Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Oh, and T, Fascism comes from CORPORATISM, not from socialism. Socialism just leads to socialism. Sometimes communism.
And T, Fascism is also a "Statist" form of government.
Oh, but wait, that was Mussolini that said that. Clearly, when it came to fascism, Benito had no clue what he was talking about.
The Entitlement mentality does seem to be gripping our nation at this point. Personal responsibility seems pretty much out the window now. But can we or should we afford 'Generation Gimme?'
If by "generation Gimmie" you mean the top 1 percent who are making money hand over fist and screaming for more tax cuts, no, we can't afford them.
At some point hard decisions are gonna have to be made. The Well's run dry. 'Generation Gimme' got to the well too late.
I think many are still trying to avoid answering this question. It is a very difficult problem. What does happen when the Well runs dry?
This thread, another thread that highlights the Republican plans to "get them born" and then "let them die".
Divesting the wealthy and the wealth creators of everything they have and redistributing it to the worthless class isnt enough.
Once the worthless have frittered away their lottery winnings they are back to being poor. Have nots in a world of haves. Therefore the wealthy have to keep producing to satisfy the worthless. They can't just give them money and go away. It never ends. At some point the weed is gone, the organic food gone to maggots, they need MORE. And more and more.
Thinking these demands aren't permanent is too optimistic. If anything they will grow. We have a group of people dedicated to doing nothing in exchange for everything.
wow talk about class warfare.
You hate the vast majority of American workers and worship the wealthy.
Do you know that the wealthy have been shown in every study of morals to care less about their fellow man than any other group?
You must be a wealthy spoiled decendent of the monied class.
I can tell due to your complete lack of compassion for your fellow man
I voted yes.... just to piss people off(I was #2).
lol! Voting Yes doesn't piss me off. I know you're wrong.
Did I say you? You are pretty rational... I disagree with your socioeconomic stances... but you aren't a prick. It's the Folk that spout Marxist/Commie every other post, tell me to get a job(when I've been working 23 years at the same place and am pretty well compensated for my efforts) and are little more than outraged parrots of AM radio(you know who you are) are who's skins I was looking to get under.
On a serious note...No... under the current system, we cannot afford them.... But we can do better than the "sink or swim" mentality of the Libertarian/Conservatives. I propose a "work for Benefits" Program that fundamentally changes the method of Welfare delivery. It will actually cost MORE than the current model in the short term, but in the long run, I think it would be a huge success.
Having people work for their benefits does some good things... Gives people a sense of purpose and empowerment, Gets rid of the stigma of being a "welfare bum" and perhaps will develop a sense of pride and dignity of having "earned" that compensation. Furthermore, it will give people who haven't worked in a long time(or never worked) a work history and an evaluation process that will help them get out of the system and into better paying jobs in the private and/or public sector.
The reason it will cost somewhat MORE is supervision and enforcement... the enforcement part is relatively easy... no work/no benefits(exceptions for Developmentally Disabled, Mentally Ill, and severe Physical handicaps will be allowed).
But we would need supervision to work with these people, and that supervision has to go beyond the role of a taskmaster. They will have to be Counselors too... Job Coaches so to speak.
If this is generation gimmme then how did all the money get funneled to the top?
The real question is whether the younger generation can afford YOU.
You know that, right?
It turns out that from a societal point of view, the quality of the retirement of one generation is directly proportional to the quality of their education investment for the next generation.
What? Are you trying to say that I would be insane to promote cuts in education spending because having a generation filled with poorly educated, unprepared people in charge of things when I become elderly is a bad thing?
And I don't mind people demanding they shut the Hell UP...and get a damned job.
You do understand you can't complain in one breath that there are no jobs due to President Obama and his "socialist" policies and then in the next breath demand that anyone who's unemployed go get a job without coming off as a giant hypocrite, right?
Blah, blah, blah.
So, reform the fucking tax system that YOU broke.
The youngest generation had nothing to do with that shit, and now you want to blame them for it?
The people who don't pay taxes don't pay them, for the most part, because they have deductions for other things, like children, or property taxes and outrageous interest rates on houses that they can't afford.
They don't pay them, because they don't have any income to tax, once all the bills are paid.
Having 12 children this day in age is fiscally irresponsible. But many do it. It reminds me of the time that my douchbag ex-brother in law held his hands above my nieces heads when he was figuring up his taxes, and excitedly exclaimed-"Cha-ching, cha-ching...!"...he was dreaming of his deductions.
