• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Cost of War, in Real Time!

ShamMol

Only Way Round is Through
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 24, 2005
Messages
1,988
Reaction score
10
Location
Pasadena, California
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Do you mean without raising taxes like we usually do to finance a war...like George's father did after the war to help pay for the costs? Honestly, it isn't the point-the point is that it doesn't matter the cost of the war because we are over there and quarrelling about the cost of it will likely result in cost-cutting measure like happened in the 90's by both sides which would not be beneficial to our troops who need our support.
 

ILikeDubyah

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Phx
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Billo_Really said:
Go to this link.

http://www.costofwar.com/

Then come back and tell me how we can afford this war.

Actually, I'm even more glad my money is going to the defense of this country, after seeing that website.
I don't want to see my money to go for free housing, I have to pay for my housing, and what happens to government funded housing areas.....I.E. Cabrini Green in Chicago....yeah, we should build more of those!
Free College education through scholarships? Don't think so. I had to work for mine...it builds character.
Free health insurance....maybe for children, but once someone's 18 & can get a job, they can get their own insurance.
Pre-school is un-necessary.
I Don't think the government should be responsible for taking care of AIDS.
Immunizations are the responsibility of the country in which you reside.
 

new coup for you

Upper West Side Jacobin
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
10,643
Reaction score
2,283
Location
Philly, "The City that shoves you back!"
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
pre-school isnt unnecessary

1)it provides childcare for working parents
2)it socializes kids and prepares them for real school
3)it's fun. or at least mine was. my pre-school teachers still recognize me and still remember my adoreable little kid antics. i met my best freind in preschool when i was 2, now we're both 19 and still best freinds.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
real school?

is that what you called it?

I learned everything outside of school...
 

mrgrinch09

New member
Joined
Aug 28, 2005
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Private
ILikeDubyah said:
.
Pre-school is un-necessary.
You are so wrong about that.

You really need to read this:
http://www.kidsource.com/kidsource/content3/benefits.preschool.2.html

There have been studies that have shown that for every dollar invested in preschool programs, there's a $2-$13 dollar return on the investment.

So you can give $1 dollar now for quality preschool programs now, or you can give $2-$13 later to pay for special education, welfare, and the Justice system.

I know where I'd rather have my money spent. :think:
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,367
Reaction score
13,587
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
Let me explain something to you guys on the right who are economics impaired.

Of every dollar you pay in federal income taxes:


- 30 Cents goes towards Defense. We need a strong defense, no doubt about it. So for the most part it’s money well spent. Then again, a recent audit found that the Pentagon could not account for 1 trillion dollars of the taxpayer’s money. This combined with the 500 dollar toilet seats and 700 dollar hammers that defense contractors routinely bilk the taxpayer for makes the Defense the most inefficient and wasteful (in terms of funding) of any federal expenditure. Of course if you point that out, you’re an unpatriotic satanic commie.

- 20 Cents or so goes towards healthcare programs. Once again, money well spent for the most part.

- 18.6 Cents does nothing but pay interest on the National Debt. It doesn’t actually pay any debt off, but rather does nothing but service interest on that debt, the vast majority incurred during the Reagan, Bush Sr., and current President Bush years. (Because Clinton never proposed a budget with over 3% growth over the previous year, debt service as a percentage of federal expenditures actually dropped during the Clinton years)

- 2.1 Cents goes towards federal housing programs for low income families.

- 3.7 Cents goes towards education.

- 3.4 Cents goes towards Veteran Benefits

- 6.6 Cents goes towards Welfare, Disability, and un-employment benefit programs

- 1.7 Cents goes towards Environment Protection (only 1.7 cents to protect the actual land that 30 cents pays to defend)

- The rest of the budget goes towards your congressman’s favorite pork barrel corporate welfare program.


You see that third number there, the 18.6 cents that does nothing but service debt.

The more this war costs us....

The higher that number gets ….

The less money there is to pay for other programs like defense, healthcare, veterans benefits, education or your senator’s favorite pork barrel corporate welfare program….

Which means the government borrows more money....

Which means that it costs the government more to service the additional debt….

