While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!

[DiamondDave]

I've been a member of this board for a little over a week. So far ive seen users post, and other users agree with...

Poor people shouldn't be allowed to vote
If you don't have a job you shoudnt be allowed to vote
Women shouldn't be allowed to vote
Young people shouldn't be allowed to vote

Why don't we toss out the vote all together? It's clearly getting in everyone's way.

Keep in mind, to be honest, the conservatives on this board, when they post that sort of stupidity, fall into two categories,

a. the ones who really are sufficiently stupid to believe what they're saying, and,

b. the ones who know that it's idiocy but are just trying to see how annoying they can be.

There are NO serious, intelligent, thoughtful conservatives on this board. Period. That is just the nature of the beast, as they say. You either accept that and play along, or let them get to you.

Go fuck yourself... this is one of the most ignorant things posted on this board by someone other than TDM, Rdummy, Chrissypoo, or Mr. Shithead

While I may hate the liberal mindset.. not all liberals are stupid, and I would never stoop so low as to claim that...

 

[AmyNation]

I've been a member of this board for a little over a week. So far ive seen users post, and other users agree with...

Poor people shouldn't be allowed to vote
If you don't have a job you shoudnt be allowed to vote
Women shouldn't be allowed to vote
Young people shouldn't be allowed to vote

Why don't we toss out the vote all together? It's clearly getting in everyone's way.

Now I don't agree with any of the others.. but the voting age part is intriguing.. upping the voting age to 21 (just like the drinking age) is indeed something I think should be looked at.. if a 20 year old cannot be trusted in judgement to drink, how can the be trusted to vote??

Why is the drinking age 21? You can join the military, get married, enter into contacts, but you can't drink? Silly.

Id say, if you raise the voting age to 21, then you need to say that 18 is not "adult" anymore and that all rights reserved for adults are then reserved for those 21 or older.

 

[DiamondDave]

I've been a member of this board for a little over a week. So far ive seen users post, and other users agree with...

Poor people shouldn't be allowed to vote
If you don't have a job you shoudnt be allowed to vote
Women shouldn't be allowed to vote
Young people shouldn't be allowed to vote

Why don't we toss out the vote all together? It's clearly getting in everyone's way.

Now I don't agree with any of the others.. but the voting age part is intriguing.. upping the voting age to 21 (just like the drinking age) is indeed something I think should be looked at.. if a 20 year old cannot be trusted in judgement to drink, how can the be trusted to vote??

Why is the drinking age 21? You can join the military, get married, enter into contacts, but you can't drink? Silly.

Id say, if you raise the voting age to 21, then you need to say that 18 is not "adult" anymore and that all rights reserved for adults are then reserved for those 21 or older.

Understood... and that is one thing to consider with a decision like that... upping enlistment age for military.. would then education be covered until the age of 21, etc...

 

[bodecea]

"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

Including food stamps and medicare....right?

 

[eflatminor]

"A government which robs Peter to pay Paul, can always count on the support of Paul." – George Bernard Shaw

 

[AmyNation]

"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

Personally I'd rather see the federal government stop sending welfare checks, be they to individuals, organizations or major corporations. The general welfare clause does NOT refer to government handouts. The so called Great Society is dead. Let it rest in peace.

Then go vote.

Serious question.

What happens to everyone getting assistance from the government if we cut all welfare tomorrow?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

I've been a member of this board for a little over a week. So far ive seen users post, and other users agree with...

Poor people shouldn't be allowed to vote
If you don't have a job you shoudnt be allowed to vote
Women shouldn't be allowed to vote
Young people shouldn't be allowed to vote

Why don't we toss out the vote all together? It's clearly getting in everyone's way.

Keep in mind, to be honest, the conservatives on this board, when they post that sort of stupidity, fall into two categories,

a. the ones who really are sufficiently stupid to believe what they're saying, and,

b. the ones who know that it's idiocy but are just trying to see how annoying they can be.

There are NO serious, intelligent, thoughtful conservatives on this board. Period. That is just the nature of the beast, as they say. You either accept that and play along, or let them get to you.

Go fuck yourself... this is one of the most ignorant things posted on this board by someone other than TDM, Rdummy, Chrissypoo, or Mr. Shithead

While I may hate the liberal mindset.. not all liberals are stupid, and I would never stoop so low as to claim that...

The NY Carbonated one has really slipped... I dunno if it's alcohol or just a bad case of Obama remorse.. but he makes little sense any more. Oh well.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

Personally I'd rather see the federal government stop sending welfare checks, be they to individuals, organizations or major corporations. The general welfare clause does NOT refer to government handouts. The so called Great Society is dead. Let it rest in peace.

Then go vote.

Serious question.

What happens to everyone getting assistance from the government if we cut all welfare tomorrow?

They'll find a job.

 

[bodecea]

"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

Including food stamps and medicare....right?

Asking again.

 

[DiamondDave]

Personally I'd rather see the federal government stop sending welfare checks, be they to individuals, organizations or major corporations. The general welfare clause does NOT refer to government handouts. The so called Great Society is dead. Let it rest in peace.

Then go vote.

Serious question.

What happens to everyone getting assistance from the government if we cut all welfare tomorrow?

They'll find a job.

Having to fend for yourself and not having a nanny to kiss every boo boo is usually motivation enough to start doing what you have to do to live and provide for yourself..

 

[BlindBoo]

"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

I think it would require a constitutional amendment.

 

[Dick Tuck]

"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

The wealthy teat suckers, who've been buying America have a conflict of interest as well.

