Republicans and Homelessness

[Flopper]

When Ronald Reagan was president in the 1980s, he cut funding for federal housing programs while at the same time many states closed mental institutions.

Liberals were in favor of deinstitutionalization.

Deinstitutionalization worked well for those with less serious mental disorders who could afford treatment but not well at all for the poor or the more serious cases. The idea was that the patients would be treated just as effectively in private care. Unfortunately that never happen for many. Today, there are walking time bombs just waiting to be set off in all our major cities.

 

[Wyatt earp]

There's a certain irony here.

The left and the liberal media is always trying to push this "gun control" paradigm on the nation. The conservatives and the Right are always telling us that the Second Amendment is sacrosanct, and that guns don't kill people, people kill people.

Now the conservatives want to turn around and take away the very options and security that the most potentially dangerous and desperate people have for security? This would then make them MORE insecure, desperate and dangerous, would it not? How can they be so short sighted?

It boggles the mind. If these representatives weren't so comfortable, one would think THEY are the mentally ill ones.

​

When Ronald Reagan was president in the 1980s, he cut funding for federal housing programs while at the same time many states closed mental institutions.

Liberals were in favor of deinstitutionalization.

When Reagan was governor of California, mental facilities were also closed. I see a pattern here, especially since at the time of the closings, Governor Reagan said in a speech that the care of these people was the responsibility of the families. When it looks like a republican idea, and smells like a republican idea (screw everybody but the wealthy) it usually is a republican idea.

 

[Flopper]

If the Republicans had there way, we would make it easier for Christian charities to help these people instead of the liberals who don't want these beautiful Christians organizations to even help the homeless and down trodden.

Thats how we handle the problem locally,food banks,shelters,local churches banding together,its more personnel and effective.The propaganda that repubs want to, as the lie goes shove granny off the clif is just that a lie.

Local charities are a wonderful way to help the poor and homeless. However, the needs are far greater than local donations and volunteers can provide. A food bank supplements SNAP. The average family get's about $250 in benefits a month from SNAP which is certainly not enough. Many families receive less that $100 a month. How usefully a food bank is in supplementing SNAP depends on the size of the food bank, it's hours and location. Some are as big as a grocery store, but most are fairly small, only open certain days with a limited selection and constantly changing stock.

 

[Flopper]

Millions of children are mentally disabled because of drug use during pregnancy. But that's the mother's choice, right?

It may be the mother's choice but it's society that foots the bill for their support.

 

[Flopper]

Millions of children are mentally disabled because of drug use during pregnancy. But that's the mother's choice, right?

That's because the paradigm by the government has always been jail, not treatment.

So now the government will throw those mentally disabled people whose mothers did drugs, out on the street. Some of them, I am sure, are women, who will turn to drugs and prostitution, just like their mothers before them did, and they will have babies, and the cycle will repeat because of the short sighted politicians and bureaucrats.

​

The stereotype of the homeless is an old drunks that's too lazy to work but like most stereotypes, it's not very accurate.. Approximately 1.6 million children will be homeless over the course of a year and 60% of those that make it to shelters are children under the age of 6. 34% of the homeless are families and 84% of those families are headed by a women.

Family Homelessness Facts Green Doors

 

[Coloradomtnman]

The problem with the bleeding heart liberal policy toward the poor is that giving away all of this stuff and taxing the producers for it makes the problem worse in two ways:

1. It drives away business, which loses jobs and creates more unemployed homeless.
2. It makes unemployment and homelessness a viable option for many.

More importantly for the left, it creates more government dependant democrat voters.

So what's the conservative plan? Let'em starve? High crime rates due to a large, impoverished population with dead bodies in the streets isn't the kind of society in which I want to live, and, it seems, neither do most of our fellow citizens.

No, that only exists in your alleged "mind". It's yet another lie you morons make up to fool yourselves with.

So what's the conservative plan?