Which means that even less money will be available for programs like defense, healthcare, veterans benefits, education or your senator’s favorite pork barrel corporate welfare program….

Which means that the government will have to borrow more money (issue more T-Bills)….

Which means that it will cost the government more money to service the additional debt….

You see the pattern yet?

Now at some point, the cost of just servicing that debt becomes crippling for the economy. So what program do you think will be first on the chopping block? Well if you guessed Defense, you’re probably wrong. If you guessed your senator’s favorite pork barrel corporate welfare program – Wrong Again, especially if your senator is a Republican. If a person were going to put some money on it, there best bet that the first programs on the chopping block would be programs like environmental protection, veteran’s benefits, and some healthcare programs. But wait you say……Those programs don’t represent a very large percentage of federal spending. Of course your right, so cutting those programs really won’t do much to solve the debt crisis will it. So within a few short fiscal years we will be at the point of defaulting on our debts because we won’t be able to continue servicing current debt and meeting fiscal obligations. So at that point, what program do you think will have to be on the chopping block? If you answered Defense, then you are right!

That friends is the goal of the terrorists. Debt is what caused the collapse of the Soviet Union, the fall of Rome, and the fall of just about every great nation in the history of civilization. Think about that one next time you hang your hat on Supply Side Economics and Neo-Conservative Foreign Policy.
 

Arch Enemy

Familiaist
DP Veteran
Joined
Mar 27, 2005
Messages
7,470
Reaction score
2,085
Location
North Carolina
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
128shot said:
real school?

is that what you called it?

I learned everything outside of school...
Some how that's doubtful.

Please don't tell you you learned about "mols" on your own.

Wow it actually has my SMALL TOWN listed. That's crazy! The town of Hillsborough North Carolina never has even seen 3 million dollars, let alone give it to this war.

I wonder, how are they getting this infromation.. are they hacking into the pentagon to find EVERY SINGLE dollar being spent? It's impossible to know all the costs.
 

ILikeDubyah

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Phx
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
new coup for you said:
pre-school isnt unnecessary

1)it provides childcare for working parents
2)it socializes kids and prepares them for real school
3)it's fun. or at least mine was. my pre-school teachers still recognize me and still remember my adoreable little kid antics. i met my best freind in preschool when i was 2, now we're both 19 and still best freinds.
1) There do not NEED to be 2 working parents in a household. The problem today is that people want to run out & buy every single thing that they may want, or may have a use for. If you were to want for less & budget your spending, as long as you're not working at wal-mart or mcdonalds, both parents do not need to work.....If you CHOOSE to work, and your spouse CHOOSES to work as well, it's not the Government's problem that no one's taking care of your kid.....Responsible parenting....Responsible parenting.

2) Socialization? Isn't that what the other neighborhood kids you were growing up around were for? I'm sorry, but at 2, 3, or 4 years old, you shouldn't have a care in the world. Instead these children have timelines to follow & are having their minds, senses of morals & values warped by adults and authority figures that are not their parents. Children this young should be playing outside in their yards & neighborhood (supervised by a mother or father that has chosen to spend time with their child, rather than quest after the almighty dollar), not stuck in a dank classroom somewhere. There'll be plenty of time for that later. How much of the money from the second income goes to paying either a babysitter or "pre-school" to take care of the kids? Also, pre school may be socialize a child enough to deal with other kids their age, but what about having a bond with your family/parents, understanding authority, etc.?
Again, it's not the government's job to take care of your kids (in this aspect).

3) I think I'd prefer to make my own fun, rather than have someone paid to babysit me tell me what's fun.

4) Once again, to get my point across, If you choose to have a 2 income family, it is not the responsibility of the government to pay for a babysitting service for your child....Also, it's my understanding (from countless online articals) that children who go to pre-school at a very young age, or spend large amounts of day cares tend to have to have behaivioral problems/ criminal records....in some articals up to 40% more of the time than children who are raised by a stay at home parent....If the parent's not around, who will teach them right from wrong (and have the lesson mean something), who will teach them correct morals & values (I know it's subjective, but I'm sure that the day-care worker doesn't have the same opinions on things as you, or every child in their care's parents).....I said Pre-school is un-necessary, and I'll even go as far as to say that it is detrimental.

