Jeb Bush's Foreign Policy Plan: More Military Spending Will 'Encourage Peace'

[Pop23]

Walmart proves that workers can't survive on wages alone - without taxpayers subsidizing their existence.

Huh, ever heard of working more than one job?

Did it myself for many years.

Oh, but that's effort. Don't want people exerting themselves do we?

 

[ChrisL]

Walmart proves that workers can't survive on wages alone - without taxpayers subsidizing their existence.

Huh, ever heard of working more than one job?

Did it myself for many years.

Oh, but that's effort. Don't want people exerting themselves do we?

There are not enough jobs for 300,000 million people. I don't get what is so hard to understand about this fact.

 

[Pop23]

Look at Liberia . . . because THIS is what happens when you have destitute people. Watch it and learn something about poverty and it's long-term effects.

Begging the question

Did you watch the video? It is just an example of how extreme poverty and hunger turns your country into a shit hole.

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

Yes it is. People are NOT generous by nature. It's about time you realized that. People are inherently selfish creatures.

I totally disagree with that and the facts show the reverse, how generous Americans are.

And the biggest things we can do to reduce poverty aren't charity, they are eliminating job killing corporate and progressive taxes that take most federal taxes directly from job creators. The next thing is free as well, having all able bodied people work for their government checks instead of doing nothing for them. The Fair Tax would dramatically reduce unemployment if not eliminate it.

Make government the last step, not the first. Then make it as local as possible to achieve accountability. Keep the Feds out entirely. Go to local then State.

Look at Liberia . . . because THIS is what happens when you have destitute people. Watch it and learn something about poverty and it's long-term effects.

Begging the question

Did you watch the video? It is just an example of how extreme poverty and hunger turns your country into a shit hole.

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

It is not "redistribution of wealth." It is government based, large-scale charity. We could not POSSIBLY take care of all the poor without it. It would be literally impossible to get all of the resources together and to make sure everyone is cared for. I don't trust the government at ALL, as many people here know, but this is the ONE thing they do right, taking care of the people who need it the most.

Do you actually think that we will do away with welfare and other social service programs for the poor because it makes some of you unhappy? And then what? Give your tax money to you? Lol.

Not that I'm in total disagreement. The poor, those that can't help themselves do need our help, but that being said, calling this charity goes against the very meaning of the word.

Forced charity does not and cannot exist

 

[Pop23]

Walmart proves that workers can't survive on wages alone - without taxpayers subsidizing their existence.

Huh, ever heard of working more than one job?

Did it myself for many years.

Oh, but that's effort. Don't want people exerting themselves do we?

There are not enough jobs for 300,000 million people. I don't get what is so hard to understand about this fact.

Today, if I wanted, I could walk out the door and have a second job within minutes.

 

[ChrisL]

Walmart proves that workers can't survive on wages alone - without taxpayers subsidizing their existence.

Huh, ever heard of working more than one job?

Did it myself for many years.

Oh, but that's effort. Don't want people exerting themselves do we?

There are not enough jobs for 300,000 million people. I don't get what is so hard to understand about this fact.

Today, if I wanted, I could walk out the door and have a second job within minutes.

Fat chance. And even if true, that is irrelevant. There are NOT 300,000,000+ jobs available. Do you realize that?

 

[ChrisL]

I'll bet many of these people who are against social services helping the poor are ALSO anti abortion. Do you people THINK about anything?

 

[ChrisL]

Begging the question

Did you watch the video? It is just an example of how extreme poverty and hunger turns your country into a shit hole.

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

Yes it is. People are NOT generous by nature. It's about time you realized that. People are inherently selfish creatures.

I totally disagree with that and the facts show the reverse, how generous Americans are.

And the biggest things we can do to reduce poverty aren't charity, they are eliminating job killing corporate and progressive taxes that take most federal taxes directly from job creators. The next thing is free as well, having all able bodied people work for their government checks instead of doing nothing for them. The Fair Tax would dramatically reduce unemployment if not eliminate it.

