The justification for wealth-redistribution.[W:2037]

[Neomalthusian]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

What is the alternative? You're going to pay one way or another whether it be through TANF or some alternative plan on what to do with these babies. The better solution is try to avoid the undesirable outcome through education, the availability of birth control etc....these things are often discussed but there will always be children born in poverty. You can't just cut a program and say the problem will solve itself. Also, educational spending is not solely tied into outcomes. There is so much more that goes into spending and a huge costs these days for big districts is transportation and heating. For districts with crumbling infrastructure it may be repair. High poverty schools have to think about much more of where their spending goes than wealthier. The list goes on and on so to say just cutting educational spending based on outcome is a logical fallacy.

...Perhaps, the better answer would be investing in education on teen pregnancy (for example).

A very politically correct idea with a very low likelihood of doing anything. Reproduction control needs to be much more aggressive if preventing pregnancy among dysfunctional young people is going to be effective. I agree they should be given accurate information and education about it (less focused on anatomy and physiology of reproduction and more focused on consequences), but truthfully, the ability of unprepared dysfunctional young people to reproduce is perpetuation the cycles of poverty and trauma. It needs to stop.

 

[Papa bull]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

That is because under current corporate law that is true. It doesn't mean it is a natural born truth or a law carved in stone.

It is a natural born truth carved into stone. But, of course, it is possible for the hammer of communism to smash that stone. Peoples revolution? You know you want it. Just say it.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

TANF is but one of over 70 federal "safety net" programs based on household income/household size. Note that the federal poverty level is structured such that adding a dependent adds over $4K of annual "need" per dependent. Try to get Medicaid in Texas if you are not disabled, not over 65 or do not have a dependent. Which one of those "qualifications" is most easily obtained?

Okay, so your beef isn't necessarily a safety net program but that people who have dependents may qualify for more aide?

 

[Henrin]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

It's not really a plan. It's a shift in attitude and thought.

Which is another way of saying I can't do it now, but in time I can and will.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

It is a natural born truth carved into stone. But, of course, it is possible for the hammer of communism to smash that stone. Peoples revolution? You know you want it. Just say it.

Again, stakeholders are not the same as a totalitarian government.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

A very politically correct idea with a very low likelihood of doing anything. Reproduction control needs to be much more aggressive if preventing pregnancy among dysfunctional young people is going to be effective. I agree they should be given accurate information and education about it (less focused on anatomy and physiology of reproduction and more focused on consequences), but truthfully, the ability of unprepared dysfunctional young people to reproduce is perpetuation the cycles of poverty and trauma. It needs to stop.

What do you mean by reproduction control?

 

[Henrin]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

The shift in thinking is that it is not just the shareholder that holds ownership.

Yeah, we figured that out already. That is why Papa called you a communist.

 

[Papa bull]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Again, stakeholders are not the same as a totalitarian government.

But you said you want the law changed to make this happen. It can already happen merely by people deciding to create or join a co-op, so why does "corporate law" need changed to make it happen unless you feel that the government must force it to happen. And that belies your statement.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

What do you mean by reproduction control?

Ubiquitous and (in some cases) incentivized and (in the more extreme cases) mandatory birth control measures.

 

[Papa bull]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Yeah, we figured that out already. That is why Papa called you a communist.

What we have here is a communist that, apparently, is embarrassed and ashamed of the word "communism".

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Which is another way of saying I can't do it now, but in time I can and will.

Really? My opinion is that powerful? Maybe, if I was a Koch brother or some other wealthy person that owns the media, think tanks, models legislation etc, etc....

 

[Henrin]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Again, stakeholders are not the same as a totalitarian government.

Sorry, but your plan is totalitarian. The only way law can make your plan happen is if it resigns ownership by force and to do this they must have ownership of all property. I realize I already said this and you said it was strawman, but the more you post the more I'm sure I'm right.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

What we have here is a communist that, apparently, is embarrassed and ashamed of the word "communism".

That red scare stuff is really getting old.

 

[Henrin]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

That red scare stuff is really getting old.

Then stop giving it validity.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

But you said you want the law changed to make this happen. It can already happen merely by people deciding to create or join a co-op, so why does "corporate law" need changed to make it happen unless you feel that the government must force it to happen. And that belies your statement.

How exactly do you think laws get changed?

 

[Papa bull]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Sorry, but your plan is totalitarian. The only way law can make your plan happen is if it resigns ownership by force and to do this they must have ownership of all property.

Rabbit needs to do some soul searching. She walks like a duck and has webbed feet and feathers and a bill like a duck and when someone points at her and says, "You are a duck", she denies it, loudly proclaiming, "Quack quack quackkkkk quackkkk quack", which in duck language means "nuh uh".

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Ubiquitous and (in some cases) incentivized and (in the more extreme cases) mandatory birth control measures.

Mandatory birth control sounds awfully totalitarian to me.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Rabbit needs to do some soul searching. She walks like a duck and has webbed feet and feathers and a bill like a duck and when someone points at her and says, "You are a duck", she denies it, loudly proclaiming, "Quack quack quackkkkk quackkkk quack", which in duck language means "nuh uh".

Again, instead if acting foolish and uninformed, please explain how laws get changed.

 

[Papa bull]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Again, instead if acting foolish and uninformed, please explain how laws get changed.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. In order for a free nation to become communist, we need only agree to change the laws. In order for a communist nation to become free, blood must be shed.

Communism is communism whether the revolution is passive or bloody.

 

[Summerwind]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Did I strike a nerve? Good.

That's just some Papa Bull**** folks.

But that's okay. I'm here.

Wow, I knew it was bad, but that really worse than even I thought.

 

[Henrin]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Mandatory birth control sounds awfully totalitarian to me.

Neomalthusian ignores the history of his idea whenever he brings it up. If you look at his thread history you should find a thread of his where he goes more in depth on his thoughts on mandatory birth control.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Sorry, but your plan is totalitarian. The only way law can make your plan happen is if it resigns ownership by force and to do this they must have ownership of all property. I realize I already said this and you said it was strawman, but the more you post the more I'm sure I'm right.

I see another village lost its idiot. Please explain how laws are changed.

 

[Henrin]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Really? My opinion is that powerful? Maybe, if I was a Koch brother or some other wealthy person that owns the media, think tanks, models legislation etc, etc....

Slow and steady has been a policy from people like you for a long time now. Anyone that thinks your plan would be put into place all at once doesn't understand how your kind works.

 

[Neomalthusian]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

Mandatory birth control sounds awfully totalitarian to me.

Birth control is a hell of a lot less oppressive than jail, which is what we do to drug offenders, or the death penalty, which is what we do to the most serious offenders. It's amazing we will put these people in a cage, denying them all sorts of freedoms in the process, but will let the same person who has had numerous fetal-substance-affected babies keep reproducing, often times without charging her with child abuse. Birth control would only be mandatory in these extreme cases of birthing drug-dependent babies who are permanently brain damaged by the mother's harmful addictive behaviors. In less severe cases, it would only be incentivized or ubiquitized.

My position is based in child welfare, human rights and maximizes people's various liberties. It would be the least infringing of the infringements, considering people could easily do anything else with their lives that they wanted… including work hard to make themselves better prepared to become parents if that's what they ultimately want.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Re: The justification for wealth-redistribution.

I've said it before and I'll say it again. In order for a free nation to become communist, we need only agree to change the laws. In order for a communist nation to become free, blood must be shed.

Communism is communism whether the revolution is passive or bloody.

Paranoid much:roll:

Changing a law does not equate to Communism in any form or fashion.