So....how many posters do we have who have heard of this INCEL Movement?

[danielpalos]

Still arguing with that tar baby of ignorant sophistry, huh?

The Poor potentially being able to benefit from social policies may be too much "social horror" for the right wing to bear.

The poor, are poor already for not taking advantage of available social policies...

Equal protection of the law is an expressly declared, inalienable right.

What's your point? Equal opportunity of outcome is not...

it is about equal protection of the law in obtaining unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

 

[Vastator]

Still arguing with that tar baby of ignorant sophistry, huh?

The Poor potentially being able to benefit from social policies may be too much "social horror" for the right wing to bear.

The poor, are poor already for not taking advantage of available social policies...

Equal protection of the law is an expressly declared, inalienable right.

What's your point? Equal opportunity of outcome is not...

it is about equal protection of the law in obtaining unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

You can dream...

 

[danielpalos]

The Poor potentially being able to benefit from social policies may be too much "social horror" for the right wing to bear.

The poor, are poor already for not taking advantage of available social policies...

Equal protection of the law is an expressly declared, inalienable right.

What's your point? Equal opportunity of outcome is not...

it is about equal protection of the law in obtaining unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

You can dream...

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

Only illegals don't care about the law. Enforce the law, right wingers.

 

[Vastator]

The poor, are poor already for not taking advantage of available social policies...

Equal protection of the law is an expressly declared, inalienable right.

What's your point? Equal opportunity of outcome is not...

it is about equal protection of the law in obtaining unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

You can dream...

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

Only illegals don't care about the law. Enforce the law, right wingers.

Unemployment isn't an enumerated right.

 

[danielpalos]

Equal protection of the law is an expressly declared, inalienable right.

What's your point? Equal opportunity of outcome is not...

it is about equal protection of the law in obtaining unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

You can dream...

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

Only illegals don't care about the law. Enforce the law, right wingers.

Unemployment isn't an enumerated right.

The law is, employment at the will of either party.

 

[Vastator]

What's your point? Equal opportunity of outcome is not...

it is about equal protection of the law in obtaining unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

You can dream...

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

Only illegals don't care about the law. Enforce the law, right wingers.

Unemployment isn't an enumerated right.

The law is, employment at the will of either party.

So?

 

[WinterBorn]

I get it. You want a free ride while living with Mom.

The capital circulates fine. The programs designed to help the poor work fine. They may be poor, but, for the most part, they are eating, living indoors and have what they need. According to studies I have seen, we have roughly 550,000 homeless people. That accounts for 0.17% of the population. And most of those have mental and substance abuse problems that have to be addressed first. 99.83% of the population of this country have their basic needs taken care of. No need to revamp 2 entire systems just for that tiny percentage that has other issues that must be taken care of first.

And as for morals, which you keep bringing up, I am speaking of pure logic and reason. But the morality of thinking you should be able to sit on your ass while everyone else works is questionable.

Why should you get what you want (not need) without working? Why are you so special?

Our alleged War on Poverty is more for political show than for actually solving simple poverty.

Welfare should be used to identify those areas which may require a "concentration of capital."

This idea that we can "solve" simple poverty is silly. We can't. The people, even on social programs, are still poor. But they have the basic necessities for living a healthy life. That is what providing for the general welfare means. It means they are capable of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

lol. Yes, we can. There is no provision for excuses in our federal doctrine. Equal protection of the law can solve simple poverty.

Equal protection under the law is already there. If you insist that the employee be paid, from tax dollars, after quitting, then the employer should be able to use tax payer funded labor to replace the employee who quit. THAT would be equal protection.

And simple poverty will not be solved except by the actions and efforts of those who are poor. The social programs provide the financial assistance they need. But beyond that, they have to work for it. They cannot expect luxuries without effort. Nor can you. Giving the poor food, medical insurance, housing ect is acceptable. Giving them money so they can take women to dinner is not. That is not a need.

The law is, employment at the will of either party, not just one party for unemployment compensation. Unequal protection of the law only burdens the Poor.

Once again, your post has nothing to do with the post you quoted.

"...only burdens the Poor."??? It seems to me that the Poor are the only ones getting benefits from the social programs that meet their basic needs without them having to work.

 

[WinterBorn]

The homeless problem is about mental health and substance abuse far more than unemployment.

no, it isn't. it is about equal protection of the law, not your right wing fantasy.

You adamant refusal to understand that homelessness is not just about finances shows your argument is ridiculous.

Very often, poverty is about ignorance or bad choices. I have known people who made as much money as I did, but they were still broke and in financial trouble.

those ones are easier to identify by solving for simple poverty for all of the other ones.

