Do you really believe that you're that much more motivated than poor people?

As for me, I don't give a shit if there's a small percentage of people cashing in for a few hundred bucks when they could be working. They'll still spend that money, and that means there are more customers for more businesses. Any money the government pushes down the ladder always goes back up, and it creates opportunity every time.

WCS wrote:

Since you continue to depend on logical fallacies to support your point of view, either you're attempting to be sarcastic in an attempt to be humorous or you really aren't all that intelligent. I'm going to assume that you're just trying to be funny, because there aren't any smart people out there that believe that creating a state of welfare dependency actually results in economic mobility. Reasonable people understand that private production is the key to economic mobility and that welfare dependency is a key to in remaining in poverty.

Social programs are good for the country, but delivering policies that stifle private production and encourage dependency on welfare are ruinous to our society.

Did you pick up all those talking points at the Chamber of Commerce or Manufacturers Association meeting? Please be specific on what you think needs to be cut. You are aware that since the Clinton era there is no such thing as never ending welfare right? If not you need to get your head out of the 1960's.

You never did name any program that should be cut because its creating dependency. Gave tried and true talking points. Told me I'm not as smart as yourself. I have heard and read about the same talking since Nixon and they were GOP talking points as far back as Coolidge. But no specific programs.

Cut out WIC and state supplied debit cards for food? You'll have every major grocer and trade associations representing the small ones all over you like stink on meadow muffins. Education subsidies? We are already falling behind other countries in literacy and science. Cut monies to higher ed? Do that and we'll be returning to the 1920's -1930's in he pre-GI Bill days where universities were good ole boys clubs and havens for RDK's ( rich dumb kids)

I'm angry with science.

I was told if I took care of myself, ate right, and exercised, I would live a long healthy life.

They lied, because this thread gave me cancer.

Moar cheese please

WCSparty wrote:Cheese

FTW

Bizarro Fletch wrote:It takes an astounding level of detachment from reality to believe that any significant portion of this country actually enjoys being on food stamps or welfare. Wake the F up. Please don't let everything you learn about those who are poor come from Rush Limbaugh.

If only conservatives would spend just a fraction of the time they dedicate to demonizing poor people and instead look at the millionaires and billionaires that thrive on corporate welfare and skirting their taxes then maybe we could actually make a dent in the debt they portend to care so much about. The Welfare Queen myth is nothing but a smokescreen to divert attention away from the real abuses and wasting of money that is actually statistically significant.

Why is it that EVERY TIME a republican is voted into the white house our country falls into huge deficits? Why? Well, they believe in tax breaks for the wealthy without any concomitant reduction in government spending. The so called trickle down effect doesn't work. We give tax  breaks to business so they will hire more people who in turn pay more taxes.  The more people working make up for the tax break.  Right? Wrong! The theory has never worked.  Big business doesn't hire any more workers and the government balloons into huge deficits.  That and the constant need to start a war so that their constituents make huge profits "Halliburton" (if only I had purchased that stock!). So, the Dems have to come in and try and fix things. Bush destroyed the economy in 8 years.  It's taken Obama nearly 7 to get the unemployment rate back down below 7%.  The deficit is still out of control because we had two effing wars to pay for an not enough money coming it to pay for it. So, the wars are winding down now and the next Pres will be given an opportunity to apply the money used for defense to pay down the debt like Clinton did.  The war mongers hated Clinton for closing down all those bases but we finally got out of the red and into the Black when Bill took over.  

Now, I am a moderate. I have voted for both parties many times. I have just noticed a trend when the R's are in office. Plus the tea party has ruined what was once a good party that I voted for in the 80s and 90s.  The modern Rs with Fox News are extremely big business pro insurance company oriented. They don't give a rats ass about the little person who is on the street begging for food. Reagan actually gave a damn.  Unfortunately, the modern R's don't. Rant over. Flame away right wingers.

These guys (the top blue line), protecting the supply side Reagan tax structure and W's slashing of the capital gains and estate taxes... using the gutting of "equal time" and more recently citizens united, pumping all the propaganda into your empty little heads thank you for protecting their oligarchy. Their grandfathers worked hard for them to be rich beyond belief... and isn't that what America is all about? You douchy fucks who believe "with a little hard work" we could all get their aren't living in reality. (unless you name is Walton or Koch or 10-20 other families of course, then the rest of us expect you to protect your oligarchy...)

WCSparty wrote:Cheese

Are you related to poster WCS?

Tanfan! wrote:

Why is it that EVERY TIME a republican is voted into the white house our country falls into huge deficits? Why? Well, they believe in tax breaks for the wealthy without any concomitant reduction in government spending. The so called trickle down effect doesn't work. We give tax  breaks to business so they will hire more people who in turn pay more taxes.  The more people working make up for the tax break.  Right? Wrong! The theory has never worked.  Big business doesn't hire any more workers and the government balloons into huge deficits.  That and the constant need to start a war so that their constituents make huge profits "Halliburton" (if only I had purchased that stock!). So, the Dems have to come in and try and fix things. Bush destroyed the economy in 8 years.  It's taken Obama nearly 7 to get the unemployment rate back down below 7%.  The deficit is still out of control because we had two effing wars to pay for an not enough money coming it to pay for it. So, the wars are winding down now and the next Pres will be given an opportunity to apply the money used for defense to pay down the debt like Clinton did.  The war mongers hated Clinton for closing down all those bases but we finally got out of the red and into the Black when Bill took over.  

Now, I am a moderate. I have voted for both parties many times. I have just noticed a trend when the R's are in office. Plus the tea party has ruined what was once a good party that I voted for in the 80s and 90s.  The modern Rs with Fox News are extremely big business pro insurance company oriented. They don't give a rats ass about the little person who is on the street begging for food. Reagan actually gave a damn.  Unfortunately, the modern R's don't. Rant over. Flame away right wingers.

Couldn't agree more. Reagan was a bit before my time but I have a lot of respect for him overall. I actually think that W gave a shit about his citizens too.....just that he made a ton of poor decisions with the economy. Mixed feelings about the war in Iraq, Sadaam was ruthless and insane.

Nobody wants to give Obama any credit for recent successes. His first term I think he'd even tell you he made some mistakes and some poor choices. The economy is showing signs of life though which is a start. Took MD a few years to turn MSU around too