Before There Was Welfare There Was Charity

So funny...watching Judge Judy...telling a girl (who has a kid) get a job!!! don't ask people for money or expect people to support you! Get a job!! Gotta love her.

reply to post by daskakik

You have just made the biggest argument for why welfare is needed.

Sorry,but no as technology and population increases jobs decrease to the point there is no one left to tax,because there are no jobs to be taxed.

So what happens when there is no public work to be done? The answer is welfare. Old world charity just couldn't cut it so something else replaced it.

The government will continue to print fiat currency to payout all the mouths that will eventually kill charity,which some already want to do, after all government does not like competition, and anyone that doesn't need them.

You think going back would be better but you didn't live in those times so you're really not in a position to say if it was better or not.

Yeah i have,

You are just going off of your romantic ideal of what it was like. Funny thing is that old timers are always saying how much easier the younger generations have it. I think I'll take their version since they actually lived it.

What is romantic is the notion that welfare works, and it clearly doesn't, as to the younger generation they have no clue how well they do have it now.

None whatsoever.

yup charity, when is ats gonna support me?

Originally posted by seabag
reply to post by EarthCitizen07

 

At lest he is trying a little bit, which is MORE than what bush and cheney tried!

The economy was much better before Obama showed up. But you’re partially correct; Obama has GIVEN more than Bush.

Indeed he has given much more bailout funds to the "too big to fail" corps. He failed with prosecuting Beyond Petroleum, he failed with helping japan, he got suckered into libya, recaptured osama for the 5th time, helped DHS spy more on americans, etc.

Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.

I think both capital hill and the white house should spend more time playing golf and hosting parties then thinking, because obviously they have a very low iq and usually create many more problems than what they attempt to fix.

You may be onto something here!

I wonder what the average handicap is for the clowns in government. Mine is around 36 but I don't get to play that much. If I had their available time I would probably be on the PGA Tour by now. And what about michelle's parties? Did they invite the kardashians over for dinner yet? Or the hiltons? (sorry for downgrading the thread to gossip).

reply to post by Jordan River


When you get starred and flagged on ATS that is charity because no one forces anyone to give them to you, while one might think they earned, others think they are given out because they deserve them. and some think they are owed more than what they provide.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by Jordan River

 

When you get starred and flagged on ATS that is charity because no one forces anyone to give them to you, while one might think they earned, others think they are given out because they deserve them. and some think they are owed more than what they provide.

edit on 29-5-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)

I like to trade my stars for cash, or at least a ATS coffee cup

reply to post by timetothink

So funny...watching Judge Judy...telling a girl (who has a kid) get a job!!! don't ask people for money or expect people to support you! Get a job!! Gotta love her.

Imagine that!

I bet the girl has no idea what she meant either. Getting a job is a foreign concept and responsibility is a four letter word to far too many these days.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by daskakik

 

Sorry,but no as technology and population increases jobs decrease to the point there is no one left to tax,because there are no jobs to be taxed.

You tax the companies. You tax whoever is still making money from the use of the countries resources.

The government will continue to print fiat currency to payout all the mouths that will eventually kill charity,which some already want to do, after all government does not like competition, and anyone that doesn't need them.

Actually I was speaking in the past tense because it was what happened to bring the present implementation of welfare into being.

Yeah i have,

You lived in the US before the great depression?

What is romantic is the notion that welfare works, and it clearly doesn't

Except for the examples around the world where it has, that you choose to ignore.

as to the younger generation they have no clue how well they do have it now.None whatsoever.

Now you're just flip flopping.

reply to post by daskakik

You tax the companies. You tax whoever is still making money from the use of the countries resources.

Making one huge assumption that there will be any companies left in this country.

Actually I was speaking in the past tense because it was what happened to bring the present implementation of welfare into being.

What brought welfare in to existence is failed social engineering.

You lived in the US before the great depression?

Did i say I did? I grew up in the 70s when things were cheaper real life experience.

Except for the examples around the world where it has, that you choose to ignore.

Oh like Ireland, and Europe and Greece ?

Not ignoring those examples that too many are who promoting welfare.

Now you're just flip flopping.

Stating a fact

reply to post by daskakik

You have just made the biggest argument for why welfare is needed.

Indeed. Technological progress bringing increased automatisation and growing productivity means that there will be less and less jobs available. But at the same time, those less people working would produce more than enough for all.

