thejeff |
So that's the solution, we'll increase government aid and make it more available even if you're working. That way the government can subsidize big businesses that want to pay low wages and not provide benefits.
Poor people get more money. Businesses make higher profits. The rich people lending to the government earn more interest. Everyone is happy.
Or we could increase wages so that it's worthwhile to work and so that the working poor don't need government help. The poor will have more money. They'll buy more stuff which will help business.
Andrew R |
Andrew R wrote:All of them, when americans worked hardWhich Americans? The ones like a majority of the founding fathers who got rich owning slaves and having them do all the work?
When weren't we taking from others? Those hard working farmers had to drive the indians off the land before they could farm it.
What happened is that hard work STOPPED WORKING as soon as we had automated factory systems and or cheaper foreign labor. You can't just say "hey you go work in a factory" because there aren't that many jobs there anymore. You can't just say "hey you go farm some land" because its all already being farmed. The least troublesome, and ironically the cheapest way of dealing with someone that doesn't want to or can't find work is just to pay them: its cheaper than prison.
'
Now, if you're working hard and your standard of living is at or below that of someone not working at all, doesn't that suggest that you're being underpaid?
Maybe the answer then is to do the best you can, not have a herd of children and piddle away every cent? So why did communism fail in russia? why has "just give it to them" never worked? Because in time no one will be left to rob to fund them.
And i would rather break my back as i literally am to earn an honest living then be like them. better to live with some damn integrity.
Andrew R |
So that's the solution, we'll increase government aid and make it more available even if you're working. That way the government can subsidize big businesses that want to pay low wages and not provide benefits.
Poor people get more money. Businesses make higher profits. The rich people lending to the government earn more interest. Everyone is happy.Or we could increase wages so that it's worthwhile to work and so that the working poor don't need government help. The poor will have more money. They'll buy more stuff which will help business.
That would be nice but artificially increasing wages has backfired so far, every time minimum wage goes up so do costs
Krensky |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Agrarian Justice by Thomas Payne.
Too bad no one listened to him.
TheWhiteknife |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
TheWhiteknife wrote:Taken from others that took it from others, like every landAndrew R wrote:Considering that our entire continent was taken from others, I dont know which time period you talk about.BigNorseWolf wrote:All of them, when americans worked hard and strove to do bigger and better, not waste and expect to take from others. We have always been a people to value hard work, what happened?Andrew R wrote:I love america for what it was, what it was meant to be, now i pity it like a dying deranged old dog. I know what it was, what potential it had but now can only wait for the inevitable endMay I ask what decade or year you're talking about?
Yeah. So when was this time when the population didnt take from others? You made that claim, not me.
Sebastian Bella Sara Charter Superscriber |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sebastian wrote:Yes, that's exactly my answer. If you read my posts, you'll note how often I talk about the importance of everyone getting along and working together. I've explained multiple times that humans are naturally cooperative and kind beings, and that they would take care of each other, the planet, and kittens if only the government would get out of their way.We have some vastly different views of the way that people work. Perhaps it's that I deal with those who would prey upon others on a daily basis that makes me so cynical.
Or we have vastly different capabilities to identify sarcasm. Which, I know can be hard to identify in online communication, particularly when 3/5 of the paragraphs go on to identify the sarcasm for those whom don't pick up on it.
Andrew R |
Andrew R wrote:Yeah. So when was this time when the population didnt take from others? You made that claim, not me.TheWhiteknife wrote:Taken from others that took it from others, like every landAndrew R wrote:Considering that our entire continent was taken from others, I dont know which time period you talk about.BigNorseWolf wrote:All of them, when americans worked hard and strove to do bigger and better, not waste and expect to take from others. We have always been a people to value hard work, what happened?Andrew R wrote:I love america for what it was, what it was meant to be, now i pity it like a dying deranged old dog. I know what it was, what potential it had but now can only wait for the inevitable endMay I ask what decade or year you're talking about?
