It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Judge: "Washington must find rooms for homeless families out in cold"

page: 6
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by amazing
 


Well you typed alot of stuff, yet still didnt manage to answer a very easy question about the Constitution.

Why is that?

If you can find a single post of mine where I stated support for invading another country, I will paypal you $100 immediately.

I'll wait for your proof.




posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:06 PM
link   
reply to post by deadcalm
 


The woman in the video I posted above is a parasite by the very definition of the word. Removing her kids would be helping them, it would at least give them a better chance of having a decent life. I never mentioned letting them starve, I said remove them from unfit parents.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:08 PM
link   
Washington has a HUGE homeless population. A HUGE crime problem. A HUGE HIV problem. A HUGE unemployment problem. If DC has to house all the homeless in private rooms ... it's going to cost them a fortune. And I don't know if they have enough of a tax paying base to pull on to make that happen.


(post by Elijah23 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:36 PM
link   

doubletap
reply to post by amazing
 


Well you typed alot of stuff, yet still didnt manage to answer a very easy question about the Constitution.

Why is that?

If you can find a single post of mine where I stated support for invading another country, I will paypal you $100 immediately.

I'll wait for your proof.


It's not in there, man. You know that. Almost 80 percent of what we do as a country isn't in the constitution, but we do it anyway. The question is why are you so intent that we not help people. Why is this the small percentage of what our country does, you chose to attack?

What should we do with homeless children. Are you saying to ignore them? I can't do that.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:39 PM
link   
reply to post by FlyersFan
 


Money isn't real... What's wrong with you people? If they can print a billion dollars to send to Ukraine or billions a day on war, then why can't they print money for this? You should be aruging that the government's priorities are wrong, not that the homeless and ill are wrong for needing help from their fellow man...



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:43 PM
link   

Elijah23
Money isn't real... What's wrong with you people? If they can print a billion dollars to send to Ukraine or billions a day on war, then why can't they print money for this? You should be aruging that the government's priorities are wrong, not that the homeless and ill are wrong for needing help from their fellow man...


Your post made no sense. Where on earth did I say that it was wrong for people to help their fellow man?
NO WHERE.

I said very clearly and very correctly .. there is a HUGE homeless problem in DC. And a huge problem with unemployment and drugs and disease. I said that I don't know if DC has a large enough tax base to draw from to pay for private rooms for all the homeless. That's the truth of the matter. The money to pay for the private rooms has to come from somewhere within the tax district. And I don't know if the tax base is there. There is no such thing as a free lunch. Someone has to pay for it.

And just printing a pile of money to pay for it doesn't work. That would have a negative impact on the economy and hurt a lot of people. So that's not the answer.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:48 PM
link   
reply to post by Elijah23
 


So we can send all the homeless to your house so you can shelter, clothe, and feed all of them?

The up and coming generation you speak of is also the generation of participation trophies, hurt feelings, and a giant sense of entitlement. Their little ideas about how everyone should be given everything may sound good on a college campus, but in reality it simply doesnt work.

Personally, I cannot wait to see reality kick their asses every which way possible. Then, and only then, will they actually learn something, instead of taking the ideas instilled in them by "academia" and thinking the world actually works that way.

No one is entitled to anything. No one has a "right" to food, water, or shelter. If you want it, earn it. That concept evidently doesnt exist in your little mind.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 02:53 PM
link   

amazing


It's not in there, man. You know that. Almost 80 percent of what we do as a country isn't in the constitution, but we do it anyway.


Did you ever stop to think perhaps that is one of the major reasons that this country is in the pathetic shape that its in? If we stuck to the government ONLY using public funds for those few and limited purposes, do you think the financial future of this country would look like the proverbial crap pile that it currently does?

Absolutely not.



The question is why are you so intent that we not help people. Why is this the small percentage of what our country does, you chose to attack?

What should we do with homeless children. Are you saying to ignore them? I can't do that.


I am not against helping people. I am against government helping people with public funds. I am against being forced to pay to subsidize the lifestyle of others. You are free to help as many people as you want, just dont use my money to do so under the guise of compassion.

SMall percentage? So called entitlement programs are exponentially more than just a small percentage.

Have you adopted any children? If not, why? That would be helping a child who otherwise would have a bleak future.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 03:14 PM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 


Okay.. I do get what you're saying and I don't totally disagree with you. I don't want a welfare state either, but...what do we do for those children? One man can't make a difference. I don't make THAT much money. Two men can't make a difference. A community can though. A state can and a country can.

In some regards, any civilized country is going to be paying for the welfare of it's citizens to some extent. It just is. At some point, it becomes our burden anyway with prisons the courts and other things of that nature. Damaged Children become damaged adults. Much cheaper to fix the problems sooner than later.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 03:16 PM
link   
reply to post by doubletap
 


(A) The Judge never demanded that the city shelter the homeless.
(B) But...if the City is going to offer shelter to the Homeless, then it is the cities obligation to make sure they are not doing so in a manner in which puts children in danger of becoming the victims of abuse or crime.
(C) Those that think parents going through financial crisis should be stripped of their children make me a little ill.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 03:20 PM
link   

deadcalm



The city was providing a warm place, that place just wasn't good enough for them, according to them.
reply to post by OpinionatedB
 


NO...NO...NO....the lawsuit said absolutely nothing about it being not "good enough"...they said that their children weren't SAFE at these facilities.