 

[Coloradomtnman]

The problem with the bleeding heart liberal policy toward the poor is that giving away all of this stuff and taxing the producers for it makes the problem worse in two ways:

1. It drives away business, which loses jobs and creates more unemployed homeless.
2. It makes unemployment and homelessness a viable option for many.

More importantly for the left, it creates more government dependant democrat voters.

So what's the conservative plan? Let'em starve? High crime rates due to a large, impoverished population with dead bodies in the streets isn't the kind of society in which I want to live, and, it seems, neither do most of our fellow citizens.

People re easy to fool. 15+ trillion dollars spent on the war on poverty hasn't changed the situation and likely made it worse. Many of those could be working but can manage without it thanks to the social safety net. I see nothing wrong with letting able bodied people starve if they refuse to provide for themselves. And the crime rate can be drastically reduced with passing personal property laws that allow you to dispatch thieves.
Liberals make things worse then want more liberalism to fix it, then more, and more, etc.

Cause bands of armed thieves are easier and less costly to deal with, right?

Turning the US into Mexico is one way we could deal with our immigration problem..

 

[PredFan]

The problem with the bleeding heart liberal policy toward the poor is that giving away all of this stuff and taxing the producers for it makes the problem worse in two ways:

1. It drives away business, which loses jobs and creates more unemployed homeless.
2. It makes unemployment and homelessness a viable option for many.

More importantly for the left, it creates more government dependant democrat voters.

So what's the conservative plan? Let'em starve? High crime rates due to a large, impoverished population with dead bodies in the streets isn't the kind of society in which I want to live, and, it seems, neither do most of our fellow citizens.

No, that only exists in your alleged "mind". It's yet another lie you morons make up to fool yourselves with.

So what's the conservative plan?

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

The problem with the bleeding heart liberal policy toward the poor is that giving away all of this stuff and taxing the producers for it makes the problem worse in two ways:

1. It drives away business, which loses jobs and creates more unemployed homeless.
2. It makes unemployment and homelessness a viable option for many.

More importantly for the left, it creates more government dependant democrat voters.

So what's the conservative plan? Let'em starve? High crime rates due to a large, impoverished population with dead bodies in the streets isn't the kind of society in which I want to live, and, it seems, neither do most of our fellow citizens.

No, that only exists in your alleged "mind". It's yet another lie you morons make up to fool yourselves with.

So what's the conservative plan?

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

 

[PredFan]

The problem with the bleeding heart liberal policy toward the poor is that giving away all of this stuff and taxing the producers for it makes the problem worse in two ways:

1. It drives away business, which loses jobs and creates more unemployed homeless.
2. It makes unemployment and homelessness a viable option for many.

More importantly for the left, it creates more government dependant democrat voters.

So what's the conservative plan? Let'em starve? High crime rates due to a large, impoverished population with dead bodies in the streets isn't the kind of society in which I want to live, and, it seems, neither do most of our fellow citizens.

No, that only exists in your alleged "mind". It's yet another lie you morons make up to fool yourselves with.

So what's the conservative plan?

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

I already told you what the better way was.

Jobs for the disabled.

Why are we responsible for people with substance abuse issues? Why do we have to take care of people who ran up
Massive debt? Why do we have to support the children of people who can't stop having kids?

The important point is what I originally stated, by giving them homes, by giving them money, we make living off the taxpayer a viable option for them,

How does supporting people who have massive debt get them to change their ways? Hiw does giving unwed mothers who can keep their legs together more money for each child the birth convince them to be more responsible?

No need to answer because I'll tell you the truth, it doesn't do a damn thing to help them.

And I don't believe for a second that you would vote for anything a conservative comes up with. Progressives are proven liars.

 

[Flopper]

So what's the conservative plan? Let'em starve? High crime rates due to a large, impoverished population with dead bodies in the streets isn't the kind of society in which I want to live, and, it seems, neither do most of our fellow citizens.

No, that only exists in your alleged "mind". It's yet another lie you morons make up to fool yourselves with.

So what's the conservative plan?

