Before There Was Welfare There Was Charity

page: 33
53
<< 30  31  32    34 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 05:10 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


That's your idea of proving capitalism predates corporations? Declaring that there was no communism or socialism before Marx? Really? Nice research, man. Fail!!!!


Yes. Process of elimination works wonders my friend. You should try it sometimes along with common sense.

The purpose of thread was specious and insolent conjecture on the hope some people would jump on that hollow "freedom and liberty" train to lose even more rights and respect than what we have already lost. Don't worry I can read the conservative astroturfing better than some people can read their horoscopes......




posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 05:15 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Let's make no mistakes about this, you make a claim, such as capitalism is older than corporations, then you argue I should do the research to prove your point, I counter you should do the research to prove your point, and you then deflect by complaining about the motives of this thread. Epic fail!!!



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Before there was welfare there was charity a perspective created by the op to enlighten some people to the true face of modern despotism, and it has constantly been derailed with petty politics, the greatness of the nanny state and the evils of kindness,and the evils of capitalism followed up by the greatness of socialized engineering that has been an epic fali indeed.

Epic fail is indeed epic because this nation is broke and it is only going to get worse because some people believe in the inherent "goodness" of government and nothing but contempt for the goodness of a human soul.

Before there was welfare there was charity a duality of the same act of what use to be good intentions that has been replaced with the road to hell,and people are begging for another helping of wrongness.

I bet that no pro welfare argument never took in to consideration that if there was more charity there would be less welfare because it's like meh so what that's what i pay taxes for and never think about it again.

Just let someone else take care of it.
edit on 1-6-2012 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 05:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Let's make no mistakes about this, you make a claim, such as capitalism is older than corporations, then you argue I should do the research to prove your point, I counter you should do the research to prove your point, and you then deflect by complaining about the motives of this thread. Epic fail!!!


The research is self-evident for those that take the time to do it.

You really want me to quote entire books or articles? That would break the T&C of the site for piracy, long quotes, and maybe even plagiarism.

Get real sir. And you are not my friend either. I used the term very, very loosely. I don't hate you but we are worlds apart in ideology and we will likely never agree on anything.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Since you cannot be bothered to take the time to do the research it must not be self evident to you and you are just delusional. If you could offer up actual research you would have instead of just yammering on as you are. You cannot offer up any research to prove your assertion that capitalism predates the corporation because there is none. It is telling that the guy arguing for socialism and communism wants somebody else to do the research to prove his points. Jesus, you just take and take in every way, and refuse to give a thing back.



posted on Jun, 1 2012 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 


they have altered the words and definitions.
"Life" meant all services necessary to live Life Well within the Society of Man. This was listed as all Utilities, Commodities, Goods and Services. This is still actually listed in the Commerce Codes.
"Welfare" meant the Well Being of all Individuals within the Society of Man. This was used when ever the terms of the contract made reference to our concern about our Neighbors rights to services of Medicine or other services that granted Well Being. Such as the services offered for children orphaned. Society was concerned about our Neighbors 'Welfare', are they 'fairing well' here.



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 07:10 AM
link   
Reply to EarthCitizen07

Banned? Welfare won't be banned. It will emplode on itself. The greedy powerhouses have set it up to fail, it already failed the elderly by stealing hundreds of billions from their Social Security funds and putting it into Obama Care. The Welfare system is on a suicide mission, it like our economy, is on artifical life support.
Reality is too harsh for many people, esp the entitlement minded souls.

As for a higher education, it will continue to exist if people had to pay per class, semester, in full before attending. The cost would decrease dramatically and quickly.
It is the assurance of the loans that bloated the costs of higher education.
Feeding, clothing and housing the poor is far more important than funding the education system. If you think more students are paying on their loans than not, you've been mislead. The student loan bubble is bursting just like the housing loans did.

There seems to be no compromise.
edit on 2-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 08:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by antonia

Originally posted by sweetliberty

This is the post I was referring to. If I'm reading this right, there seems to be an assumpion that unemployment, welfare will increase due to invention. The opposite is true. Sure, people will have to attend some training classes and there could be the elimation of some jobs but progress creates many more jobs than it destroys.
When people aren't harnessed, their imagination is allowed to thrive. These are the job creators.


