Do plan on calling these millionares and asking them to help you pay for your kids college, or your prescription drugs? Or housing & care for your parents when they get older?
NO Ill do that MYSELF
Well put yourself in the shoes of a low-income family. What do you do then, are you just SOL? You're poor so you don't deserve it. Is that advancement in civilization, is that improved culutre? Personally I don't think it is.
GET OFF YOUR ASS AND WORK!!!! Thats what made this country!!!
Welfare is the worst thing that EVER happened to the USA in the last 50 years
Payton I dare you to actually answer my question. If you went your whole life living at or below the poverty level, working full time and providing for your family, where will you turn to pay for unexpected medical costs/prescription drugs. Or send your kids to college so they can become better educated and not end up like you. Are you really just out of luck, tough break?
The world needs ditch diggers too...
OK Ill answer it. Why have you gone your whole life living below the poverty line? Mabey bad luck, but more likely the UNWILLINGNESS to change. There are Billions of dollars in loans available to make you able to make a better living. NOT A HANDOUT but a loan that you pay back. So that takes care of College.
As far as unexpected illness, You plan ahead. Set aside for a rainy day. You see IT IS A FACT that the poor Smoke, Drink and Eat more then the wealthy. Cut back or get rid of those out and you will have more then enough to pay for heath care each month. And I believe in a strong family, you know the thing that liberalism has destroyed!!!
I believe that EVERY MAN and WOMEN is responsible for themselves and thier families!!
I DO NOT EXPECT THE GOVERNMENT TO FIX MY PROBLEMS!!!
Fat, Drunk and Bobcat is no way to go through life son!
Dean Wormer- Animal House
You didn't answer my question, but I'll assume you're saying that if a situation arises the poor are SOL because it's their own fault.
A few things
1. You cannot save for a rainy day if you're barely living from paycheck to paycheck
2. Bush cut hundreds of millions of $$ from student loans, so thats thinning, with more years of republican rule there might not be any student loans left.
3. Show me the proof that the poor eat/drink/smoke more than the wealthy. Sounds more like a steriotype that you've applied more than a proven fact. Prove me wrong here, please.
One more question. The people of New Orleans are screwed because they had their homes and entire lives destroyed by a natural disaster. And you think thats their own fault?
You didn't answer my question, but I'll assume you're saying that if a situation arises the poor are SOL because it's their own fault.
A few things
1. You cannot save for a rainy day if you're barely living from paycheck to paycheck
2. Bush cut hundreds of millions of $$ from student loans, so thats thinning, with more years of republican rule there might not be any student loans left.
3. Show me the proof that the poor eat/drink/smoke more than the wealthy. Sounds more like a steriotype that you've applied more than a proven fact. Prove me wrong here, please.
One more question. The people of New Orleans are screwed because they had their homes and entire lives destroyed by a natural disaster. And you think thats their own fault?
#1 You cannot expect a different outcome, if you keep doing the same thing.
#2 Still leaves many BILLIONS
#3 Do a google search
#4 It was a big disaster- But I live in Texas and those New Orleans people are total free loaders, not all- BUT A LARGE %. Open any paper, listen to any radio down here and All they keep saying is We need more But we refuse to work anywhere or go back and work on cleaning up New Orleans
Fat, Drunk and Bobcat is no way to go through life son!
Dean Wormer- Animal House
I haven't read the entire thread, but I picked up the familiar themes.
So let me go on record and agree that changes need to be made around the country, and wealth redistribution must stop.
THEREFORE, we have to quit taking wealth in the form of federal tax dollars from the wealthy (blue) states and transferring it to the poor (red) states. All we're doing is creating a society of dependency in the red states, and they can't get their noses out of the welfare trough.
So from here on out, you should only get as much cash back from the feds as you put in, so MT (and most other red states) can quit being a federal welfare state at the expense of the wealthy blue states.
Is that what you guys are getting at? It sounds like the idea is that poor people suck and that they need to learn accountability. It's ironic that someone in MT would be making that case, but I'm sure everyone in CA, NY, CT, MA, IL, etc., etc, would be happy to quit subsidizing you guys anytime. Just get on the phone and tell Conrad you're tired of your pork and highway funds.
It's so bizarre how so many "red staters" don't quite realize where the poor and the rich are this country, and that when they point the accusatory fingers at "those people," that they are indirectly pointing into the mirror.
I haven't read the entire thread, but I picked up the familiar themes.
So let me go on record and agree that changes need to be made around the country, and wealth redistribution must stop.