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

I already told you what the better way was.

Jobs for the disabled.

Why are we responsible for people with substance abuse issues? Why do we have to take care of people who ran up
Massive debt? Why do we have to support the children of people who can't stop having kids?

The important point is what I originally stated, by giving them homes, by giving them money, we make living off the taxpayer a viable option for them,

How does supporting people who have massive debt get them to change their ways? Hiw does giving unwed mothers who can keep their legs together more money for each child the birth convince them to be more responsible?

No need to answer because I'll tell you the truth, it doesn't do a damn thing to help them.

And I don't believe for a second that you would vote for anything a conservative comes up with. Progressives are proven liars.

The only thing that I have ever seen from conservatives is to blame low income people for their status and dismantle safety nets to encourage them to find better jobs for which they aren't qualified.

 

[PredFan]

No, that only exists in your alleged "mind". It's yet another lie you morons make up to fool yourselves with.

So what's the conservative plan?

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

I already told you what the better way was.

Jobs for the disabled.

Why are we responsible for people with substance abuse issues? Why do we have to take care of people who ran up
Massive debt? Why do we have to support the children of people who can't stop having kids?

The important point is what I originally stated, by giving them homes, by giving them money, we make living off the taxpayer a viable option for them,

How does supporting people who have massive debt get them to change their ways? Hiw does giving unwed mothers who can keep their legs together more money for each child the birth convince them to be more responsible?

No need to answer because I'll tell you the truth, it doesn't do a damn thing to help them.

And I don't believe for a second that you would vote for anything a conservative comes up with. Progressives are proven liars.

The only thing that I have ever seen from conservatives is to blame low income people for their status and dismantle safety nets to encourage them to find better jobs for which they aren't qualified.

Actually, you only see what you want to see.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

So what's the conservative plan? Let'em starve? High crime rates due to a large, impoverished population with dead bodies in the streets isn't the kind of society in which I want to live, and, it seems, neither do most of our fellow citizens.

No, that only exists in your alleged "mind". It's yet another lie you morons make up to fool yourselves with.

So what's the conservative plan?

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

I already told you what the better way was.

Jobs for the disabled.

Why are we responsible for people with substance abuse issues? Why do we have to take care of people who ran up
Massive debt? Why do we have to support the children of people who can't stop having kids?

The important point is what I originally stated, by giving them homes, by giving them money, we make living off the taxpayer a viable option for them,

How does supporting people who have massive debt get them to change their ways? Hiw does giving unwed mothers who can keep their legs together more money for each child the birth convince them to be more responsible?

No need to answer because I'll tell you the truth, it doesn't do a damn thing to help them.

And I don't believe for a second that you would vote for anything a conservative comes up with. Progressives are proven liars.

What if someone is so disabled that they are unable to work enough or at a job that pays enough to be self-sufficient?

It isn't about being responsible for other people, it's about what kind of society in which we want to live. People make mistakes - no one is perfect. And everyone is susceptible to misfortune. So do we, as a society, do something to help those less fortunate, or who took a risk that went bad, or when they were young made mistake that affects their potential to earn or excel, or the disabled, the handicapped, those most vulnerable?

A person can't be on Welfare forever. It's two years and then they are on their own. Same with food stamps, unemployment, etc. There are many Americans who went on to be financially successful who at one time benefitted from government intervention. There are even more who it helped get back on their feet again. There are a very few who game the system. So should we throw everyone off and into the streets because of a few bad eggs?

I don't want to live in a country like Mexico where people build walls around their property and line them with barbed wire or broken glass to keep the numerous desperate from robbing and/or killing them just to survive. I don't want to see cities surrounded by shanty towns filled with desperate people clinging to survival. I don't want children to beg for money or try to sell me chiclets in this country because we won't help their parents out of a mess because "how will they learn?".

I have voted with Conservatives several times. Prove me a liar before you judge me as one.

 

[LogikAndReazon]

There would be no poverty, homelessness, or untreated mental patients if liberal/progressive/socialist/marxist hypocrites put all their efforts and money behind their empty bleeding heart concerns.....

