convince me welfare recipients should take drug test...

[rexlunae]

Not only that, but when a government starts taking control of charity, it gets all fouled up and leaves you with less money to be charitable to those you see that are really in need.

Forced charity is not charity at all.

You're right. It's not charity. It's a right.

 

[Angel4Truth]

Not a good argument at all.

Whether one believes we should have a law to murder babies in the womb, we have it.

Whether one believes we should have a same sex marriage law or not, we have it.

???????????????

Which is all irrelevant to this discussion. Taxes that a person paid into, then later received a benefit of, has nothing to do with the other issues you have brought up here. You also clipped from my entire statement and took it out of context - because that wasnt an argument put forth for welfare, it was just a statement that preceeded my questions, could you answer the questions?

Another way to ask you, do you think you should receive a benefit from tax money you paid in? Will you be or do you receive social security for example? Is it possible a person can receive it without paying in or getting more than they paid in?

 

[lovemeorhateme]

No.
I advocate that you should be able to be charitable with your own money to those you want to be charitable to.
And not have some bureaucrat TAKE it from you and spend it on what he deems fit.

I fully support charity, and believe it should be someone's choice whether or how much they support charity.

What I'm talking about isn't charity. It's insurance which guarantees to help those in need to prevent people needing charity which is far from guaranteed.

 

[lovemeorhateme]

If family takes care of family, then goverment is a non sequitor.

That's very idealistic but unfortunately very unrealistic.

 

[lovemeorhateme]

That would suit me just fine.

Anyone that thinks a government can spend your money better than you can is foolish.
I think the government wastes money like crazy.

But if you would prefer to live as a slave on a government run plantation, suit yourself.

"The most terrifying words in the English language are 'I'm from the government and I'm here to help.'" - Ronald Reagan

If that suits you, then why not campaign to get rid of the police, fire service, education system and all welfare including pensions and tell people to pay for it themselves?

Out of interest, what is your view on state pensions? Do you think poor older people who have worked all their lives and paid into the system but cannot afford a private pension should have nothing but fresh air to live on until they die?

 

[lovemeorhateme]

I will just add this. Without welfare, if someone loses their job they then have nothing to live on until they get another job. If there are no jobs going in their area, they can't afford to move. If they rent their home or have a mortgage on it, this then means they lose their home. Homeless people can't get jobs.

How should one deal with this situation?

 

[Tambora]

Which is all irrelevant to this discussion. Taxes that a person paid into, then later received a benefit of, has nothing to do with the other issues you have brought up here. You also clipped from my entire statement and took it out of context - because that wasnt an argument put forth for welfare, it was just a statement that preceeded my questions, could you answer the questions?

Another way to ask you, do you think you should receive a benefit from tax money you paid in? Will you be or do you receive social security for example? Is it possible a person can receive it without paying in or getting more than they paid in?

If you are going to imply that I was attempting to misrepresent you, then I am now out of this conversation.

 

[Arthur Brain]

I will just add this. Without welfare, if someone loses their job they then have nothing to live on until they get another job. If there are no jobs going in their area, they can't afford to move. If they rent their home or have a mortgage on it, this then means they lose their home. Homeless people can't get jobs.

How should one deal with this situation?

Leave them to the whims of charity and let the chips fall where they may apparently...

lain:

 

[Quincy]

If family takes care of family, then goverment is a non sequitor.

That happens but not everyone has the luxury. Just because they should, doesn't mean it's right to ignore reality where many people don't.

If we had a system where people could choose to opt out of paying into welfare programs, but completely forfeit ever getting aid from them regardless of hardships, it would be nice. I bet there wouldn't be very many people who'd opt out.

 

[Angel4Truth]

If you are going to imply that I was attempting to misrepresent you, then I am now out of this conversation.

I implied no such thing. I assumed you misread what i wrote, the part about it being available, is not a defense of it existing, only a statement of what it is right now, then followed with the larger concern.

 

[republicanchick]

I will just add this. Without welfare, if someone loses their job they then have nothing to live on until they get another job. If there are no jobs going in their area, they can't afford to move. If they rent their home or have a mortgage on it, this then means they lose their home. Homeless people can't get jobs.

