CDZ Should Government Benefits be Earned By Able-Bodied Adults?

[WelfareQueen]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

 

[Foxfyre]

Repeating the topic question:

Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?​

In my never to be considered humble opinion, the only valid and/or legal government benefits that can be earned are via those who work doing the essential functions of government. And those should be entitled only to benefits earned while working and should not extend beyond a person's tenure working for government. Toward that end, those working in government should contribute to their own retirement and health plans, etc. and that should not be a responsibility of the taxpayer.

And yes, it is immoral for the government to forcibly take property from those who earned it and give it to those who did not earn it. In any other scenario, we would call that theft.

A moral people does take care of the helpless among us, but the only moral way that is done is via mutually agreed social contract or voluntary charity.

 

[PoliticalChic]

1. No.
There is no provision in the Constitution for the federal government using the general fisc for charity.
States can.

2. The abject failure of the Liberal welfare scam proves that there is actually an ulterior motive for the largesse.......to accrue votes.

a. The cause for the system is illusory.
The classic understanding of poverty....no home, no heat, no food......is virtually unknown in America.


3. Marvin Olasky, in "The Tragedy of American Compassion," explains that in earlier times, human needs were taken care of by other human beings-not by bureaucracies. The important difference was that the latter may take care of food and shelter...but the former also dealt with the human spirit and behavior.

Welfare programs today, are Liberal….conservatives don’t look for material solutions, but understand that changing values is what solves the problem of poverty..


4. Well, how was "welfare" formerly handled? Noted in the minutes of the Fairfield, Connecticut town council meeting: "April 16, 1673, Seriant Squire and Sam moorhouse [agreed] to Take care of Roger knaps family in this time of their great weaknes...."
"Heritage of American Social Work: Readings in Its Philosophical and Institutional Development," by Ralph Pumphrey and W. Muriel Pumphrey, p.22.

5. November, 1753, from the Chelmsford, Massachusetts town meeting: "payment to Mr. W. Parker for takng one Joanna Cory, a poor child of John Cory, deceased, and to take caree of her while [until] 18 years old."
See The Social Service Review XI (September 1937), p. 452.

6. The Scots' Charitable Society, organized in 1684, "open[ed] the bowells of our compassion" to widows like Mrs. Stewart, who had "lost the use of her left arm" and whose husband was "Wash'd Overboard in a Storm."
Pumphrey, Op.Cit., p. 29.



7. And here is the major difference between current efforts and the earlier: charity was not handed out indiscriminately- "no prophane or diselut person, or openly scandelous shall have any pairt or portione herein."

The able-bodied were expected to find work,and if they chose not to, well....it was considered perfectly appropriate to press them to change their mind.
Olasky, "The Tragedy of American Compassion," chapter one.

 

[Josf]

There are at least two kinds of criminals.

1. Obvious criminals whose crimes are out in the open instead of their crimes effectively hidden behind lies.

2. Criminals whose crimes are covered up with effective lies.

When someone perpetrates the crime of theft, out in the open, the criminal is called a thief, out in the open, in front of God and everyone.

When a criminal gets away with covering up the crime of theft: the actual crime is said to be something other than theft. I'm pretty sure that none of the true Christians are going to claim that God is fooled when the criminals claim that their crimes of their theft are taxes, not theft, because they say so, and because you had better not say otherwise, or you will be taxed even more for failing to obey the order to pay without question.

"The validity of the public debt of the United States, authorized by law, including debts incurred for payment of pensions and bounties for services in suppressing insurrection or rebellion, shall not be questioned."

Government is a duty to each other to help each other in defense of the innocent victims from the guilty criminals. Crime is precisely what it is in time and place every time a guilty minded criminal, with malice aforethought, targets an innocent victim, and then perpetrates that injury done to that victim, including the crime of covering up crimes under the color of law. I don't know why people volunteer to be fools, it makes little cents.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Repeating the topic question:

Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?​

In my never to be considered humble opinion, the only valid and/or legal government benefits that can be earned are via those who work doing the essential functions of government. And those should be entitled only to benefits earned while working and should not extend beyond a person's tenure working for government. Toward that end, those working in government should contribute to their own retirement and health plans, etc. and that should not be a responsibility of the taxpayer.

