- Joined
- Oct 19, 2012
- Messages
- 12,029
- Reaction score
- 3,530
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Obama is creating more and more of the poor. How much is enough?
So presidents "create" wealth and poverty, meaning Bush creating the most poverty in history since the Depression.
Good point!
Unemployment, food stamps, and disability have all grown under Obama, so again you are proven to be the board liar.
So presidents "create" wealth and poverty, meaning Bush creating the most poverty in history since the Depression.
Good point!
The largest recession since the Great Depression resulting in the loss of over $1T in wealth among Americans.
Thank you George.
Unemployment, food stamps, and disability have all grown under Obama, so again you are proven to be the board liar.
Do you disagree with those programs expanding during a recession? Because that's what' shappened. MOre people need those programs, because of the sorry state the economy has been in.
I know you're not asking me, but the federal government should not do need-based social programming at all. There are there are some things that the federal government should not be doing (at any time) and which states, counties, cities, communities, churches, businesses, or other associations of people can address on their own.
What should happen if a community is unable to adequately provide for the needs of its members?
:shrug: Then it might go the way of other failed communities. There could be countless reasons why a community would fail to make itself a desirable place to live. It is unwise to imagine a bad scenario, or even be faced with a real one, and then immediately assume that something much larger has to save it. People should know what's at stake if they mismanage their lives, families, communities and/or states such that it motivates them to act wisely.
The impulse to create a god out of our federal government must be resisted. Success AND failure (painful as the latter can be) are both necessary to be able to learn and adapt. A network of fail-safes encourages reckless imprudence.
The problem that I have with your post, and with a lot of libertarians in general, is an idea that if something goes wrong, it must necessarily always be the fault of the people involved,
This is why I refer to so many libertarians as Social Darwinists.
The problem that I have with your post, and with a lot of libertarians in general, is an idea that if something goes wrong, it must necessarily always be the fault of the people involved, and they should be left to suffer without any ****s given by their greater community. This is why I refer to so many libertarians as Social Darwinists.
Do you disagree with those programs expanding during a recession? Because that's what' shappened. MOre people need those programs, because of the sorry state the economy has been in.
Do you disagree with those programs expanding during a recession? Because that's what' shappened. MOre people need those programs, because of the sorry state the economy has been in.
The problem that I have with your post, and with a lot of libertarians in general, is an idea that if something goes wrong, it must necessarily always be the fault of the people involved, and they should be left to suffer without any ****s given by their greater community. This is why I refer to so many libertarians as Social Darwinists.
Survival of the fittest, that is a fundimental law of nature.
The problem that I have with your post, and with a lot of libertarians in general, is an idea that if something goes wrong, it must necessarily always be the fault of the people involved, and they should be left to suffer without any ****s given by their greater community. This is why I refer to so many libertarians as Social Darwinists.
the idea that we should take the right to vote away from those who make so little money that they pay no federal income taxes / retired people is preposterous ; so much so that it is unworthy of debate.
however, since you asked, the majority of them still pay for social security and Medicare, so removing their right to vote would amount to taxation without representation.
if voter suppression is your best path to victory, you're doing something wrong.
under libertarianism, you have freedom to be the best you can be, by being free you exercise that freedom to choose, make you own decisions, it is not for anyone else to protect you, when you make the wrong decisions, if people wish do help you voluntary that is fine.
but people should not be mandated and forced to help other people, because its taking away my freedom, by applying that force.........so freedom is the issue.
Survival of the fittest, that is a fundimental law of nature.
But by taking away my freedom to murder you and eat your still-beating heart, you're taking away my freedom too. So freedom is the issue. We as a society have decided that society works better if we limit the amount of brutal murders, Mr. Tasty Heart. Similarly, some of us think that society functions better if there are safeguards to limit the amount of people who fall into crippling poverty. I could give you a list of reasons why that makes society work better for everyone. If freedom was the only issue, we'd be in an anarchy.
By the way, why do you have a Nazi as your avatar?
Listen, Mr. Tasty-heart. First you say "freedom is the issue", then you talk about how we're talking about libertarianism. Make up your mind. We both agree that society needs laws to function, I agree we need laws to have freedom, I just think we need a bit more laws than you do, to make sure we have freedom from our fellow citizens, and because I think we as a community, sometimes need to act together.you don't have freedom to MURDER! because you are infringing on another persons rights. libertarianism is you can pretty much do as you want, as long as you don't violate the rights of other people.
Listen, Mr. Tasty-heart. First you say "freedom is the issue", then you talk about how we're talking about libertarianism. Make up your mind. We both agree that society needs laws to function, I agree we need laws to have freedom, I just think we need a bit more laws than you do, to make sure we have freedom from our fellow citizens, and because I think we as a community, sometimes need to act together.
Why is your avatar a Nazi?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?