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.

 

Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 10:36 PM
link   
With all of the equality issues we are dealing with today, I thought it'd be a good reminder to everyone to point out what made the USA the powerhouse it is and how it is threatened by this new age of entitlement.

Life is easy in today's age in the States. There is no fear of starving if you can't earn enough. No sweat from your brow if you need shelter. Put one foot forward, if you fail....the goverment has programs.

Too many people will never put their second foot forward. They'll never truly experience what it is like to pour every minute and every cent into a dream just to watch it fail. They'll never be able to look at their failures as an "expensive education". They'll never be able to pick themselves back up from the humility of failure, while judgemental eyes chastise them, only to try to dream once again while pennyless.

We've made it too easy to give up!

Our country is great because past generations were stubborn as mules and were to prideful to accept a handout. Today's generation feel entitled to basic necessities and view them as "rights".

Food, shelter, and clothing aren't "rights"! Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are. You have the freedom to live and find what makes you content, but you have to work for it.

Handouts and goverment programs have destroyed this nations pride. Worse, citizens actually support this BS.

I leave you with Milton Friedman:









Ghost




posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

So we should let the mentally-ill and homeless who roam our streets starve to death?

Let the families who lost everything during the Great Recession starve to death?

Let those who are fully mentally-capable of supporting themselves yet were born in p***-poor conditions starve to death?

There's a reason why entitlement programs weren't as widespread back in the day, and it's not because of some "inherent pride" that apparently all people born before the 70's had and not us. It's because times change, and people learn new and better ways to handle the less-fortunate in our society.

Now don't go and say "But there are WAY too many people exploiting the system!" because, I assure you, those who DO exploit these programs are few and far between.

Unless of course, you get all your information from Fox News, Drudge, Rusch, or Brietbart ... sites that are plagued with an almost dangerously blind form of conservativism.

Sometimes, I think some of the people who run those media outlets aren't even conservatives at all. They're just mean and bitter human beings.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Passerby1996




So we should let the mentally-ill and homeless who roam our streets starve to death?

Let the families who lost everything during the Great Recession starve to death?

Let those who are fully mentally-capable of supporting themselves yet were born in p***-poor conditions starve to death?


If your well able in mind and body to work, you better find a job. Mentally ill and physically disabled are but a small portion of beneficiaries.



Now don't go and say "But there are WAY too many people exploiting the system!" because, I assure you, those who DO exploit these programs are few and far between.

Unless of course, you get all your information from Fox News, Drudge, Rusch, or Brietbart ... sites that are plagued with an almost dangerously blind form of conservativism.


Ohhh, but I will go and say that. Our federal and local governments have made it more beneficial to not work than to hold jobs for so many people. Go to a Walmart on the 1st or 15th if you doubt that. And frankly, I don't want to pay in on taxes to those abusing the system. I'm not responsible for them and I have my own bills to pay.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:17 PM
link   
The self righteous right wing propaganda strikes again. Here we go with the stereo types of the poor. I once saw a guy on foodstamps buy 16 lobsters driving a Ferrari.
edit on 30-11-2015 by wantsome because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Passerby1996

No, we should give them free food and monthly stipens, and 1 & 1/3 votes during elections.

No, we should give them free housing and free college tuition to ensure their survival.

No, we should allow them to live in any country, anywhere they choose, and allow them to live off national taxations, no! World taxations.

Yes, the less fortunate should get everything, and the more fortunate should lose everything, that'd balance it out.

Yes, few and far between! Nevermind the few and far between seem to be increasing...let us find more fortunates and spread the wealth! We should vote on it!

Yes! Fox News has to go! Too fortunate! Let us create media based off of who is less fortunate! We could vote on it!

Yes, all conservatives are mean and bitter humans! Don't believe me? Let's vote on it!



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:28 PM
link   
a reply to: wantsome

Apologies if I misunderstood, what part of advocating self sufficiency equated to being 'self righteous'?

Perhaps it was the part where ones self sufficiency profits themselves and you felt they should share their additional fruits?



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:35 PM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

But that's exactly what I'm saying! What if they are mentally-capable but can't find a job due to how they were raised, or if they DO have a job but the pay is so low they might as well be living in the street.