I know for a fact in my city that there is a separate shelter for homeless families which is in a separate place than the part for homeless women which is separate than the shelter for homeless men.

What they didn't appear to like was the all people in one room bit, hence the desire for "private" accommodations.

Well, when you are in a room with other people who are in the same boat as you are, ie: they have their children with them and all too... its about as safe as it gets... there aren't going to be rapists running about.

It boils down to their desire to have "private" accommodations instead of being in the room with OTHER families. And while that is not good, it IS about as safe as your going to get short of getting a job and having your own apartment.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 03:26 PM
link   

doubletap

I am not against helping people. I am against government helping people with public funds.


Yes! Time to tear up the roads, abolish the police and fire departments...Every man, woman and child for themselves!!

Many millennia ago, people banded together for survival purposes. Now we have nations. What was the value of those tribes? Could it be that as a community everyone fared better than as individuals in the wilds? That a hunter could get ill and still survive at the mercy of the tribe and return to being a contributor again...everyone wins.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 03:36 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 


And look how much worse off we are today leaving it to government to do our giving for us.

Now, everyone gives their tax dollars, so they don't help the person anymore, which leaves holes that before used to be filled. Which makes the necessity of giving our tax dollars, plus having to fill the holes, which means we are giving now more than ever before and people getting less...

communities would go back to helping their people more, and people would have the hand up that they need in hard times, if people would stop asking everything to be filled by government. That is not the job of the government.

The government cannot see those who are simply taking advantage or truly needing help like those closest to the person can. And its starting to destroy us as a nation.
edit on 25-3-2014 by OpinionatedB because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 04:19 PM
link   

Indigo5


Yes! Time to tear up the roads, abolish the police and fire departments...Every man, woman and child for themselves!!



Postal roads are authorized by the Constitution, police and fire departments are state matters, not federal.

Try again.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 04:20 PM
link   

amazing


In some regards, any civilized country is going to be paying for the welfare of it's citizens to some extent. It just is. At some point, it becomes our burden anyway with prisons the courts and other things of that nature. Damaged Children become damaged adults. Much cheaper to fix the problems sooner than later.


Remove the children and put them up for adoption. The costs are alleviated, and the children will have a chance at a better future than they would remaining in a long term welfare home.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 04:23 PM
link   

doubletap

amazing


In some regards, any civilized country is going to be paying for the welfare of it's citizens to some extent. It just is. At some point, it becomes our burden anyway with prisons the courts and other things of that nature. Damaged Children become damaged adults. Much cheaper to fix the problems sooner than later.


Remove the children and put them up for adoption. The costs are alleviated, and the children will have a chance at a better future than they would remaining in a long term welfare home.


no. The absolute worst thing you can ever do is split up a family. ever.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 04:39 PM
link   

amazing


no. The absolute worst thing you can ever do is split up a family. ever.


Any evidence to substantiate that claim? It sounds emotion based.

Removing a kid from a welfare household and placing him with a family that is financially capable of supporting him/her would be a much more stable and healthy environment.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 05:37 PM
link   

Indigo5


Yes! Time to tear up the roads, abolish the police and fire departments...Every man, woman and child for themselves!!




doubletap


Postal roads are authorized by the Constitution, police and fire departments are state matters, not federal.

Try again.



Why do I need to try again? You response fails logic. You said EXACTLY you are "against government helping people with public funds."...

They are NOT a business and should never be run like one..not everything that is profitable is of social value and not everything of social value is profitable...Hell if Government was a business we would all be paying a much higher tax rate to afford for a consistent profit margin that politicians would disperse among themselves as an annual bonus!

Government's very purpose (Both State and Federal) is to collect and spend public funds without capitalistic profit motive for the benefit of the public.

Reconciled with your statement below, you are opposed to any form of government.


doubletap

I am not against helping people. I am against government helping people with public funds.



posted on Mar, 25 2014 @ 05:45 PM
link   

doubletap

amazing


no. The absolute worst thing you can ever do is split up a family. ever.


Any evidence to substantiate that claim? It sounds emotion based.

Removing a kid from a welfare household and placing him with a family that is financially capable of supporting him/her would be a much more stable and healthy environment.


HOLY CRAP....skip the income distribution crisis and move right to the world where a large bank balance entitles people to take babies from the poo by government dictate. Scary...

Here is a clue. Most kids don't know they are poor. They might realize it as they grow older, but most kids don't think in those terms. that is because family matters the most to them. Take that away and part of them withers.

Also...if you have been following the research on success and "grit" or "resilience" you'd discover that adults that had economic challenge in their youth tend to be more successful than the opposite.

Otherwise, the damage of stripping small children from their families far outweighs any short-term hardship of economic struggle.



new topics

top topics



 
12
<< 3  4  5    7  8 >>

log in

join