And yes, it is immoral for the government to forcibly take property from those who earned it and give it to those who did not earn it. In any other scenario, we would call that theft.

A moral people does take care of the helpless among us, but the only moral way that is done is via mutually agreed social contract or voluntary charity.

Thank you. I agree. The moral argument is key, because many will say....

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Of course, Karl Marx made that statement and it is at the heart of current social justice movement in America. Is it moral to take from those with ability and a work ethic and give to those without ability or a work ethic?

As to your point about the truly needy.....I also feel strongly that those who are truly unable to work or have severe disabilities need to be helped by a compassionate society (e.g. those with Downs Syndrome as an example).

But I will say, when I worked for County Government many years ago there was a center for Mentally Disabled folks where they worked. I can say almost without except the MR folks I talked to were very proud of their work and efforts to be productive. I think a basic human need is to be productive. I believe it is immoral when Government disempowers people so that they are incentivized to be less productive.

 

[DarkFury]

Charity is not charity when it is forced.
Forced charity breeds bad feelings.
Toss in third party mis-management {government} and you are just looking for a fight.

 

[Foxfyre]

Repeating the topic question:

Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?​

In my never to be considered humble opinion, the only valid and/or legal government benefits that can be earned are via those who work doing the essential functions of government. And those should be entitled only to benefits earned while working and should not extend beyond a person's tenure working for government. Toward that end, those working in government should contribute to their own retirement and health plans, etc. and that should not be a responsibility of the taxpayer.

And yes, it is immoral for the government to forcibly take property from those who earned it and give it to those who did not earn it. In any other scenario, we would call that theft.

A moral people does take care of the helpless among us, but the only moral way that is done is via mutually agreed social contract or voluntary charity.

Thank you. I agree. The moral argument is key, because many will say....

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Of course, Karl Marx made that statement and it is at the heart of current social justice movement in America. Is it moral to take from those with ability and a work ethic and give to those without ability or a work ethic?

As to your point about the truly needy.....I also feel strongly that those who are truly unable to work or have severe disabilities need to be helped by a compassionate society (e.g. those with Downs Syndrome as an example).

But I will say, when I worked for County Government many years ago there was a center for Mentally Disabled folks where they worked. I can say almost without except the MR folks I talked to were very proud of their work and efforts to be productive. I think a basic human need is to be productive. I believe it is immoral when Government disempowers people so that they are incentivized to be less productive.

I was blessed with position and opportunity to be one of the leaders to put together a domestic violence association years ago. We conducted a county wide survey of all persons who would possibly be involved in such cases--medical, law enforcement, etc.--to determine the scope of the problem. The results were significant.

We then solicited private donations but also went to the city and county where, after a number of widely publicized and very public hearings, we were granted land with rent free and tax free status and support of civil servants including the police so long as it was used for the purpose of ministering to victims of domestic violence. After a couple of years of harboring victims in private homes we were able to construct and professionally staff a permanent shelter.

We had full community approval and support including many unpaid volunteers but also ready and willing assistance from the police, the court system, and the medical community. It was a beautiful blend of social contract utilizing government services and private involvement to take care of some of the most helpless among us. It was effective, efficient, and dealt with all aspects of the problem including getting help for the offenders as well as protection for the victims.

In my opinion, that is how a moral society takes care of those unable to take care of themselves. Big expensive authoritarian one-size-fits-all government programs confiscate precious resources, siphon off huge chunks of them to feed an ever growing bureaucracy, and accomplishes little for those they are supposed to help. Plus they create permanent dependencies where our program was organized so that it did not.

American government was originally designed to enable the people, not take the place of what the people should be doing for themselves and others.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

 

[WelfareQueen]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

There are many things the Government spends money on that I disagree with....including many of the things you listed above.

And I believe I made a clear distinction when I said able-bodied adults. Able-bodied adults do not include children. They do not include those who are mentally disabled as I have stated. And they do not include the elderly who paid into social security.

 

[aaronleland]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

Don't forget the banks who were "too big to fail" whose CEOs are still collecting millions in salaries each year. I know janitors who are better at scrubbing toilets than they are at running a bank, but they earned that money.

