The State of our Dysfunctional Union

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

You would be surprised, read the political madness forum for a while and you will see that there is a sizable part of the population that is all for taking away everything from people who have nothing.

That's your answer?

You have cited no examples.

Why should I even believe anything you say when you cannot even do such a simple thing? Do you not care about your credibility? By the way you avoided something so simple - providing us with just one example - it seems that you must not care much about your credibility.





[edit on 14-8-2010 by Exuberant1]

Originally posted by whatukno
denying hate

Ok, maaaan,
I can hear you!
you don't have to shout.


David Grouchy

reply to post by Exuberant1


I have tried doing that before, and the mods have deleted my threads because of it, I won't have this thread deleted because I called individual members out. It's against the T&C.

It's there people have written it, if you don't believe me, well I am sorry.

www.topix.com...
endwelfare.com...
www.city-data.com...

Some examples off site.

Originally posted by whatukno
reply to post by Exuberant1

 

I have tried doing that before, and the mods have deleted my threads because of it, I won't have this thread deleted because I called individual members out. It's against the T&C.

No one told you to limit yourself to ATS.

Why aren't you bothering to look for examples outside of ATS?

Surely you could find some examples to substantiate your claim that people are calling for welfare to be cut off - at least enough to alarm you into writing about it on ATS.

Did Bill O'Reilly call for people to be cut off welfare? (he sounds like he would) Any MSM sources?

Is the Tea Party calling for an end to welfare?

reply to post by whatukno


Well I feel that you should give us more ideas as to possible solutions. We need to decouple government from big business. Throw out the lobbyists!

reply to post by Exuberant1


I gave you examples, right there, I am not talking about the MSM or Government in this thread, I am talking about the people. But if you want...





[edit on 8/14/2010 by whatukno]

reply to post by Tiger5


[qoute]Well I feel that you should give us more ideas as to possible solutions. We need to decouple government from big business. Throw out the lobbyists!

I thought Obama campaigned on them ideas

See, that is part of the problem, we elect politicians on the basis of how much BS they sell us and how much money they raise and throw at us.

I wonder what would happen if we elected the lowest bidder? The people that had the best solutions for the smallest price?

reply to post by whatukno



That story is about ending welfare abuse, not welfare for people who need it.

Find a better example.

reply to post by Exuberant1


And you ignored every other example I gave, so if you are going to ignore the examples I give I am not going to just waste my time and keep doing it. It's not worth my time to waste on you.

If you can't read or can't understand it, I am sorry, but I gave you 3 different examples from 3 different websites all showing that there are INDEED people that want to end welfare.

So, let's move on shall we?

Forced charity is NOT charity. It is slavery, will not even bring in the FACT that socialism for the uber rich and corporate partners to government, DOES nothing to further mankind. Let alone liberty and freedom.

Then you to bring into the argument the betterment of the collective, sounds AWFULLY familiar to the pharaohs building their pyramids on the deaths of 10's of 1000's of SLAVES.

Then you post videos of people attempting to ELIMINATE FRAUD in regards to welfare, not the elimination of welfare.

There is NO such thing as collective salvation. How DARE you even attempt to equate forced taxation as a road to salvation. That road leads to EVIL.

The END NEVER justifies the means, that way leads to Stalin.

Your way leads to ruination of the soul. Charity is not through the state, it is through the self.

Death is just another door. When you are worm food, does not even begin the road one walks. We are NOT meat sacks, we are souls of infinite individuality. There are NOT two souls of the same existence, nothing can be destroyed; only changed.

Charity begins in ones own heart, to force morality is just that, FORCE. If you believe you are going to change the heart of an evil through legislation, you have ALREADY lost the argument.

God Bless and Peace.

reply to post by whatukno


In the future please don't derail your own thread by responding to trolls and idiots.

Good OP.

reply to post by whatukno


Yes, poloticians are supposed to be "representative" of the population...

How can that be if most are now career pollies???

I say ban all career pollies..We need average Joes (and Janes) who know what its like in the real world..

We also need to set a limit for "all" campaign expenditure and we need to "BAN" political parties.....

Then we may get a representative Goverment...

reply to post by whatukno


So you cannot find any politicians who are out to end welfare for those who need it?

If not, then it really isn't something that is going to happen is it?

Yet it somehow worries you enough to write about it on ATS. Stop worry mongering.

There you go Exuberant1, a fine example of someone who wants to end welfare. They think that people are moral, that people would willingly give to charity. I disagree, I think that people are immoral, I think that people are selfish, I think that people would rather others starve than to do anything to help them.

reply to post by Exuberant1


Again, this thread is about the real people in charge, the people of this country. Not about the politicians. Please stay on topic.

[edit on 8/14/2010 by whatukno]

reply to post by Jezus


Thank you, I should take your advice.

reply to post by CynicalM


You are absolutely right.

reply to post by whatukno


lol, did you just tell yourself to stay on topic??/

Now thats funny.

reply to post by CynicalM


Thanks for the catch, I fixed it now.


But liberty is all about being inclusive. In fact I propose that one cannot have liberty without inclusivity.

reply to post by whatukno


No probs, but now you've made my post look silly

On topic, inclusive in what way?