Dutch King: Say Goodbye to Welfare State

reply to post by eLPresidente


Exactly how is anybody forcing anyone?

Banks were bailed out because they would have taken the whole economy down the drain.
And it will happen again so long as they are to big to fail.

reply to post by eLPresidente

Your fight against big bank bailouts isn't with me, in fact it is with a lot of your socialist friends.

reply to post by buster2010

Your Conservative buddies are the ones that pushed for the bailout. They even had to go behind closed doors to get it done.

Just the facts....

H.R. 1424 (110th): Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008

Democrat controlled House and Senate passed the bill.

Introduced:
Mar 09, 2007 (110th Congress, 2007–2009)

Sponsor:
Rep. Patrick Kennedy [D-RI1] [ big ultra Liberal ]


Vote results [ semi mixed ]

House Democrats in favor = 221 ( only 3 against ) [Gulp !!!]
House Republicans in favor = 47 ( only 145 against ) [Gulp !!!]

Senate Democrats in favor = 40 ( only 9 against )
Senate Republicans in favor = 33 ( only 15 against )

Now what was THAT about "Your Conservative buddies are the ones that pushed for the bailout" ?

[ wink wink ]

reply to post by xuenchen

Now what was THAT about "Your Conservative buddies are the ones that pushed for the bailout" ?

What party was the President from when this was going on? He wasn't a Democrat or an Independent was he?

UnifiedSerenity
reply to post by spartacus699

 

What a great way to create a slave society. The progressive rich ruin the economy by offering lots of social programs and when they run out of other people's money, they offer to feed you 3 hots and give you a cot in exchange for back breaking menial labor. Sounds like a great plan if you are one of the rich.

Only problem is you want your slaves to have enough skills to supply you with 21st century living. So you can't have a bunch of menial labor cavemen if you care about that...

It's not a bunch of slaves tilling the fields anymore, it's more like a bunch of people in the factory pressing clothes or checking watches on a conveyer belt.

It's cheap clerical workers and technical support and 65 hour/week cannery workers. Witness the exploitation of poor countries where there're people working 340+ days per year 8+ hours per day for pennies to the dollar, essentially without modern healthcare.

jonnywhite
If you don't work, you don't eat. If you don't watch your diet and exercise and habits, you have ill health. It's common sense, but in our society these lessons are hard won.

Sorry,

this is way too simplified, this "It's YOUR fault" way of thinking.

You imply that anyone who is using the welfare system, ranging from unemployment benefits to affordable healthcare etc. is actually not entitled to it, too lazy or in whatever other way TO BLAME for this.

It is true that percentage of people may well indeed take advantage of such a system, no doubt about it, but for how many people it's NOT their "FAULT" whatsoever, there are much more complex things at work than super-simplifying and to say "if you don't work you don't eat".

Here is only ONE small example, pulled out of my head...when I heard that someone on welfare (in the states!) would actually get more money from WF than flipping burgers at McD. So..something must be wrong then, alright, when corporates and firms pay people so little money "to work" that WF is the better option.

And...even if it's an "inconvenient truth", immigrants and globalization DO play a role too.

I just don't like how people are generalized as "work shy" and lazy as if THAT would be the solution to all problems... oh... how many ARE (say, in the US) actually working one or two jobs, get **** # pay and STILL unable to pay for healthcare...etc..there are just too many factors at work which cause the problem. NOT (only) people "who don't work".

The only reason the welfare state has collapsed is because the Netherlands have been systematically destroyed and sucked dry by Europe, and the European banking system, together with our government mismanagement and deceit.

But off, course it´s the fault of the people who are lazy.

earthling42
reply to post by eLPresidente

 

Exactly how is anybody forcing anyone?

Banks were bailed out because they would have taken the whole economy down the drain.
And it will happen again so long as they are to big to fail.

Socialism, unless we are talking about voluntary socialism (which the large large large majority of Socialists don't actually believe in) is implemented through force.

You call yourself compassionate, are you compassionate enough to let me opt-out of your system of forced slavery? Take some time and think about it.

On the bailouts, I already said I AGREE that the banks shouldn't get bailouts, wtf is wrong with some of you people? Free markets don't need a mafia government to save it, in a truly free market the banks SHOULD'VE and WOULD'VE been left to fail.

Thus completely destroying the term, "too big to fail".