Of course the people saying that pre-school should be paid fro by the Fed. Government are probably also the people who will blame the Fed Government & the school system when their kid turns out to be a(n) alchoholic/drug addict/sex offender/gang member/violent person/etc...etc...etc....all of which could have been curbed early on, if one of the parents had chosen to give up "their career"/"their lifestyle" and had actually chosen to parent the child they brought into the world, rather than having a surrogate do it for them.
 

SouthernDemocrat

Pragmatist
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
22,367
Reaction score
13,587
Location
KC
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Moderate
ILikeDubyah said:
1) There do not NEED to be 2 working parents in a household. The problem today is that people want to run out & buy every single thing that they may want, or may have a use for. If you were to want for less & budget your spending, as long as you're not working at wal-mart or mcdonalds, both parents do not need to work.....If you CHOOSE to work, and your spouse CHOOSES to work as well, it's not the Government's problem that no one's taking care of your kid.....Responsible parenting....Responsible parenting.
I will agree with you one thing, a lot of people buy a lot of crap that they don’t need just for the sake of materialism alone. However, it’s the “Me-Ism” and “Culture of Greed” so prevalent on the right that promotes those types of ideals. Sustainable living is at its core a very liberal ideal.

That said…..

Do you have children?

Do you have a house payment?

Do you have a job?

Or are you some trust fund baby Republican who has had everything handed to him.

It costs a lot of money to live these days you know. In fact, its costs a middle class family a lot more money these days to get by. I have a decent career, I make pretty good money, and I am not a materialist person. My favorite leisure activities are fishing, hiking, backpacking, and canoe trips, and none of those activities cost a lot of money. We live in a 3 bedroom 1 bath home in the Kansas City Metro. However, if my wife did not work, we would barely be scraping by and we certainly could not afford to own a home. Like most American families, we both work out of necessity. We shell out 700 dollars a month to send our 4 year old son to the best possible day school we can afford to send him to. He benefits greatly from his time there (they were teaching him Spanish at age 3 for crying out loud).

ILikeDubyah said:
2) Socialization? Isn't that what the other neighborhood kids you were growing up around were for? I'm sorry, but at 2, 3, or 4 years old, you shouldn't have a care in the world. Instead these children have timelines to follow & are having their minds, senses of morals & values warped by adults and authority figures that are not their parents. Children this young should be playing outside in their yards & neighborhood (supervised by a mother or father that has chosen to spend time with their child, rather than quest after the almighty dollar), not stuck in a dank classroom somewhere. There'll be plenty of time for that later. How much of the money from the second income goes to paying either a babysitter or "pre-school" to take care of the kids? Also, pre school may be socialize a child enough to deal with other kids their age, but what about having a bond with your family/parents, understanding authority, etc.?
Again, it's not the government's job to take care of your kids (in this aspect).
You don’t have a clue. Discipline and structure are the best things in the world for toddlers, they thrive on it. We spend a great deal of time with our son. When we get out of work and he gets out of school, we go the park, play outside, go fishing, go swimming, go hiking (he can hike for 2 or 3 miles at the age of 4), take him to his t-ball games or anything else that any other kid should be doing. However, he also loves going to his school and while he is there he gets exposed to different cultures, beliefs, and activities that he would never get exposed to just playing with the neighborhood kids.

ILikeDubyah said:
3) I think I'd prefer to make my own fun, rather than have someone paid to babysit me tell me what's fun.

4) Once again, to get my point across, If you choose to have a 2 income family, it is not the responsibility of the government to pay for a babysitting service for your child....Also, it's my understanding (from countless online articals) that children who go to pre-school at a very young age, or spend large amounts of day cares tend to have to have behaivioral problems/ criminal records....in some articals up to 40% more of the time than children who are raised by a stay at home parent....If the parent's not around, who will teach them right from wrong (and have the lesson mean something), who will teach them correct morals & values (I know it's subjective, but I'm sure that the day-care worker doesn't have the same opinions on things as you, or every child in their care's parents).....I said Pre-school is un-necessary, and I'll even go as far as to say that it is detrimental.

