If You're On Food Stamps, You Should Lose Voting Privileges?

page: 4
47
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join

posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Laokin

Originally posted by Viking9019
Well they are the lowest of the low in society so i wouldn't care if they did lose their privileges.

If they had their privileges taken away years ago then Obama would of never of got into power since most of his supporters were ghetto trash.


Go to hell.


Society is society. We all have EQUAL rights. You do not remove the rights of a person based on what assets they hold.

EVER.

I ::vomit::
edit on 29-2-2012 by Laokin because: (no reason given)


We have rights to our property and income. Your saying we should not remove those rights of any person based on thier assets, however we do, people making more money, with more assets, are forced to pay a higher tax percentage. WHILE your on food stamps, or on any government welfare program, you should lose your rights to vote, but only while you are on the programs, not a permanent thing. The special stores you would go to, to purchase government funded food, would be a short lived hassle, that isn't much of a hassle at all. You guys aren't planning to be on welfare or food stamps for years and years right? So whats the problem?




posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
I love the way people bash the poor in America. It's amazing that no one ever mentions those who have received vast somes of tax payer money in the form of corporate welfare, literally trillions of your hard earned tax dollars dolled out to private banks and business's. Yet it is those of your fellow American citizens, people in your own communities who you want the boot to come down on hardest.

What a joke


I'm an American and I agree with you 100%.





posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by andersensrm
 


Explain to me, legally, how taking away someone's voting right based on income/assets has any backing...

Like the idea or not, it is unconstitutional and illegal.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Viking9019
 


well im not getto trash and im on food stamps...lol...oh and i use to vote..how about that....lol..hope your not on it one day....never know when you might need help.

Now yes no one whould live on it if able to work..but todays economy you will find people who lost everthing and made good money..now ther on food stamps....welp i guess there getto as well...lol



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by DivineFem
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


There are many people here who would say the same things about the troops. Getting all those benefits and money for doing "nothing".

Unless you've been in their shoes, you can't possibly know as much as you think.

This is not directed specifically at you, but to everyone who thinks they know the whole story,but in reality, just hearing it heresay.


I had a step Uncle like RockPuck, he got smashed by a semi one day, he got brain injury,
his wife eventually left him because it made him a dick. He couldn't work because the injury made him
even more hateful towards people and nobody could stand him...It is ironic that the guy always bitching
about taxes and welfare was left with no other option but take money from the system he hated.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   
No one ever mentions the 117 trillion dollars of welfare that Americans receive who are not "corporate"

www.usdebtclock.org...



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


you forgot retired people , if they can't work any more due to age then they should be euthanized .
in fact why not get rid of anybody you don't like


i hope that one day you will realise your acting the very way that the p.t.b do .
t.p.t.b look down upon anyone not of their wealth and status .



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by andersensrm

Originally posted by Laokin

Originally posted by Viking9019
Well they are the lowest of the low in society so i wouldn't care if they did lose their privileges.

If they had their privileges taken away years ago then Obama would of never of got into power since most of his supporters were ghetto trash.


Go to hell.


Society is society. We all have EQUAL rights. You do not remove the rights of a person based on what assets they hold.

EVER.

I ::vomit::
edit on 29-2-2012 by Laokin because: (no reason given)


We have rights to our property and income. Your saying we should not remove those rights of any person based on thier assets, however we do, people making more money, with more assets, are forced to pay a higher tax percentage. WHILE your on food stamps, or on any government welfare program, you should lose your rights to vote, but only while you are on the programs, not a permanent thing. The special stores you would go to, to purchase government funded food, would be a short lived hassle, that isn't much of a hassle at all. You guys aren't planning to be on welfare or food stamps for years and years right? So whats the problem?



But the property and income in not EQUAL. Thus, the more you take, the more you starve others. You then wish to take those that are starving and cut off their rights even though they are starving due to circumstance, not due to ignorance or laziness.

It makes no sense, it's unconstitutional and you don't understand how economics work, and therefor; your opinion of those who need entitlements due to the poor economic climate is rendered moot.


If my car broke down and I took it to somebody who wasn't a mechanic, does his opinion matter? No, why? Because he doesn't understand the system he is opting his opinion on.

Thus making his opinion WRONG.


Like yours.

It's not an opinion, it's just out right 100% factually wrong.


In other words, you cannot take something from someone that has nothing -- so because you have more and losing a few % more doesn't affect your standard of living -- it's only FAIR that you pay extra.

If you don't like paying extra in taxes, than fight against the tax, not against the amount you pay. The government is stealing your money, not the poor people.

Stop being full of yourself. You aren't superior to me.
edit on 29-2-2012 by Laokin because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   
and what about our vets....well???



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   

Originally posted by neo96
No one ever mentions the 117 trillion dollars of welfare that Americans receive who are not "corporate"

www.usdebtclock.org...




OK Neo...



Nice addition at the end BTW
that Americans receive who are not "corporate"



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:40 PM
link   
reply to post by Rockpuck
 


I've seen you bash on social security and promote the military in this thread. Although I can't say that social security is the optimal way of life, well let me tell you remember that...