Are we really having this conversation?

buster2010
reply to post by eLPresidente

 

Your fight against big bank bailouts isn't with me, in fact it is with a lot of your socialist friends.

Your Conservative buddies are the ones that pushed for the bailout. They even had to go behind closed doors to get it done.

Wait, what are you talking about? the only conservative buddies I have would've never supported a bailout, as I do not and I really rather not make friends with people that believe in using the government as a mafia strong-arm.

And apparently, you don't read.

Here is what I wrote that you completely did not bother to read or just maybe conveniently ignored because I made too much sense.

You don't have to convince me to let big banks fail, I advocate a free market and in a free market, the government doesn't get to give "bailouts". Bailouts is what many progressives AND conservatives wanted because it would harm people in the short term due to chaotic nature of stock dumping and human behavior during a crisis. Even though a majority of Americans didn't want to bail out the big banks in 2008, people still cried out for it, in the name of saving the poor and the middle class.

#EPICFAIL

reply to post by xuenchen


participation , I can see in future work for welfare happening. A slave working force working on something less than the minimum wage.

crazyewok

eLPresidente
If socialism was so great, people would come to IT vs using violence to force people IN.

Tell that to the millions trying to immigrate into the EU!



And to all you yanks claiming this is a example of failed EU states.

I will point you too Norway, Sweadon and Denmark................. Hardly examples of failed states mainly cause they minimised there involvemnet with the Euro.

Whats causing the EU problem is not welfare but the 1 currency which was a good idea until the rich countrys started invited destitute countrys like greece into it!

Wow, you completely missed the point.

Is the European socialist system forced on 100% of the taxable population or does 100% of the taxable population have an option to OPT-OUT?

I asked a question why not just let people decide they want socialism voluntarily versus forcing everybody to pay into it. Your poor argument that, "millions are flocking to the EU" for social welfare has absolutely NOTHING to do with my point. It addresses those that want the welfare but it does not address those that DON'T. And of course you will never address this issue because socialists will never admit that they force unwilling participants into their system.

reply to post by eLPresidente


Here the thing?

You dont like it dont live here.

If you take a poll in the Northen Europe states most are rather happy.

And us in the UK DONT want you American system.

The US is not the right way or wrong way.
Why cant you Americans accept that diffrent places in the world want diffrent things? And what works or is wanted in one area isnt nessarly what is wanted or works elsewere?

I do not have a problem with helping those who have legitimate physical or mental limitations preventing them from supporting themselves. However, the concept of charity or entitlement is not inherently guaranteed by nature, but is artificially created within the social structures which adopt it. Wanting to take care of someone and not wanting to take care of someone are both equally natural.

Without governments and other organizations implementing systems, designed to financially support those who can't or don't want to support themselves, people would be left to their own devices. Without charitable systems in place, people must decide to either work, leech off their families, rob other people or simply die. Many folks who use the system, seem to take for granted the kindness of those who fund the system. I think the biggest laugh on ATS is finding someone who, decries their government for taking too much control over their lives, and also demand more entitlement programs. Doesn't a persons source of income always demand control over a larger part of a persons life?

Yeah, I do look down on many people who receive welfare and disability payments. I have a veterans administration rating of 100% permanent and total, yet I do not receive a monthly disability check from the government. I put energy into going back to work, and I am earning above the income limit to receive my guaranteed free government money. I could easily choose to be lazy, and stay at home all day, but my moral beliefs do not allow for it.

reply to post by xuenchen


This is my quoted reply in another similar thread.

Auricom
reply to post by tinner07

 

That's exactly what it is. In Norway (where I'm currently located), there were discussions about ending disability pensions due to the influx of immigrants who are "helped" by doctors from the same countries they're from so they'd get disability even though they were fully able to work.

Here's a story about a woman nearing her 50's that I know.

Back in 2004, she met a man from Egypt. During their time together, Selim (his name) wanted to get disability seeing his girlfriend (my landlord) had it. She has some kind of arthritis that people usually get when they're much older, it's a degenerative problem and she's had a hip replaced and sincerely cannot work. Her hands, ankles and other parts often swell up leaving her unable to do much.

Selim was working full time, he quit his job and got an undocumented job at a local fast food store. (This store often employs illegals and others under the table and is run by non-western immigrants.) After six months of working and living on social welfare doubling up his monthly "salary", he found a doctor from Cairo. She (the doctor) helped Selim get disability due to "mental issues". He pulls in around 12000 Norwegian kroner monthly through disability and another 8000 kroner through undocumented work, which he continues to do.