Also, please cite your sources for where you're getting this information. I'll tear them apart with simple human logic and ACTUAL EVIDENCE, but I'll give you the chance.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: ghostrager
a reply to: wantsome

Apologies if I misunderstood, what part of advocating self sufficiency equated to being 'self righteous'?

Perhaps it was the part where ones self sufficiency profits themselves and you felt they should share their additional fruits?
Advocating self sufficiency is one thing but it's another to insinuate that everyone using social programs is abusing the system because it 's too easy to give up.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Passerby1996

Bet on yourself, don't fall victim to childhood. If your job lends you to the streets, own the streets. Work smarter, not harder.

How the hell do you think those barely above the poverty line live day to day?

Read it again.



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Passerby1996




But that's exactly what I'm saying! What if they are mentally-capable but can't find a job due to how they were raised, or if they DO have a job but the pay is so low they might as well be living in the street.



I'm an advocate for proper paying jobs/benefits for disabled people and people who held jobs but were layed off and can't find work(although less so). Your barking up the wrong tree if you assume otherwise. In fact, the people who need goverment assisted programs(people with disabilities/disadvantaged people in the workforce) are victimized/undermined by the sheer amount of people that abuse such programs.




Also, please cite your sources for where you're getting this information. I'll tear them apart with simple human logic and ACTUAL EVIDENCE, but I'll give you the chance.


That's simply adorable

edit on 30-11-2015 by ghostrager because: Clarification



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Boscov

No, we should give them free food and monthly stipens, and 1 & 1/3 votes during elections.


I didn't say just give them everything they could ever want. They just need the minimum to start a new life and be successful. Or, if they have a mental disability, get the support they need to get the most out of life while never exploiting the system. Also, yes they should be able to vote as long as they have a sense of reasoning. I don't remember including the "1/3" part, though.


No, we should give them free housing and free college tuition to ensure their survival.


I never said we'd give everyone "free housing", unless they are in poverty. And by free housing I don't mean a mansion or even a house to live on their own. There should be temporary stay facilities for individuals and families in poverty to stay in until they get back on their feet. Also, free college tuition would be AWESOME! I'm not just talking about those in need but also for anyone. While the question of how we can pay for such a program is still up in the air, once we figure it out I'm all for it.


No, we should allow them to live in any country, anywhere they choose, and allow them to live off national taxations, no! World taxations.


Like I said in my first post, there is actually very little evidence to suggest the poor are exploiting entitlements. Please give me evidence to the contrary. CHALLENGE: Guve me evidence to the contrary FROM A MEDIA OUTLET THAT'S NOT RIGHT-LEANING!


Yes, the less fortunate should get everything, and the more fortunate should lose everything, that'd balance it out.


Never said that. Please read before typing. I can't stress that enough.


Yes, few and far between! Nevermind the few and far between seem to be increasing...let us find more fortunates and spread the wealth! We should vote on it!


Again ... EVIDENCE?!


Yes! Fox News has to go! Too fortunate! Let us create media based off of who is less fortunate! We could vote on it!


Never said that either, except the part that Fox News is conservativism at it's "finest". Also, why are we voting on this again? Wow, politicians these days are rolling out these apparently real referendums like no man's business. And apparently you're one if them!


Yes, all conservatives are mean and bitter humans! Don't believe me? Let's vote on it!


No ... Seriously. Why are we voting?! WHY?!?!



posted on Nov, 30 2015 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

Wow! You should really state that in your opening post, because all us logical human beings were thinking the opposite of you, m'lord. Sorry to ever doubt you, m'lord!

From what I can tell about your personality, you just took every part of that totally-non-sarcastic comment to heart.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 12:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Boscov

How many times do I have to read it again? Because every time I do I just come to the conclusion I made before you even responded to me.

The "don't fall victim to childhood" bit tells me that you probably never had to deal with living in a family that could barely support you, and the mental scars that can leave on ANY child growing up in that situation.

I rest my case on that point. I'm still waiting for that evidence though, but something tells me I might be baiting my breath only to find more hot air to breath.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 12:38 AM
link   
a reply to: Passerby1996

Entitlements yield self propagation, on both sides...actually all sides that receive entitlements, and is done so by lobbying interests, either defeating or supporting legislative votes.

A good start in life? Everyone deserves that? At what age? What happens to self worth when no one is able to define their rise above their lot? What is the voting age?

Balancing wealth would require seizure of earned incomes, by vote.

