You can't help the poor with tax cuts, or increases, until they're ready to WORK!!!!

[bucs90]

Saw the 2 threads. "Can't help the poor with tax cuts" and "Can't help the poor with tax increases".

Both are true. Because you can't help the poor with either, until the poor INDIVIDUAL is ready to no longer be poor!!! "The Poor" isn't a group. It's a mass of individuals, with various individual work ethics, criminal records, skills or lack thereof.

The more comfortable we make an individual in his poverty, they less likely he is to rise above it. The less comfortable we make the mass of "The Poor", the more likely some will rise above it, while others will suffer more than they would have in comfort.

So what do we do? Make them uncomfortable? Thus guaranteeing more rise above it? Or make the mass of them comfortable in poverty, guaranteeing less of them rise above it?


If a person drops out of school, does drugs, is lazy, commits crime, has horrible priorities, or is just all around a shitbag of a person, well, at what point do we just say "Sorry dude, you are doing NOTHING to help yourself." And leave it at that.


The gov't CANNOT change a persons work ethic or values. A handout check wont do that. Neither will a lack of one. But if we make poverty comfortable, you can be sure less people will flee it.

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Saw the 2 threads. "Can't help the poor with tax cuts" and "Can't help the poor with tax increases".

Both are true. Because you can't help the poor with either, until the poor INDIVIDUAL is ready to no longer be poor!!! "The Poor" isn't a group. It's a mass of individuals, with various individual work ethics, criminal records, skills or lack thereof.

The more comfortable we make an individual in his poverty, they less likely he is to rise above it. The less comfortable we make the mass of "The Poor", the more likely some will rise above it, while others will suffer more than they would have in comfort.

So what do we do? Make them uncomfortable? Thus guaranteeing more rise above it? Or make the mass of them comfortable in poverty, guaranteeing less of them rise above it?


If a person drops out of school, does drugs, is lazy, commits crime, has horrible priorities, or is just all around a shitbag of a person, well, at what point do we just say "Sorry dude, you are doing NOTHING to help yourself." And leave it at that.


The gov't CANNOT change a persons work ethic or values. A handout check wont do that. Neither will a lack of one. But if we make poverty comfortable, you can be sure less people will flee it.

You realize that a full third of employed Americans are "poor", right?

 

[uscitizen]

Work at what jobs?


I hear 17,000 or so (at last count) lined up for the 1,800 announced Ford jobs.

 

[oreo]

Saw the 2 threads. "Can't help the poor with tax cuts" and "Can't help the poor with tax increases".

Both are true. Because you can't help the poor with either, until the poor INDIVIDUAL is ready to no longer be poor!!! "The Poor" isn't a group. It's a mass of individuals, with various individual work ethics, criminal records, skills or lack thereof.

The more comfortable we make an individual in his poverty, they less likely he is to rise above it. The less comfortable we make the mass of "The Poor", the more likely some will rise above it, while others will suffer more than they would have in comfort.

So what do we do? Make them uncomfortable? Thus guaranteeing more rise above it? Or make the mass of them comfortable in poverty, guaranteeing less of them rise above it?


If a person drops out of school, does drugs, is lazy, commits crime, has horrible priorities, or is just all around a shitbag of a person, well, at what point do we just say "Sorry dude, you are doing NOTHING to help yourself." And leave it at that.


The gov't CANNOT change a persons work ethic or values. A handout check wont do that. Neither will a lack of one. But if we make poverty comfortable, you can be sure less people will flee it.

Well HELL--as long as they're getting other people's money--what makes you believe they're ever going to be READY to go to work?-- Free MONEY--hey--who in the hell would want to go to work?

 

[uscitizen]

Saw the 2 threads. "Can't help the poor with tax cuts" and "Can't help the poor with tax increases".

Both are true. Because you can't help the poor with either, until the poor INDIVIDUAL is ready to no longer be poor!!! "The Poor" isn't a group. It's a mass of individuals, with various individual work ethics, criminal records, skills or lack thereof.

The more comfortable we make an individual in his poverty, they less likely he is to rise above it. The less comfortable we make the mass of "The Poor", the more likely some will rise above it, while others will suffer more than they would have in comfort.

So what do we do? Make them uncomfortable? Thus guaranteeing more rise above it? Or make the mass of them comfortable in poverty, guaranteeing less of them rise above it?


If a person drops out of school, does drugs, is lazy, commits crime, has horrible priorities, or is just all around a shitbag of a person, well, at what point do we just say "Sorry dude, you are doing NOTHING to help yourself." And leave it at that.


The gov't CANNOT change a persons work ethic or values. A handout check wont do that. Neither will a lack of one. But if we make poverty comfortable, you can be sure less people will flee it.

Well HELL--as long as they're getting other people's money--what makes you believe they're ever going to be READY to go to work?--

Kinda like Wall Street types?

 

[bucs90]

Saw the 2 threads. "Can't help the poor with tax cuts" and "Can't help the poor with tax increases".

Both are true. Because you can't help the poor with either, until the poor INDIVIDUAL is ready to no longer be poor!!! "The Poor" isn't a group. It's a mass of individuals, with various individual work ethics, criminal records, skills or lack thereof.

The more comfortable we make an individual in his poverty, they less likely he is to rise above it. The less comfortable we make the mass of "The Poor", the more likely some will rise above it, while others will suffer more than they would have in comfort.

So what do we do? Make them uncomfortable? Thus guaranteeing more rise above it? Or make the mass of them comfortable in poverty, guaranteeing less of them rise above it?


If a person drops out of school, does drugs, is lazy, commits crime, has horrible priorities, or is just all around a shitbag of a person, well, at what point do we just say "Sorry dude, you are doing NOTHING to help yourself." And leave it at that.