 

[WelfareQueen]

Repeating the topic question:

Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?​

In my never to be considered humble opinion, the only valid and/or legal government benefits that can be earned are via those who work doing the essential functions of government. And those should be entitled only to benefits earned while working and should not extend beyond a person's tenure working for government. Toward that end, those working in government should contribute to their own retirement and health plans, etc. and that should not be a responsibility of the taxpayer.

And yes, it is immoral for the government to forcibly take property from those who earned it and give it to those who did not earn it. In any other scenario, we would call that theft.

A moral people does take care of the helpless among us, but the only moral way that is done is via mutually agreed social contract or voluntary charity.

Thank you. I agree. The moral argument is key, because many will say....

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Of course, Karl Marx made that statement and it is at the heart of current social justice movement in America. Is it moral to take from those with ability and a work ethic and give to those without ability or a work ethic?

As to your point about the truly needy.....I also feel strongly that those who are truly unable to work or have severe disabilities need to be helped by a compassionate society (e.g. those with Downs Syndrome as an example).

But I will say, when I worked for County Government many years ago there was a center for Mentally Disabled folks where they worked. I can say almost without except the MR folks I talked to were very proud of their work and efforts to be productive. I think a basic human need is to be productive. I believe it is immoral when Government disempowers people so that they are incentivized to be less productive.

I was blessed with position and opportunity to be a one of the leaders in putting together a domestic violence association years ago. We conducted a county wide survey of all persons who would possibly be involved in such cases--medical, law enforcement, etc.--to determine the scope of the problem. The results were significant.

We then solicited private donations but also went to the city and county where, after a number of widely publicized and very public hearings, we were granted land with rent free and tax free status and support of civil servants including the police so long as it was used for the purpose of ministering to victims of domestic violence. After a couple of years of harboring victims in private homes we were able to construct and professionally staff a permanent shelter.

We had full community approval and support including many unpaid volunteers but also ready and willing assistance from the police, the court system, and the medical community. It was a beautiful blend of social contract utilizing government services and private involvement to take care of some of the most helpless among us. It was effective, efficient, and dealt with all aspects of the problem including getting help for the offenders as well as protection for the victims.

In my opinion, that is how a moral society takes care of those unable to take care of themselves. Big expensive authoritarian one-size-fits-all government programs confiscate precious resources, siphon off huge chunks of them to feed an ever growing bureaucracy, and accomplishes little for those they are supposed to help. Plus they create permanent dependencies where our program was organized so that it did not.

American government was originally designed to enable the people, not take the place of what the people should be doing for themselves.

I worked for years with victims of domestic violence....disabled vets....sexually or physically abused adults and children. You are spot on imho.

The Government and its bureaucrats don't know much about helping those genuinely in need. The community approach you mentioned is really the only way to go. Without community buy-in all programs will ultimately fail. The Government throwing trillions of dollars in a 50 year War on Poverty is a classic example.

 

[WelfareQueen]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

Don't forget the banks who were "too big to fail" whose CEOs are still collecting millions in salaries each year. I know janitors who are better at scrubbing toilets than they are at running a bank, but they earned that money.

Off topic, but I agree. But Obama supported the bail outs. So did Bush. I would say both sides are equally to blame.

 

[midcan5]

WelfareQueen, That depends on which group of able bodied Americans you are asking about? Our representatives do little for the pay and benefits they receive. Are they the people you are asking about? Wealthy people in America do little or nothing and yet benefit from our national resources, are they the people you are asking about? Are you asking about the sickly and elderly are they the people? Or children and the handicapped, are they the people you are asking about? But probably you are asking only because you are a mindless ideologue who lives in assumptions and other BS that keeps your empty head full of negative nonsense. Hate and pessimism rule you people, get a life and maybe you'll stop asking stupid questions based on a view of the world that only the mindless possess.