 

[PredFan]

No, that only exists in your alleged "mind". It's yet another lie you morons make up to fool yourselves with.

So what's the conservative plan?

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

I already told you what the better way was.

Jobs for the disabled.

Why are we responsible for people with substance abuse issues? Why do we have to take care of people who ran up
Massive debt? Why do we have to support the children of people who can't stop having kids?

The important point is what I originally stated, by giving them homes, by giving them money, we make living off the taxpayer a viable option for them,

How does supporting people who have massive debt get them to change their ways? Hiw does giving unwed mothers who can keep their legs together more money for each child the birth convince them to be more responsible?

No need to answer because I'll tell you the truth, it doesn't do a damn thing to help them.

And I don't believe for a second that you would vote for anything a conservative comes up with. Progressives are proven liars.

What if someone is so disabled that they are unable to work enough or at a job that pays enough to be self-sufficient?

It isn't about being responsible for other people, it's about what kind of society in which we want to live. People make mistakes - no one is perfect. And everyone is susceptible to misfortune. So do we, as a society, do something to help those less fortunate, or who took a risk that went bad, or when they were young made mistake that affects their potential to earn or excel, or the disabled, the handicapped, those most vulnerable?

A person can't be on Welfare forever. It's two years and then they are on their own. Same with food stamps, unemployment, etc. There are many Americans who went on to be financially successful who at one time benefitted from government intervention. There are even more who it helped get back on their feet again. There are a very few who game the system. So should we throw everyone off and into the streets because of a few bad eggs?

I don't want to live in a country like Mexico where people build walls around their property and line them with barbed wire or broken glass to keep the numerous desperate from robbing and/or killing them just to survive. I don't want to see cities surrounded by shanty towns filled with desperate people clinging to survival. I don't want children to beg for money or try to sell me chiclets in this country because we won't help their parents out of a mess because "how will they learn?".

I have voted with Conservatives several times. Prove me a liar before you judge me as one.

There are charitable organizations that can help those who are disabled and cannot work. No American should be forced by the government to give money that he or she has earned to those who do not earn it.

Why should the producers be responsible to take care if those who screwed up their lives? Again, we are making irresponsible behavior a viable option for people.

You live in denial when you try to claim that there are only a few bad apples. But even if it's true, why should those who didn't screw their lives up have to pay for others who did and continue to do so?

You have yet to answer that question.

Again the most important facts are theses:

1. That government assistance most often fails at turning a person's life around
2. Increasing entitlements only makes homelessness a viable option for people.

 

[Cassandro]

Millions of children are mentally disabled because of drug use during pregnancy. But that's the mother's choice, right?

That's because the paradigm by the government has always been jail, not treatment.

So now the government will throw those mentally disabled people whose mothers did drugs, out on the street. Some of them, I am sure, are women, who will turn to drugs and prostitution, just like their mothers before them did, and they will have babies, and the cycle will repeat because of the short sighted politicians and bureaucrats.

​

The stereotype of the homeless is an old drunks that's too lazy to work but like most stereotypes, it's not very accurate.. Approximately 1.6 million children will be homeless over the course of a year and 60% of those that make it to shelters are children under the age of 6. 34% of the homeless are families and 84% of those families are headed by a women.

Family Homelessness Facts Green Doors

Thanks for the cite, but it is designed to disguise the fact that homelessness results from mental illness and/or drug addiction. Otherwise, these people would take advantage of the myriad of programs that would provide them with permanent housing. (The drug addicts don't want to submit to drug testing.)

The fact that many of them have children does not alter this fact. People who neglect or abuse their children should have their children taken from them and they should be incarcerated or confined in a treatment facility where they can't have more children. The longer we pretend otherwise, the worse this problem will become.

 

[Flopper]

Millions of children are mentally disabled because of drug use during pregnancy. But that's the mother's choice, right?

