I Love how the left Talks about Working Poor!

[Lonestar_logic]

No one is stopping me they are making it harder...Geez like regulations make it harder....Damn you are being slow....By the way insulting a people cause of their financial situation is hate...Sorry but thats the way i see it.

How do regulations keep you from getting a job and/or excelling at your job.


There are a lot of jobs out there to be had.

I said like regulations you simpleton.... I was Making a comparison

I know what you said dumbass, my question was..... how?

How do regulations make it harder for you to succeed?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Redistribution only gives power to the elite you retard it does nothing to help the poor but keep them poor.

So providing a basic education to all American children regardless of their family's ability to pay is what's keeping poor kids in poverty when they grow up.

What's the better plan?

The better plan is to learn not to twist words and phrases to support a falsehood. Income redistribution doesn't have a damn thing to do with paying for government public services and/or public infrastructure. It has to do with taking from one citizen who has wealth, and giving it to another citizen who does not.

BTW, our public education system is not providing a basic education to all American children, and that is a goodly share of our current problems. But, the education unions contribute large sums to Democrats, and as long as Democrats have political power, no one is going to upset that applecart.

The conservative position is to tie the public education funds to the individual child, and let him/her get the best education available in his/her area.

Public education is a redistribution of wealth. It's taking money from some people to pay for the education of other people who can't otherwise afford it.

And if you think a voucher system in public education is not redistribution of wealth, you are wrong. That is still taking money from the haves to pay for the education of the have-nots who can't otherwise afford it.

Therefore, unless you are unequivocally opposed to public education, then you support redistribution of wealth to some extent,

which makes you totally in agreement with the President on what he said in this video.

 

[NYcarbineer]

So providing a basic education to all American children regardless of their family's ability to pay is what's keeping poor kids in poverty when they grow up.

What's the better plan?

The better plan is to learn not to twist words and phrases to support a falsehood. Income redistribution doesn't have a damn thing to do with paying for government public services and/or public infrastructure. It has to do with taking from one citizen who has wealth, and giving it to another citizen who does not.

BTW, our public education system is not providing a basic education to all American children, and that is a goodly share of our current problems. But, the education unions contribute large sums to Democrats, and as long as Democrats have political power, no one is going to upset that applecart.

The conservative position is to tie the public education funds to the individual child, and let him/her get the best education available in his/her area.

You are making way to much sense to get a interactive discussion from the radical lefties on this board. The instant you talk about doing the best with what you have to work with they are confused and angry!

Public education is redistribution of wealth. Period. Would you end it, because you're opposed to the redistribution of wealth? Would you prefer a system where the only children who got a basic education were those whose parents could afford to foot the bill in its entirety?

 

[peach174]

The way that programs are done by Dem's is that it keeps people on those programs and is very hard to get off of them. The way they set them up, keeps you on the program and never helps you get out of the situation you are in. That is socialism.
Repubs want to help them get out of their situations and off government assistance. A hand up, not a hand out. That's freedom, not government control.
Vouchers for children have worked very well and has got them into better schools and then into good colleges.
Romney wants to do the vouchers. Dem's are against it because it does not keep the teacher's unions in power.

 

[peach174]

The better plan is to learn not to twist words and phrases to support a falsehood. Income redistribution doesn't have a damn thing to do with paying for government public services and/or public infrastructure. It has to do with taking from one citizen who has wealth, and giving it to another citizen who does not.

BTW, our public education system is not providing a basic education to all American children, and that is a goodly share of our current problems. But, the education unions contribute large sums to Democrats, and as long as Democrats have political power, no one is going to upset that applecart.

The conservative position is to tie the public education funds to the individual child, and let him/her get the best education available in his/her area.

You are making way to much sense to get a interactive discussion from the radical lefties on this board. The instant you talk about doing the best with what you have to work with they are confused and angry!

Public education is redistribution of wealth. Period. Would you end it, because you're opposed to the redistribution of wealth? Would you prefer a system where the only children who got a basic education were those whose parents could afford to foot the bill in its entirety?

No it isn't.
Public education is for the general welfare of the nation. It helps everyone in the Nation.
Redistribution of wealth is taking from haves, for programs for the have nots and chooses which individual groups, that government picks and chooses and keeps that party in power.
It does not help the individuals at all.