SC Lt. Gov: Poor Like "Stray Animals." Don't Feed Them or "They Breed."

page: 8
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 10:35 AM
link   
reply to post by Sestias
 


Although what he says is an 'obvious' comparison in his mind to strays and people, his words are COMPLETELY blown out of proportion in the quote that you have provided.

I'm not a Bauer fan. Don't even know who the guy is other than Lt. Gov. But I hate it when this kind of crap happens. For a better report of what was stated try this link.

Better report on his statement




posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Great, that didn't occur to me, you may be on to something, but now who would fund the war? Do you think we should bring everybody home? Personally I do, but we also have to protect our land, so I can't say if this would be harmful or helpful? See everyone fails to see the point that there is no simple solution. At least I would like to think if there were, it'd already have happened, but maybe I see the glass as half empty?


Rats, the thing didn't save my edit. Basically, I'm a Libertarian, and I believe the War On (Iraq, Afghanistan, Drugs, Vietnam, Korea, etc.) are/were all unconstitutional, unjust, a waste of tax payers money, and a way for the super elite to line their pockets with our suffering by owning businesses that profited from the wars.

There was some economists (I forgot who, I'll try to find if you're really interested) who said that in 2008, if all income tax was completely stopped...the US would still bring in as much money as it did in 1995 (in which I believe we were 'at war' with Kosovo, and paid for that just fine). There are still plenty of taxes the Government reams us with. They don't need income tax. It's only used to feed the greedy at the top and for the Military Industrial Complex.

Remember, the super wealthy are not always evil (Bill Gates for example. He gives money away all the time, even though he gets taxed on everything from his stocks (50%), his business (50%+), and all the employees he has employed, and his home, jets etc.)

Also, congressman and senators and the like make I think well over 200k a year (not including insider trading and passing laws to help the companies they own stock in). I don't believe they're taxed on it either (though I could be mistaken). Your enemy is government, not joe blow who is getting reamed.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 10:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by habfan1968

Change the govt. run school system to what exactly? all private schools, who is gonna educate the too many kids of the poor then? themselves?

Providing an education is not easy but it is being provided, how one chooses to utilize the opportunity is the real issue.


Is that why MacDonalds cheeseburgers are so expensive, since the Government doesn't run fast food? Oh wait! They have double cheeseburgers for under a BUCK! (Though I wouldn't eat it, :lol


It's called competition. Competition will let the market lower prices just above profit if need be. The more private schools there are, the lower the prices will go. And since this is education we're talking about, chances are the quality will go up, since parents want their children to be successful, and will choose schools based on that cross section (price v quality). Sure less expensive schools will have less quality, but I'm sure they'll be better than schools that are currently in the backwoods or in the hoods.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne

Originally posted by ldyserenity

Great, that didn't occur to me, you may be on to something, but now who would fund the war? Do you think we should bring everybody home? Personally I do, but we also have to protect our land, so I can't say if this would be harmful or helpful? See everyone fails to see the point that there is no simple solution. At least I would like to think if there were, it'd already have happened, but maybe I see the glass as half empty?


Rats, the thing didn't save my edit. Basically, I'm a Libertarian, and I believe the War On (Iraq, Afghanistan, Drugs, Vietnam, Korea, etc.) are/were all unconstitutional, unjust, a waste of tax payers money, and a way for the super elite to line their pockets with our suffering by owning businesses that profited from the wars.

There was some economists (I forgot who, I'll try to find if you're really interested) who said that in 2008, if all income tax was completely stopped...the US would still bring in as much money as it did in 1995 (in which I believe we were 'at war' with Kosovo, and paid for that just fine). There are still plenty of taxes the Government reams us with. They don't need income tax. It's only used to feed the greedy at the top and for the Military Industrial Complex.

Remember, the super wealthy are not always evil (Bill Gates for example. He gives money away all the time, even though he gets taxed on everything from his stocks (50%), his business (50%+), and all the employees he has employed, and his home, jets etc.)