That's because the paradigm by the government has always been jail, not treatment.

So now the government will throw those mentally disabled people whose mothers did drugs, out on the street. Some of them, I am sure, are women, who will turn to drugs and prostitution, just like their mothers before them did, and they will have babies, and the cycle will repeat because of the short sighted politicians and bureaucrats.

​

The stereotype of the homeless is an old drunks that's too lazy to work but like most stereotypes, it's not very accurate.. Approximately 1.6 million children will be homeless over the course of a year and 60% of those that make it to shelters are children under the age of 6. 34% of the homeless are families and 84% of those families are headed by a women.

Family Homelessness Facts Green Doors

Thanks for the cite, but it is designed to disguise the fact that homelessness results from mental illness and/or drug addiction. Otherwise, these people would take advantage of the myriad of programs that would provide them with permanent housing. (The drug addicts don't want to submit to drug testing.)

The fact that many of them have children does not alter this fact. People who neglect or abuse their children should have their children taken from them and they should be incarcerated or confined in a treatment facility where they can't have more children. The longer we pretend otherwise, the worse this problem will become.

Judging from the homeless shelters, I have seen I agree with your assessment that drug addition and mental illness are a major cause of homelessness. However, that's about all I agree with.

Most of the families that remain homeless for long periods are trapped by addiction and or mental illness and they simply aren't capability of escaping. That doesn't mean they don't love their children or they abuse them. As bad as the situation is, taking children away from their only parent is usually not in the best interest of child, the parent, or the state. The outlook for kids that enter foster care or orphanages is not good compared to kids left with the parents. They are 5 times more likely to drop out of school, three times more likely to end up on government assistance as adults, more likely to be incarcerated and 85% less likely to attend college.

Another problem with your suggestion is cost. The national average for keeping a child in foster care is $26,000/ year. Incarceration for the parent will run $25,000 to $30,000 a year Supporting a mother with 2 children is far cheaper than making them wards of the state and generally the outcome for the kids is better. It also gives the parent a chance to turn their life around which is very difficult if you're living on streets.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

So what's the conservative plan?

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

I already told you what the better way was.

Jobs for the disabled.

Why are we responsible for people with substance abuse issues? Why do we have to take care of people who ran up
Massive debt? Why do we have to support the children of people who can't stop having kids?

The important point is what I originally stated, by giving them homes, by giving them money, we make living off the taxpayer a viable option for them,

How does supporting people who have massive debt get them to change their ways? Hiw does giving unwed mothers who can keep their legs together more money for each child the birth convince them to be more responsible?

No need to answer because I'll tell you the truth, it doesn't do a damn thing to help them.

And I don't believe for a second that you would vote for anything a conservative comes up with. Progressives are proven liars.

What if someone is so disabled that they are unable to work enough or at a job that pays enough to be self-sufficient?

It isn't about being responsible for other people, it's about what kind of society in which we want to live. People make mistakes - no one is perfect. And everyone is susceptible to misfortune. So do we, as a society, do something to help those less fortunate, or who took a risk that went bad, or when they were young made mistake that affects their potential to earn or excel, or the disabled, the handicapped, those most vulnerable?

A person can't be on Welfare forever. It's two years and then they are on their own. Same with food stamps, unemployment, etc. There are many Americans who went on to be financially successful who at one time benefitted from government intervention. There are even more who it helped get back on their feet again. There are a very few who game the system. So should we throw everyone off and into the streets because of a few bad eggs?

I don't want to live in a country like Mexico where people build walls around their property and line them with barbed wire or broken glass to keep the numerous desperate from robbing and/or killing them just to survive. I don't want to see cities surrounded by shanty towns filled with desperate people clinging to survival. I don't want children to beg for money or try to sell me chiclets in this country because we won't help their parents out of a mess because "how will they learn?".

I have voted with Conservatives several times. Prove me a liar before you judge me as one.

There are charitable organizations that can help those who are disabled and cannot work. No American should be forced by the government to give money that he or she has earned to those who do not earn it.