Of course the people saying that pre-school should be paid fro by the Fed. Government are probably also the people who will blame the Fed Government & the school system when their kid turns out to be a(n) alchoholic/drug addict/sex offender/gang member/violent person/etc...etc...etc....all of which could have been curbed early on, if one of the parents had chosen to give up "their career"/"their lifestyle" and had actually chosen to parent the child they brought into the world, rather than having a surrogate do it for them.
I don’t think that everyone ought to have their pre-school paid for, but certainly, a single parent in many cases ought to get some help with it. A single mother earning 25k a year would have hell coming up with 700 or more a month for childcare. Moreover, a lot of the people I know that make so much money that the mother stays home with the kids have little brats for kids. If you teach a kid to respect his parents early on, he or she will have much less of a chance ending up in a gang, on hard drugs, or in prison, but that has nothing to do with whether or not they go to day care or not and everything to do with whether or not the parents act like parents and discipline their children. Our son goes to Day School, but we have taught him from day one to say yes sir and no sir or yes mam and no mam to adults, he is very well mannered and behaved because I don’t put up with anything.
 

ILikeDubyah

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Phx
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
SouthernDemocrat said:
I will agree with you one thing, a lot of people buy a lot of crap that they don’t need just for the sake of materialism alone. However, it’s the “Me-Ism” and “Culture of Greed” so prevalent on the right that promotes those types of ideals. Sustainable living is at its core a very liberal ideal.

That said…..

Do you have children?

Not as of yet, so I'll cite my immediate family. My parents were not rich, and neither were their parents. My father has worked for the last 40 years as a Tool & Die maker....He's a blue collar laborer...My parents had 10 children. My mother has never worked a paying job in her life, her job was to stay home and take care of the kids. We grew up far from having everything we we could ever dream of, however we never really wanted for anything either.

None of us went to pre-school, coincidentally, none of us have criminal records, behavioral problems, or are dependant on drugs, alcohol, etc. We all have well paying jobs, we're all married, none have been divorced, some of us have children, and are perpetuating the idology that we preach.


Do you have a house payment? Yes I do, and I have for the last 5 years...not bad considering that I'm only 25.

Do you have a job? Again, yes I do...very profitable.

Or are you some trust fund baby Republican who has had everything handed to him.

First, I am not a republican, and I do not like most republicans, as they are too liberal. I'm a conservative in that I want things to be like they were hundreds of years ago. My user name stems from the fact that I feel GWB is doing a good job as president, and has good character. It has nothing to do with his political standings on issues.As for a trust fund...no. When the boys in our family turned 13, we got jobs. We paid for our own clothes...it taught us responsibility. The girls were allowed to get jobs as well, and they did. We all paid for our own higher education, no help from the parents, and that's a good thing, because it not only teacher responsibility, it builds character, and keeps you from becoming one of those idiots that had college paid for by someone else, which means they can screw around as much as they like & not have to pay for it, have no worries and eventually go out into the world with no experience/clue. The funny thing is that EVERYONE in our neighborhood growing up had it the same way. It was kind of like a Leave it to Beaver neighborhood in the 70's 80's & 90's...unfortunately, from what I hear, the neighborhood has changed to be just like everywhere else...


It costs a lot of money to live these days you know. In fact, its costs a middle class family a lot more money these days to get by. I have a decent career, I make pretty good money, and I am not a materialist person. My favorite leisure activities are fishing, hiking, backpacking, and canoe trips, and none of those activities cost a lot of money. We live in a 3 bedroom 1 bath home in the Kansas City Metro. However, if my wife did not work, we would barely be scraping by and we certainly could not afford to own a home. Like most American families, we both work out of necessity. We shell out 700 dollars a month to send our 4 year old son to the best possible day school we can afford to send him to. He benefits greatly from his time there (they were teaching him Spanish at age 3 for crying out loud).