How many people have won millions in the lottery and still ended up broke? You cannot save someone from themselves by giving them tax money.

The problems with most homeless are not going to be solved by giving them $2k a month. In fact, it would likely exacerbate the problems.

unemployment compensation that bears true witness to our own laws, solves for that on a longitudinal basis.

Nonsense. Unemployment compensation does not bear witness to anything, much less our own laws.

And what the hell does "longitudinal basis" mean in this context?

 

[WinterBorn]

Still arguing with that tar baby of ignorant sophistry, huh?

The Poor potentially being able to benefit from social policies may be too much "social horror" for the right wing to bear.

More nonsense from our pseudo-intellectual.

 

[WinterBorn]

Even if they took advantage of all social policies available to them, they'd still be poor.

with recourse to unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed, persons could take as long as the want to practice at becoming Good capitalists.

Why would they want to wait to become good capitalists? They are the ones who benefit from it.

 

[WinterBorn]

it is about equal protection of the law in obtaining unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

You can dream...

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

Only illegals don't care about the law. Enforce the law, right wingers.

Unemployment isn't an enumerated right.

The law is, employment at the will of either party.

So?

So, Daniel think that, since the law is that employment is at-will for both employer and employee, if the employee quits of his own free will, he is entitled to unemployment compensation due to equal protection under the law. He doesn't care to explain what benefit the employer gets that is anywhere near equal to that.

 

[WinterBorn]

Even if they took advantage of all social policies available to them, they'd still be poor.

Exactly. I have told him that.

The entire reason Daniel want unemployment compensation for anyone, regardless of whether they were laid off, quit, or fired for cause, is that he does not want to work. That is why he came up with this bullshit complaint that equal protection under the law means someone who quits a job should be compensated.

A year or so ago, basically arguing this same topic, I suggested he needs welfare, not unemployment compensation. Turns out, since he lives with his Mom and she provides for all his basic needs, the welfare means test would disqualify him from any benefits. Not benefits he needs, but benefits he wants.

So he has created this entire fantasy argument about how capital needs to circulate to help the market economy, homeless people could be save by unemployment for anyone without a job (when I pointed out that homeless people have no address to mail a check to or to get a bank account, his answer was to use MailBoxes Ect), we could solve simple poverty, and that the state needs to issue state IDs even if you don't have an address.

All of the above is so he can get extra spending money and, hopefully, take women out to dinner.


Just thought I'd catch everyone up. In case you didn't read the last 50 pages of insanity. I wouldn't, and I was involved in it.

 

[Vastator]

Even if they took advantage of all social policies available to them, they'd still be poor.

Exactly. I have told him that.

The entire reason Daniel want unemployment compensation for anyone, regardless of whether they were laid off, quit, or fired for cause, is that he does not want to work. That is why he came up with this bullshit complaint that equal protection under the law means someone who quits a job should be compensated.

A year or so ago, basically arguing this same topic, I suggested he needs welfare, not unemployment compensation. Turns out, since he lives with his Mom and she provides for all his basic needs, the welfare means test would disqualify him from any benefits. Not benefits he needs, but benefits he wants.

So he has created this entire fantasy argument about how capital needs to circulate to help the market economy, homeless people could be save by unemployment for anyone without a job (when I pointed out that homeless people have no address to mail a check to or to get a bank account, his answer was to use MailBoxes Ect), we could solve simple poverty, and that the state needs to issue state IDs even if you don't have an address.

All of the above is so he can get extra spending money and, hopefully, take women out to dinner.


Just thought I'd catch everyone up. In case you didn't read the last 50 pages of insanity. I wouldn't, and I was involved in it.

Hmm... What a loser... I will say though, that homeless or not; having an ID should be made possible. Address or not.

 

[WinterBorn]

Even if they took advantage of all social policies available to them, they'd still be poor.

Exactly. I have told him that.

The entire reason Daniel want unemployment compensation for anyone, regardless of whether they were laid off, quit, or fired for cause, is that he does not want to work. That is why he came up with this bullshit complaint that equal protection under the law means someone who quits a job should be compensated.

A year or so ago, basically arguing this same topic, I suggested he needs welfare, not unemployment compensation. Turns out, since he lives with his Mom and she provides for all his basic needs, the welfare means test would disqualify him from any benefits. Not benefits he needs, but benefits he wants.

So he has created this entire fantasy argument about how capital needs to circulate to help the market economy, homeless people could be save by unemployment for anyone without a job (when I pointed out that homeless people have no address to mail a check to or to get a bank account, his answer was to use MailBoxes Ect), we could solve simple poverty, and that the state needs to issue state IDs even if you don't have an address.