Why should the producers be responsible to take care if those who screwed up their lives? Again, we are making irresponsible behavior a viable option for people.

You live in denial when you try to claim that there are only a few bad apples. But even if it's true, why should those who didn't screw their lives up have to pay for others who did and continue to do so?

You have yet to answer that question.

Again the most important facts are theses:

1. That government assistance most often fails at turning a person's life around
2. Increasing entitlements only makes homelessness a viable option for people.

No one is responsible for anyone but themselves or their dependents. We agree on that. I'm not responsible for the drunk across the street who gets subsidized housing or any kind of government assistance and neither is anyone else.

Charitable organizations are not able to handle the volume of the problems associated with poverty, physical or mental disability, substance abuse, etc. they never have been and will not be in the foreseeable future.

You want this to be a moral absolutism about earning, taking, and contributing. I see this as a practical problem about a safe society and quality of life. You find it morally repugnant to be forced by We the People to have a portion of your taxed income go to people who don't pay their own way through life, whether through their own fault or through no fault of their own, because it's a forced contribution instead of a voluntary one.

From my POV, I don't want the mentally or physically disabled on the streets begging, children begging, people starving, shanty towns, high rates of crime, large danger zones that are unsafe to travel through at night. To me it's a matter of pragmatism: our neighborhoods, cities, and nation is safer, less impoverished, and there is less suffering and misery all around: for the most vulnerable as well as for those who are productive. And it helps many people, who wish to be responsible and productive, through the hard times so that they can get back on their feet again.

According to this website: Welfare Fraud - Federal Safety Net

All government assistance programs, including negative tax returns, pell grants, Medicaid, SNAP, etc. had a total 8.1% of improper payments made, including fraud.

"Improper Payment Definition
Improper payments are described this way by the OMB: “ ‘Improper payments’ occur when:

• funds go to the wrong recipient;
• the right recipient receives the incorrect amount of funds (including over payments and underpayments);
• documentation is not available to support a payment; or
• the recipient uses funds in an improper manner.

Although not all improper payments are fraud, and not all improper payments represent a loss to the government, all improper payments degrade the integrity of government programs and compromise citizens’ trust in government.”"

So, yes it's a few bad apples because most of these improper payments were clerical or bureaucracic mistakes.

As for your last two points: Please link.

 

[PredFan]

Not that you give a damn what it is. You liberals have zero credibility, and zero honesty. The plan is to provide jobs by unleashing the strength of the private sector. It's the only plan that ever works.

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

I already told you what the better way was.

Jobs for the disabled.

Why are we responsible for people with substance abuse issues? Why do we have to take care of people who ran up
Massive debt? Why do we have to support the children of people who can't stop having kids?

The important point is what I originally stated, by giving them homes, by giving them money, we make living off the taxpayer a viable option for them,

How does supporting people who have massive debt get them to change their ways? Hiw does giving unwed mothers who can keep their legs together more money for each child the birth convince them to be more responsible?

No need to answer because I'll tell you the truth, it doesn't do a damn thing to help them.

And I don't believe for a second that you would vote for anything a conservative comes up with. Progressives are proven liars.

What if someone is so disabled that they are unable to work enough or at a job that pays enough to be self-sufficient?

It isn't about being responsible for other people, it's about what kind of society in which we want to live. People make mistakes - no one is perfect. And everyone is susceptible to misfortune. So do we, as a society, do something to help those less fortunate, or who took a risk that went bad, or when they were young made mistake that affects their potential to earn or excel, or the disabled, the handicapped, those most vulnerable?

A person can't be on Welfare forever. It's two years and then they are on their own. Same with food stamps, unemployment, etc. There are many Americans who went on to be financially successful who at one time benefitted from government intervention. There are even more who it helped get back on their feet again. There are a very few who game the system. So should we throw everyone off and into the streets because of a few bad eggs?

