What is racism and is this it"

[Tank]

You feed them, they'll breed them

 

[California Girl]

Well, I haven't read the whole article, mind you, but, for starters, the claim that somehow welfare is at the "heart" of the current economic crisis is simply unfounded. Then there's the claim cutting subsidies on school lunches, housing, and meds would not result in people going without school lunches, housing, and meds - this is simply not logical and furthermore goes entirely against elementary economic theory.

A subsidy on any normal good allows more people access to it: if oil is subsidized, more people can afford to buy more oil, if the subsidy ends less people can afford to do so. Eliminating the subsidy may not have much societal significance if the good in question is comic books or cookies, but when the good in question is housing or medicine there are human consequences. Now, it is perfectly reasonable for someone to question whether the subsidy is worth it, or whether it is 'good' or 'bad' or whatever - that's all perfectly debatable. What isn't debatable is that the end of subsidies on things like school lunches, housing, and medicine will necessarily make at least some people go hungry, homeless, and med-less. Again, whether this is acceptable or not is debatable, that it would occur is not.

In the American context, it's safe to say that the majority of the poor would not be hungry or homeless (maybe med-less) - they would just shift consumption to cheaper alternatives like McDonald's Dollar Menu items, city-limits shanties, and subsidized medicines from Mexico and Canada (as millions already do). After all, it's not like everyone is homeless and starving in welfare-less countries like Honduras and the Central African Republic - people definitely get by, just... not as well, and not as many.

Thank you for your well thought out response.
While I have no problem with government providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times, our welfare system tends to make people dependent on government handouts and removes incentive people need to pull themselves out of the hole they find themselves in.
It's the old "give a man a fish" parable. We have passed out free fish for so long, we've created a voting block that demands more fishes but hasn't the incentive to learn to fish for themselves.
The "poor" get enough assistance that they can afford nice cars, flat screen tv's, cell phones for their kids and $100 plus sneakers. Why?
People should not be "comfortable" of welfare. They should not live as well as the blue collar working stiff who's saving up to buy a house and is paying for their fish with his taxes.

That, for the most part, is incorrect and part of the myth. And a good number of people that are pointing out that this plays into racism..are correct. Because it does. The people that perpetuate this myth may not be racists themselves..but they know how to play to them.

If you compare the social programs with other countries on par with the United States, around the world..the US is pretty stingy with it's poor.

I think half the problem is that, it appears that liberals want more entitlements... like the do in Europe. Now, a major part of the problems that EU countries have found themselves in over the past couple of years is because of those entitlement programs. We simply do not want to go down that road. It is fine to say 'hey, compared to other countries, we're really stingy' but.... liberals seem to want to keep increasing those entitlements... and then we won't be 'stingy', we'll be Europe.

Most countries in Europe, on the other hand, are desperately trying to get away from entitlements and become more like the US. Why? Because they found out the hard way that it's unworkable, unaffordable and, most importantly.... it is really damaging for individuals to live on welfare. It is, in fact (and I mean, cold, hard, researched and evidenced fact) that is it hugely damaging to minorities. Hence, it is the democrats, with their love of entitlements for minorities who do the most damage to those communities. And, what is worse, liberals know that... and they don't care. Hence, liberals are more racist than conservatives.

 

[Tank]

This liberal experiment of trying to raise colored peoples standards has not worked, so will will have to lower the standards of everyone else.

 

[luckystrike]

[. There goes my big rant on welfare.

But what about the people in the other 125 countries that are poorer than Mexico?

Not everyone needs to live in a house with cable, 50"DTV, brand new SUV, and all the other bullshit.

I have none of those and I don't miss something I never had. That applies to BILLIONS of the poor who never had much.

But when Mexicans see all the toys that Americans have because they built a country to last over 500 years instead of sitting in a mudhole complaining about not having clean pants, Mexicans start inventing a reason to steal the American toys without having to rebuild Mexico.

A Mexican's ego cannot handle the fact that Mexicans ruined Mexico without any assisstance from the gringos. Mexicans overpopulated Mexico not gringos. This is fact.

 

[luckystrike]

Thank you for your well thought out response.
While I have no problem with government providing a safety net for those who have fallen on hard times, our welfare system tends to make people dependent on government handouts and removes incentive people need to pull themselves out of the hole they find themselves in.
It's the old "give a man a fish" parable. We have passed out free fish for so long, we've created a voting block that demands more fishes but hasn't the incentive to learn to fish for themselves.
The "poor" get enough assistance that they can afford nice cars, flat screen tv's, cell phones for their kids and $100 plus sneakers. Why?
People should not be "comfortable" of welfare. They should not live as well as the blue collar working stiff who's saving up to buy a house and is paying for their fish with his taxes.

That, for the most part, is incorrect and part of the myth. And a good number of people that are pointing out that this plays into racism..are correct. Because it does. The people that perpetuate this myth may not be racists themselves..but they know how to play to them.

If you compare the social programs with other countries on par with the United States, around the world..the US is pretty stingy with it's poor.

I think half the problem is that, it appears that liberals want more entitlements... like the do in Europe. Now, a major part of the problems that EU countries have found themselves in over the past couple of years is because of those entitlement programs. We simply do not want to go down that road. It is fine to say 'hey, compared to other countries, we're really stingy' but.... liberals seem to want to keep increasing those entitlements... and then we won't be 'stingy', we'll be Europe.

Most countries in Europe, on the other hand, are desperately trying to get away from entitlements and become more like the US. Why? Because they found out the hard way that it's unworkable, unaffordable and, most importantly.... it is really damaging for individuals to live on welfare. It is, in fact (and I mean, cold, hard, researched and evidenced fact) that is it hugely damaging to minorities. Hence, it is the democrats, with their love of entitlements for minorities who do the most damage to those communities. And, what is worse, liberals know that... and they don't care. Hence, liberals are more racist than conservatives.

How do you justify drafting someone to fight wars for billionaire? How do those rich people compensate the families of those who died in wars?

Entitlements are seen by people with money as like paying people to be lazy. Rich people continue to get richer by forcing the masses to worship money, work harder, and envy them.

When people stop worshipping money, the rich will fall!

 

[lehr]

Greatest thread ever.

obama agrees that if a baby survives an abortion - it can just be left on a tin pan til it dies


where do people like this come from ??