"native" american population came in waves and took from each other, just as all of the rest of the known world was held by one group then taken by another. that is human history since before modern man ever walked this earth. stolen land is nothing new
A Man In Black RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32 |
I believe you are fully ignorant to how they use the programs and just how comfy they are on our backs. I grew up poor, scraping to make it without help. they live MUCH better than i did.
This is it, the ugly heart of your belief.
You were miserable, and hate the idea that anyone deserves more than what you had.
Sebastian Bella Sara Charter Superscriber |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And i would rather break my back as i literally am to earn an honest living then be like them. better to live with some damn integrity.
Your commitment to righteous indignation and impotent rage over actual solutions is truly an inspiration to us all. Your integrity and $2.00 will even get you a cup of coffee at starbucks.
thejeff |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
So there never was a time whenTheWhiteknife wrote:"native" american population came in waves and took from each other, just as all of the rest of the known world was held by one group then taken by another. that is human history since before modern man ever walked this earth. stolen land is nothing newAndrew R wrote:Yeah. So when was this time when the population didnt take from others? You made that claim, not me.TheWhiteknife wrote:Taken from others that took it from others, like every landAndrew R wrote:All of them, when americans worked hard and strove to do bigger and better, not waste and expect to take from others. We have always been a people to value hard work, what happened?Considering that our entire continent was taken from others, I dont know which time period you talk about.
americans worked hard and strove to do bigger and better, not waste and expect to take from others.
It's just that the others we were taking from were the natives, not real hard working americans.
thejeff |
That would be nice but artificially increasing wages has backfired so far, every time minimum wage goes up so do costs
Costs go up, but not as much. The economy improves. Unemployment drops. Tax revenues rise.
There's probably a limit to it. Mandating a minimum wage of $1000/hr is not likely to do anything but inflate. Changes that only affect the bottom of the scale do work.
Andrew R |
Andrew R wrote:I believe you are fully ignorant to how they use the programs and just how comfy they are on our backs. I grew up poor, scraping to make it without help. they live MUCH better than i did.This is it, the ugly heart of your belief.
You were miserable, and hate the idea that anyone deserves more than what you had.
Not at all, i was and am happy with my life. I think it is quite the opposite that most that hate the rich do so out of jealously.
Andrew R |
Andrew R wrote:Your commitment to righteous indignation and impotent rage over actual solutions is truly an inspiration to us all. Your integrity and $2.00 will even get you a cup of coffee at starbucks.
And i would rather break my back as i literally am to earn an honest living then be like them. better to live with some damn integrity.
I would love to see a real solution but so many would rather just give the horde what it demands as longs as they can look the other way, all the better when they can give with someone elses money.
Better to have principals even if they earn me nothing but painAndrew R |
If you say so. Integrity speaks for itself; those who find it necessary to advertise such qaualities do so because their other words and deeds do not support the claim.
Feel free to come watch my life if you want. I ask for nothing and frankly would live with less if not for my wife.
Andrew R |
If you say so. Integrity speaks for itself; those who find it necessary to advertise such qaualities do so because their other words and deeds do not support the claim.
Also, for whatever it's worth, I suspect I am in a higher tax bracket, but please, by all means, continue to snark on about how I'm getting the gov't to take your precious money and not my own.
That is likely part of the problem, you are comfortable and a hard day for you involves time sitting in a chair i bet. Suspect you may never have know the meaning of labor by your words. Men that earn by sweat and blood tend to take getting robbed less lightly.
Andrew R |
There's more than enough on display here to reach a conclusion. As I said, I'm completely in awe of your amazing integrity and moral sophistication. You must be very proud.
Work hard, play by the rules,be honest and don't steal, don't ask for things you don't need. Such terrible morals indeed.
A Man In Black RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32 |
Sebastian Bella Sara Charter Superscriber |
Andrew R |
Andrew R wrote:Yeah, I know, right. It's even more shocking that I've still manage to prove you wrong, outsmart you, and do better by playing at the same rules. But you have integrity, or so you say.Sebastian wrote:More integrity and pride. As menioned above, I grew up poor. I'm the only high school grad out of my three siblings. I've worked in factories and gone to school while working. s usual, you don't know what you're talking about.Shocking then that you don't know any better.