Ultimately, there is no way how to deal with this trend other than redistribution.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by daskakik

 

You have just made the biggest argument for why welfare is needed.

Sorry,but no as technology and population increases jobs decrease to the point there is no one left to tax,because there are no jobs to be taxed.

Isn't that why we need to stop automation though?

Are you willing to just sit there and let corporations dictate from A to Z?

It is kind of sickening people are forced to have a vain outlook of life because government is A SHILL of business....but nornally(if not ALWAYS) that is exactly what happens. The longer the captain at the wheelhouse is sleeping the GREATER the chance some rogue wave from the side will come about and capsize the ship of liberty.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by daskakik

 

Making one huge assumption that there will be any companies left in this country.

And you're assuming there won't. I think it is more than likely that there will be. Stop being silly.

What brought welfare in to existence is failed social engineering.

Sure, which still ended up in a lack of public jobs.

Did i say I did? I grew up in the 70s when things were cheaper real life experience.

But not in a time when there was no welfare so you still have no first hand experience.

Oh like Ireland, and Europe and Greece ?

No like the ones that are doing it right. You said it yourself in a previous post that you don't intend to look beyond the us borders so you must be pointing out other failures because it suits your argument. How very neo.

Stating a fact

But you just posted that things in the 70'S were better so how can the younger generations have it better if things were better in the 70`s? That is called flip flopping.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

Isn't that why we need to stop automation though?

Since when have progressives ever had a problem with progress?

re you willing to just sit there and let corporations dictate from A to Z?

The only people dictating anything is to rob from peter to pay paul and they have ran out of peter's,

It is kind of sickening people are forced to have a vain outlook of life because government is A SHILL of business....but nornally(if not ALWAYS) that is exactly what happens.

Then that would make the founding fathers and all those who fought the revolutionary war,"shills".

reply to post by daskakik

And you're assuming there won't. I think it is more than likely that there will be. Stop being silly.

Fine let's run with that since someone is so Omniscient.

Sure, which still ended up in a lack of public jobs.

How bout less social engineering might create more jobs and less people on those programs, we all know more government has not been the answer,

But not in a time when there was no welfare so you still have no first hand experience.

And do you have first hand experience to say otherwise?

No like the ones that are doing it right. You said it yourself in a previous post that you don't intend to look beyond the us borders so you must be pointing out other failures because it suits your argument. How very neo.

Personal snip aside there is no one in Europe or anywhere "doing it right".

But you just posted that things in the 70 were better so how can the younger generations have it better if things were better in the 70`s? That is called flip flopping.

A car,and a home and everything else during the 70's were a hell of a lot cheaper, look up how much a car or home cost back then compared to now.

Healthcare costs were cheaper,
Educations were cheaper
Clothing was cheaper.

The younger generation has no worries there is always someone else to pay their bills unlike the previous generations who came before.

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by daskakik

 

You tax the companies. You tax whoever is still making money from the use of the countries resources.

Making one huge assumption that there will be any companies left in this country.

There will still be plenty of companies left after this great planned consolidation of power, money and influence.

Each recession and depression builds on the past one.

Actually I was speaking in the past tense because it was what happened to bring the present implementation of welfare into being.

What brought welfare in to existence is failed social engineering.

What about reaganomics and thatcherism? Deregulate everything and leveraged buyouts? Then clinton rejected the glass-steagel act? Seems like multiple counts of stupidity from everyone that ultimately lead to everyone collecting dimes from the chinese creditors.

I'm with the mindset and opinions of LDragonFire and EarthCitizen 110%. I have read the OP and arguments pissing on welfare, and honestly, no one has proposed anything feasible. The ones up here bad mouthing those on assistance and welfare in general probably have never been in dire straits or even known *personally* anyone in such a predicament. Charity, eh? Okay player, from who? I can only speak for myself here. I do what *I* can to help out friends and neighbors. I gave away our old furniture set to a family that needed it. I told them come get, have a way to transport it and it's yours.

I gave my neighbor down the way quite a bit of food from my own house as she hit a rough patch. Then again, I'd give someone my last if I truly knew they needed it more than I did, and I know there are many, MANY others like myself in that regard out there...but for every one of us, there are like 50 A-holes who would walk past a woman in the freezing cold with a battered face and an infant in arms wrapped in rags and not even offer to buy her a hot meal and give her conversation. We know YOU kinds make up most of humanity (I'm not singling out anyone in particular here) so tell me, WHAT charity could the poor truly count on if it wasn't a social mandate/law?

