• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's 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.

This is just stupid.

dstebbins said:
I saw on the news this morning that the House of Representatives passed a bill yesterday that would cut food stamp spending in order to reduce the deficit. THIS IS JUST REDICULOUS, THE ******S! Why don't they just blow ****ing trumphets and scream "SCREW THE PEOPLE WE CARE ABOUT MOOLAH!"

Congress is basically turning it's back on the very people who the government is supposed to serve. What are the low-income earners going to do now? The government already gives them barely enough food stamps to put food on the table at dinner time. I know this because we used to get food stamps until I got a raise, and I got barely enough to buy the bear necessities for the month, like milk, eggs, and bread! The internet was a free service from my phone company, so I don't have to pay for that (it was a "for a limited time" offer).

You get one service cut, you start to loose -- not cut, loose -- more. Pretty soon their going to be cutting social security and forcing seniors to make ends meet their own damn selves!

This is just abominable. Cut transportation spending, cut military funds (because God knows we hate this war). Hell, if it comes down to a last resort, RAISE TAXES! But PLEASE, don't cut any welfare programs. Too many people rely on them to make ends meet.
Click to expand...

I call it "Reverse Robin Hood"- rob from the poor to give to the rich.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
lol so by not stealing the money that's already mine your somehow robbing from the poor, HAY guess what it's my money not the governments.
Click to expand...

You're right. I personally, would like to opt out of my portion of taxes that pays the military. But I see that one of the purposes of the government is to protect the weak, which involves taxes so we don't have KIDS starving to death on the streets. That's right. I'm pulling the "kid card." By being part of this nation you agree to pay a portion of your wages to support it. If you don't like it, leave.
 
Kelzie said:
You're right. I personally, would like to opt out of my portion of taxes that pays the military. But I see that one of the purposes of the government is to protect the weak, which involves taxes so we don't have KIDS starving to death on the streets. That's right. I'm pulling the "kid card." By being part of this nation you agree to pay a portion of your wages to support it. If you don't like it, leave.
Click to expand...

In actuallity that's the whole reason why I'm an evil conservative, because I hate kids. :mrgreen: But seriously this is a tactic long used by the left, you create a subserviant base of dependent sheep who you use for your own ends because through their dependence it ensures that they will never be risen out of their current socio economic condition and further ensures that they will be dependent on the Dems which keeps the Dems in power.

Rugged individualism, socialist, it's the only way to get ahead in this world, handouts just keep the poor poor.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
In actuallity that's the whole reason why I'm an evil conservative, because I hate kids. :mrgreen: But seriously this is a tactic long used by the left, you create a subserviant base of dependent sheep who you use for your own ends because through their dependence it ensures that they will never be risen out of their current socio economic condition and further ensures that they will be dependent on the Dems which keeps the Dems in power.

Rugged individualism, socialist, it's the only way to get ahead in this world, handouts just keep the poor poor.
Click to expand...

Well...let's see. My mom was poor...because of handouts, she is now a contributing member of the society. Good theory though. :2wave:
 
Kelzie said:
Well...let's see. My mom was poor...because of handouts, she is now a contributing member of the society. Good theory though. :2wave:
Click to expand...

exactly she was poor because of handouts, then she got a good job and through her individual motivation she is now a contributing member of society.

Let me ask you was she furthering her education while she was receiving welfare support?

Look I don't have a problem with giving welfare to people who are trying to do good but why should I give welfare to people who aren't even trying, how are they my responsiblity?

This is what federal loans are for I'm going to be 15 grand in debt just after getting my Bachelors, I don't even wanna think about after graduate or law school,

I didn't even graduate high school and now I've got a 3.5 gpa and am on my way to getting into law school, all with out the help of welfare, If I can do it anyone can.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
exactly she was poor because of handouts, then she got a good job and through her individual motivation she is now a contributing member of society.

Let me ask you was she furthering her education while she was receiving welfare support?

Look I don't have a problem with giving welfare to people who are trying to do good but why should I give welfare to people who aren't even trying, how are they my responsiblity?

This is what federal loans are for I'm going to be 15 grand in debt just after getting my Bachelors, I don't even wanna think about after graduate or law school,

I didn't even graduate high school and now I've got a 3.5 gpa and am on my way to getting into law school, all with out the help of welfare, If I can do it anyone can.
Click to expand...

No, but thanks for trying to guess our life. :lol: She was poor cause my dad left with the money after she had stayed home to take care of me and my sister for eight years. And that's great you're going to school without welfare. So am I. Try doing it with two kids. And yes, she did go to school while we were on welfare.