The gov't CANNOT change a persons work ethic or values. A handout check wont do that. Neither will a lack of one. But if we make poverty comfortable, you can be sure less people will flee it.

You realize that a full third of employed Americans are "poor", right?

"Poor" by the definition of left wing america? Yes.

"Poor" by the definition of the rest of the world? NOT EVEN CLOSE.

"Poor" Americans are amongst the 5% richest humans on Earth.

Poverty in America is more a condition of envy than a condition of mere survival. You lefties are so obsessed with envy that you think it's a human right to not live in a lifestyle that is deemed in the lower class of America.

And of the "poor" in America, I'd say 95% are in that status as a result of what they did to themselves, rather than what someone else didn't do for them.

 

[oreo]

Saw the 2 threads. "Can't help the poor with tax cuts" and "Can't help the poor with tax increases".

Both are true. Because you can't help the poor with either, until the poor INDIVIDUAL is ready to no longer be poor!!! "The Poor" isn't a group. It's a mass of individuals, with various individual work ethics, criminal records, skills or lack thereof.

The more comfortable we make an individual in his poverty, they less likely he is to rise above it. The less comfortable we make the mass of "The Poor", the more likely some will rise above it, while others will suffer more than they would have in comfort.

So what do we do? Make them uncomfortable? Thus guaranteeing more rise above it? Or make the mass of them comfortable in poverty, guaranteeing less of them rise above it?


If a person drops out of school, does drugs, is lazy, commits crime, has horrible priorities, or is just all around a shitbag of a person, well, at what point do we just say "Sorry dude, you are doing NOTHING to help yourself." And leave it at that.


The gov't CANNOT change a persons work ethic or values. A handout check wont do that. Neither will a lack of one. But if we make poverty comfortable, you can be sure less people will flee it.

Well HELL--as long as they're getting other people's money--what makes you believe they're ever going to be READY to go to work?--

Kinda like Wall Street types?

Well--I don't now that there are many "Wall Street Types living in this country" other than on Wall Street- 1 BLOCK in-New York City--but go ahead and believe that the east coast- central--mid-west and western states and southern states of this country are full of Wall Streeter's if it makes you feel better about getting your hand-out which is paid for by others--

 

[theDoctorisIn]

Saw the 2 threads. "Can't help the poor with tax cuts" and "Can't help the poor with tax increases".

Both are true. Because you can't help the poor with either, until the poor INDIVIDUAL is ready to no longer be poor!!! "The Poor" isn't a group. It's a mass of individuals, with various individual work ethics, criminal records, skills or lack thereof.

The more comfortable we make an individual in his poverty, they less likely he is to rise above it. The less comfortable we make the mass of "The Poor", the more likely some will rise above it, while others will suffer more than they would have in comfort.

So what do we do? Make them uncomfortable? Thus guaranteeing more rise above it? Or make the mass of them comfortable in poverty, guaranteeing less of them rise above it?


If a person drops out of school, does drugs, is lazy, commits crime, has horrible priorities, or is just all around a shitbag of a person, well, at what point do we just say "Sorry dude, you are doing NOTHING to help yourself." And leave it at that.


The gov't CANNOT change a persons work ethic or values. A handout check wont do that. Neither will a lack of one. But if we make poverty comfortable, you can be sure less people will flee it.

You realize that a full third of employed Americans are "poor", right?

"Poor" by the definition of left wing america? Yes.

"Poor" by the definition of the rest of the world? NOT EVEN CLOSE.

"Poor" by the definition of the US government - as in "the poverty line".

"Poor" Americans are amongst the 5% richest humans on Earth.

Not quite, but I'm not sure what your point is. Just because you could live like a king in Bratislava for $5 a week doesn't make it easier to live in New York City on $22,000 a year.

Poverty in America is more a condition of envy than a condition of mere survival. You lefties are so obsessed with envy that you think it's a human right to not live in a lifestyle that is deemed in the lower class of America.

More than half of Americans will have spent at least 1 year out of the last 10 living below the poverty line.

And of the "poor" in America, I'd say 95% are in that status as a result of what they did to themselves, rather than what someone else didn't do for them.

And what would you base that assumption on?

 

[bucs90]

Saw the 2 threads. "Can't help the poor with tax cuts" and "Can't help the poor with tax increases".

Both are true. Because you can't help the poor with either, until the poor INDIVIDUAL is ready to no longer be poor!!! "The Poor" isn't a group. It's a mass of individuals, with various individual work ethics, criminal records, skills or lack thereof.

The more comfortable we make an individual in his poverty, they less likely he is to rise above it. The less comfortable we make the mass of "The Poor", the more likely some will rise above it, while others will suffer more than they would have in comfort.

So what do we do? Make them uncomfortable? Thus guaranteeing more rise above it? Or make the mass of them comfortable in poverty, guaranteeing less of them rise above it?


If a person drops out of school, does drugs, is lazy, commits crime, has horrible priorities, or is just all around a shitbag of a person, well, at what point do we just say "Sorry dude, you are doing NOTHING to help yourself." And leave it at that.


The gov't CANNOT change a persons work ethic or values. A handout check wont do that. Neither will a lack of one. But if we make poverty comfortable, you can be sure less people will flee it.

Well HELL--as long as they're getting other people's money--what makes you believe they're ever going to be READY to go to work?--

Kinda like Wall Street types?

But the "Wall Street types" do get up in the morning, avoid drinking beer and doing heroine, put on a shirt and tie, bath themselves, shave, and go to a job. Even if you hate them, they are working. We did bail them out. But at least they're working.