We are far removed from simple pastoral and tribal existence. Most everyone these days is out for "dolo" (self) and I work with plenty people that would call you 'friend' and not offer to help you out even if they were well aware that you were struggling and they had the surplus and means to lend you a helping hand. I think we all get a bit disillusioned by the fakers and those who take advantage, but more and more these days, people are hitting that "rough patch" and needing help. Will those of you against welfare step up and help your neighbor feed her kids? I bet the answer is hell no based on some of the crap I have read here for the past few days, and some wanna-be witty, half cocked sanctimonious spiel will follow about how they should pull them selves up by the boot straps and such...

Newsflash...people are selling their boots and the straps just to pay Caesar his due these days. I'm sure they should sell their soles next. Pun fully intended.

reply to post by EarthCitizen07

There will still be plenty of companies left after this great planned consolidation of power, money and influence.

Sorry thought companies were the blight of humanity and now you want to base the entire countries existence off them?

Seems to me that is how we got the current state of the union. Companies are evil!!!! No wait we need them to pay for our welfare!.

What about reaganomics and thatcherism? Deregulate everything and leveraged buyouts? Then clinton rejected the glass-steagel act? Seems like multiple counts of stupidity from everyone that ultimately lead to everyone collecting dimes from the chinese creditors.

Reaganomics aka trickle down is working great for China, and regulation destroys jobs, and it destroys wealth, and that is a fact.

No amount of regulation has created a job with exception of a government job which has to be paid for by stealing from the people to fund the government.,

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by daskakik

 

You have just made the biggest argument for why welfare is needed.

Indeed. Technological progress bringing increased automatisation and growing productivity means that there will be less and less jobs available. But at the same time, those less people working would produce more than enough for all.

Ultimately, there is no way how to deal with this trend other than redistribution.

That is why capitalism cannot work in the long run. It places an inordinate demand on technology and productivity to maximise profits over everything else. These hawks don't care about the enviroment, if they pay sustainable(preferably comfortable wages), how many people lose their job to outsourcing and automation.

The only way to solve this is to remove profit from the equation at the top level planning. A semi-planned economy can do this but of course national geographic and history spend most of their time showing gas chambers and how demonic ALL the socialists were.

You see socialism only existed in germany and russia. Nowhere else! Everyone is an evil nazi! Heil hitler!

Originally posted by neo96
reply to post by daskakik

 

Fine let's run with that since someone is so Omniscient.

Please, even in the most oppressive regimes there always seem to be a black markets. Yo don't need to have godlike powers to know that if there are humans there is trade.

How bout less social engineering might create more jobs and less people on those programs, we all know more government has not been the answer,

How about, it is something that already happened and as someone said earlier in the thread there is no going back. You said technology and population growth create larger unemployment. I'm agreeing. How can you tell someone to get a job and also admit that there aren't enough jobs?

And do you have first hand experience to say otherwise?

I have never said I did. I said that those who were there say otherwise and that I will take their word over yours on this matter.

Personal snip aside there is no one in Europe or anywhere "doing it right".

Sure whatever. You said you didn't even care to look so how would you know?

A car,and a home and everything else during the 70's were a hell of a lot cheaper, look up how much a car or home cost back then compared to now.

It's sad when you can't even see how bad you are flip flopping.

The younger generation has no worries there is always someone else to pay their bills unlike the previous generations who came before.

And those that came before yours said the same thing about your generation.

Originally posted by timetothink
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux

 

Can you feel the wind as everything you say zooms over their collective heads?

They will keep stomping their feet and keep sticking their fingers in their ears because that is how they want it....they want the government nanny state, so they will not hear anything any of us say...just like a six year old.

That's rich, none of you can even answer simple questions

And we have fingers in the ears?

Why don't you answer?


Where are the 40 + million welfare recipients live when

They have neither a job in this slow economy or rent money?

Where are they going to use the bathroom and wash up?

Come on, no fingers in the ears here, let me know!

If you are truly arguing in good faith maybe you can clue

Us in on what 40 million people on the streets will do to

The economy and real estate prices?

Dying to hear your response!