I don't want to live in a country like Mexico where people build walls around their property and line them with barbed wire or broken glass to keep the numerous desperate from robbing and/or killing them just to survive. I don't want to see cities surrounded by shanty towns filled with desperate people clinging to survival. I don't want children to beg for money or try to sell me chiclets in this country because we won't help their parents out of a mess because "how will they learn?".

I have voted with Conservatives several times. Prove me a liar before you judge me as one.

There are charitable organizations that can help those who are disabled and cannot work. No American should be forced by the government to give money that he or she has earned to those who do not earn it.

Why should the producers be responsible to take care if those who screwed up their lives? Again, we are making irresponsible behavior a viable option for people.

You live in denial when you try to claim that there are only a few bad apples. But even if it's true, why should those who didn't screw their lives up have to pay for others who did and continue to do so?

You have yet to answer that question.

Again the most important facts are theses:

1. That government assistance most often fails at turning a person's life around
2. Increasing entitlements only makes homelessness a viable option for people.

No one is responsible for anyone but themselves or their dependents. We agree on that. I'm not responsible for the drunk across the street who gets subsidized housing or any kind of government assistance and neither is anyone else.

Charitable organizations are not able to handle the volume of the problems associated with poverty, physical or mental disability, substance abuse, etc. they never have been and will not be in the foreseeable future.

You want this to be a moral absolutism about earning, taking, and contributing. I see this as a practical problem about a safe society and quality of life. You find it morally repugnant to be forced by We the People to have a portion of your taxed income go to people who don't pay their own way through life, whether through their own fault or through no fault of their own, because it's a forced contribution instead of a voluntary one.

From my POV, I don't want the mentally or physically disabled on the streets begging, children begging, people starving, shanty towns, high rates of crime, large danger zones that are unsafe to travel through at night. To me it's a matter of pragmatism: our neighborhoods, cities, and nation is safer, less impoverished, and there is less suffering and misery all around: for the most vulnerable as well as for those who are productive. And it helps many people, who wish to be responsible and productive, through the hard times so that they can get back on their feet again.

According to this website: Welfare Fraud - Federal Safety Net

All government assistance programs, including negative tax returns, pell grants, Medicaid, SNAP, etc. had a total 8.1% of improper payments made, including fraud.

"Improper Payment Definition
Improper payments are described this way by the OMB: “ ‘Improper payments’ occur when:

• funds go to the wrong recipient;
• the right recipient receives the incorrect amount of funds (including over payments and underpayments);
• documentation is not available to support a payment; or
• the recipient uses funds in an improper manner.

Although not all improper payments are fraud, and not all improper payments represent a loss to the government, all improper payments degrade the integrity of government programs and compromise citizens’ trust in government.”"

So, yes it's a few bad apples because most of these improper payments were clerical or bureaucracic mistakes.

As for your last two points: Please link.

But your solution to the problem only crests more if the problem. That is why it's getting worse and worse.

 

[Coloradomtnman]

Your prejudice isn't appreciated. I am interested because nothing seems to work to reduce the numbers of homeless or impoverished except a war time economy and/or government assistance or intervention.

If there's a better way, then by all means, let us in on it.

Alright, so explain to me how the conservative plan helps mentally ill and disabled people stay off the streets? How does it help people with out of control substance abuse issues? How does it help the family on the edge whose devastated by massive debt, either through bad planning or no fault of their own? How does it help the children of idiots who get knocked up and who don't take responsibility seriously, who have no business having children but...they did and now what happens to their children? Mom can't keep a job and Dad disappeared, or went to jail. What happens to that kid? If conservatives have a good plan that does all that while lowering taxes and government spending, it'll get my vote.

I already told you what the better way was.

Jobs for the disabled.

Why are we responsible for people with substance abuse issues? Why do we have to take care of people who ran up
Massive debt? Why do we have to support the children of people who can't stop having kids?

The important point is what I originally stated, by giving them homes, by giving them money, we make living off the taxpayer a viable option for them,

How does supporting people who have massive debt get them to change their ways? Hiw does giving unwed mothers who can keep their legs together more money for each child the birth convince them to be more responsible?