Make government the last step, not the first. Then make it as local as possible to achieve accountability. Keep the Feds out entirely. Go to local then State.

Look at Liberia . . . because THIS is what happens when you have destitute people. Watch it and learn something about poverty and it's long-term effects.

Begging the question

Did you watch the video? It is just an example of how extreme poverty and hunger turns your country into a shit hole.

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

It is not "redistribution of wealth." It is government based, large-scale charity. We could not POSSIBLY take care of all the poor without it. It would be literally impossible to get all of the resources together and to make sure everyone is cared for. I don't trust the government at ALL, as many people here know, but this is the ONE thing they do right, taking care of the people who need it the most.

Do you actually think that we will do away with welfare and other social service programs for the poor because it makes some of you unhappy? And then what? Give your tax money to you? Lol.

Not that I'm in total disagreement. The poor, those that can't help themselves do need our help, but that being said, calling this charity goes against the very meaning of the word.

Forced charity does not and cannot exist

I'm not calling it charity. I'm calling it welfare and social services. Charity could not handle the amount it would take to help the poor. And then there are those who want to FORCE women to have children that they either cannot afford or do not want. Sure, GREAT idea. Let's just add to the problems. Good God.

 

[ChrisL]

If you are going to force poor people to have children as some kind of punishment for having sex, then you'd better be prepared to pay for those children because the poor woman with no social support who has to rely on charity is not going to be able to do so.

And WHO will suffer? The innocent children. That's who.

 

[initforme]

Increasing military spending makes perfect sense. Cut SS, Medicare, and education funding massively. Then cut unemployment insurance, wipe it right out. Then take all that money and spend it on the military. Take the money are raise the pay of military recruits as where we live out of a class of 150, there are zero enlistees this year and there was 1 last year out of 162.

 

[Pop23]

Walmart proves that workers can't survive on wages alone - without taxpayers subsidizing their existence.

Huh, ever heard of working more than one job?

Did it myself for many years.

Oh, but that's effort. Don't want people exerting themselves do we?

There are not enough jobs for 300,000 million people. I don't get what is so hard to understand about this fact.

Today, if I wanted, I could walk out the door and have a second job within minutes.

Fat chance. And even if true, that is irrelevant. There are NOT 300,000,000+ jobs available. Do you realize that?

We could free up millions of jobs in a heartbeat. Do you realize that?

 

[Pop23]

Did you watch the video? It is just an example of how extreme poverty and hunger turns your country into a shit hole.

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

Yes it is. People are NOT generous by nature. It's about time you realized that. People are inherently selfish creatures.

I totally disagree with that and the facts show the reverse, how generous Americans are.

And the biggest things we can do to reduce poverty aren't charity, they are eliminating job killing corporate and progressive taxes that take most federal taxes directly from job creators. The next thing is free as well, having all able bodied people work for their government checks instead of doing nothing for them. The Fair Tax would dramatically reduce unemployment if not eliminate it.

Make government the last step, not the first. Then make it as local as possible to achieve accountability. Keep the Feds out entirely. Go to local then State.

Begging the question

Did you watch the video? It is just an example of how extreme poverty and hunger turns your country into a shit hole.

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

It is not "redistribution of wealth." It is government based, large-scale charity. We could not POSSIBLY take care of all the poor without it. It would be literally impossible to get all of the resources together and to make sure everyone is cared for. I don't trust the government at ALL, as many people here know, but this is the ONE thing they do right, taking care of the people who need it the most.

Do you actually think that we will do away with welfare and other social service programs for the poor because it makes some of you unhappy? And then what? Give your tax money to you? Lol.

Not that I'm in total disagreement. The poor, those that can't help themselves do need our help, but that being said, calling this charity goes against the very meaning of the word.