THEREFORE, we have to quit taking wealth in the form of federal tax dollars from the wealthy (blue) states and transferring it to the poor (red) states. All we're doing is creating a society of dependency in the red states, and they can't get their noses out of the welfare trough.
So from here on out, you should only get as much cash back from the feds as you put in, so MT (and most other red states) can quit being a federal welfare state at the expense of the wealthy blue states.
Is that what you guys are getting at? It sounds like the idea is that poor people suck and that they need to learn accountability. It's ironic that someone in MT would be making that case, but I'm sure everyone in CA, NY, CT, MA, IL, etc., etc, would be happy to quit subsidizing you guys anytime. Just get on the phone and tell Conrad you're tired of your pork and highway funds.
It's so bizarre how so many "red staters" don't quite realize where the poor and the rich are this country, and that when they point the accusatory fingers at "those people," that they are indirectly pointing into the mirror.
Your getting warmer
Fat, Drunk and Bobcat is no way to go through life son!
Dean Wormer- Animal House
How can you do that if your home, life, and job was litterally washed away by a hurricane? Thats what we should do, call up every evacuee from the Gulf Coast and tell them sorry we're not going to help at all and they should just get off their a$$?
And then why don't we do that in Iraq? If you believe what Bush says we went in there is liberators. Shouldn't the Iraqi people have gotten off their a$$ and overthrown Saddam themselfs without our help? I mean, that would fit along the lines for you think New Orleans should be handled right?
I haven't read the entire thread, but I picked up the familiar themes.
So let me go on record and agree that changes need to be made around the country, and wealth redistribution must stop.
THEREFORE, we have to quit taking wealth in the form of federal tax dollars from the wealthy (blue) states and transferring it to the poor (red) states. All we're doing is creating a society of dependency in the red states, and they can't get their noses out of the welfare trough.
So from here on out, you should only get as much cash back from the feds as you put in, so MT (and most other red states) can quit being a federal welfare state at the expense of the wealthy blue states.
Is that what you guys are getting at? It sounds like the idea is that poor people suck and that they need to learn accountability. It's ironic that someone in MT would be making that case, but I'm sure everyone in CA, NY, CT, MA, IL, etc., etc, would be happy to quit subsidizing you guys anytime. Just get on the phone and tell Conrad you're tired of your pork and highway funds.
It's so bizarre how so many "red staters" don't quite realize where the poor and the rich are this country, and that when they point the accusatory fingers at "those people," that they are indirectly pointing into the mirror.
Fine with me BAC. Keep your money in California and keep those mexicans juiced up with medical and dental for all I care.
Is there not a difference between giving money to a state for infrastructure and education and the money straight to the lower class?
Again, the conservative philosophy grossly underestimates the size of our economy and the impact of federal spending.
The point made about the poor in the US having it so good compared with other countries illustrates this. We will always have poor, government assistance helps them live better than poor people in other countries. It certainly insures poor children survive with life's essentials, and for some it provides a means to escape the situation.
Is there some waste? Sure, just like there is in every bureacracy including big business. But for every anecdotal story of waste (Ronnie evil "welfare queens") there is also a story of some mother who got herself and her children out of th situation. The poor in this country also benefit from great public education and infrastructure. The fact is, corporate welfare and military spending far out-weigh social welfare programs. But I guess you guys find single mothers sexier targets than the likes of JR Simplot and Halliburton.
So get off your ass you say? Well then so should the auto workers and build thier own roads instead of relying upon public roads to subsidize their industry. The same goes for all subsidies. And while we're at it, lets start collecting royalties from all the products invented at state universities that private companies are now making a buck on. Lets see what happens when we really pull the federal spending rug out from under the feet of the US economy, and everyone is forced to "get off their ass".
There's a notion that a society's greatness can be measured by how well it treats its less fortunate. I for one am glad we're ahead of the Ivory Coast (if somewhat behind Sweden) in this category.
Joined: 25 Jan 2003 Posts: 2137 Location: The Lords personal toilet, otherwise known as Battle Creek, MI. 765 eGriz Bucks
So having your house blown away gives you the right to be an ass. Being on welfare gives the person the right to drive a new Lexus. I just don't get it.
I'm a divorced guy and I shell out around two hundred bucks a week for child support and child care for my son. I make a good living but like many in this country some months are tougher on the pocketbook than others. Do I expect a handout? NO. I have realized that what I need to do is work a little more overtime, buy generic rather than name brand at the store, realize that I have to make do with what I have. That if I really want something that I have to try and save for it. It's not the governments job to make me happy, only I can make myself happy. Those who expect to rely on the government will never be happy until they get up and do something about it.