All of the above is so he can get extra spending money and, hopefully, take women out to dinner.


Just thought I'd catch everyone up. In case you didn't read the last 50 pages of insanity. I wouldn't, and I was involved in it.

Hmm... What a loser... I will say though, that homeless or not; having an ID should be made possible. Address or not.

I don't really have a problem with that. ID is needed.

 

[danielpalos]

it is about equal protection of the law in obtaining unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

You can dream...

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

Only illegals don't care about the law. Enforce the law, right wingers.

Unemployment isn't an enumerated right.

The law is, employment at the will of either party.

So?

only illegals don't care about the law.

 

[danielpalos]

Our alleged War on Poverty is more for political show than for actually solving simple poverty.

Welfare should be used to identify those areas which may require a "concentration of capital."

This idea that we can "solve" simple poverty is silly. We can't. The people, even on social programs, are still poor. But they have the basic necessities for living a healthy life. That is what providing for the general welfare means. It means they are capable of Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness.

lol. Yes, we can. There is no provision for excuses in our federal doctrine. Equal protection of the law can solve simple poverty.

Equal protection under the law is already there. If you insist that the employee be paid, from tax dollars, after quitting, then the employer should be able to use tax payer funded labor to replace the employee who quit. THAT would be equal protection.

And simple poverty will not be solved except by the actions and efforts of those who are poor. The social programs provide the financial assistance they need. But beyond that, they have to work for it. They cannot expect luxuries without effort. Nor can you. Giving the poor food, medical insurance, housing ect is acceptable. Giving them money so they can take women to dinner is not. That is not a need.

The law is, employment at the will of either party, not just one party for unemployment compensation. Unequal protection of the law only burdens the Poor.

Once again, your post has nothing to do with the post you quoted.

"...only burdens the Poor."??? It seems to me that the Poor are the only ones getting benefits from the social programs that meet their basic needs without them having to work.

that is Your limited understanding. it is about equal protection of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

no, it isn't. it is about equal protection of the law, not your right wing fantasy.

You adamant refusal to understand that homelessness is not just about finances shows your argument is ridiculous.

Very often, poverty is about ignorance or bad choices. I have known people who made as much money as I did, but they were still broke and in financial trouble.

those ones are easier to identify by solving for simple poverty for all of the other ones.

How many people have won millions in the lottery and still ended up broke? You cannot save someone from themselves by giving them tax money.

The problems with most homeless are not going to be solved by giving them $2k a month. In fact, it would likely exacerbate the problems.

unemployment compensation that bears true witness to our own laws, solves for that on a longitudinal basis.

Nonsense. Unemployment compensation does not bear witness to anything, much less our own laws.

And what the hell does "longitudinal basis" mean in this context?

it really is about equal protection of the law.

 

[danielpalos]

You can dream...

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

Only illegals don't care about the law. Enforce the law, right wingers.

Unemployment isn't an enumerated right.

The law is, employment at the will of either party.

So?

So, Daniel think that, since the law is that employment is at-will for both employer and employee, if the employee quits of his own free will, he is entitled to unemployment compensation due to equal protection under the law. He doesn't care to explain what benefit the employer gets that is anywhere near equal to that.

that is the law.

 

[Vastator]

You can dream...

A person may not be deprived of life, liberty, or property without due process of law or denied equal protection of the laws

Only illegals don't care about the law. Enforce the law, right wingers.

Unemployment isn't an enumerated right.

The law is, employment at the will of either party.

So?

only illegals don't care about the law.

Both nonsense, and irrelevant...

 

[WinterBorn]

You adamant refusal to understand that homelessness is not just about finances shows your argument is ridiculous.

Very often, poverty is about ignorance or bad choices. I have known people who made as much money as I did, but they were still broke and in financial trouble.

those ones are easier to identify by solving for simple poverty for all of the other ones.

How many people have won millions in the lottery and still ended up broke? You cannot save someone from themselves by giving them tax money.

The problems with most homeless are not going to be solved by giving them $2k a month. In fact, it would likely exacerbate the problems.

unemployment compensation that bears true witness to our own laws, solves for that on a longitudinal basis.

Nonsense. Unemployment compensation does not bear witness to anything, much less our own laws.

And what the hell does "longitudinal basis" mean in this context?

it really is about equal protection of the law.

So you keep saying. You think you should get $2k a month from the gov't. What does the employer get.

You say it's about equal protection. You get protection from poverty. What does the employer get?