2016 Election Thread Part Deux

[tumscalcium]

I'm not the one doing the raping. It's amazing and disturbing that you fight the ones trying to help you and praise the ones that hurt you.

You want to take away from people just because they hVe more. You're not worried about yourself, you're worried about that neighbor of yours with a new car that they earned. If you want to worry about a neighbor worry about the losers that take from you.

Stop trying to take from people.

No one should be taxed simply for working. Everyone should pay 0 income taxes.

 

[SuperDave]

You want to take away from people just because they hVe more. You're not worried about yourself, you're worried about that neighbor of yours with a new car.

Stop trying to take from people.

No one should be taxed simply for working. Everyone should pay 0 income taxes.

Yes.. I care about people who are poor and people who can't take care of themselves and I'm sorry it bothers you. Why is helping people a bad thing in the U.S.?

 

[Grand Vol]

Yes.. I care about people who are poor and people who can't take care of themselves and I'm sorry it bothers you. Why is helping people a bad thing in the U.S.?

Do you also care about those that just don't want to work? That want to continue sucking on the government teet and be lazy with their lives?

I'm all about welfare in cases where it provides temporary assistance to get someone back on their feet. Everyone at some point in their life needs a little help. But the system is so out of control it's insane. And I for one don't believe it's the government's job to tax everyone else more to level the playing field. That's not what America was founded on or what we stood for.

You want to help people? Fine, go find a notable charity and start giving your money away. Convince others to do the same. Otherwise, leave the rest of us alone.

 

[SuperDave]

Do you also care about those that just don't want to work? That want to continue sucking on the government teet and be lazy with their lives?

I'm all about welfare in cases where it provides temporary assistance to get someone back on their feet. Everyone at some point in their life needs a little help. But the system is so out of control it's insane. And I for one don't believe it's the government's job to tax everyone else more to level the playing field. That's not what America was founded on or what we stood for.

You want to help people? Fine, go find a notable charity and start giving your money away. Convince others to do the same. Otherwise, leave the rest of us alone.

You guys aren't going to like the future very much.

 

[tumscalcium]

You guys aren't going to like the future very much.

If it ends up the way you want no one will.

 

[SuperDave]

If it ends up the way you want no one will.

Well.. that's where it's going.

 

[McDad]

Yes.. I care about people who are poor and people who can't take care of themselves and I'm sorry it bothers you. Why is helping people a bad thing in the U.S.?

It's easy to care with other people's money.

 

[UTCVol]

If it ends up the way you want no one will.

The education system has utterly failed. We have ample case studies for the failure of socialism worldwide and yet millennials prefer it to capitalism. I've been told by people my age that Venezuela, Mao's China, Greece, and the USSR weren't socialist but Denmark and Sweden are. El oh el.

 

[Septic]

It's easy to care with other people's money.

/thread

 

[RikidyBones]

It's easy to care with other people's money.

 

[lawgator1]

Do you guys think that people living in poverty on welfare and other such programs would prefer to stay in the circumstance if they thought that there was a realistic opportunity for them to work and make enough money to significantly change their lives? I mean, I could work 20 more hours a week but not make much more, if any, so what's the incentive?

 

[AirVol]

Do you guys think that people living in poverty on welfare and other such programs would prefer to stay in the circumstance if they thought that there was a realistic opportunity for them to work and make enough money to significantly change their lives? I mean, I could work 20 more hours a week but not make much more, if any, so what's the incentive?

Welfare pays more than minimum wage, why would they want to work when the gov't takes care of them?

The ones getting off of welfare are the ones that want a better life, and for their children.

 

[hog88]

Do you guys think that people living in poverty on welfare and other such programs would prefer to stay in the circumstance if they thought that there was a realistic opportunity for them to work and make enough money to significantly change their lives? I mean, I could work 20 more hours a week but not make much more, if any, so what's the incentive?

The welfare system is a trap for many. It will provide enough money to live but if you try to get a job, entry level and work your way up they pull the rug out keeping you dependent on the system.

I'm for putting a lifetime limit on welfare programs for able bodied/mind people but while receiving payments let them work and make as much money as possible as they work into a sustainable wage.

 

[lawgator1]

Welfare pays more than minimum wage, why would they want to work when the gov't takes care of them?

The ones getting off of welfare are the ones that want a better life, and for their children.

So let the die or live in the streets?

Or is there an obvious alternative ?

 

[lawgator1]

The welfare system is a trap for many. It will provide enough money to live but if you try to get a job, entry level and work your way up they pull the rug out keeping you dependent on the system.

I'm for putting a lifetime limit on welfare programs for able bodied/mind people but while receiving payments let them work and make as much money as possible as they work into a sustainable wage.

So sliding scale, and allow benefits while working, for a period of time? Interesting idea. Has some promise, I think. But incentive has to be real. Otherwise won't work.