No it doesn't. In the past this was true because the technology didn't entirely replace human labor. The technologies coming online today will replace human labor not simply augment it. You assume this group of people displaced by the technology is going to be young enough and smart enough to take on more skilled work. Now, you mention retraining. And where are they going to get the money to do that?


Progress has always had their doubting Thomas's arguing how machines will replace humans and humans will be left in the dark.
The Driveless cars and trains will employ a great number of people...people who submit to the new age Al Gore climate change mother earth religon lie, public union socialists.

I read in an earlier post that you told JPZ that he had not "convienced" you charity would help those already on welfare, or you said something similar to that.
You agreed both welfare and charity had their problems but I hadn't seen where you added any critical thinking to it. I may have over looked it though.
What I did read was that you weren't "convienced". You seemed to have left the critial thinking others, waiting for the golden answers that might tickle your fancy.
I contend the naysayers on this thread have the exact mindset as those who benefit greatly in the welfare system. They expect other people to go the extra mile, to do all of the critical thinking, to do the hard work for them. I guess its easier to ride the entitlment train for as long as its moving even though is going to derail as we know it to be now.
I wish more people would stand on their own feet instead of standing on the feet of others. People go out of their way to encourage those who take on responsibility.

edit on 2-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: to add a word



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 08:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by doomedtoday
You guys wanna know sumthin? Of course you don't, nobody cares what I think. Oh well, I'm gonna say it anyway because a portion of you will more than likely read it even if you don't give a crap.

The constitution is the problem! There I said it, and you are now p!$$ed. Right?
Big business and politicians have been permitted to walk around and all over that ting for how long now? I don't see any of you or anyone else for that matter doing anything about it. So why shouldn't the people also be allowed to ignore that ancient document? Tell me why big business is better than you and I. Tell me why people complain about too big to fail but act as if they support the idea.

I have a great respect for anyone who isn't afraid to own up to what they believe in or what or who they think is the problem.
In my opinion, the Constitution is hasn't changed. The problem is it doesn't leave much room for Socialism.
They don't like the restraints of power so they've been "interrupting" it to their advantage. How can the never changing, rarely changing, Constitution be the problem when it is so direct?
People have perverted it, not the other way around.
edit on 2-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: to add a letter



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 08:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by doomedtoday
I would also like to add an interesting little tid bit. I live in a state that has been called the "volunteer" state. Yet oddly enough whenever I am at a store and the person being paid zilch to accept their cash in exchange for goods asks the customer if they would like to donate a dollar to (insert charity here), more often than not, it is the elderly and the people using a foodstamp card that make a donation. I know it really isn't any of my business to watch the people in front of me and see how they pay and all that crap but what can I say, I'm a very curious person. Good thing I'm not a cat...

Only once in my life have I ever seen a man who had a fairly "successful" look to him make a donation and it was only one dollar. I've donated more than a dollar and I'm technically under the poverty line...

As for those people standing outside taking donations, I've never once witnessed a man in a suit give them anything but you see families and elderly do so fairly often, sure its only a dollar or two usually but how come people with less can help others but those with more can't be bothered with that stuff...


What if the "suits" already gave big bucks to charity?
What if the suits were hocked up to their necks and are fighting foreclosure on their home?
Did the suits already give to their church? What about the man who pays for his mothers care in a nursing home?
Or the suit that funds his god-sons college education?
I don't think the grocery store is a reliable place to determine who gives and who doesn't.
Hopefully people donate to the local non governmental charities, the fraud is minimal and its easier to detect. Donating locally, to the smaller charities, might put the larger govt charities on notice.
If someone has lost faith in mankind, hopefully they'll donate to their local animal shelter and not donate to the worldwide feel-good animal organizations.
edit on 2-6-2012 by sweetliberty because:



posted on Jun, 2 2012 @ 10:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
reply to post by sweetliberty
 




but progress creates many more jobs than it destroys.