Yes, it does cost a great amount of money to live, however, cost of living has always been high. Here is an example...in the year 1900, a full time brick layer was paid an average .50 an hour. Today, a full time brick layer is paid an average of $18.06 an hour. That is an increase of 36% in pay In the year 1900, $100 had the same buying power as $1,820.00...cost of living has only increased 18%....that means that 18% of what you are now making is free & clear above cost of living. Granted, these figures do not account for technological advances such as cars, gasoline, tv's, & computers (the latter 2 being a 1 time expense every 10 years or so). The point is that today we have more money than expenses...people just have to learn how to manage it better.



You don’t have a clue. Discipline and structure are the best things in the world for toddlers, they thrive on it. We spend a great deal of time with our son. When we get out of work and he gets out of school, we go the park, play outside, go fishing, go swimming, go hiking (he can hike for 2 or 3 miles at the age of 4), take him to his t-ball games or anything else that any other kid should be doing. However, he also loves going to his school and while he is there he gets exposed to different cultures, beliefs, and activities that he would never get exposed to just playing with the neighborhood kids.

Discipline & structure provided by someone the child really doesn't know/doesn't know the child is useless.(not to mention the respect issue) Also, most people don't give a rat's a** what their child learns at the day care, nor don do really spend time with them after hours. My wife is a high school teacher, and the kids she's dealing with now are the children from the era when mass pre-school/day care really came into it's own...It's like these children never had parents. They're disrespectful, they all have attitudes & behavioral problems...This reminds me of something I saw where the parent said "Don't worry, TV will raise the kids".



I don’t think that everyone ought to have their pre-school paid for, but certainly, a single parent in many cases ought to get some help with it. A single mother earning 25k a year would have hell coming up with 700 or more a month for childcare. Moreover, a lot of the people I know that make so much money that the mother stays home with the kids have little brats for kids. If you teach a kid to respect his parents early on, he or she will have much less of a chance ending up in a gang, on hard drugs, or in prison, but that has nothing to do with whether or not they go to day care or not and everything to do with whether or not the parents act like parents and discipline their children. Our son goes to Day School, but we have taught him from day one to say yes sir and no sir or yes mam and no mam to adults, he is very well mannered and behaved because I don’t put up with anything.
I don't agree with you here either. The only way I would support the government paying for day care or pre-school is if somehow one of the parents was widowed. Giving funding to people who choose to be single parents, either by divorce, or having sex out of wedlock would just be wrong.That's right, I said CHOOSE.

It's like saying "Oh, you messed up? this isn't what you want? don't worry, we'll take care of you....go do whatever you want!" It just perpetuates more crap. I DO agree with you that discipline & respect start at home, so does learning & socialization. This is why I say that pre-school/government funded pre-school is not necessary.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
ILikeDubyah said:
I don't agree with you here either. The only way I would support the government paying for day care or pre-school is if somehow one of the parents was widowed. Giving funding to people who choose to be single parents, either by divorce, or having sex out of wedlock would just be wrong.That's right, I said CHOOSE.

It's like saying "Oh, you messed up? this isn't what you want? don't worry, we'll take care of you....go do whatever you want!" It just perpetuates more crap. I DO agree with you that discipline & respect start at home, so does learning & socialization. This is why I say that pre-school/government funded pre-school is not necessary.
Yeah and if their husband beats them...Well that's just too freakin bad! Learn to deal with it right? Because certainly trying to leave would be a crime because than society might have to take care of them. :roll:
 

ILikeDubyah

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Phx
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kelzie said:
Yeah and if their husband beats them...Well that's just too freakin bad! Learn to deal with it right? Because certainly trying to leave would be a crime because than society might have to take care of them. :roll:
First, what ever happened to self reliance?!?!

Second, you hop into marriage without fully knowing the other person or what they're capable of ....it's your fault & it's not the government's job to fix the problem you created.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
ILikeDubyah said:
First, what ever happened to self reliance?!?!

Second, you hop into marriage without fully knowing the other person or what they're capable of ....it's your fault & it's not the government's job to fix the problem you created.
Sure. It's the wife's fault. She was probably asking for it too. Really, if she was too young when she got married and didn't know what she was getting into, she should be forced to stay there. The government certainly couldn't help her out, I mean, it's not like he's going to kill her or anything. Just smack her around a little right?
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
What ever happend to mutual relationships!