Bread Winner Making Babies Welfare Queens US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

"Do not waste your time on Social Questions. What is the matter with the poor is Poverty; what is the matter with the rich is Uselessness." George Bernard Shaw

"We have two American flags always: one for the rich and one for the poor. When the rich fly it means that things are under control; when the poor fly it means danger, revolution, anarchy." Henry Miller

 

[Foxfyre]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

You actually ask a valid question. We should all be questioning the motives of money being spent as you describe in those 10 examples and those we elect to lead us should be required to offer very clear and precise answers of why such expenditures are justified. And if they cannot clearly and precisely justify them, they should be required to cease and desist.

But that is actually a separate topic from what WQ offers in this thread. Think of the syndrome of two wrongs don't make a right. One type of wrong does not justify authorizing a different wrong just because one involves Americans and the other does not.

 

[WelfareQueen]

WelfareQueen, That depends on which group of able bodied Americans you are asking about? Our representatives do little for the pay and benefits they receive. Are they the people you are asking about? Wealthy people in America do little or nothing and yet benefit from our national resources, are they the people you are asking about? Are you asking about the sickly and elderly are they the people? Or children and the handicapped, are they the people you are asking about? But probably you are asking only because you are a mindless ideologue who lives in assumptions and other BS that keeps your empty head full of negative nonsense. Hate and pessimism rule you people, get a life and maybe you'll stop asking stupid questions based on a view of the world that only the mindless possess.

Bread Winner Making Babies Welfare Queens US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

"Do not waste your time on Social Questions. What is the matter with the poor is Poverty; what is the matter with the rich is Uselessness." George Bernard Shaw

"We have two American flags always: one for the rich and one for the poor. When the rich fly it means that things are under control; when the poor fly it means danger, revolution, anarchy." Henry Miller[/QUOTE\


You said the following: "Wealthy people in America do little or nothing."


One thing wealthy people do is make money. Making money is good. To demonize successful people by saying "they do little or nothing," is a false argument.

Are you not entitled to the money you have earned? So why are not people that make more money than you?

You said the following: "Wealthy people in America do little or nothing."

One thing wealthy people do is make money. Making money is good. To demonize successful people by saying "they do little or nothing," is a false argument.

Are you not entitled to the money you have earned? So why are not people that make more money than you?

 

[aaronleland]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

Don't forget the banks who were "too big to fail" whose CEOs are still collecting millions in salaries each year. I know janitors who are better at scrubbing toilets than they are at running a bank, but they earned that money.

Off topic, but I agree. But Obama supported the bail outs. So did Bush. I would say both sides are equally to blame.

Both sides are equally to blame for most of the things Sonny listed, but we are focused on whether or not lower/middle class citizens receive benefits.

Of course there are many people receiving government benefits who don't deserve them, but I don't think there's any easy yes or no answer to your question. How do we differentiate between those who have earned government benefits, and those who haven't?

I was raised by a single mother with five children who worked all her life. We received food stamps, and I'm sure most people would agree she deserved them. But how do we differentiate between people like her, and people who are playing the system for a free ride?

I don't pretend to know the answer.

 

[Sonny Clark]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

There are many things the Government spends money on that I disagree with....including many of the things you listed above.

And I believe I made a clear distinction when I said able-bodied adults. Able-bodied adults do not include children. They do not include those who are mentally disabled as I have stated. And they do not include the elderly who paid into social security.

Children are NOT abled bodied? The mentally challenged are NOT abled bodied? And, the elderly who are abled bodied should not have to earn their assistance? So, you disagree with a lot of spending, but you find helping American citizens the most disgusting of all? Do you have plans to complain about the spending of tax dollars on the items I listed, or are going to stop with just complaining about American citizens receiving some form of government assistance? Helping the less fortunate, the poor, and the needy is what really disgust you the most? Out of all the waste and abuse of tax dollars, government assistance for American citizens really gets you fired up enough to post a piece about it?

 

[Sonny Clark]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

Don't forget the banks who were "too big to fail" whose CEOs are still collecting millions in salaries each year. I know janitors who are better at scrubbing toilets than they are at running a bank, but they earned that money.

You're correct, I did not mention the financial institutions. My bad.

 

[WelfareQueen]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

Don't forget the banks who were "too big to fail" whose CEOs are still collecting millions in salaries each year. I know janitors who are better at scrubbing toilets than they are at running a bank, but they earned that money.

Off topic, but I agree. But Obama supported the bail outs. So did Bush. I would say both sides are equally to blame.

Both sides are equally to blame for most of the things Sonny listed, but we are focused on whether or not lower/middle class citizens receive benefits.

Of course there are many people receiving government benefits who don't deserve them, but I don't think there's any easy yes or no answer to your question. How do we differentiate between those who have earned government benefits, and those who haven't?

I was raised by a single mother with five children who worked all her life. We received food stamps, and I'm sure most people would agree she deserved them. But how do we differentiate between people like her, and people who are playing the system for a free ride?

I don't pretend to know the answer.

A very fair answer imho. But your Mom is an example of why benefits should exist.

My ex-wife used to work in the 'hood as a therapist....(we both did). So many mothers told her they did not work because they would lose their TANF benefits.

They also referred to the father's of their children as "my friend." Why you ask.....

Because if a father was identified he would be responsible for child support, and again the Mom would lose her TANF check.

Aaron...when the system is set up in such a way then no one wins.

 

[WelfareQueen]

The question of distribution of benefits goes to the heart of our American System right now.

President Obama has talked openly about "spreading the wealth around." Basically, his vision of social justice is to take money from those who have earned it....and then giving that money to those who have not earned it....essentially a vast redistribution of wealth where the Government gets to decide who the winners and loser are.

So this begs the question: Should Government benefits be earned?

Is it moral for the Government to take wealth from those who have earned it....and then redistribute that wealth to millions of able-bodied adults who have not earned it?

What is our social obligation (it any) to give wealth to those who have not earned it?

And keep in mind....if you have not worked for something....you have earned nothing....that point cannot be argued.

All clean debate rules apply. No ad hominem attacks. No profanity. No off topic. Any posts of that nature will not be tolerated.

For those of you who support Obama's vision of social justice....please explain why logically and coherently. For those of you who do not....the same rules apply. I appreciate the debate and input.

Sherry Foxfyre rightwinger rdean PoliticalChic ClosedCaption

Serious Questions:

(1) When we build mosques on foreign soil, is that money earned by the ones getting the mosques?
(2) When we supply weapons to drug lords and terrorists, do they earn the money to pay for them?
(3) When we pay bribes to North Korea and Iran, do they earn the money we give them?
(4) When we give enormous subsidies to rich farmers and big oil, do they earn that money?
(5) When we pay for the care and support of illegal immigrants, do they earn that money?
(6) When we send untold $Billions in the name of foreign aid to foreign governments, do they earn that money?
(7) When we subsidize Brazilian corn crops and protect the opium crops in Afghanistan, do they earn that money?
(8) When we pay ridiculous perks and benefits to members of Congress, do they earn that money?
(9) When we pay for Mrs. Obama's lavish vacations and White House parties, does she earn that money?
(10) When we award no-bid contracts to corporations such as Halliburton, is that money earned?

So, American CITIZENS who receive some form of government assistance due to various reasons, should be forced to earn what they get from our government? In other words, the mentally challenged, the little children, and the elderly, should have to work for their assistance as long as they're "abled bodied"?

And, what do you have to say about your hard earned tax dollars spent on the 10 items that I have listed above? Are you opposed to the items I listed, the same as you're opposed to those receiving some form of government assistance getting "free" money and benefits?

There are many things the Government spends money on that I disagree with....including many of the things you listed above.

And I believe I made a clear distinction when I said able-bodied adults. Able-bodied adults do not include children. They do not include those who are mentally disabled as I have stated. And they do not include the elderly who paid into social security.

Children are NOT abled bodied? The mentally challenged are NOT abled bodied? And, the elderly who are abled bodied should not have to earn their assistance? So, you disagree with a lot of spending, but you find helping American citizens the most disgusting of all? Do you have plans to complain about the spending of tax dollars on the items I listed, or are going to stop with just complaining about American citizens receiving some form of government assistance? Helping the less fortunate, the poor, and the needy is what really disgust you the most? Out of all the waste and abuse of tax dollars, government assistance for American citizens really gets you fired up enough to post a piece about it?

I have explained able-bodied adult multiple times. It is extremely clear.

If you would like to start another thread about wasteful Government spending please feel free....but here....you are off topic.