The divide in this country is growing, and is alarming

BTW, I do not speak for all conservatives. My views are shared by many people I know... but I speak for myself only.


And just for the record LG.... YOU CERTAINLY DO NOT SPEAK FOR ANY MUCH LESS ALL CONSERVATIVES.
 
This is a really good line of thinking.

Here's the problem with welfare:

Those who grow up in it don't know any different. That's just the way they live. They don't have any qualms scaping by and living their life because that's the way it's always been for them. They get used to it. That's their standard of living and sure, they'd like to live in a big house and have a lot of money in their pocket. But is it worth the effort when they grow up in those conditions and become socialized in that environment?

Entitlement programs make things worse, not better. They ensure the cycle continues, so if that's the man keeping the poor down, then yes. I agree.

exactly. it's easy to say "who would want to be on welfare?" if you are upper middle class. but if it's what you are used to and the alternative is decades of working your arse off. . .?
 
I read his post and I was called an uncle Tom etc. You know as well as I do that inside the AA community it is just as racist amongst each other. "you too dark" or "high yella' girl with good hair thinks she's something" or "uncle Tom" or "house *****" it's a damn shame.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

You're an Uncle Tom because you see it... I am a racist because I see it. And because we as a society aren't willing to be honest... nothing changes.
 
You're an Uncle Tom because you see it... I am a racist because I see it. And because we as a society aren't willing to be honest... nothing changes.

I'll agree - though many conservatives don't share your views. Some don't think any should be helped - have this inherent fear of joe neighbor getting a free meal.
 
I agree that we have no choice but to reduce entitlement spending. What I cannot agree to, however, is doing it in such a manner as places the burden on a part of society that you simply set backwards another few decades whilst simultaneously leaving in tact the wealth of those who benefited (or suffered far less, anyway) during the downturn.
I don't agree. In fact, I think programs for the retired and physically disabled should be revamped and made better.

What we cannot afford is able bodied, able minded people to live off the labors of those whose principle difference is having made better life choices and having lived by BETTER values and ethics. We cannot afford a system that virtually destroyed the black community in some areas by actually encouraging single parent homes.

The poor do not have advocates like the wealthy do. And despite the fact that the wealthy are far fewer in number, they get their way far more frequently, because they have the wherewithal to control things.

You are half way there... So if the problem is that centralized power enables those with wealth and access to manipulate the system... who is served when more power is centralized and more people are made dependent?
 
I'll agree - though many conservatives don't share your views. Some don't think any should be helped - have this inherent fear of joe neighbor getting a free meal.

I know ALOT of conservatives. I do not know ANY who mind helping someone in genuine need.
 
BTW, I do not speak for all conservatives. My views are shared by many people I know... but I speak for myself only.


And just for the record LG.... YOU CERTAINLY DO NOT SPEAK FOR ANY MUCH LESS ALL CONSERVATIVES.


I am trying to figure this one out....
 
Pretty clear to me that LG is not a conservative, much less trying to speak for them.


That's the part I don't get. Unless he means to say that my characterizations of his motives is incorrect. That's probably what he means.

But, when I read what he posts, and his sanctimonious and incredibly oversimplified and naive "all conservatives help someone genuinely in need" and other similar garbage, I find my perception of him to be reinforced more than ever before.
 
I don't know that welfare "causes" anything. I just find it hard to believe that there are tens of millions of people who would choose to remain in poverty and live on public assistance if there was a meaningful opportunity instead.
What that tells us is that you only know this problem from aloft some ivory tower.

I know them. I have known them my whole life. Dependence on gov't has DESTROYED millions. Their ambition and hope have dried up. People NEED challenges. People NEED some level of "fear" that they might fail. People NEED to feel the pride of accomplishment that can only come when they are responsible for themselves. You take those things away... and you destroy people.

We can debate what a "meaningful opportunity" is. But if someone makes the choice to live in poverty -- which is what your comment implies -- then I think you need to ask yourself why and also ask why is it that you think they actually have a choice.

My parents both grew up in poor families. Both were the youngest of 8. Both were the first to graduate HS. Both pulled themselves up by their bootstraps so to speak because they were always taught that they were responsible for themselves and should expect no one to give them anything... but to be grateful if they did. They sacrificed to invest in my brother and me... who became the first two college graduates out of all the cousins produced by those 16 siblings.

You may not like the truth but the difference isn't skin color. The difference is the values and ethics you live by. Everyone has opportunities and choices. Some get better ones than others... but you cannot let the fact that someone had it easier prevent you from choosing the best you can and doing the best you can. You can't just quit because it isn't easy.
 