And I never give school enough credit. I'm terrible at it, but I think teachers deserve a pay raise
 

ILikeDubyah

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Phx
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kelzie said:
Sure. It's the wife's fault. She was probably asking for it too. Really, if she was too young when she got married and didn't know what she was getting into, she should be forced to stay there. The government certainly couldn't help her out, I mean, it's not like he's going to kill her or anything. Just smack her around a little right?
I'm not saying she/he "should be forced to stay in the marriage." I'm saying it's not the governments job to fix her/his (men can be abused too) problems grown out of a situation like that. It is thw government's job to put the abuser in jail, but as for their situation otherwise...solve the problem yourself, rather than wait to be handed the solution or have a band-aid put on the situation.
 

Kelzie

The Almighty
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 23, 2005
Messages
13,534
Reaction score
1,000
Location
Denver, CO
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Liberal
ILikeDubyah said:
I'm not saying she/he "should be forced to stay in the marriage." I'm saying it's not the governments job to fix her/his (men can be abused too) problems grown out of a situation like that. It is thw government's job to put the abuser in jail, but as for their situation otherwise...solve the problem yourself, rather than wait to be handed the solution or have a band-aid put on the situation.
So your solution to an emotionally damaged women with no job training, house, or savings account and three kids is to say "Suck it up?" Figure out how to do it on your own or starve. How very humane of you.
 

128shot

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
1,258
Reaction score
31
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Being human is a bitch isn't it?

Even I have compassion..and I'm a dirty capitalist!
 

ILikeDubyah

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Phx
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
Kelzie said:
So your solution to an emotionally damaged women with no job training, house, or savings account and three kids is to say "Suck it up?" Figure out how to do it on your own or starve. How very humane of you.
Pretty much, this is America, the land of oppertunity...make something of yourself. Now, if charities & non profit organizations (which I have donated to) want to help these people out, God Bless them, but it's not, nor should it be required that the government does so.
 
Last edited:

new coup for you

Upper West Side Jacobin
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
10,643
Reaction score
2,283
Location
Philly, "The City that shoves you back!"
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
ILikeDubyah said:
1) There do not NEED to be 2 working parents in a household. The problem today is that people want to run out & buy every single thing that they may want, or may have a use for. If you were to want for less & budget your spending, as long as you're not working at wal-mart or mcdonalds, both parents do not need to work.....If you CHOOSE to work, and your spouse CHOOSES to work as well, it's not the Government's problem that no one's taking care of your kid.....Responsible parenting....Responsible parenting.
maybe where you live one income is enough, but i live down town in a big northeastern city. things are EXPENSIVE here.
 

new coup for you

Upper West Side Jacobin
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
10,643
Reaction score
2,283
Location
Philly, "The City that shoves you back!"
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
ILikeDubyah said:
Pretty much, this is America, the land of oppertunity...make something of yourself. Now, if charities & non profit organizations (which I have donated to) want to help these people out, God Bless them, but it's not, nor should it be required that the government does so.
it's the governments job to spend peoples tax money on what they want it spent on

and although public support for welfare is very conditional right now, i think most people would be in favor of government aid in the situation which was described

seriously dude there isnt any reason to be so cruel, helping people out that need it doesnt lead to communism, it just makes you not an asshole.
 

ILikeDubyah

Member
Joined
Jul 27, 2005
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
Location
Phx
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
new coup for you said:
maybe where you live one income is enough, but i live down town in a big northeastern city. things are EXPENSIVE here.
I've lived in Chicago & Phoenix....both pretty large/expensive cities...it can be done.
 

new coup for you

Upper West Side Jacobin
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 15, 2005
Messages
10,643
Reaction score
2,283
Location
Philly, "The City that shoves you back!"
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
i live in a two story row home and my family doesnt have a car and both my parents work HARD. i seriously doubt i would have the options i have today if my mom didnt have a job.

and even if money wasnt an issue, i'm GLAD my mom has a job. i'm sure its made her feel more fufilled as a person.
 
Top Bottom