Also, congressman and senators and the like make I think well over 200k a year (not including insider trading and passing laws to help the companies they own stock in). I don't believe they're taxed on it either (though I could be mistaken). Your enemy is government, not joe blow who is getting reamed.


Oh I agree with you there on that last statement...But, being the government ain't going nowhere soon, How do the American people get the taxation to stop? Or maybe more people like you should run for office, unfortunately they'd (the other government runners) wouldn't let anybody like that get through the starting gate. This is the major problem so how do we Americans fix it when the government won't? I am very interested in that article, and I do agree with the war as being useless, in part, I still am not sold on the idea that there was a true threat to America, but then again, if there was, then we must take action. I tend to lean that it was an inside job. But, yet I have not seen proof for either side, so I am keeping my mind open to the possibility of both sides. It's hard to have any concrete proof we needed to be in Iraq or against it. I wish I was all knowing, then I'd be able to make an educated decision on this. I do beleive that if that article you quoted is right, then why aren't more people knocking at the whitehouse, screaming "STOP TAKING MY INCOME!!!!"???



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:00 AM
link   
If we got rid of the minum wage and welfare you wouldn't have to worry about bying Chinese junk because everything would be made in the USA!



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:02 AM
link   
reply to post by habfan1968
 


I'm not saying I have the answers. I would never be that arrogant. But why throw good money after bad? Since the start of the "war on poverty" in 1965, the United States has spent more than $5 trillion trying to ease the plight of the poor. What we have received for this massive investment is -- primarily -- more poverty. I just don't see the point of throwing more money into the failed welfare and educational systems. SOMEBODY is profiting from this but it is most certainly not the poor or americas students.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne

Originally posted by habfan1968

Change the govt. run school system to what exactly? all private schools, who is gonna educate the too many kids of the poor then? themselves?

Providing an education is not easy but it is being provided, how one chooses to utilize the opportunity is the real issue.


Is that why MacDonalds cheeseburgers are so expensive, since the Government doesn't run fast food? Oh wait! They have double cheeseburgers for under a BUCK! (Though I wouldn't eat it, :lol


It's called competition. Competition will let the market lower prices just above profit if need be. The more private schools there are, the lower the prices will go. And since this is education we're talking about, chances are the quality will go up, since parents want their children to be successful, and will choose schools based on that cross section (price v quality). Sure less expensive schools will have less quality, but I'm sure they'll be better than schools that are currently in the backwoods or in the hoods.


I disagree, the poor will have to choose between paying for school or let's say some necessity and of course choose necessity, by passing the kids education. Private education costs about $10,000 a year here in Ontario for kids from kindergarten to grade 8 then increases from grades 9 - 12, competition would surely bring the price down, but to a level where it's affordable for the masses of poverty line families is not realistic. Say it was $3000 a year per child how many could afford it then?



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:18 AM
link   
reply to post by habfan1968
 


You just made an argument as for why poor families shouldnt reproduce. If they cant afford to properly house, feed, clothe, and educate their children, they shouldnt have them.

Good job.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by brainwrek


You just made an argument as for why poor families shouldnt reproduce. If they cant afford to properly house, feed, clothe, and educate their children, they shouldnt have them.

Good job.


Isn't that the American Dream ?

Anyone , from any walk of life , can achieve their goals for a better life?

I believe American's cling to this , like baseball and apple pie.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 


And your alternative would be? Let things remain as they are. The systems are working so well let's not rock the boat. I'm not saying I have the answers. But we have a failed welfare system and a flawed educational system. I don't think we should be sitting on our hands letting government steer this ship.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 11:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by koolerthanjesus
reply to post by dawnstar
 


And your alternative would be? Let things remain as they are. The systems are working so well let's not rock the boat. I'm not saying I have the answers. But we have a failed welfare system and a flawed educational system. I don't think we should be sitting on our hands letting government steer this ship.