I dont think so. Automatisation replaces human work. Sure, there are some more jobs created, but its generally far less than what has been replaced. The net effect is important.
Progress also increases barriers to entry, since it generally replaces unqualified work with jobs requiring higher education and higher initial investments.

Thats why job market situation in the 21st century is simply not comparable to the situation in the 19th century. libertarians tend to romanticise. And it will only get "worse" with increasing progress.


This reminded me of something I heard on the news a little while back.
U.S. Manufactoring Sees Shortage of Skilled Factory Workers, Feb 2pqw

Good jobs but where the workers.
I hope this link works, its a good read.
edit on 2-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: fix link
edit on 2-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 01:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by Jean Paul Zodeaux
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Since you cannot be bothered to take the time to do the research it must not be self evident to you and you are just delusional. If you could offer up actual research you would have instead of just yammering on as you are. You cannot offer up any research to prove your assertion that capitalism predates the corporation because there is none. It is telling that the guy arguing for socialism and communism wants somebody else to do the research to prove his points. Jesus, you just take and take in every way, and refuse to give a thing back.


You already proved it with your quote and then accussed me of saying garbage, when it was you that did not even read YOUR OWN MATERIAL. How silly can you be?


Just because the term *corporation* is one of the oldest word, does not mean didley squat in relation to business. They had capitalism back then and traded in silver and gold coins. They were proprietars of a trade and some partnerships were also formed. Do you not know any history, even high school level stuff? You did not read about mesopotamia where people gathered in towns and started crafts?
edit on 6/3/2012 by EarthCitizen07 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 02:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by sweetliberty

Reply to EarthCitizen07

Banned? Welfare won't be banned. It will emplode on itself. The greedy powerhouses have set it up to fail, it already failed the elderly by stealing hundreds of billions from their Social Security funds and putting it into Obama Care. The Welfare system is on a suicide mission, it like our economy, is on artifical life support.
Reality is too harsh for many people, esp the entitlement minded souls.


It might fail because of gross mismanagement and diverting funds to the military or corporate socialism, but I do not have to cheer for that either. It seems some people DO CHEER for that and I find that quite insolent to be honest. What will you think when it comes time to collect you're ss check and medicare/medicaid and you find out it is dried up? Will you continue to be so arrogant? Highely doubt it, but maybe you have a private pension plan and thus do not care. Just wait till another AIG scandal and pooof. no money!



As for a higher education, it will continue to exist if people had to pay per class, semester, in full before attending. The cost would decrease dramatically and quickly.
It is the assurance of the loans that bloated the costs of higher education.
Feeding, clothing and housing the poor is far more important than funding the education system. If you think more students are paying on their loans than not, you've been mislead. The student loan bubble is bursting just like the housing loans did.

There seems to be no compromise.
edit on 2-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)


Higher education should not be backed by government loans. I completly agree with you on this issue. It was bad policy from the beginning. We have way too many people working with their brains rather than their hands or a combination of both.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 05:44 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 




Higher education should not be backed by government loans.


I think the best system would be that you pay for education retroactively, only after you finish it and get a job, and the amount you pay would be certain % of your salary for a specified time (not a fixed sum). That way, you dont have to worry about money or debt when you are studying, and at the same time universities would have an incentive to offer programs that would be financially profitable for their students (wanted on the market).
It would also eliminate unnecessary middlemen like banks.
edit on 3/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 05:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maslo
I think the best system would be that you pay for education retroactively, only after you finish it and get a job, and the amount you pay would be certain % of your salary for a specified time (not a fixed sum). That way, you dont have to worry about money or debt when you are studying, and at the same time universities would have an incentive to offer programs that would be financially profitable for their students (wanted on the market).
It would also eliminate unnecessary middlemen like banks.
edit on 3/6/12 by Maslo because: (no reason given)


Admirable and at least an idea. To this, it deserves attention. While I disagree with the "delayed" idea; what happens if a person doesn't pass the required courses to receive such delayed "loans". What if that student doesn't pay that loan, or the schools decide it is a hassle because students under such program are taking up slots that could be better utilized?



