Why do we treat poor people like children?
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
05-03-2014, 06:33 AM
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
Food pucks=Rice cakes

[Image: RiceCakes-LightSalt-Detail.sflb.ashx]

If bullshit were music some people would be a brass band.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 06:43 AM
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(28-02-2014 08:45 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  I'm in Walmart. The couple in front of me make two transactions. One for food that they pay with food stamps, and another for all the stuff they can't buy with food stamps...this one they pay in cash. Why not just give the couple cash instead of food stamps? Why do we take this attitude that poor people are incapable of making good decisions?

Ironic question and post title, considering the fact that, whether you support it or not, welfare programs are already infantilisation.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 09:19 AM (This post was last modified: 05-03-2014 09:26 AM by Logica Humano.)
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(04-03-2014 07:38 PM)Heywood Jahblome Wrote:  This is untrue.

Libertarians favor economic regulations or government involvement in the market that eliminates externalities.

This is untrue.

Libertarians are divided into two camps.

A) Minarchists: Individuals who believe the government should be limited to preventing aggression, theft, breach of contract and fraud.

B) Anarchists: Individuals that advocate government's complete elimination as a political system.

Neither one describes any government regulation pertaining to currency regulation, market fairness, or wealth distribution. Libertarianism is anarcho-capitalism manifested in a pseudo-intellectual name. Unless you want to argue that you are a Libertarian Socialist (which is still unrealistic and unsustainable), I am absolutely correct. If you are a libertarian who supports the minimum wage, you are supporting a concept that is fundamentally contradictory to your childish socio-economic ideology.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Logica Humano's post
05-03-2014, 10:28 AM
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(05-03-2014 09:19 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Libertarians are divided into two camps.

I've found, rather, that if you ask three self-identified "libertarians" what they believe you'll get four different ideologies.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like cjlr's post
05-03-2014, 10:57 AM
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(05-03-2014 10:28 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(05-03-2014 09:19 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Libertarians are divided into two camps.

I've found, rather, that if you ask three self-identified "libertarians" what they believe you'll get four different ideologies.

I have found that most libertarians actually favor government involvement whenever they like a law and dislike government involvement whenever they dislike the law.
Every "libertarian" I have met in real life is for the death penalty, against abortion, and against a gay marriage. Hmmm Consider

Swing with me a while, we can listen to the birds call, we can keep each other warm.
Swing with me forever, we can count up every flower, we can weather every storm.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 11:04 AM
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(05-03-2014 10:28 AM)cjlr Wrote:  
(05-03-2014 09:19 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Libertarians are divided into two camps.

I've found, rather, that if you ask three self-identified "libertarians" what they believe you'll get four different ideologies.


Or you'll just get frankksj. And everyone loves a good Frankksj ideology. Thumbsup

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Cathym112's post
05-03-2014, 11:08 AM (This post was last modified: 05-03-2014 11:12 AM by Logica Humano.)
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(05-03-2014 10:28 AM)cjlr Wrote:  I've found, rather, that if you ask three self-identified "libertarians" what they believe you'll get four different ideologies.

As I have said, individuals can harbor any contradictory beliefs they want. Libertarians are free to subscribe to the idea of a government that regulates the economy. The two camps I defined are real, not made up. Like any ideology, it is a gradient. Those two camps, however, are not inclusive of a strong government (which would be a government that regulates wages).

So, case in point, no. Libertarianism is not for you if you favor a stronger minimum wage.

(05-03-2014 10:57 AM)LostandInsecure Wrote:  I have found that most libertarians actually favor government involvement whenever they like a law and dislike government involvement whenever they dislike the law.
Every "libertarian" I have met in real life is for the death penalty, against abortion, and against a gay marriage. Hmmm Consider

I have found that most libertarians favor less government and more private enterprise under the guise of some ignorant pipe-dream that preaches a combination of socio-economic darwinism and dependency on corporate greed. It is a form of political woo that claims private industry will benefit the people, no strings attached. It is demonstrably false; but, they still have at it. It is insanity -- which is why I refuse to seriously engage frankksj.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Logica Humano's post
05-03-2014, 11:13 AM
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(04-03-2014 02:40 PM)War Horse Wrote:  
(04-03-2014 02:12 PM)Cathym112 Wrote:  War, absolutely. Its unfair to say it was "stolen" from you though. SS is not an investment. Its not your money. Its a ponzi scheme.