Most of the elite don't really work hard, kill pretty much everything in the way to get profit, don't spend those profits in the country that they abused of and are counter productive.

Most people in the army work towards killing who ever they are told to kill for the elite, end up having mental problems and aren't really productive because of the destruction and the money they gain is just created out of no real productivity, it actually lowers the value of money.

People on social security, don't kill, aren't very productive but are not counter-productive because they spend in country and keeps the system going trough hard times. Most have, in some points in life, not complied 100% to injustices and have failed to bow down to money while dismissing their values.

Without social security, homelessness would be abundant ...maybe we should of let the weak die since forever for the sake of productivity but some humans are compassionate.
I guess no one is perfect.
edit on 29-2-2012 by User8911 because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Viking9019
Well they are the lowest of the low in society so i wouldn't care if they did lose their privileges.

If they had their privileges taken away years ago then Obama would of never of got into power since most of his supporters were ghetto trash.


Excuse me??

People on food stamps are the lowest of the low in society?? I think people who think like you do, are the lowest of the low is society. The only difference between you and someone on food stamps is a paycheck.

There are many many working poor people in this country and there are many many reasons why people are poor. If voting is a right, then you have no right to take it away from someone just because you do not feel that they make enough money.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:41 PM
link   
reply to post by mastahunta
 


It always surprises me, especially, in this current climate that people are so quick to rag on people who are getting unemployment benefits and the like. Very few peoples jobs are 100% secure in todays world. I wonder how many people on here would be able to support themselves and their families if they should lose their jobs in the current market.

I'm sure most people on these social programs would much rather be working and supporting their families



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:42 PM
link   

Originally posted by Rockpuck
reply to post by ideasarebulletproof
 


I would never accept assistance. I've been laid off in this recession, and I refused to even accept unemployment benefits.

I will never rely on the State.

I will never accept a hand out.

I will never demand services from my fellow citizens without working for it.

I tightened my household budget, supplemented my food with what I grow myself, and discovered other ways of making money to survive.

I guess that's the difference between people like me, and those who take for free without hesitation.


Did you pay taxes on that money you made to survive? Highly doubtful. So see you are probably just as bad as the people your complaining about. Pot meet kettle.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by Laokin
 


Show me the evidence that most people in hardship is not a result of laziness, then I will take everything back that I said, and will apologize. Until then, thats what I honestly believe. Most people in hardship, in america, are there purely because of themselves. Their laziness and carelessness has brought them to a situation they now realize is a bad one, and want others to pay for it. I see no problem with taking away voting rights to those that are in government welfare programs. If its unconstitutional, then make an amendment, thats what they're for.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by MrWendal

Originally posted by Viking9019
Well they are the lowest of the low in society so i wouldn't care if they did lose their privileges.

If they had their privileges taken away years ago then Obama would of never of got into power since most of his supporters were ghetto trash.


Excuse me??

People on food stamps are the lowest of the low in society?? I think people who think like you do, are the lowest of the low is society. The only difference between you and someone on food stamps is a paycheck.

There are many many working poor people in this country and there are many many reasons why people are poor. If voting is a right, then you have no right to take it away from someone just because you do not feel that they make enough money.


F'IN "A" RIGHT!





I would clearly consider him to be the lowest of the low, for it takes an extremely low person to kick some one when they are down.

It takes a person higher up to offer a hand to pull you out of the hole.

edit on 29-2-2012 by Laokin because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
It appears the intent of Mr Brion at the link, is to introduce shame in order to discourage Food Stamp use and also take away their political power.

It used to be that it was shameful when politicians engaged in dirty deals over the best interest of Americans, but today, it is wide open with no shame at al.

If shame is the intent, then how about we require politicians wear patches of every Corporation and Wall Street Bank they receive money from?

How about we also require those that served in our government, that then go on to serve in the private sector after helping their cronies out, also where patches of the positions they held in government and the laws and regulations they helped repeal / dispell?

Lets spread the shame around.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:45 PM
link   
reply to post by andersensrm
 


You see no problem with it, but I ask, again, for you to provide any legal backing that would make it possible.

It aint there, because it is absolutely an unconstitutional idea.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by andersensrm
 


You see no problem with it, but I ask, again, for you to provide any legal backing that would make it possible.

It aint there, because it is absolutely an unconstitutional idea.


Which is why you amend the constitution. We can't have people on welfare, claiming they have no money, becasue they have a Benz that is taking up 40% of their monthly income, while during high school their favorite phrase was "I don't care" which is why they're in a crappy job to begin with. If you have all the benefits of life, while on welfare, what's the point of getting off of it.



posted on Feb, 29 2012 @ 04:47 PM
link   
reply to post by neo96
 


And once upon a time, it was frowned upon when politicians served their cronies interests in the private sector over the best interest of Americans. Not anymore.


I would also add that lobbyists and any person donating money into politics, should wear a patch designating what industry they work in, and what politicians they supported.





top topics
 
47
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join