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 06:11 AM
link   
reply to post by sweetliberty
 


is that the article that has the business owner claiming that machinists can make $75,000, $100,000 thousand with overtime???


there was one crying the same thing, we can't find skilled workers, the guy owned a machine shop, and he that's what he claimed in the article.....$75,000-$100,000!!!

I think he was overestimating the earning potential of machinists!! try enough not to be eligible for any type of gov't assistance, but not enough to actually feed, pay the rent, cloths, and keep warm a family of five!!
my husband is a journeyman tool and die maker, with over 30 years experience.

he wants to know where they are paying $75,000!!! he's never been paid half of that much!
and right now, he's working in basically a one man shop! he is doing everything!

they are just trying to pressure the gov't to import workers for these jobs is all, there'd be plenty of machinists here if they hadn't starved them out of the occupation and decided not to train the younger generations the trade!
they made the ir bed, let them sleep in it awhile! schools don't do a very good job training machinists anyways, it's a trade where nothing but on the job training is really adequate.

if anyone knows where machinists are being paid that kind of money, let me know, maybe we will relocate!!
but, I think they are imaginary jobs, thought up as part of an attempt for the gov't to allow more immigrants into the country, so the wages that are being paid can fall even more!



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 07:17 AM
link   
reply to post by ownbestenemy
 




what happens if a person doesn't pass the required courses to receive such delayed "loans".


There are no loans. You dont pass the course, you pay nothing.



What if that student doesn't pay that loan, or the schools decide it is a hassle because students under such program are taking up slots that could be better utilized?


There is no loan. You mean, if they dont pay after they are employed? Well, it would be against the law.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


SS will not be around when I'm eligible. As for a pension plan, I don't have one.
From what I've heard, they won't exist if the current adminstration is around for another four years. If Obama becomes desperate, which he is, he's probably going to excuse all student loans before the November elections. He's already instructing banks to eat their housing loans, ...I wish we, the people were allowed to conduct our affairs with the same kind of logic Obama exercises...(not really).

On a side note, sometimes it seems like your posts aren't in line with being a Social Democrat. It could be me, I'm not as familiar with it as I thought I was I guess.



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by dawnstar
 


I wish the jobs paid 75,000 to 100,000 (with overtime) but it wasn't mentioned in any of them.
I wonder if the article you're speaking about came from Williston, North Dakota, the oil boom territory. I've seen that rate of pay offered to truck drivers with a CDL license.
These CNC machine operators, programmers, and welders range from 36,000 to 58,240.

I think if the Welfare system wanted to pass out a wide array of goodies to able-bodied people who are down on their luck for whatever reason, they should offer the goodies to the ones who find and keep employment.
Anyone unemployeed for longer than two weeks would be dropped without further notice.
All students seeking an higher would still have to work, paying in full 2/3 of the cost per semester up front. 1/3 paid from the gooddie jar but expected to be paid in full within four years


No job, no goodies and the number of children would be irrelevent, no "special circumstances".
Edit to clarify said unconstitutional goodies would continue for the student no longer than four years. These same goodies would discontinue for the employeed when their income exceeds 30,000.00 dollars or after four years of assistance.
Note: this does not apply to the elderly or severely handicapped, disabled.
Had the Weseal in Chief truly cared (from the heart) about the poor, he would have cheerfully donated the Cash for Clunkers to them. Instead he destroyed them
edit on 3-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)
edit on 3-6-2012 by sweetliberty because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 3 2012 @ 04:44 PM
link   
reply to post by sweetliberty
 

the the guy was a business owner in the maryland area, or maybe one of the adjacent states. my guess, if he was telling the truth about how much he was paying, he's a defense contractor or something.

the higher education situation in this country has become obscene in my opinion. at one time, a person could work during the summer months and work part times while in school, and be able to work their way through college. now, they have gotten so expensive, the kids are graduating with about as much debt as one would incur back then for a house!!!





new topics
top topics
 
53
<< 30  31  32    34 >>

log in

join