Conservatism is dying a slow death of a thousand entitlements, by vote.

You seek facts. Follow the votes. Metropolitan voting leans Blue, liberal. Tell me where poverty concentrations are. How does the majority of inner city vote? Explain that to me, logically.

You ask why I keep hammering the voting. Voting has been bought. I agree, the imbalance is great, so great that those on top have figured out that the disenfranchised will vote for handouts, self propogation, mutual needs met.

You and I are not far apart on understandings. I do not respect voting for entitlements, whether the voter receives them or not. We simply cannot provide for everyone, without denying everyone the right to success. There it lies, success is born out of some form of struggle. Our struggles are shameful, but that makes every success that much sweeter.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 01:01 AM
link   
FOR REAL - some of you need to go and read a book.




Millions of Americans work full time, year round, for poverty-level wages. Barbara Ehrenreich decided to join them. She was inspired in part by the rhetoric surrounding welfare reform, which promised that a job -- any job -- can be the ticket to a better life. But how does anyone survive, let alone prosper, on $6 an hour? To find out, Ehrenreich left her home, took the cheapest lodgings she could find, and accepted whatever jobs she was offered.

Moving from Florida to Maine to Minnesota, she worked as a waitress, a hotel maid, a cleaning woman, a nursing-home aide, and a Wal-Mart sales clerk. She lived in trailer parks and crumbling residential motels. Very quickly, she discovered that no job is truly "unskilled," that even the lowliest occupations require exhausting mental and muscular effort. She also learned that one job is not enough; you need at least two if you intend to live indoors.

Nickel and Dimed reveals low-rent America in all its tenacity, anxiety, and surprising generosity -- a land of Big Boxes, fast food, and a thousand desperate stratagems for survival. Read it for the smoldering clarity of Ehrenreich's perspective and for a rare view of how "prosperity" looks from the bottom. You will never see anything -- from a motel bathroom to a restaurant meal -- in quite the same way again.


We're so dumbfounded by our entitlement we fail to recognize we're standing on someone's neck.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 01:32 AM
link   

originally posted by: [post=20092650]ghostrager[/post


Food, shelter, and clothing aren't "rights"! Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness are. You have the freedom to live and find what makes you content, but you have to work for it.


Ghost


Surely a contradictory statement, without food , shelter and clothing; then life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are impossible.

The problem isn't that the benefits system is too generous, it is that there are two few decent jobs and opportunities that allow anyone the change to make something of themselves.

I can't understand the philosophy that at the same time as wanting to remove/reduce social safety nets vehemently opposes many of the things that allow people to escape poverty such as free further education.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 01:57 AM
link   
I'm sick of it all that includes both political parties. They pander to their base and after they get elected they screw us over. I'm sick of rich greedy businessmen and greedy lawyers running this country. Everybody is so obsessed with their piece of the pie in this country they're willing to cut anyone's throat that get in the way. I'm sure you've all seen black Friday videos from this past week right? This is what we've become as a nation. Meanwhile the people at the top are laughing all the way to the bank. They hide their money in offshore tax havens while shipping jobs overseas and leave us to fight over cheap plastic junk on a holiday's. Getting together with family is suppose to be the most important part of the holiday. We have stupid greedy leaders and we've become a nation of stupid greedy people.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 09:56 AM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

Aah Milton Friedman. Good choice.

With the freedom to rise comes the freedom to fall. Though it's a difficult pill to swallow, you're right, handouts are not rights.

The reason people want government handouts is not for the sake of the poor, but because they don't want to have to do the charity themselves. The welfare state subsidizes poverty. It pays people to be poor.



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 09:57 AM
link   
a reply to: ghostrager

What's your point here? You do know that America still has the highest GDP of any other country in the world despite your contempt for social programs right?



posted on Dec, 1 2015 @ 10:09 AM
link   

originally posted by: LesMisanthrope
a reply to: ghostrager

Aah Milton Friedman. Good choice.

With the freedom to rise comes the freedom to fall. Though it's a difficult pill to swallow, you're right, handouts are not rights.

The reason people want government handouts is not for the sake of the poor, but because they don't want to have to do the charity themselves. The welfare state subsidizes poverty. It pays people to be poor.


I think the reason people support government handouts (telling turn of phrase) is that they believe that people should not have to rely on charity to avoid absolute poverty and starvation.



new topics

top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join