23 Sep 06
Originally posted by PhilodorYou'd see crime go way up and lots of riots.
Well it's a job they have to offer so if you cannot obtain one requiring a degree you have the option of taking what is going rather than scrounge.
Trouble is that the 'benefit' are so generous as to make it an attractive propositio for such persons to refuse whatever jobs are on offer. If the choice were between work or starve one would see a very differ ...[text shortened]... arly much depends on the subject of a degree or other formal qualification . What is yours ?
23 Sep 06
Originally posted by slappy115Sounds good to me.
I finally came up with a solution to welfare today. If you want to go on welfare, you can. You can do it for the rest of your life if you want. However, if you are going to relie on the state, then the state, in a sense, controls you; and since you are not paying taxes (you ARE on welfare after all), all you have to do is forfeit your right to vote.
...[text shortened]... could go on with this for a while but I would like to see anyone else's opinions on this.
23 Sep 06
1 edit
Originally posted by slappy115I think you would also have to take away their right to bear arms bud.
I finally came up with a solution to welfare today. If you want to go on welfare, you can. You can do it for the rest of your life if you want. However, if you are going to relie on the state, then the state, in a sense, controls you; and since you are not paying taxes (you ARE on welfare after all), all you have to do is forfeit your right to vote.
could go on with this for a while but I would like to see anyone else's opinions on this.
Look at the looting that went on in New Orleans, multiply it by 10, and add most of the Democrats for good measure.
24 Sep 06
Originally posted by AmauroteAnybody can apply for welfare, for after all we are a free and democratic land. So why would we exclude anyone? Why are you only including the poor and excluding the not so poor? That is discrimination after. Since it is a public program ran by the government, anyone can go on welfare so long as you renounce the right to vote forever.
Are we including corporate welfare and oligopoly profits in this category, or are we merely applying it to the luckless majority who happen to have been born without the opportunity to indulge in capital accumulation?
24 Sep 06
Originally posted by 7ate9Not having a job does not qualify for welfare. Plus there is work out there. It all depends on how much you want it.
I've only voted once, and only did it because I was bored that particular day. You fail to understand that people on benefits do not in general have much of a life... for whatever reasons that may be. In general I don't suspect it would be that much of a punishment.
How would you work this, for say people who are in seasonal jobs... do they still have the r ...[text shortened]... te for the US of A, but if we were to follow your arse, it could simply ruin our country. 🙂.
I never said that being jobless takes away the right to vote. Students of the voting age tend to be jobless.
24 Sep 06
Originally posted by shavixmirBefore the industrial revolution, many people were farmers. It is not the same as a factory job so would you call them unemployed. For the most part unemployment is a choice. You might not like the job you find but it is indeed a job.
If you create a society where unemployment is a possibility, you need to create welfare to support people.
It's that easy.
24 Sep 06
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundYou are infringing on Constitutional rights when you deny someone the right to bear arms. However, you could make it an addition clause that after giving up the right to vote, you must also give up the right to bear arms, too.
I think you would also have to take away their right to bear arms bud.
Look at the looting that went on in New Orleans, multiply it by 10, and add most of the Democrats for good measure.
The difference is a voluntary giving up of rights.
And if you are found in violation of this, we send you to Mexico. They send their poor to us so we should return the favor.
24 Sep 06
Originally posted by slappy115The comparison doesn't really bear analysis: a millionaire doesn't qualify for Medicare (although he may well apply), and the unemployed can't qualify for a defence contract or a crackerbarrel subsidy, although in point of fact both are more often than not welfare by another name. The idea that the private sector is independent of the public sector is a pretty fictive one - even worse, it leads to the kind of social imbalances JK Galbraith has been talking about for nearly sixty years.
Anybody can apply for welfare, for after all we are a free and democratic land. So why would we exclude anyone? Why are you only including the poor and excluding the not so poor? That is discrimination after. Since it is a public program ran by the government, anyone can go on welfare so long as you renounce the right to vote forever.
24 Sep 06
Originally posted by slappy115The point of the post is, if you take away the money, they'll uprise and Shoot your ass (can i say ass??) out of your middle class home, and take the very things you hold dear.
You are infringing on Constitutional rights when you deny someone the right to bear arms. However, you could make it an addition clause that after giving up the right to vote, you must also give up the right to bear arms, too.
The difference is a voluntary giving up of rights.
And if you are found in violation of this, we send you to Mexico. They send their poor to us so we should return the favor.
25 Sep 06
Originally posted by huckleberryhoundLOL, I'm not middle class. We don't own a home. We rent and under current requirements qualify to be on welfare. Just because we meet the requirements, it does not mean that we are. I'll starve to death before I will be a burden on someone else, especially someone I don't know. Furthermore, I can shoot back or did you forget that?
The point of the post is, if you take away the money, they'll uprise and Shoot your ass (can i say ass??) out of your middle class home, and take the very things you hold dear.
As for what I hold dear, it is freedom. Freedom to do what I want (within reason) and the fact that I do not require someone else to pay my bills or buy my food, a sense of pride which people forget about. You place too much emphasis on material possessions. And before you say, "slap aren't you saying that you're mad because they are taking your money?" Damn right I'm mad not because I lost something but rather the fact that they did not EARN it, like I did. There is a four letter word that most people will never understand.
And I bet if you took away the money, they would find a job. Of course, you will reply, "But slap, I can't support myself nor my family on this job." Get two jobs or a better job. Either that or give your children away because you are unfit to be parents if you cannot support them.
25 Sep 06
Originally posted by AmauroteYet you are discriminating based on class. Discrimination is discrimination. Everyone wants to be equal but that will never happen.
The comparison doesn't really bear analysis: a millionaire doesn't qualify for Medicare (although he may well apply), and the unemployed can't qualify for a defence contract or a crackerbarrel subsidy, although in point of fact both are more often than not welfare by another name. The idea that the private sector is independent of the public sector is a pre ...[text shortened]... to the kind of social imbalances JK Galbraith has been talking about for nearly sixty years.
"All men are created equal."
You want welfare then you need to go in front of every hard working American and say, "I am not equal. I am unable to support myself and/or my family. I am lower than every hard working person out there because I am unable to function as a productive member of society so I beg (let me emphasize BEG) you as a lower creature to have pity on me and allow me the funds to eat, clothe, and shelter myself and/or my family. Without you, I will rot away and die. Please have pity on me."
The day someone gets on television and addresses what welfare truly is is the day that I will accept it.