 

[eflatminor]

"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

Personally I'd rather see the federal government stop sending welfare checks, be they to individuals, organizations or major corporations. The general welfare clause does NOT refer to government handouts. The so called Great Society is dead. Let it rest in peace.

Then go vote.

Serious question.

What happens to everyone getting assistance from the government if we cut all welfare tomorrow?

Note I said "federal" government. States are free to engage in whatever socialist policies they like.

What happens to the recipients? They can apply for state assistance, request help from charity, or perhaps go without the creature comforts that makes today's "poor" in America rich compared to the rest of the world, much less past societies.

Cars, cell phones, air conditioners, televisions, video games...those that possess such luxuries should not justify the theft and redistribution of wealth from productive citizens.

From 2010 Census figures:

What is Poverty in the United States: Air Conditioning, Cable TV and an Xbox

Edit: As to the organizations and corporations who receive government welfare (handouts, bailouts, loopholes, etc), why they'd just have to compete in a free market...I know, the horror!

 

[AmyNation]

Personally I'd rather see the federal government stop sending welfare checks, be they to individuals, organizations or major corporations. The general welfare clause does NOT refer to government handouts. The so called Great Society is dead. Let it rest in peace.

Then go vote.

Serious question.

What happens to everyone getting assistance from the government if we cut all welfare tomorrow?

Note I said "federal" government. States are free to engage in whatever socialist policies they like.

What happens to the recipients? They can apply for state assistance, request help from charity, or perhaps go without the creature comforts that makes today's "poor" in America rich compared to the rest of the world, much less past societies.

Cars, cell phones, air conditioners, televisions, video games...those that possess such luxuries should not justify the theft and redistribution of wealth from productive citizens.

From 2010 Census figures:

What is Poverty in the United States: Air Conditioning, Cable TV and an Xbox

Edit: As to the organizations and corporations who receive government welfare (handouts, bailouts, loopholes, etc), why they'd just have to compete in a free market...I know, the horror!

Ah. I could see a valid argument for that.

They'll find a job.

Silly

Having to fend for yourself and not having a nanny to kiss every boo boo is usually motivation enough to start doing what you have to do to live and provide for yourself..

Another non-answer.

 

[rightwinger]

Personally I'd rather see the federal government stop sending welfare checks, be they to individuals, organizations or major corporations. The general welfare clause does NOT refer to government handouts. The so called Great Society is dead. Let it rest in peace.

Then go vote.

Serious question.

What happens to everyone getting assistance from the government if we cut all welfare tomorrow?

Note I said "federal" government. States are free to engage in whatever socialist policies they like.

What happens to the recipients? They can apply for state assistance, request help from charity, or perhaps go without the creature comforts that makes today's "poor" in America rich compared to the rest of the world, much less past societies.

Cars, cell phones, air conditioners, televisions, video games...those that possess such luxuries should not justify the theft and redistribution of wealth from productive citizens.

From 2010 Census figures:

What is Poverty in the United States: Air Conditioning, Cable TV and an Xbox

Edit: As to the organizations and corporations who receive government welfare (handouts, bailouts, loopholes, etc), why they'd just have to compete in a free market...I know, the horror!

You are confusing personal wealth with income.

As any multi-billionaire can tell you, his personal wealth is irrelevant when it comes to paying federal taxes. It is none of your business how many houses, jets and yachts he owns

When it comes to the poor....you begrudge them an air conditioner

 

[Harry Dresden]

Sounds fair. I thought the government giving out gifts for votes=illegal. Only people that work for a living should be allowed to vote.

and what if that person through no fault of his own lost his job and had to go on unemployment?......or got injured enough not to work and is on disability?.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

That you're looking for the larger-herd to follow?​

Shamen someone such as you should not be saying others follow a herd....im sure you can relate to this sound.........Baaaaaaaaaaaa.......

 

[eflatminor]

Serious question.

What happens to everyone getting assistance from the government if we cut all welfare tomorrow?

Note I said "federal" government. States are free to engage in whatever socialist policies they like.

What happens to the recipients? They can apply for state assistance, request help from charity, or perhaps go without the creature comforts that makes today's "poor" in America rich compared to the rest of the world, much less past societies.

Cars, cell phones, air conditioners, televisions, video games...those that possess such luxuries should not justify the theft and redistribution of wealth from productive citizens.

From 2010 Census figures:

What is Poverty in the United States: Air Conditioning, Cable TV and an Xbox

Edit: As to the organizations and corporations who receive government welfare (handouts, bailouts, loopholes, etc), why they'd just have to compete in a free market...I know, the horror!

You are confusing personal wealth with income.

Not at all. Wealth can be converted to cash, which can supplement income.

As any multi-billionaire can tell you, his personal wealth is irrelevant when it comes to paying federal taxes.

Of course, we're not talking about federal income tax, we're talking about what happens to everyone getting assistance from the federal government if we cut welfare. Pay attention now.

It is none of your business how many houses, jets and yachts he owns...

Correct, because I'm not forced to hand over my money to support his lifestyle. Unless of course he's the CEO of a solar panel factory in which case, it's very much my business.

When it comes to the poor....you begrudge them an air conditioner

Not at all. I begrudge having my money confiscated so he can buy an air conditioner. Big difference.

 

[Freemason9]

While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!

Welp, there goes the states of Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska.

 

[Truthmatters]

"For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You should be removed from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check."

I came across this at another site. I neither agree or disagree at this point but what do YOU think?

Ahhhh paying Americans not to vote.

dear idiot this is the path to dictatorship.

Goatless boy your long lost goat is smarter than you.