BINGO!!!! Well I was just discussing this with someone else. Everything the government has done is flawed in some way. We need to take back the reigns, but I just don't know how we will do that if we can't even get along amongst ourselves, to keep America from dying.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by habfan1968

I disagree, the poor will have to choose between paying for school or let's say some necessity and of course choose necessity, by passing the kids education. Private education costs about $10,000 a year here in Ontario for kids from kindergarten to grade 8 then increases from grades 9 - 12, competition would surely bring the price down, but to a level where it's affordable for the masses of poverty line families is not realistic. Say it was $3000 a year per child how many could afford it then?


If the avg American makes 30k/yr (that's 15% income tax versus 25% if they made over 32k/yr), and income tax was abolished (which is what we need in order for the libertarian market to commence), that would free up roughly 4k, which is more than the 3k you propose. But also bear in mind, his employer would have more money to free up (since his business would not need to pay taxes), and maybe give him 40k/yr.

Also remember, that in a private school situation, if a kid is in a poorer school, but advancing very fast, there would be people who would see his potential and 'grant' him access to a better school (maybe run by Bill Gates or some such person) if he agrees to finish his schooling, and work for say, maybe 5 years. Then the rich are basically investing in poor children's education in a way the govt. never could.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ldyserenity
[snip]...to keep America from dying.


America died in 1913. And Woodrow Wilson is the man who allowed the murder.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:24 PM
link   
I think that we are reaching some tough decisions here in the US.

I don' t think that we as a nation can afford people that view welfare as a lifestyle.

So, I think that the structure of public assistance is going to change over the next decade. I like the idea of a safety net for people that suddenly find themselves down and out. However, you should only get about 6 months of assistance and then there need to be some changes to your circumstances.

If you haven't got a job after 6 months, you should be forced to enroll in job skills classes that train you for jobs that are available in your area. You should have to be on birth control if you can become pregnant. (When the scientist perfect birth control for men, this should apply to men as well).

When your job training is complete you will be compelled to take a job if one is available. If you get fired, you're not going to get more assistance.

If no jobs are available, the government should be the employer of last resort. You would have to report 5 days a week 8-5 and be available labor for government projects.

Drug testing for someone receiving public assistance should be mandatory. If you fail a drug test, you should immediately be place din drug rehab.


In California, we had welfare reform some time ago. So, a 15 year old girl could no longer get pregnant and receive an apartment, welfare and food stamps. The teen pregnancy rate dropped immediately. So before reform, many teens were making a lifestyle choice of government assistance. That choice has been eliminated. I think that we need to eliminate government assistance as a lifestyle choice. If you choose to be supported by the state, you should be compelled to work very hard for the state, while at the same time be encourage to find work in the private sector that would pay better.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 12:47 PM
link   
reply to post by dariousg
 


The link you provided still has the outrageous statement about the poor being like stray animals; it's not much different than the article in Chattahbox. Yours just puts a more favorable spin on it. But the man's callous remarks are still in there.

dariousg's link:

Better report on his statement

[edit on 26-1-2010 by Sestias]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Wildbob77
 


So, as was mentioned in another post earlier, what do you propose we do with the disabled? Those who are mentally ill or developmentally challenged or even those whose injuries or health make them unable to work?

I don't think ANYBODY on this thread advocates that teen-age mothers should be having children they can't mentally, emotionally and/or financially afford to support and in many cases drop out of school, which might prepare them for better jobs.

The trouble with some of your solutions is they come very close to eugenics.

In my state the mentally challenged were forcibly sterilized until the 1970's. Public outrage caused this practice to cease. I understand there were other states that used to sterilize those who received public assistance.

I don't think the American people would stand for these practices today.

In addition, other earlier posters have already demonstrated that many if not most states are now making it harder and harder for people who are not disabled to receive public assistance indefinitely. I know in my state only children or the disabled are eligible for Medicaid. A healthy adult, no matter how poor they are, cannot receive this assistance.