How should one deal with this situation?

I say if the person is under 45, he should go back to his parent's and they should help him. They brought him/her into the world, after all.

of course, this may make people stop & think b4 having children... and maybe make them want abortion to stay legal...

hmmm

But you know, people need to be responsible for their children, even when they are not "children" anymore... b/c they are still valuable humans even if not children. Sometimes it seems that the world bends over backwards for children, but then when they grow up, they are completely on their own, whether they are ready to be on their own or not..

Here's a saying I heard once

"Adults are children too"



+++

 

[lovemeorhateme]

I say if the person is under 45, he should go back to his parent's and they should help him. They brought him/her into the world, after all.

of course, this may make people stop & think b4 having children... and maybe make them want abortion to stay legal...

hmmm

But you know, people need to be responsible for their children, even when they are not "children" anymore... b/c they are still valuable humans even if not children. Sometimes it seems that the world bends over backwards for children, but then when they grow up, they are completely on their own, whether they are ready to be on their own or not..

Here's a saying I heard once

"Adults are children too"



+++

What if their parents aren't around anymore? What if their parents want nothing to do with them? And what if their parents are around, want something to do with them but can't afford to help?

Your idea poses a very unrealistic situation.

 

[republicanchick]

What if their parents aren't around anymore? What if their parents want nothing to do with them? And what if their parents are around, want something to do with them but can't afford to help?

Your idea poses a very unrealistic situation.

well, here's the thing: everyone has a right to the basic neccesities of life

Big goverenmnt is NOT the answer. The system as it exists now is definitely NOT the answer

Why doesn't the government just subsidize a job for these people, rahter than handing them $$?

I mean, you know, that is still.. or could be big gov... i don't know.. have to admit, i haven't thought the issue through yet. But I would rather have the gov help businesses to hire people than help people just... get $$



++++

 

[Nick M]

If you are going to imply that I was attempting to misrepresent you, then I am now out of this conversation.

You are wasting your time, you might get an infraction for pointing out that the pro-abortion socialist has people fooled.

 

[Angel4Truth]

You are wasting your time, you might get an infraction for pointing out that the pro-abortion socialist has people fooled.

Liar. I am neither pro abortion (birth control isnt abortion and neither is sterilization, you don't seem to know the difference) and because i would feed the child of a young women talked out of abortion instead of letting it starve once its born and then calling her a whore who should get no help, means i'm a socialist now?

Something is really wrong with you.

 

[glorydaz]

I will just add this. Without welfare, if someone loses their job they then have nothing to live on until they get another job. If there are no jobs going in their area, they can't afford to move. If they rent their home or have a mortgage on it, this then means they lose their home. Homeless people can't get jobs.

How should one deal with this situation?

Hi Pete :wave:

This is why we should be nice to people. :rain:

We have friends (if not family) and when we are in need our friends share with us just as we share with them. So, we never really have "nothing" to live on.

 

[Arthur Brain]

You are wasting your time, you might get an infraction for pointing out that the pro-abortion socialist has people fooled.

Oh quit whining and quit lying.

:baby:

 

[Rusha]

Liar. I am neither pro abortion (birth control isnt abortion and neither is sterilization, you don't seem to know the difference) and because i would feed the child of a young women talked out of abortion instead of letting it starve once its born and then calling her a whore who should get no help, means i'm a socialist now?

Something is really wrong with you.

Indeed ... being prolife shouldn't stop after the child is born.

 

[lovemeorhateme]

You are wasting your time, you might get an infraction for pointing out that the pro-abortion socialist has people fooled.

She is neither pro-abortion nor a socialist.

"Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour." Exodus 20:16

 

[lovemeorhateme]

Hi Pete :wave:

This is why we should be nice to people. :rain:

We have friends (if not family) and when we are in need our friends share with us just as we share with them. So, we never really have "nothing" to live on.

Hey, Nana :wave2:

I agree with you, we should be nice to people. I also believe we should share with others. But how many people can afford to help someone with their rent or mortgage payments?