How many people are abusing the system please? Everyone keeps saying that and I have never seen any numbers proving it.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
lol so by not stealing the money that's already mine your somehow robbing from the poor, HAY guess what it's my money not the governments.
Click to expand...

Well, if you make over $ 200,000 a year, you should be quite happy with the tax breaks you've gotten. Everyone else has not been so lucky. That's why I call it "Reverse Robin Hood"
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
exactly she was poor because of handouts, then she got a good job and through her individual motivation she is now a contributing member of society.

Let me ask you was she furthering her education while she was receiving welfare support?

Look I don't have a problem with giving welfare to people who are trying to do good but why should I give welfare to people who aren't even trying, how are they my responsiblity?

This is what federal loans are for I'm going to be 15 grand in debt just after getting my Bachelors, I don't even wanna think about after graduate or law school,

I didn't even graduate high school and now I've got a 3.5 gpa and am on my way to getting into law school, all with out the help of welfare, If I can do it anyone can.
Click to expand...

But you'll give 1.5 Billion in 2005 to WalMart in Government subsidies?
 
Kelzie said:
No, but thanks for trying to guess our life. :lol: She was poor cause my dad left with the money after she had stayed home to take care of me and my sister for eight years. And that's great you're going to school without welfare. So am I. Try doing it with two kids. And yes, she did go to school while we were on welfare.
How many people are abusing the system please? Everyone keeps saying that and I have never seen any numbers proving it.
Click to expand...

That's my whole point she was trying to better herself while on welfare but the vast majority of people do not. Your whole socialist great society plans have already proven to be a failure, a welfare state will lead to the demise of our country.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
That's my whole point she was trying to better herself while on welfare but the vast majority of people do not. Your whole socialist great society plans have already proven to be a failure, a welfare state will lead to the demise of our country.
Click to expand...

Prove it. And since people succeed, it's obviously not a failure.
 
Kelzie said:
You're right. I personally, would like to opt out of my portion of taxes that pays the military. But I see that one of the purposes of the government is to protect the weak, which involves taxes so we don't have KIDS starving to death on the streets. That's right. I'm pulling the "kid card."
Click to expand...
I have to take issue with a few of the thoughts in the above statement Kelzie. Governments do not exist for any other purpose than to maintain social order, that is the true nature of their existance. This being said, the only powers an government can have are given expressly by the people through acceptance of the social contract. Protecting the weak is beyond the scope of our constitutional duty, through the New Deal(Raw Deal) of FDR and Great Society programs the government created an entitlement mentality and assumed a new responsibility, these "new responsibilities" required more money, and thus modern taxation was born, we as a society are letting this modern role of the government become an increasingly large behemoth and therefore must reign it in before it consumes us.
By being part of this nation you agree to pay a portion of your wages to support it. If you don't like it, leave.
Click to expand...
In a way you are correct here, as a citizen you do accept the social contract as is, but the problem is that it is not what the forefathers envisioned at it's current level, in fact, taxation was the catalyst to the American Revolution.
Click to expand...
 
How about Congress cuts farms subsidies. Why should farmers be subsidised to produce products that the market does not want, or products that they could not produce at a profit without government assistance?

By getting rid of subsidies it would allow third world famers a better chance at selling their products in the U.S market. Cheaper produce for American consumers, less government spending, and increased incomes for developing nation's farmers, means that everyone wins. And the plus side is that it would show the hypocrisy of the European Union's stance on fair trade and agriculture.

Come on food stamps seems pretty fair. If you think that anyone would be 'comfortable' and has no incentive to get a job when the only government assistance they get is food stamps, then you would have to be delusional.

From what I have heard about the American Social Security system, it seems a lot more geared to getting people off it, than the Australian Social security system. In Australia you actually get paid money every fortnight. There are no food stamps.

I believe in individual liberties and freedoms, and I believe in a social security system that protects people in times of need, and at the same time encourages people to get back to work. To cut food stamps seems stingy.

How about the fat cats (politicians) on Capital hill take a pay cut. Cut the pork barrelling of just about every bill, and how about congress cuts corporate and agricultural subsidies?

But I suppose that would take political will, and the poor don't have their own lobbying group that serves interest.

