Trends in Political Values and Core Attitudes

[Bern80]

Should I not be comparing your current words with your previous words, Bern?

I repeat, show me said past words where I said all social programs should be abolished or that they're all bad, or that only the lazy use them.

that's a mighty engrossing dance there... so, you had control over your life... but took advantage of social TAX PAYED program anyway rather than resign yourself to the stoic positions that you usually take regarding social programs? Gosh, I don't even want to ask if you had cable TV during that period of time...

This may be your most convuluted argument yet. Best i can sum is that according to you control over your life = no need for social programs? Yeah, that makes sense.

So which ones get the axe then, Bern? The ones that you have enjoyed or the ones that a target demographic enjoys? Why am I reminded of the conversation we had just the other day regarding "regulations" and the aftermath of repealing them without further consideration?

In the broadest sense they need to be cut so much as structured in such a way that encourage better decision makeing and they don't allow people who are capable to remain on them indefinately. Social programs however wern't the point of the thread at all, so why you brought it up is beyond me. It was about the changeing atitude of our nation.

Be defensive, Bern. By all means. It seems that you get frustrated easily when you are not talking down to people on some king of the hill position of authority on an issue. Im not the one making you take a hardline position in the abstract that becomes retracted bit by bit upon further closer inspection. Feel free to sling mud if such is necessary though. It's probably my fault for referencing your previous statements.

I am defenseive because as much as i like to debate it is impossible to do so with someone who needs to insist one's position is something it isn't. We keep going round and round by me telling you what I believe then you respond back with an argument that is based on some other false belief you have attributed to me.

 

[Shogun]

Well Bern.. I would reply but I get the feeling that doing so would illicit another stomping of the foot so... I guess Ill just have to stop asking you for clarification and accept a "repeal regulations" type of answer that sounds good but means little.

suffice it to say, HOWEVER, that post #7 probably validates your post.

 

[Skull Pilot]

you all really don't understand how unemployment works if you think it is a governemnt social program.
http://ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/uitaxtopic.asp

fyi employers pay the insurance premiums through FUTA and just as in any other insurace system, claims are paid out to those receiving benefits if warranted

so don't worry no tax money devoted to other socail programs was used to pay for unemployment benefits

 

[midcan5]

Yeah if heard the life is so darn complex one before too. Life is more often than not as complicated as you choose to make it. Saying it's complicated is just an excuse or another way of saying I'm not responsible or I have no control over my situation.

No one is making any excuses, you are ironically the one who has taken advantage of those bleeding heart liberal programs. And it is complicated if work stops, finding another job can be complicated. a family in your situation with a lost job may not be able to make ends meet. amazing what cold hearts you people have. Oh and did you find the Cadillac mom yet?

Shogun, good replies.

 

[Shogun]

Unemployment Insurance Taxes

Unemployment Insurance (UI) is a federal-state program jointly financed through federal and state employer payroll taxes (federal/state UI tax). Generally, employers must pay both state and federal unemployment taxes if: (1) they pay wages to employees totaling $1500, or more, in any quarter of a calendar year; or, (2) they had at least one employee during any day of a week during 20 weeks in a calendar year, regardless of whether or not the weeks were consecutive. However, some state laws differ from the federal law and employers should contact their state workforce agencies to learn the exact requirements.

Federal Unemployment Tax Act

The Federal Unemployment Tax Act (FUTA), authorizes the Internal Revenue Service to collect a federal employer tax used to fund state workforce agencies. Employers pay this tax annually by filing IRS Form 940. FUTA covers the costs of administering the UI and Job Service programs in all states. In addition, FUTA pays one-half of the cost of extended unemployment benefits (during periods of high unemployment) and provides for a fund from which states may borrow, if necessary, to pay benefits.

Federal Tax Rate

The FUTA tax rate is 6.2% of taxable wages.

your link.



yes.. clearly NOT a social program and clearly NOT socialist in nature.

 

[midcan5]

you all really don't understand how unemployment works if you think it is a governemnt social program.
http://ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/uitaxtopic.asp

fyi employers pay the insurance premiums through FUTA and just as in any other insurace system, claims are paid out to those receiving benefits if warranted

so don't worry no tax money devoted to other socail programs was used to pay for unemployment benefits

sorta like social security huh, taxes become something else when they enter the realm of BS. Employers do that outta the goodness of their hearts. Without government it would simply not exist. Darn! smacks of socialism dont it, people working together.....

 

[Shogun]

sorta like social security huh, taxes become something else when they enter the realm of BS. Employers do that outta the goodness of their hearts. Without government it would simply not exist. Darn! smacks of socialism dont it, people working together.....

Thats what I think pissed ole Bern off. Yea, these programs fucking SUCK.... until they are personally leaned upon. Reminds me of an ACLU-hating Rush being legally defended for drugs... by the ACLU. Does the whole "people have more control over their lives then liberals want to admit" line seem as significant after learning that the guy who made that very statement took 6 months on the tax payer dime to get his shit together? DESPITE, apparently, having full control otherwise? If he wonders why he should pay for food stamps then why the hell should his previous employers have had to pay out for this half a year of personal discovery? Yes, it smacks of socialism and YES I agree that the abusive fringe needs to be pruned.. but that still doesn't validate the pick and choose nature of such consternation about social programs.

 

[Bern80]

No one is making any excuses, you are ironically the one who has taken advantage of those bleeding heart liberal programs. And it is complicated if work stops, finding another job can be complicated. a family in your situation with a lost job may not be able to make ends meet. amazing what cold hearts you people have. Oh and did you find the Cadillac mom yet?

Shogun, good replies.

And just as Shogun you completely misrepresent my position. Yes there is a need for social programs for those that can't help themselves or to serve as a cushion while get back on your feet or make a career change. And like it or not what this whole thing is about is very simple and cuts to the heart between the difference in the right and left. I believe MOST people have a level of control over their lives that allows them to adapt and pull through most situations if they make the effort. Shit is gonna happen to you that you can't control, but you do have control over how you respond to said shit. A wiser man than I said, 'circumstances don't make the man, they reveal him'. You and Shogun seem to have the position that MOST people are just victims and have little real control over the things that befall them and even less ability to 'right the ship' so to speak.

 

[Shogun]

Have I stated any such thing, Bern? Should I stomp my foot now? I can probably get defensive and backtrack too, you know.

 

[Bern80]

Have I stated any such thing, Bern? Should I stomp my foot now? I can probably get defensive and backtrack too, you know.

go for it. You just don't comprehend english I guess. From your statements it seems your position is exactley as i stated. If it isn't say so and what it is and we'll move on.

 

[Shogun]

i'll pass, thanks. I'm a big boy and seem capable of keeping pace with you. Now, can we put the teething ring down and hop back on topic or is there anything else you want to say about my posts.


Far be it for me to point out another piece of rich irony that you complained about my side ASSUMING your position... yet you don't bat an eye in posting, "it seems your position is exactley as i stated." Indeed, I'm probably the one that doesn't comprehend things in this thread.

 

[Bern80]

i'll pass, thanks. I'm a big boy and seem capable of keeping pace with you. Now, can we put the teething ring down and hop back on topic or is there anything else you want to say about my posts.

again go for it. Though the condescending tone and juvenile remarks indicate we aren't gonna get very far.

 

[Shogun]

again go for it. Though the condescending tone and juvenile remarks indicate we aren't gonna get very far.

back atcha, buddy. I probably comprehend enough engrish to gather just a touch more irony from that statement.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I think that it concerns both – one’s concern for himself – that he does not become incapacitated by some freak accident, make a foolish catastrophic mistake, hit a string of bad luck and become dependent. It also reflects concern for his fellow man. As I see it, people want to be sure that there is a strong safety net for those who are mentally restarted and ill, and those who are severely physically handicapped. There are some people who will never be self-reliant, without some degree of government assistance. (We can debate how much we should spend on social services but I doubt that there are people who think that every cent from each and every social service should be removed. I think that we would be more problems if we were to end all government social service support. There is not enough charity in the private sector to support all of the truly needy.) Some people will always be dependent on handouts through practically no fault of their own. People want to be sure that government services remain, at lest to some extent, for such people. Consider yourself lucky and fortunate that you are not one of them.

By the way, I pay taxes and give some time and money to private charity.

just how do you define "truly needy"??

in my home state of MA i have first hand knowledge of how the mentally retarded and severely physically handicapped are cared for and I have also seen first hand the exquisite waste of money (one incident comes to mind where $35 grand was spent to retile two shower stalls that any idiot could have done for about $2 grand or less hell I plumbed a room, put in new fixtures and tiled my new bathroom for about $3000) as well as how much the unions have cost the taxpayers of MA. so you cannot tell me this particular segment of the population is not well cared for at least in MA.

I don't really have a problem with social services but unlike liberals, i just don't think (no let me rephrase that) i know that the government just does not do anything well or cost effectively. i don't trust the government with my money and neither should you. tell me how is it some private charities can spend 80% of revenue on their objectives and we're lucky if the government get 10-15% of the money collected into the actual programs it sponsors?

 

[Skull Pilot]

sorta like social security huh, taxes become something else when they enter the realm of BS. Employers do that outta the goodness of their hearts. Without government it would simply not exist. Darn! smacks of socialism dont it, people working together.....

you are misrepresenting unemployment as something ALL taxpayers fund which is untrue.

maybe now you won't be so quick to call a small business owner greedy because he can't afford to pay more than minimum wage to an employee. and seriously, as a business owner, what problem is it of mine that some guy who was not my employee and therefore not my responsibility gets laid off?

hey why don't YOU pony up 6% of your income to help them out and then i can give a little more to my own employees' retirement matching funds

you actually define socialism as people working together? i define it as government coersion and theft of my hard earned money to support someone else who did not work as hard or risk as much or make as many sacrifices as i did. i define it as the government taking so much from my business that i can't offer all the benefits i want to offer to my valued employees.

 

[Gunny]

Well, let's wait for the troglodytes to come out of their caves and beat this one to death with their sound bite clubs.

You got some nerve accusing ANYONE of THAT. You are Mr Soundbyte Extraordinnaire.

GMAFB.

 

[mattskramer]

just how do you define "truly needy"??

in my home state of MA i have first hand knowledge of how the mentally retarded and severely physically handicapped are cared for and I have also seen first hand the exquisite waste of money (one incident comes to mind where $35 grand was spent to retile two shower stalls that any idiot could have done for about $2 grand or less hell I plumbed a room, put in new fixtures and tiled my new bathroom for about $3000) as well as how much the unions have cost the taxpayers of MA. so you cannot tell me this particular segment of the population is not well cared for at least in MA.

I don't really have a problem with social services but unlike liberals, i just don't think (no let me rephrase that) i know that the government just does not do anything well or cost effectively. i don't trust the government with my money and neither should you. tell me how is it some private charities can spend 80% of revenue on their objectives and we're lucky if the government get 10-15% of the money collected into the actual programs it sponsors?

Well. One example of someone who is truly needy is a 25-year-old who functions at a 4th-grade level. He was surrendered by his parents who could no longer deal with him or afford to care for him. I understand that the private sector may do things more economical than does the public sector. What does a private charity do if it can’t afford to help as many qualifying individuals that apply? Doesn’t it have to turn some away? What does government does if it can’t afford to help as many qualifying individuals as apply? It can raise taxes.

There is more waste in one but there is more risk in the other. I agree that neither system is perfect. I believe in giving to private charity. I also believe that at least a little but of a government safety net is needed.

 

[Shogun]

you are misrepresenting unemployment as something ALL taxpayers fund which is untrue.


um, social programs are not solely defined as those that tax ALL taxpayers, dude. It's utterly laughable to see your side DEFEND unemployment as some other animal than a social program.... that has no origin in the constitution like every other social program that is otherwise railed upon, no less....


don't let this clarification keep you from constructing necessary strawmen though.

 

[Skull Pilot]

you are misrepresenting unemployment as something ALL taxpayers fund which is untrue.


um, social programs are not solely defined as those that tax ALL taxpayers, dude. It's utterly laughable to see your side DEFEND unemployment as some other animal than a social program.... that has no origin in the constitution like every other social program that is otherwise railed upon, no less....


don't let this clarification keep you from constructing necessary strawmen though.

i am not defending unemployment. if you bothered to quote the rest of the post you took that line from you would see that


did you not read this line?:

what problem is it of mine that some guy who was not my employee and therefore not my responsibility gets laid off?

don't let the full context of a remark stop you from trying to twist my arguments though

 

[Shogun]

you all really don't understand how unemployment works if you think it is a governemnt social program.
http://ows.doleta.gov/unemploy/uitaxtopic.asp

fyi employers pay the insurance premiums through FUTA and just as in any other insurace system, claims are paid out to those receiving benefits if warranted

so don't worry no tax money devoted to other socail programs was used to pay for unemployment benefits

what can i say... this post seems to suggest otherwise.