http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3677

"The claim behind these critiques is clear: federal spending on entitlements and other mandatory programs through which individuals receive benefits is promoting laziness, creating a dependent class of Americans who are losing the desire to work and would rather collect government benefits than find a job.
Such beliefs are starkly at odds with the basic facts regarding social programs, the analysis finds. Federal budget and Census data show that, in 2010, 91 percentof the benefit dollars from entitlement and other mandatory programs went to the elderly (people 65 and over), the seriously disabled, and members of working households. People who are neither elderly nor disabled — and do not live in a working household — received only 9 percent of the benefits.
[Image: 2-10-12bud-f1.jpg]

We can go back and forth citing references, but the money was not ever meant to be taken by politicians to prop up their sweetheart deals.

They took the money out of my paycheck, over which I had no control, and were suppose to invest it in future 'help' with retirement. Had I been able to invest the money myself, I would have no one to blame but myself as to the outcome.

But thats not the case, is it?

Think of all the people that paid into SS and died before ever collecting one red cent... the system was working great untill the surplus money in the fund got to much for the greedy fucks in Washington to keep their hands of off.

Entitlement my ass... they took my money for years and years, used it for their pleasure and now say, oops, to bad, none left for you.

Fuck that train of thought. Assholes are trying to hurt the very people that can least afford it, and they know that there wont be much of a fight when it comes to grandmas living on a can of dog food a day. Fuck that shit, I paid my dues, and now its their turn to step up to the plate. Angry

War - SS was never an investment. It was always a ponzi scheme. Well, worse than one, since you were compelled to participate in it. The recipients of benefits from SS always relied on the previous generation's payments into the system.
Those do not collect anything (through early death) pales in comparison to the amount of people that outlive their contribution.

The mistake of the government was implying to its citizens when it established the program in 1935, was that "don't worry...we'll take care of you" and declined to postulate that sustained complete reliance on SS for income was unsustainable. No one considered the generational population gaps. There hasn't been a "baby boom" in more than 60 years. On the contrary, families are getting smaller and smaller, which means there just isn't enough people on the bottom pyramid to support the top. As the baby boomers die off, and there is less strain on the system, there will probably be some improvement.

I'm not saying you aren't deserving of help. Not at all. We are a society that tries - although can fail miserably - to take care of our old and our sick. I'm just pointing out that rallying against the poor is a little like pissing and moaning about a crack in the bottom of your boat when there is a huge gaping hole in the side of it. Welfare is a drop in the bucket of entitlement spending.

A little rudeness and disrespect can elevate a meaningless interaction to a battle of wills and add drama to an otherwise dull day - Bill Watterson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 11:22 AM
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(05-03-2014 11:13 AM)Cathym112 Wrote:  War - SS was never an investment. It was always a ponzi scheme. Well, worse than one, since you were compelled to participate in it. The recipients of benefits from SS always relied on the previous generation's payments into the system.
Those do not collect anything (through early death) pales in comparison to the amount of people that outlive their contribution.

The mistake of the government was implying to its citizens when it established the program in 1935, was that "don't worry...we'll take care of you" and declined to postulate that sustained complete reliance on SS for income was unsustainable. No one considered the generational population gaps. There hasn't been a "baby boom" in more than 60 years. On the contrary, families are getting smaller and smaller, which means there just isn't enough people on the bottom pyramid to support the top. As the baby boomers die off, and there is less strain on the system, there will probably be some improvement.

I'm not saying you aren't deserving of help. Not at all. We are a society that tries - although can fail miserably - to take care of our old and our sick. I'm just pointing out that rallying against the poor is a little like pissing and moaning about a crack in the bottom of your boat when there is a huge gaping hole in the side of it. Welfare is a drop in the bucket of entitlement spending.

Actually, that is not entirely accurate -- though you are right that the system should be improved. Current generations could sustain social security if they were payed wages equal to the amount of inflation. Sadly, wages have been stagnant since the 1980s.

[Image: Untitled-2.png?_subject_uid=322943157&am...Y7Dzq4lJog]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
05-03-2014, 11:35 AM
RE: Why do we treat poor people like children?
(05-03-2014 09:19 AM)Logica Humano Wrote:  Libertarians are divided into two camps.

A) Minarchists: Individuals who believe the government should be limited to preventing aggression, theft, breach of contract and fraud.

B) Anarchists: Individuals that advocate government's complete elimination as a political system.

C) classical liberalism

Rolleyes

Softly, softly, catchee monkey.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: