Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
I am a Democrat because I believe in helping those in need. All of us, you and I, have an obligation to those less fortunate. You go first, okay? I'm a little short this week.WHO GIVES A SHIT if charity is forced or not? People need help out there. You see, the thing with Liberals is... they think that it should be open ended and nothing should be given back in return(like performing work for it
Man oh man, ain't them liberals just saintly. Their idea of GIVING is using the Federal Government to FORCE others to do their giving FOR THEM. Then they can sit around and CROW about how they CARE MORE. We people WHO WORK are suppose to just do it to take care of OUR FAMILIES and everybody else who is just to damn lazy to go out and get a friggen job. But if we balk at that we are HEARTLESS.
Compared to other countries our poor is rich. When do you see flat screen TV is Africa or computers. We are a bunch of entitled people who need to change and not everything for you. Provide for your families dont sit on your Arse and expect the government to take care of you.. There are things the people can do like farm the lands and let the illegals go back home. America has become one spoiled brat!!
Uh huh.Job bills, education grants and subsidies, targeted tax cuts, job corp, head start, free pubic education to all, pubic supported universities and colleges, internships, vista and Americorp, affirmative Action, GI bill, welfare to work etc. are all means to "teach a man to fish" and all under attack by 'conservatives'.
Q. Why are 'conservatives' myopic?
A. 'Cause greed, hate, fear and bias inhibit rational thought.
The GI Bill?
History
On June 22, 1944, President Franklin D. Roosevelt signed into law the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944, commonly known as the G.I. Bill of Rights. By the time the original G.I. Bill ended in July 1956, 7.8 million World War II veterans had participated in an education or training program and 2.4 million veterans had home loans backed by the Veterans' Administration (VA). Today, the legacy of the original G.I. Bill lives on in the Montgomery G.I. Bill.
Harry W. Colmery, a World War I veteran and the former Republican National Committee chairman, wrote the first draft of the G.I. Bill.[1][2] He reportedly jotted down his ideas on stationery and a napkin at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, DC.[2] U.S. Senator Ernest McFarland was actively involved in the bill's passage and is known, with Warren Atherton, as one of the "fathers of the G.I. Bill." One might then term Edith Nourse Rogers, R-Mass., who helped write and who co-sponsored the legislation, as the "mother of the G.I. Bill".[citation needed] Like Colmery, her contribution to writing and passing this legislation has been obscured by time.[3]
Y'know, mindlessly repeating "liberal good, conservative bad" isn't really rational thought.
You're such a moron, do you really think (lol, of course not) that my post targeted all Republicans? Note the single quotes around the word conservative, it is significant.
Do pay attention, you ignorant, arrogant ass.That aside, do you doubt that the GI Bill taught vets to 'fish'? Or that your post discredited the essence of my post? Or that small business loans aide entrepreneurs, or that you and the other proud and loud members of the echo chamber area anything but willfully ignorant bigots?
And you have every right to feel good about yourself for being generous with other people's money.Unbelievable...The world could be falling apart and we sit here and point fingers and argue semantics.
WHO GIVES A SHIT if charity is forced or not? People need help out there. You see, the thing with Liberals is... they think that it should be open ended and nothing should be given back in return(like performing work for it), the problem with Conservatives is THEY want the power and the glory of saying "Look at me!, I give to charity!, I'm important... plus, I get to pick and choose who I give it to, I get to decided how much(if anything at at all) I give.
First.. on the liberal side... we are naive suckers. I'll admit it. However, I want to teach them to fish... That's why I want a working version of welfare like the CCC. Have them earn their money.
Ok.. Conservatives. You people are genuinely fucked up.. not naive.. but hateful little pricks. The whole reason you are railing against welfare is that you don't want to help... period. Sure.. you can make your claim that you do this and you do that.. Fuck it.. I don't believe you. How can I do that? Simple, I'll use the same principles you do when you talk about Democrats and liberals... none.
I give a shit!
You want to waste money? Waste your own and leave mine the hell alone!
Fact is private charities can do more with less money than the government can and be a hell of a lot more successful.
Private charities have been more successful than government welfare for several reasons. First, private charities are able to individualize their approach to the circumstances of poor people in ways that governments can never do. Government regulations must be designed to treat all similarly situated recipients alike. Glenn C. Loury of Boston University explains the difference between welfare and private charities on that point. "Because citizens have due process rights which cannot be fully abrogated . . . public judgments must be made in a manner that can be defended after the fact, sometimes even in court." The result is that most government programs rely on the simple provision of cash or other goods and services without any attempt to differentiate between the needs of recipients.
Take, for example, the case of a poor person who has a job offer. But she can't get to the job because her car battery is dead. A government welfare program can do nothing but tell her to wait two weeks until her welfare check arrives. Of course, by that time the job will be gone. A private charity can simply go out and buy a car battery (or even jump-start the dead battery).
Good for you. You have every right as an American to be greedy, selfish, intolerant and callous.
It's funny that liberals feel qualified to decide what everyone's best interests are.I'm glad the Repubs/Party of Godare saddled w/ their 'base' many of which are poor and remain that way by voting against their own interests
The War on Poverty is a quagmire. There's no exit strategy.So the War on Poverty is another Progressive Epic Fail.
Wow. Never saw that coming
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him how to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.
So you admit welfare is wrong?
The War on Poverty is a quagmire. There's no exit strategy.So the War on Poverty is another Progressive Epic Fail.
Wow. Never saw that coming
The War on Poverty is a quagmire. There's no exit strategy.So the War on Poverty is another Progressive Epic Fail.
Wow. Never saw that coming
Ditto for the War on Drugs and the War on Terrorism.
No exit strategy and no hope of accomplishing victory as long as humans remain on this earth.
Immie
If the War on Poverty were actually about combating poverty, that would be true.The War on Poverty is a quagmire. There's no exit strategy.So the War on Poverty is another Progressive Epic Fail.
Wow. Never saw that coming
Ditto for the War on Drugs and the War on Terrorism.
No exit strategy and no hope of accomplishing victory as long as humans remain on this earth.
Immie
The War on Poverty is a quagmire. There's no exit strategy.
Ditto for the War on Drugs and the War on Terrorism.
No exit strategy and no hope of accomplishing victory as long as humans remain on this earth.
Immie
I disagree.
We will never eliminate terrorism seeing as with some, acting as a terrorist comes from within.
However, we can continue our war on organized terrorism...and minimize its impact.
If the War on Poverty were actually about combating poverty, that would be true.The War on Poverty is a quagmire. There's no exit strategy.
Ditto for the War on Drugs and the War on Terrorism.
No exit strategy and no hope of accomplishing victory as long as humans remain on this earth.
Immie
But it's not. It's about keeping people dependent on government and dutifully pulling the D lever. In that, it's been a great success.
Its about keeping children from not getting enough nutrition so that they can be healthy adults and cost us less in medical over their lifetimes.
You people just dont understand long term thinking
Ditto for the War on Drugs and the War on Terrorism.
No exit strategy and no hope of accomplishing victory as long as humans remain on this earth.
Immie
I disagree.
We will never eliminate terrorism seeing as with some, acting as a terrorist comes from within.
However, we can continue our war on organized terrorism...and minimize its impact.
I do not disagree with your statement, but we will never eliminate terrorism and even if we should be able to minimize it, we will never know that five minutes from now the next attack will take place. Thus the War on Terrorism has no hope of being won.
Immie
30 Million in Poverty Aren't as Poor as You Think, Says Heritage Foundation
Although the public equates poverty with physical deprivation, the overwhelming majority of poor households do not experience any form of physical deprivation. Some 70 percent of poor households report that during the course of the past year, they were able to meet “all essential expenses,” including mortgage, rent, utility bills, and important medical care.
In their footnotes, the Heritage Foundation uses studies that say things like the following. I suspect they hope people won't read the "footnotes". "Feeding America estimated that 10.3 million households used food pantries in 2009, but this estimate is not scientific and is not based on a representative sample of the U.S. population. The report uses complex and subjective estimation techniques, which include arbitrarily adjusting some results upward." (do all right wing sites have to play these shenanigans?)
What is Poverty in the United States: Air Conditioning, Cable TV and an Xbox
Tens of millions of Americans are uninsured and 50 million suffer from insecure access to food. But nearly all poor households own a refrigerator, television, and microwave. Surprising? Not really. It's a snapshot of one of the most important trends of the U.S. economy: the productivity paradox.
30 Million in Poverty Aren't as Poor as You Think, Says Heritage Foundation - Derek Thompson - Business - The Atlantic
More than 19 million Americans, or just over 6% of the population, live on less than $5,400 a year, or close to $100 a week, an analysis of 2009 Census data reveals. $5,400 is half the official poverty rate, a value which the financial news website Insider Monkey, which compiled these figures, dubs "extreme poverty". In what should be a national disgrace, the "state" with the worst extreme poverty rate (EPR) was the nation's capital, with over 10% of the District of Columbia's citizens living in extreme poverty. All of the "top ten" had rates in excess of 7%.
19 Million Americans Live On $100 A Week
You can go to the alley behind where I live and pick up a TV or a refrigerator, but if you have no food, who cares? The answer here is education and jobs.
Remember, a lot of those poor are Republicans, or don't they care?
Its about keeping children from not getting enough nutrition so that they can be healthy adults and cost us less in medical over their lifetimes.
You people just dont understand long term thinking
Its about keeping children from not getting enough nutrition so that they can be healthy adults and cost us less in medical over their lifetimes.
You people just dont understand long term thinking
Here's some long term thinking. If you can't afford to feed your children.. don't have any!
I know it's an outragious idea!