And yet you have neither proven me wrong nor outsmarted anyone except in your own mind and those that agree with you from their own conclusions. now you are just sounding like an arrogant child saying "i win" to win an argument.
Paul Watson |
A Man In Black wrote:???Andrew R wrote:Better to have principals even if they earn me nothing but painAnother point where we disagree. Corporal punishment in schools is an antiquated disgrace. (I did think you were older than that, though.)
You used the wrong one of principal/principle in the post he quoted. Principal is for school administratoers and principle is for things to live by.
Andrew R |
Andrew R wrote:You used the wrong one of principal/principle in the post he quoted. Principal is for school administratoers and principle is for things to live by.A Man In Black wrote:???Andrew R wrote:Better to have principals even if they earn me nothing but painAnother point where we disagree. Corporal punishment in schools is an antiquated disgrace. (I did think you were older than that, though.)
Whoops, typing has never been my strong point, less so with the arthritis so i get used to trusting the spell checker too much.
A Man In Black RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32 |
Paul Watson |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok. How do you determine who gets the money and how much extra admin does that cost? Is the extra cost more or less than the cost you're saving? Does your proposal mean people are literally starving because there isn't work for them at wages that allow them to live? The problem is you haven't shown how you would avoid the problems that have beset every attempt to reform welfare since, ever, in every country in the western world.
It's mostly a different emphasis. You put the stress on no one getting something they haven't worked for even if innocent people who should get assistance don't. The other side, which I'll admit includes me, puts the emphasis on making sure everyone who should get help gets it, even though we know that means some people will get it when they shouldn't. You cannot square the circle because no system will be perfect. Someone will either get help when they don't deserve it or not get help when they do. You prefer the latter to minimise the former and we go the other way.
Also, only you have been saying that you don't care if people starve as long as you're not paying for them. That's a pretty sociopathic thing to propose, almost bordering on Monty Burns cartoonish supervillainy. That makes it harder to think that any point we make will be considered seriously.
Comrade Anklebiter |
Inflation, stagnation, boom, bust, market-scarcity, market-glut, derivatives, LIBOR, toxic CDOs, deregulation, free trade agreements, austerity programs, price controls, wage controls, inner city riots, "Great Society" bandaids, imperialist war, slashing of wages, dismantling of the unions, unemployment rates, "real" unemployment rates, RESERVE ARMY OF LABOR, shadow economy, illegal immigration, neocolonial exploitation, blah blah blah.
For workers revolution to smash all that shiznit!!
Vive le Galt!
Happy Bastille Day!
EDIT: I admit, I've been smoking weed. Which is why I forgot to include the item that was the whole reason for compiling the list. [facepalm]
Comrade Anklebiter |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
BigNorseWolf wrote:If only there was some sort of government aid for people in that position...Now, if you're working hard and your standard of living is at or below that of someone not working at all, doesn't that suggest that you're being underpaid?
That government aid, Citizen, is called international proletarian socialist revolution.
Paul Watson |
Hitdice wrote:That government aid, Citizen, is called international proletarian socialist revolution.BigNorseWolf wrote:If only there was some sort of government aid for people in that position...Now, if you're working hard and your standard of living is at or below that of someone not working at all, doesn't that suggest that you're being underpaid?
I'm not sure if overthrowing the government can technically be called government aid.
Comrade Anklebiter |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe the answer then is to do the best you can, not have a herd of children and piddle away every cent? So why did communism fail in russia? why has "just give it to them" never worked? Because in time no one will be left to rob to fund them.
And i would rather break my back as i literally am to earn an honest living then be like them. better to live with some damn integrity.
I don't know, Citizen R, why did communism fail in Russia? Was it because of welfare recipients overbreeding and smoking weed? Because I don't remember that part...
Comrade Anklebiter |
Agrarian Justice by Thomas Payne.