Shortly after he received disability, he broke up with his girlfriend. He can now move anywhere he'd like in the world and continue to receive the 12000 kroner from the Norwegian government. That's why disability is a very sought after pension by immigrants. They can come to Norway from a poor country, get disability and than move back to their country of origin and "live like kings".

His now ex girlfriend has tried several times to get him busted by reporting him to skatte etaten (not sure what it's called in English, I believe it's the Norwegian version of the IRS) but they say they do not have the resources to check up on the claim.

So instead of removing the possibility for immigrants to get disability, they'd rather take it all away, even from people who CANNOT.WORK. Some Norwegians call people like Selim "lykke jegere" (happiness hunters) due to the fact that they come to Norway, throw their passports away and become undocumented immigrants so Norway can't throw them out. Once they're here for good, they than get social welfare and eventually try to get disability.

You'd be surprised by how many immigrants come to Norway who refuse to learn the language (I met a guy here early on during Norwegian classes who couldn't speak a lick of Norwegian despite living in Norway for SEVEN years!) and thus cannot work forcing the Norwegian government to give them social welfare.

Depending on community, social welfare pays out roughly 4500 kroners monthly. More if you have a spouse and children. Electricity and apartments are also paid for by the government. Even women who are not Norwegian citizens get a payout when they give birth. This is over 20000 kroner per child.

So is it a wonder places like Denmark, Sweden and Norway become such high profile targets for these "happiness hunters"? Of course not, what IS surprising though is that the Norwegian government allows it. Some more information pertinent to the discussion is how many immigrants severely misuse welfare even though THEY.OWN.BUSINESSES. I also knew Selim for a while, he was open about how all this was done and suggested I too partake.

What happens is that the owners of these businesses stay on welfare, but get cousins and other family members to come to Norway and become undocumented immigrants. Once they're settled and get work visa, they'll put their cousin (or whoever) as an owner of the company. The guy doesn't have to do anything, except get paid for being a name on a paper. They'll do this as long as their money lasts. There were a couple of these stores in Oslo a couple of years ago that were exposed.

It's insanity if you ask me and a prime example of these countries digging their own financial graves.

crazyewok
reply to post by eLPresidente

 

Here the thing?

You dont like it dont live here.

If you take a poll in the Northen Europe states most are rather happy.

And us in the UK DONT want you American system.

The US is not the right way or wrong way.
Why cant you Americans accept that diffrent places in the world want diffrent things? And what works or is wanted in one area isnt nessarly what is wanted or works elsewere?

Of course you don't address the use of force that socialists abuse, just like I predicted. Deflection is the key to winning an argument you can't win.

Notice how you won't address the forced system on 100% of taxable income or not, but you will speak on behalf of the entire United Kingdom, and I QUOTE,

and us in the UK DONT want you American system

.

You even said

if you take a poll in the northern Europe states, most are rather happy

Sure, MOST. That is the point I'm making and you even made it FOR ME.

I'm not telling you socialism is not accepted, I'm telling you it is in itself a MORAL CONFLICT. You seem to not understand that. There is a % of people that do not want to have their hard earned money stolen from them and that is a 100% fact that you seem to conveniently ignore.

Don't' you ever get tired of not having a logical argument? Or am I the first person that has ever brought this issue up to you?

reply to post by eLPresidente


Or the fact that most European country are not constitutional Republics like the USA and are infact Democracys therefore majority rule is (In theroy but not always in practice) the standard practice. So if the majority want that that then that what happens, the minority tuff.

Of course there are variations of Democracy from country to country and only switzlerland is a Dircet democracy but that the jist of the matter.

Moraly no it might not be right in the US of A but in Europe thats how things are done and Moraly thats right for us!

If the minority in Europe want to get rid of our soclised healthcare systems and rip all our welfare systems appart (which addmitantly do need reforming here in the UK) they are free to protest and try and get more supporters but until then the majority wins.

And for those that really dont want to pay there taxes and cant be botherd to protest? Well no one forceing them to stay in Europe and they can leave any time!

And as foe use force? Well the USA has a more militrised police force than most EU countries! Hey your domestic army is probably more well funded than most EU countries militarys!