I consider two people having several children, just as guilty as of milking the system, as the "welfare moochers". 12 children....one parent working, grosing $50k per year...irresponsible planning. If you don't agree with that....too bad.
I have a difficult time understanding why so few see the hyposcrisy in this.
Now now... having children produce the taxpayers of the future. How about we start Compensating labor appropriately instead of blaming people who are producing the next generation of Working Americans? Obviously your douchebag ex brother in law was working and contributing to society.
It turns out that from a societal point of view, the quality of the retirement of one generation is directly proportional to the quality of their education investment for the next generation.
What? Are you trying to say that I would be insane to promote cuts in education spending because having a generation filled with poorly educated, unprepared people in charge of things when I become elderly is a bad thing?
That Sir, is PRECISELY what I'm trying to say.
The Entitlement mentality does seem to be gripping our nation at this point. Personal responsibility seems pretty much out the window now. But can we or should we afford 'Generation Gimme?'
If by "generation Gimmie" you mean the top 1 percent who are making money hand over fist and screaming for more tax cuts, no, we can't afford them.
The difference is, they are working, investing, and risk taking when it comes to making money. We can not afford to give luxury items (ads for free cell phones to those on WIC for example) to those who whine it's not fair, but are not willing to take the risk or have the determination to work hard to get there on their own. Government hand-outs as a "right" is what got countries like Greece into the financial mess they are in. We can not afford that .
What? Are you trying to say that I would be insane to promote cuts in education spending because having a generation filled with poorly educated, unprepared people in charge of things when I become elderly is a bad thing?
That Sir, is PRECISELY what I'm trying to say.
I disagree. Not due to K-12
But college.
Our Legislature controls tuition. Damn wall street as the OWS would say.
That Sir, is PRECISELY what I'm trying to say.
I disagree. Not due to K-12
But college.
Our Legislature controls tuition. Damn wall street as the OWS would say.
You are right. Through the costly Pell grants and governement giveaways, the legislatue has raised the cost of tuition exorbinately. Meanwhile we don;t have enough skilled tradespeople for the jobs in manufacturing. But we do have remedial reading in college.
What's wrong with this picture?
How about tax incentives to the private sector to hire people off of the "workfare" roles? How about the Job Coaches be skilled in recognizing and developing the talents of the people they are in charge of? Some of them may become part of the business community themselves.
Sure, some would get integrated in the Public Sector. Working for the Public Sector is not a bad thing in and of itself. The problem is what we have now... too many Bureaucracies that are redundant. Through attrition(Not Hiring when Public Employees retire), we can achieve the necessary downsizing of governmental employees. When it gets to the point where we NEED workers again...then we can hire from the Workfare Roles as well as the Civil Service list... let the most qualified win.
We need a scalpel approach on this... A meat cleaver will just put more middle class people out of work.
Actually the left is the group of least compassion as they don't tend to give "charity", because "people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away."
Who Gives and Who Doesn't? - ABC News
If this is generation gimmme then how did all the money get funneled to the top?
Ever heard of getting an education and then working hard at a job to earn some of that money at the top?
Probably not. Most liberals are government tit sucking, high school drop out, unemployed, where's my freebie handout, fat assed lazy skanks that live in mommy and daddy's basement.
Oh geee... lookie there... I just described YOU!
Actually the left is the group of least compassion as they don't tend to give "charity", because "people who believe it's the government's job to make incomes more equal, are far less likely to give their money away."
Who Gives and Who Doesn't? - ABC News
Yeah, except the "charities" that the Right gives to are ones that they get to choose, and therefore include their own children's little league teams, contributions to church social events that they attend, etc, etc...
When given the opportunity to make "charitable" deductions, people donate their money to their own community (usually to people who don't need it), thus benefitting themselves, then they claim a tax deduction, and then they crow about it like they did something wonderful. Meanwhile the only thing they did was give little Timmy's soccer team the ability to buy shiny new uniforms so little Timmy can look good on the field.
And that's not even including the millions and millions of dollars that are claimed on tax forms for non-existent "charitable" donations.
Let's face it, people on the right HATE paying taxes, and will do ANYTHING to avoid doing so.
Democrats here said we need to raise taxes so they dont have to increase tuition.
would someone from the idiot left tell me how wall street is responsible.???