Too bad no one listened to him.
Shout-out for Citizen Paine!! Even though the Jacobins did try to cut his head off...
Vive le Galt!!
Comrade Anklebiter |
Not Caring About the Poor: The Musical Interlude
Also, this thread is now officially Comrade Anklebiter's Favorite Thread of the Moment.
Andrew R |
Ok. How do you determine who gets the money and how much extra admin does that cost? Is the extra cost more or less than the cost you're saving? Does your proposal mean people are literally starving because there isn't work for them at wages that allow them to live? The problem is you haven't shown how you would avoid the problems that have beset every attempt to reform welfare since, ever, in every country in the western world.
It's mostly a different emphasis. You put the stress on no one getting something they haven't worked for even if innocent people who should get assistance don't. The other side, which I'll admit includes me, puts the emphasis on making sure everyone who should get help gets it, even though we know that means some people will get it when they shouldn't. You cannot square the circle because no system will be perfect. Someone will either get help when they don't deserve it or not get help when they do. You prefer the latter to minimise the former and we go the other way.
Also, only you have been saying that you don't care if people starve as long as you're not paying for them. That's a pretty sociopathic thing to propose, almost bordering on Monty Burns cartoonish supervillainy. That makes it harder to think that any point we make will be considered seriously.
Here is the real issue, if you make it about making sure no one starves and cutting off the fun money FAR fewer people will CHOOSE it as a way of life. Pay to clothe the destitute, do not let it be used for high end fashon items no one needs. Feed the hungry, do not let it cover unhealthy junk foods. Put a roof over the homeless, but expect them to be moderate in size and utility usage. DO NOT EVER put cash in their hands to gamble, smoke or drink. They will have to expect some "invasion of privacy" to monitor who is living where, work, school, etc. Go back to making it a hand up not a hand out.
A Man In Black RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32 |
Andrew R |
Andrew R wrote:But does this really stop suffering or spread it?Stops (or at least mitigates) suffering. Got any other silly questions?
No it doesn't, it spread this state of choosing to live on it, to have too many kids that will just keep it going. The system stops little true suffering and spreads it. That is far from silly
houstonderek |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Andrew R wrote:We have illegals a plenty working fields, cleaning etc. Jobs lazy ass americans are being allowed to refuse. Flush out the illegals and get americans to work.Often for less than minimum wage and under illegal conditions because they can't complain without the risk of being deported.
And how, exactly, do you plan on deporting millions of undocumented people?
Having a crap economy is working wonders. Immigration from Mexico and points south is actually trending towards the negative as construction and agricultural jobs dry up. A two year drought in Texas and a current drought in the northeast is killing the ag industry.
No need to do anything. Although Obama is doing a fine job of deporting illegals at a much higher rate than his predecessor.
A Man In Black RPG Superstar 2010 Top 32 |
No it doesn't, it spread this state of choosing to live on it, to have too many kids that will just keep it going. The system stops little true suffering and spreads it. That is far from silly
[CITATION NEEDED]
You've got a pretty major factual claim there, that helping people increases suffering, and so far you've been coasting on anecdotes and stereotypes. So! It's time to put your money where your mouth is and back this up. Got any proof, or are you going to keep raving about "welfare queens"?
Andrew R |
Andrew R wrote:No it doesn't, it spread this state of choosing to live on it, to have too many kids that will just keep it going. The system stops little true suffering and spreads it. That is far from silly[CITATION NEEDED]
You've got a pretty major factual claim there, that helping people increases suffering, and so far you've been coasting on anecdotes and stereotypes. So! It's time to put your money where your mouth is and back this up. Got any proof, or are you going to keep raving about "welfare queens"?
So if it is solving any problem why are we here? Why do you seem to enjoy the welfare state? If they keep having kids that by and large stay on welfare it IS going to grow. So each generation is going to keep living this way ending up with more in poverty, more that can't live without the government teat. Getting the poor to limit family size is a good start. Some responsibility is needed