:(
 
hipsterdufus said:
Well, if you make over $ 200,000 a year, you should be quite happy with the tax breaks you've gotten. Everyone else has not been so lucky. That's why I call it "Reverse Robin Hood"
Click to expand...
It's a principle thing, if you make just over 200k a year you are still technically middleclass, it starts at about 205k, but you would get damn near 45% of your hard earned money taken back, this very fact keeps many people from even wanting to produce the kind of effort required which penalizes everyone. And think about this, why should I have to do 205k dollars worth of work(in my field not impossible, but very draining) to take home maybe 110K, still seems like a great amount of take home pay. Right? Wrong, the point being that someone in a smaller bracket will probably make, oh, let's say 50k in a year and take home probably about 40-45k, this is before tax cuts, naturally, and I know people want to make the greed argument, but I don't care, it all boils down to right and wrong and the concept of class warfare as a political tool.
 
LaMidRighter said:
I have to take issue with a few of the thoughts in the above statement Kelzie. Governments do not exist for any other purpose than to maintain social order, that is the true nature of their existance. This being said, the only powers an government can have are given expressly by the people through acceptance of the social contract. Protecting the weak is beyond the scope of our constitutional duty, through the New Deal(Raw Deal) of FDR and Great Society programs the government created an entitlement mentality and assumed a new responsibility, these "new responsibilities" required more money, and thus modern taxation was born, we as a society are letting this modern role of the government become an increasingly large behemoth and therefore must reign it in before it consumes us.
Click to expand...

Maintaining social order is only one of the functions of government. I think there's six, one of them definitetly being protection of the weak. I can go look at my comparitive politics textbook if you want.
 
Trajan Octavian Titus said:
so you're saying that Trumans great society programs were a success?

:roll:
Click to expand...

Prove that the majority of people on welfare do not succeed.
 
Its a set up Trajan, don't step into it!:lol:

I got the welfare speech and food stamp rhetoric in the "Capitalism" thread some time back . . . don't say I didn't worn you.

:mrgreen:
 
FireUltra 98 said:
Its a set up Trajan, don't step into it!:lol:

I got the welfare speech and food stamp rhetoric in the "Capitalism" thread some time back . . . don't say I didn't worn you.

:mrgreen:
Click to expand...

It's really impossible for the other person to win without looking like the worlds biggest prick. Trajan might not have a problem with that though. :lol:
 
Kelzie said:
It's really impossible for the other person to win without looking like the worlds biggest prick. Trajan might not have a problem with that though. :lol:
Click to expand...


Not sure if I see it like you Kelzie, sorry:neutral: After all I never agreed with you or galen on welfare . . . I just stopped talking about it because we were not going to agree after 5 or six posts.

Good luck with Trajan.
 
Kelzie said:
Maintaining social order is only one of the functions of government. I think there's six, one of them definitetly being protection of the weak. I can go look at my comparitive politics textbook if you want.
Click to expand...
From the site:
http://www.forerunner.com/mandate/X0043_Five_Functions_of_Go.html
1. To establish justice - This is the goal of the passages in Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2:14, which say that government is to punish evildoers and protect those who do right.

2. To insure domestic tranquility - This phrase comes from the focus of prayer for government, which Paul urged in 1 Timothy 2:1-2. The New American Standard Bible says to pray for government "in order that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness and dignity."

3. To provide for the common defense - The protection of innocent human life is at the base of not only capital punishment (Genesis 9:6), but also in the provision of an army for protection from external threats.

4. To promote the general welfare - Romans 13:4 says that civil rulers are servants "to you for good." The common good of all classes of citizens must be promoted by government passage of laws guaranteeing equal opportunity. It is not proper for government to provide money and aid to special interest groups. It is to promote, not provide, and to do so for all people in general, not for special people.

5. To secure the blessings of liberty - Blessing are a gift of one's Creator, not a privilege granted by government. These blessings include life, liberty, and property. A biblical view of government sees that it cannot provide these, only secure them.
Click to expand...

Naturally, these principles of government function fall to interpretation, one of the fallacies of "social welfare" is that it achieves "social justice". Social justice is a contradiction in terms however, because to protect the weak, as advocates claim, you violate the equal protection standard of not only this philosophy, but the ninth amendment of the Bill of rights, but the principle of advancement in society through hard work, because to "support the weak" under the current system apparantly justifies "taking from the strong by force if necessary".
 
LaMidRighter said:
From the site:
http://www.forerunner.com/mandate/X0043_Five_Functions_of_Go.html


Naturally, these principles of government function fall to interpretation, one of the fallacies of "social welfare" is that it achieves "social justice". Social justice is a contradiction in terms however, because to protect the weak, as advocates claim, you violate the equal protection standard of not only this philosophy, but the ninth amendment of the Bill of rights, but the principle of advancement in society through hard work, because to "support the weak" under the current system apparantly justifies "taking from the strong by force if necessary".
Click to expand...

So, I just want to make sure where you're coming from, you promote having people starve to death with their children because it's taking from the strong?
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom