What do people have against

[bripat9643]

who takes care of those who cant make it on their own?

That's what charity is all about. I know the concept is alien to libtards like you.

 

[Truthmatters]

when in history has this need been completely filled by charity?

 

[Antiderivative]

Income inequality helps explain our savings deficiency which will tie directly to our statist/corporatist policies.

This is another good discussion that rw kooks can challenge me on.

What does any of the have to do with politicians promising far more than we can pay for?

Sorry for my previous explanation, but lobbying has much in common with political favoritism.

 

[snjmom]

I don't have a problem living within my means. I also Pay my bills, and I don't take a pay cut when I know I have to make my car payment etc.

Cutting spending isn't taking a pay cut.

Nor does incurring more debt help get you out of debt

Every tax cut is a pay cut. The people want the services that gov offers, yet refuse to pay for them. The poor want the income transfers, the middle class want the incentives for the middle class life and the rich want protection from the poor. You get what you pay for.

“Interest never sleeps nor sickens nor dies; it never goes to the hospital; it works on Sundays and holidays; it never takes a vacation. … Once in debt, interest is your companion every minute of the day and night; you cannot shun it or slip away from it; you cannot dismiss it; it yields neither to entreaties, demands, or orders; and whenever you get in its way or cross its course or fail to meet its demands, it crushes you.” (J Reuben Clark Jr)

Unless you kill the lender.

 

[bripat9643]

who takes care of those who cant make it on their own?

No one is stopping all those compassionate libs from writing the needy a check.

 

[bripat9643]

when in history has this need been completely filled by charity?

Before the existence of welfare, charity is all we had. No one starved.

 

[Truthmatters]

At what point is charity evil?

Is charity always good?

If charity is good than we the people can all decide to vote in a lump sum to charity and its fine huh?

 

[Truthmatters]

when in history has this need been completely filled by charity?

Before the existence of welfare, charity is all we had. No one starved.

Can you go get proof no one starved?

 

[snjmom]

who takes care of those who cant make it on their own?

No one is stopping all those compassionate libs from writing the needy a check.

So what, all the conservative pricks get a free ride on cholera and dead body removal? You live in a country that writes into law a certain standard of living. There are other countries that don't, though they don't offer the private property protections or political freedoms that ours does.

Pick your poison.

 

[snjmom]

when in history has this need been completely filled by charity?

Before the existence of welfare, charity is all we had. No one starved.

People still starve.

 

[Truthmatters]

This guy actually thinks no one starves to death in the US.

 

[Antiderivative]

Forced charity is not charity at all.

 

[bripat9643]

At what point is charity evil?

Is charity always good?

If charity is good than we the people can all decide to vote in a lump sum to charity and its fine huh?

Charity is never evil. However, taking money at gunpoint is not "charity." That's what distinguishes charity from welfare: the latter is collected at gunpoint. The former is purely voluntary.

You don't "vote" for charity. Everything the government does is enforced at gunpoint.

 

[Truthmatters]

The irony is the welfare system has worked so well that silly little boys like the poster actually think its impossible for someone to starve to death

 

[bripat9643]

Can you go get proof no one starved?

Can you find proof that anyone did?

The rules of logic do not require me to prove a negative.

 

[Truthmatters]

At what point is charity evil?

Is charity always good?

If charity is good than we the people can all decide to vote in a lump sum to charity and its fine huh?

Charity is never evil. However, taking money at gunpoint is not "charity." That's what distinguishes charity from welfare: the latter is collected at gunpoint. The former is purely voluntary.

You don't "vote" for charity. Everything the government does is enforced at gunpoint.

Yes we do vote for charity.

It also has some great other benifits for society like a healthier populace and brighter children

 

[bripat9643]

The irony is the welfare system has worked so well that silly little boys like the poster actually think its impossible for someone to starve to death

Of course it's possible. You could refuse to eat, and then you would starve to death. Karen Carpenter starved to death, but that wasn't because she couldn't afford to buy food.

 

[Truthmatters]

Can you go get proof no one starved?

Can you find proof that anyone did?

The rules of logic do not require me to prove a negative.

I can get you statistics from years before we helped and years after.

I can go get proof.

You can not because what you said is blatently wrong.

 

[Truthmatters]

Hunger - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[Antiderivative]

Charity is never evil. However, taking money at gunpoint is not "charity." That's what distinguishes charity from welfare: the latter is collected at gunpoint. The former is purely voluntary.

You don't "vote" for charity. Everything the government does is enforced at gunpoint.

The government hates charity. I can dig up numerous examples where the government outlawed giving food to homeless people.

In fact, they shut down an anti-war organization that was feeding homeless people in my home city.