Forced charity does not and cannot exist

I'm not calling it charity. I'm calling it welfare and social services. Charity could not handle the amount it would take to help the poor. And then there are those who want to FORCE women to have children that they either cannot afford or do not want. Sure, GREAT idea. Let's just add to the problems. Good God.

Rape is a crime

Good lord

 

[Pop23]

I'll bet many of these people who are against social services helping the poor are ALSO anti abortion. Do you people THINK about anything?

You realize you are doing an apple/orange argument.

 

[Pop23]

Walmart proves that workers can't survive on wages alone - without taxpayers subsidizing their existence.

Huh, ever heard of working more than one job?

Did it myself for many years.

Oh, but that's effort. Don't want people exerting themselves do we?

There are not enough jobs for 300,000 million people. I don't get what is so hard to understand about this fact.

Today, if I wanted, I could walk out the door and have a second job within minutes.

Fat chance. And even if true, that is irrelevant. There are NOT 300,000,000+ jobs available. Do you realize that?

It is true. I know a guy with a factory that's been trying to hire three people for over a month now. The applicants work for a few day, then don't show up.

I've helped a couple of times. Piece o cake work really.

 

[ChrisL]

Walmart proves that workers can't survive on wages alone - without taxpayers subsidizing their existence.

Huh, ever heard of working more than one job?

Did it myself for many years.

Oh, but that's effort. Don't want people exerting themselves do we?

There are not enough jobs for 300,000 million people. I don't get what is so hard to understand about this fact.

Today, if I wanted, I could walk out the door and have a second job within minutes.

Fat chance. And even if true, that is irrelevant. There are NOT 300,000,000+ jobs available. Do you realize that?

It is true. I know a guy with a factory that's been trying to hire three people for over a month now. The applicants work for a few day, then don't show up.

I've helped a couple of times. Piece o cake work really.

No, LOL, there are not 300,000,000+ jobs available. There are ALWAYS going to be people who are out of work and poor.

 

[ChrisL]

I'll bet many of these people who are against social services helping the poor are ALSO anti abortion. Do you people THINK about anything?

You realize you are doing an apple/orange argument.

NO, the two things are totally related. IF you want to force women to have children they cannot afford when they would prefer to abort said child, then you'd better be prepared for your tax monies to go to pay for said child.

 

[ChrisL]

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

Yes it is. People are NOT generous by nature. It's about time you realized that. People are inherently selfish creatures.

I totally disagree with that and the facts show the reverse, how generous Americans are.

And the biggest things we can do to reduce poverty aren't charity, they are eliminating job killing corporate and progressive taxes that take most federal taxes directly from job creators. The next thing is free as well, having all able bodied people work for their government checks instead of doing nothing for them. The Fair Tax would dramatically reduce unemployment if not eliminate it.

Make government the last step, not the first. Then make it as local as possible to achieve accountability. Keep the Feds out entirely. Go to local then State.

Did you watch the video? It is just an example of how extreme poverty and hunger turns your country into a shit hole.

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

It is not "redistribution of wealth." It is government based, large-scale charity. We could not POSSIBLY take care of all the poor without it. It would be literally impossible to get all of the resources together and to make sure everyone is cared for. I don't trust the government at ALL, as many people here know, but this is the ONE thing they do right, taking care of the people who need it the most.

Do you actually think that we will do away with welfare and other social service programs for the poor because it makes some of you unhappy? And then what? Give your tax money to you? Lol.

Not that I'm in total disagreement. The poor, those that can't help themselves do need our help, but that being said, calling this charity goes against the very meaning of the word.

Forced charity does not and cannot exist

I'm not calling it charity. I'm calling it welfare and social services. Charity could not handle the amount it would take to help the poor. And then there are those who want to FORCE women to have children that they either cannot afford or do not want. Sure, GREAT idea. Let's just add to the problems. Good God.