No need to answer because I'll tell you the truth, it doesn't do a damn thing to help them.

And I don't believe for a second that you would vote for anything a conservative comes up with. Progressives are proven liars.

What if someone is so disabled that they are unable to work enough or at a job that pays enough to be self-sufficient?

It isn't about being responsible for other people, it's about what kind of society in which we want to live. People make mistakes - no one is perfect. And everyone is susceptible to misfortune. So do we, as a society, do something to help those less fortunate, or who took a risk that went bad, or when they were young made mistake that affects their potential to earn or excel, or the disabled, the handicapped, those most vulnerable?

A person can't be on Welfare forever. It's two years and then they are on their own. Same with food stamps, unemployment, etc. There are many Americans who went on to be financially successful who at one time benefitted from government intervention. There are even more who it helped get back on their feet again. There are a very few who game the system. So should we throw everyone off and into the streets because of a few bad eggs?

I don't want to live in a country like Mexico where people build walls around their property and line them with barbed wire or broken glass to keep the numerous desperate from robbing and/or killing them just to survive. I don't want to see cities surrounded by shanty towns filled with desperate people clinging to survival. I don't want children to beg for money or try to sell me chiclets in this country because we won't help their parents out of a mess because "how will they learn?".

I have voted with Conservatives several times. Prove me a liar before you judge me as one.

There are charitable organizations that can help those who are disabled and cannot work. No American should be forced by the government to give money that he or she has earned to those who do not earn it.

Why should the producers be responsible to take care if those who screwed up their lives? Again, we are making irresponsible behavior a viable option for people.

You live in denial when you try to claim that there are only a few bad apples. But even if it's true, why should those who didn't screw their lives up have to pay for others who did and continue to do so?

You have yet to answer that question.

Again the most important facts are theses:

1. That government assistance most often fails at turning a person's life around
2. Increasing entitlements only makes homelessness a viable option for people.

No one is responsible for anyone but themselves or their dependents. We agree on that. I'm not responsible for the drunk across the street who gets subsidized housing or any kind of government assistance and neither is anyone else.

Charitable organizations are not able to handle the volume of the problems associated with poverty, physical or mental disability, substance abuse, etc. they never have been and will not be in the foreseeable future.

You want this to be a moral absolutism about earning, taking, and contributing. I see this as a practical problem about a safe society and quality of life. You find it morally repugnant to be forced by We the People to have a portion of your taxed income go to people who don't pay their own way through life, whether through their own fault or through no fault of their own, because it's a forced contribution instead of a voluntary one.

From my POV, I don't want the mentally or physically disabled on the streets begging, children begging, people starving, shanty towns, high rates of crime, large danger zones that are unsafe to travel through at night. To me it's a matter of pragmatism: our neighborhoods, cities, and nation is safer, less impoverished, and there is less suffering and misery all around: for the most vulnerable as well as for those who are productive. And it helps many people, who wish to be responsible and productive, through the hard times so that they can get back on their feet again.

According to this website: Welfare Fraud - Federal Safety Net

All government assistance programs, including negative tax returns, pell grants, Medicaid, SNAP, etc. had a total 8.1% of improper payments made, including fraud.

"Improper Payment Definition
Improper payments are described this way by the OMB: “ ‘Improper payments’ occur when:

• funds go to the wrong recipient;
• the right recipient receives the incorrect amount of funds (including over payments and underpayments);
• documentation is not available to support a payment; or
• the recipient uses funds in an improper manner.

Although not all improper payments are fraud, and not all improper payments represent a loss to the government, all improper payments degrade the integrity of government programs and compromise citizens’ trust in government.”"

So, yes it's a few bad apples because most of these improper payments were clerical or bureaucracic mistakes.

As for your last two points: Please link.

But your solution to the problem only crests more if the problem. That is why it's getting worse and worse.

I'm sorry, but I don't understand your response.