 

[hog88]

So sliding scale, and allow benefits while working, for a period of time? Interesting idea. Has some promise, I think. But incentive has to be real. Otherwise won't work.

Incentive is the lifetime limit, hit it and done, no more. Might even have to start taking kids away from parents who hit it and can't afford to feed them.

It's harsh but we have to many people dependent on hand outs.

 

[RikidyBones]

So sliding scale, and allow benefits while working, for a period of time? Interesting idea. Has some promise, I think. But incentive has to be real. Otherwise won't work.

Incentive is to not be on the street. I think the term should be deterrent more than incentive. If you have to be convinced to work for your health, kids health or shelter, then you have no right to anyone else's money. It's a you problem. I like the idea of a time even while working or a time while in training that welfare can still be used but it needs to be harshly capped.

We shouldn't keep funding the lazy while the people who have worked their entire lives don't have enough social security. Thats insane.

 

[lawgator1]

Incentive is to not be on the street. I think the term should be deterrent more than incentive. If you have to be convinced to work for your health, kids health or shelter, then you have no right to anyone else's money. It's a you problem. I like the idea of a time even while working or a time while in training that welfare can still be used but it needs to be harshly capped.

We shouldn't keep funding the lazy while the people who have worked their entire lives don't have enough social security. Thats insane.

I appreciate what you are saying, and certainly agree that the current regime is not fair, and acts as a disincentive. The solution, however, is not simply to point that out. We all know it. To fix it, we have to come up with something that will appeal to Human Nature. We have to come up with a way to get people to transition away from it, and that depends on having an incentive to make such a transition.

 

[Grand Vol]

So sliding scale, and allow benefits while working, for a period of time? Interesting idea. Has some promise, I think. But incentive has to be real. Otherwise won't work.

Pretty much this. There isn't an incentive to remove oneself at this point, especially in light of working people getting benefits yanked while they still require some assistance.

It's not like financial problems are fixed overnight, or even in a month. But the government (depending on the State in question) is quick to revoke those checks when a certain number is hit. Some latitude is probably in order to assist until they get their feet back under them.

Again, the problem is with those who have zero desire to work their way off the system.

 

[Grand Vol]

I appreciate what you are saying, and certainly agree that the current regime is not fair, and acts as a disincentive. The solution, however, is not simply to point that out. We all know it. To fix it, we have to come up with something that will appeal to Human Nature. We have to come up with a way to get people to transition away from it, and that depends on having an incentive to make such a transition.

The incentive is the time limits before it cuts off.

Another incentive would be a vocational rehab system that could help placement into a job, depending on the abilities of the person in question.

 

[RikidyBones]

I appreciate what you are saying, and certainly agree that the current regime is not fair, and acts as a disincentive. The solution, however, is not simply to point that out. We all know it. To fix it, we have to come up with something that will appeal to Human Nature. We have to come up with a way to get people to transition away from it, and that depends on having an incentive to make such a transition.

Its not the governments responsibility to convince people to better themselves and it's not their responsibility to make them comfortable if they choose not to. We are catering to the wrong people. The solution is to cap it and put the pressure on the people that are wrongfully using welfare. Its mean and perhaps tough lovin but it's required at this point.

 

[AM64]

The incentive is the time limits before it cuts off.

Another incentive would be a vocational rehab system that could help placement into a job, depending on the abilities of the person in question.

That's a two part issue though - there have to be jobs for it to work. Somebody has to admit that "free trade" is a misnomer and a failure. We've allowed and promoted wage escalation to a point that US labor priced itself out of competition - and we are still doing it with new minimum wage increases despite what's right in front of our faces - guess you really can't fix stupidity. But despite our own self inflicted injury, you cannot fight manipulated Chinese labor rates by playing fair.

 

[***RoadVol***]

That's a two part issue though - there have to be jobs for it to work. Somebody has to admit that "free trade" is a misnomer and a failure. We've allowed and promoted wage escalation to a point that US labor priced itself out of competition - and we are still doing it with new minimum wage increases despite what's right in front of our faces - guess you really can't fix stupidity. But despite our own self inflicted injury, you cannot fight manipulated Chinese labor rates by playing fair.

Can a person actually live on the current minimum wage? I mean only afford the required things to survive?

 

[hog88]

Can a person actually live on the current minimum wage? I mean only afford the required things to survive?

A (singular) person can live on minimum wage in certain parts of the country hence there should not be a federal minimum wage and the mandate for or not should be at the state level.

 

[***RoadVol***]

A (singular) person can live on minimum wage in certain parts of the country hence there should not be a federal minimum wage and the mandate for or not should be at the state level.

Would you care to break down the living expenses one could afford on minimum wage? Ones you must have to survive.