Rape is a crime

Good lord

Where did I mention rape? Women are going to have sex and get pregnant. That is the bottom line. It doesn't matter what you think about it or even if you might have some great points, it is still going to happen.

 

[Pop23]

Huh, ever heard of working more than one job?

Did it myself for many years.

Oh, but that's effort. Don't want people exerting themselves do we?

There are not enough jobs for 300,000 million people. I don't get what is so hard to understand about this fact.

Today, if I wanted, I could walk out the door and have a second job within minutes.

Fat chance. And even if true, that is irrelevant. There are NOT 300,000,000+ jobs available. Do you realize that?

It is true. I know a guy with a factory that's been trying to hire three people for over a month now. The applicants work for a few day, then don't show up.

I've helped a couple of times. Piece o cake work really.

No, LOL, there are not 300,000,000+ jobs available. There are ALWAYS going to be people who are out of work and poor.

Find anywhere where I've said different. There will always be people unwilling to speak well, bathe daily and want to put out effort.

There are also those that can't for other reasons find work. It is the latter I care about.

 

[Pop23]

Yes it is. People are NOT generous by nature. It's about time you realized that. People are inherently selfish creatures.

I totally disagree with that and the facts show the reverse, how generous Americans are.

And the biggest things we can do to reduce poverty aren't charity, they are eliminating job killing corporate and progressive taxes that take most federal taxes directly from job creators. The next thing is free as well, having all able bodied people work for their government checks instead of doing nothing for them. The Fair Tax would dramatically reduce unemployment if not eliminate it.

Make government the last step, not the first. Then make it as local as possible to achieve accountability. Keep the Feds out entirely. Go to local then State.

Do you know what begging the question means? I didn't dispute that. You are assuming that government redistribution of wealth is the only solution to the problem, that is what I am disagreeing with.

It is not "redistribution of wealth." It is government based, large-scale charity. We could not POSSIBLY take care of all the poor without it. It would be literally impossible to get all of the resources together and to make sure everyone is cared for. I don't trust the government at ALL, as many people here know, but this is the ONE thing they do right, taking care of the people who need it the most.

Do you actually think that we will do away with welfare and other social service programs for the poor because it makes some of you unhappy? And then what? Give your tax money to you? Lol.

Not that I'm in total disagreement. The poor, those that can't help themselves do need our help, but that being said, calling this charity goes against the very meaning of the word.

Forced charity does not and cannot exist

I'm not calling it charity. I'm calling it welfare and social services. Charity could not handle the amount it would take to help the poor. And then there are those who want to FORCE women to have children that they either cannot afford or do not want. Sure, GREAT idea. Let's just add to the problems. Good God.

Rape is a crime

Good lord

Where did I mention rape? Women are going to have sex and get pregnant. That is the bottom line. It doesn't matter what you think about it or even if you might have some great points, it is still going to happen.

So you meant willingly get pregnant, not forced to have children.

 

[Pop23]

I'll bet many of these people who are against social services helping the poor are ALSO anti abortion. Do you people THINK about anything?

You realize you are doing an apple/orange argument.

NO, the two things are totally related. IF you want to force women to have children they cannot afford when they would prefer to abort said child, then you'd better be prepared for your tax monies to go to pay for said child.

Force equals charity

And willingly getting pregnant is force?

Ok


Huh?

 

[ChrisL]

I'll bet many of these people who are against social services helping the poor are ALSO anti abortion. Do you people THINK about anything?

You realize you are doing an apple/orange argument.

NO, the two things are totally related. IF you want to force women to have children they cannot afford when they would prefer to abort said child, then you'd better be prepared for your tax monies to go to pay for said child.

Force equals charity

And willingly getting pregnant is force?

Ok


Huh?

Forcing a woman to carry an unwanted pregnancy to term and become a mother is MUCH more forceful than using your tax dollars to help the poor. I know, I know, you poor poor thing. A portion of your taxes goes to help people. Horrible. Just horrible.