I know ALOT of conservatives. I do not know ANY who mind helping someone in genuine need.

uh ok? I'm saying I agree - but that there are many who despise all forms of government help because of the inherent fear i mentioned.
 
Pretty clear to me that LG is not a conservative, much less trying to speak for them.

He tries constantly though. Just a few posts ago he was telling us what the motives were and were not for the changes we desire in the tax code. He not only falsely assigned racism to me... he called me a racist based on nothing more than my disagreement with him about the best way to see all Americans with the maximum opportunity for success.
 
He tries constantly though. Just a few posts ago he was telling us what the motives were and were not for the changes we desire in the tax code. He not only falsely assigned racism to me... he called me a racist based on nothing more than my disagreement with him about the best way to see all Americans with the maximum opportunity for success.

dude can read our minds!!!
 
uh ok? I'm saying I agree - but that there are many who despise all forms of government help because of the inherent fear i mentioned.

Who are they?

I do not like gov't help because it creates dependents and virtually assures corruption. We were much better as a country and society when churches, families, and other charities cared for the poor, sick, and elderly. The unworthy didn't get help as much. Those in need did because they were loved and appreciated it.

Gov't programs are callous and uncaring toward both the payer and payee. The payer learns to resent the recipient... and the recipient learns to resent the payer. Natural Law seems to be telling us that those programs are destructive.
 
He tries constantly though. Just a few posts ago he was telling us what the motives were and were not for the changes we desire in the tax code. He not only falsely assigned racism to me... he called me a racist based on nothing more than my disagreement with him about the best way to see all Americans with the maximum opportunity for success.

I see. I missed that.

:hi:
 
That's the part I don't get. Unless he means to say that my characterizations of his motives is incorrect. That's probably what he means.
No. I mean more specifically that you consistently make assumptions about the motives and thinking of conservatives... and are just as consistently wrong.

But, when I read what he posts, and his sanctimonious and incredibly oversimplified and naive "all conservatives help someone genuinely in need" and other similar garbage, I find my perception of him to be reinforced more than ever before.

Did you read? Did I say "all conservatives"? Or did I say that I did not know any conservatives unwilling to help those in genuine need?

This is just another example of what you do that is so flagrantly dishonest. You read what you wanted to read rather than what I actually wrote. You seem to do it specifically so you can throw out blanket condemnations of individuals and conservatives generally... then accuse others of being "sanctimonious and incredibly oversimplified and naive".

I think it is a fairly safe bet that I know more conservatives than you do on a personal and intimate level AND have witnessed the things we are discussing on a more personal and up close level. Yet according to you... I am naive.
 
gov't programs are callous and uncaring toward both the payer and payee. The payer learns to resent the recipient... And the recipient learns to resent and dependent upon the payer. Natural law seems to be telling us that those programs are destructive.

fyp
 
I do not like gov't help because it creates dependents and virtually assures corruption.


This is a lie.

You don't care about poor blacks. You don't reject government programs because you think they hurt the poor.

You do it because you resent the black poor people.
 
This is a lie.

You don't care about poor blacks. You don't reject government programs because you think they hurt the poor.

You do it because you resent the black poor people.

what a croc. Most of us don't give a crap about the rest of the people in the world, at least outside of our own world. Asking someone to care about a large group is silly. Pretending that his reasoning for despising government programs is insincere is ludicrous. The programs are by their very nature self perpetuating, which makes them an absolute failure from day 1. If any programs of that nature were not made with the end in mind, they failed. They failed the constituents and the country. You don't have to like that reality, but shoving your head in your ass and pretending that it's a race relations issue is ludicrous. The programs are a disaster when they're aiding milkers, regardless of ilk.
 
what a croc. Most of us don't give a crap about the rest of the people in the world, at least outside of our own world. Asking someone to care about a large group is silly. Pretending that his reasoning for despising government programs is insincere is ludicrous. The programs are by their very nature self perpetuating, which makes them an absolute failure from day 1. If any programs of that nature were not made with the end in mind, they failed. They failed the constituents and the country. You don't have to like that reality, but shoving your head in your ass and pretending that it's a race relations issue is ludicrous. The programs are a disaster when they're aiding milkers, regardless of ilk.


Many have that point of view and we can debate that. But sjt claiming he opposes government entitlement programs because they keep the black man down and he's all about helping out the black man is just absurd.
 
Advertisement

Back
Top