"Well, why not 112%? Why not 500 percent or 1,300 percent or 38 billion percent? I mean if he can crank it up beyond 100%, why not? What's stopping him exactly?" ----Floyd Landis to Outside Magazine on athletes saying they gave 110%
Do plan on calling these millionares and asking them to help you pay for your kids college, or your prescription drugs? Or housing & care for your parents when they get older?
...dont' look now Re/Max, the the rich are already paying....
It's an example of history repeating itself Payton, it's happened over and over.
Since when has working hard been a failure?
The lower class becoming the majority of the population in a country and revolting against the elite few. It's something that has happened throughout history.
Re/Max: WAKE UP... What side of this equation do you feel you are on?
Fine with me BAC. Keep your money in California and keep those mexicans juiced up with medical and dental for all I care.
Is there not a difference between giving money to a state for infrastructure and education and the money straight to the lower class?
The only difference is one of perspective. Most mexicans in CA probably make more than the average Montanan, so they are subsidizing your lazy MT asses as well (to extend the apparent notion that "lower income" equates to "lazy").
And it's not just infrastructure that MT is sucking from the federal teet, either. There are a whole lot of direct payments to people in the state of MT ... not to mention that you guys pay a lot lower % of your income to federal taxes than CA folks.
In other words, on average, MT is poor, and benefits as compared to the rest of the country as a result. If you want to rail against the "leeches" on our society, don't go racial and look to New Orleans (that was subtle) or "Mexcians in California." Look at most of the people in MT -- they are the working poor in our country.
And for the record, if you have any exposure at all to Mexicans in this country, you would know that they absolutely do work their asses off doing the hardest and lowest paying jobs this country has to offer.
Fine with me BAC. Keep your money in California and keep those mexicans juiced up with medical and dental for all I care.
Is there not a difference between giving money to a state for infrastructure and education and the money straight to the lower class?
The only difference is one of perspective. Most mexicans in CA probably make more than the average Montanan, so they are subsidizing your lazy MT asses as well (to extend the apparent notion that "lower income" equates to "lazy").
And it's not just infrastructure that MT is sucking from the federal teet, either. There are a whole lot of direct payments to people in the state of MT ... not to mention that you guys pay a lot lower % of your income to federal taxes than CA folks.
In other words, on average, MT is poor, and benefits as compared to the rest of the country as a result. If you want to rail against the "leeches" on our society, don't go racial and look to New Orleans (that was subtle) or "Mexcians in California." Look at most of the people in MT -- they are the working poor in our country.
And for the record, if you have any exposure at all to Mexicans in this country, you would know that they absolutely do work their asses off doing the hardest and lowest paying jobs this country has to offer.
Hey I got it. I understand what your saying. I am still all for your previous plan. Cut us off and lets us deal with it on a state level. Won't happen, but I wish states would take care of their own problems. If we don't have enough money to deal with a certain problem, we don't do it.
Ponezone I'm not saying "its there" but that was an example of what had happened in the past when the lower class is all but ignored.
ignored...? IGNORED? Why... comparing the "lower class" in the U.S. with the lower classes of the world population.... the U.S. "lower class" is fed, has access of basic medical care, has shelter, has free public education (even probably through college), has vehicles, and will probably be at home watching the Olympics on their big screen TV this evening....
How is the lower class being ignored? Please let me know.....
Ponezone, please READ what I was talking about. I brought up events in history, not right now. The French Revolution as an example. I'm not saying the poor in the US are all but ignored right now, I was referencing past events.
The US isn't even close to simply ignoring the poor. PaytonLives was saying our policy for dealing with the poor should simply be telling them, get off your ass. Thats it. At least thats all he said in this thread. Based upon his ideals I was trying to explain to him how well that worked out for other countries in the past.
I don't want to act as though I am speaking for BAC, and I am certain he will correct me if I am wrong. I think he makes a good case for the Pork Barrell recipient that Montana is, and has been for decades. The amount of money Baucus, Burns, Rehberg, and others before them have sent to MT is staggering.
The average PORK per capita on a National basis is $33.03 per capita. Montana, on the other hand recieves $164.47 per capita, placing MT 5th behind Alaska, DC, Hawaii, and West Virginia.
For you CA bashers, CA receives $6.62 per capita placing CA 50th when it comes to government largess. If anyone is interested here is a link to a site that shows you many ways money is pissed away by the Government on various PORK.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