I think too many people are obsessed with the idea that some among us might receive help they don't "deserve." Most of it just amounts to an enormous class struggle, which aims to keep those who are not privileged under the heel of those who own our society.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by ldyserenity
[snip]
I am very interested in that article, and I do agree with the war as being useless, in part, I still am not sold on the idea that there was a true threat to America, but then again, if there was, then we must take action.
[/snip]

[snip]
I do beleive that if that article you quoted is right, then why aren't more people knocking at the whitehouse, screaming "STOP TAKING MY INCOME!!!!"???
[/snip]


An article (not THE article, but a similar one): www.cato-at-liberty.org...

Basically,m the reason more people don't scream about it is...they don't know, don't care, or they enjoy the luxuries of the welfare state (whether on it, or benefiting from it).



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne

Originally posted by ldyserenity
[snip]
I am very interested in that article, and I do agree with the war as being useless, in part, I still am not sold on the idea that there was a true threat to America, but then again, if there was, then we must take action.
[/snip]

[snip]
I do beleive that if that article you quoted is right, then why aren't more people knocking at the whitehouse, screaming "STOP TAKING MY INCOME!!!!"???
[/snip]


An article (not THE article, but a similar one): www.cato-at-liberty.org...

Basically,m the reason more people don't scream about it is...they don't know, don't care, or they enjoy the luxuries of the welfare state (whether on it, or benefiting from it).


Thanks for that very informative article. We need more politicians like that. I do think you're dead on about that last statement, I think a lot of people benefit off this system, the least of all the recipients, who would want to live that way for any real length of time? It would have to be degrading unless they are unintelligent people. I mean I know one of them myself and I pity her, she's very unintelligent... To me; I have gone through the system twice, And it took every ounce of my being not to just turn around and say "Bump this" because to me, Whose worked since 12 years old, to have to ask for any kind of help at all felt degrading. Honestly.
The point is, I think that some of the people "progrmmable people"were so degraded that they actually beleived they can do no better, which makes them less intelligent than they were at one time, why? Because the system wants to benefit off of them as well, after all, look at all the social workers that would lose their paycheck if they didn't have people like this in the system.

[edit on 26-1-2010 by ldyserenity]



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


Exactly. It's a catch 22. That's why, I believe this Governor is talking about those that do not want to help themselves, not hard working people like you, your children, or Doc Velocity. I don't mind unemployment (though I wish it was optional, so if you refused to pay, you'd be out on your ass [I'd refuse, and I wouldn't mind being out on my ass. I'm a survivalist]), it's the welfare state that needs changing. And there only one (albeit drastic) way to do it. and that's to pull the rug from under people's feet. As long as the wake-up call is big enough, people will get the message.



posted on Jan, 26 2010 @ 01:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Arcane Demesne
reply to post by ldyserenity
 


Exactly. It's a catch 22. That's why, I believe this Governor is talking about those that do not want to help themselves, not hard working people like you, your children, or Doc Velocity. I don't mind unemployment (though I wish it was optional, so if you refused to pay, you'd be out on your ass [I'd refuse, and I wouldn't mind being out on my ass. I'm a survivalist]), it's the welfare state that needs changing. And there only one (albeit drastic) way to do it. and that's to pull the rug from under people's feet. As long as the wake-up call is big enough, people will get the message.


Yes, then they could put it to use for healthcare for those who work hard but haven't got enough or no coverage through their jobs, but you did understand that I think the system has brainwashed (Some of)them into beleiving they can do no better for themselves, right? What about those people, it's a monster the system created and the people living off it are just a victim as well, so how do you reverse the damage? I really do beleive that some of them not all, have been manipulated by the system as pawns to keep this thing running. That's just an opinion, but I think there needs to be some net for those who's self esteem and self worth has been lowered. MAybe counseling? I don't know. It's also why many of them turn to drugs which we all know affects your IQ. Depression is one of the MAIN causes of drug abuse.





new topics
top topics
 
21
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join