posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 05:52 PM
reply to post by Hefficide
Oh yeah we're going to argue for sure here
In a system that is predicated upon allowing the rich to to rob from the poor without any checks or balances? I call it a necessary evil.
I don't I call that trading one master for another.
The biggest welfare recipients in America are not those receiving food stamps... they are corporations that pay no taxes,
Not really considering 47% of Americans have zeo tax liabiilties, and are drawing more in benefits than they return in to that system.
Between Social Security,Medicare,Medicaid,free homes,free education($1 Trillion in Student loan debt) and the rest of those social engineering
programs that create debt all for naught.
We the people are the biggest welfare recipients in this country, and it is nothing but the redistribution of wealth to so they can go out and buy
more corporate products.
While I am not a follower of socialism nor communism... the malicious and false representation of all social programs as being such is
Me neither I am a follower of people stepping up to the task of paying their own way of life I absolutely reject any and all those who purport
changing the environment to suit the individual.
Because that is what we have here reverse darwinism at work insert label of choice(communist,socialists,marxists) trying to social engineer the
environment that creates stagnation, nay regressive policies that created the largest dependency based society the world has ever seen.
So the argument is who pays for it to what we really has is one big arse zoo that would perish if something ever happened to the care takers.
Funny thing here is those same people say 'Don't feed the animals' turn around and practice the opposite in real life.
So why do people support that for animals and reject the same rationale for civilization?
Makes no sense to me.
edit on 26-7-2013 by neo96 because: (no reason given)