Why do democrats hate poor black people and want them permanently on welfare?

[American_Jihad]

Democrats are about power. And keeping people poor and dependent is a way to stay in power. it is that simple. They can't threaten me over health care...I pay for my own. I dont care if government cuts food stamps, section 8, welfare or head start. That makes me an obstacle for them to overcome and they do it with their dependent class.
Government handouts create serfs.

That's why they like to let people out of prison and let everybody in the world into America for the VOTE, they actually want a one party system and total control which in all reality would be the end of America as we know today. I hope they NEVER get their way...

 

[Papageorgio]

And the Democrats don't want to do that, they would lose the base of voters. No wonder liberals hate poor blacks.

Just right wing fantasy. Actually having solutions should increase market share.

No, the wealth of the blacks would be the downfall of the Democratic Party, now we know why the Democratic Party hates poor blacks.

some solutions that may not work are better than nothing but repeal.

You have no repeal, you want no repeal, repeal means your power ends. That is why you cry for no repeal, status quo is not your foe.

you wish. the right has no solutions; nothing but repeal. the democrats pushed through healthcare reform.

The Democrats passed health care because they hate poor blacks and want them to resign to the fact the democrats will always need poor blacks, no matter how hated they are by Democrats.

 

[LeftofLeft]

no, no you can't and it has been proven over time. It is the reason for the fall of the soviet union, you idiot.

Yes, you can. It is how most problems get solved, under Capitalism. Only the right wing, never gets it. The former Soviet Union, was socialist.

exactly, and is why it fails every time. socialism is a failure. so stop trying to push it.

dear, we have the best form of socialism in the entire world. The rich can get bailed out and keep their multimillion dollar bonuses while on means tested corporate welfare, and the poor can still have steak and lobster on their EBT cards.

....and yet a Middle Class still exists. USA Exceptionalism......no socialist or socialist wannabee could achieve this. Income Inequality????

We have a mixed market economy; socialism is like Palmolive, you are soaking in it.

Limited Socialism, Greater Capitalism. The moment Socialism exceeds Capitalism here in the US, our economy will look like the failed and limited models elsewhere in the world. At that point, there will be no Middle Class to speak of.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

WTF do you mean by administrative laws? You can't get a federal extension unless you exhaust your state benefits. All states have to carry unemployment insurance.


Sent from my iPhone using USMessageBoard.com

It is not a true insurance program. It is a social safety net called, unemployment compensation insurance. It should be used more effectively.

In any case, administrative law does not preempt a federal doctrine or State law regarding the legal concept of employment at will.

EDD should be required to prove a for-Cause employment relationship to deny or disparage at-will employment compensation benefits.

We do have employment at will. You don't want to work, then don't work and don't get paid.

Yes, unemployment is an insurance program. The only unemployment safety net is federal unemployment, and that's only issued by the President during tough times when there are few jobs and people run out of state unemployment.

It is about equal protection of the law. Employment is at the will of either party, so is unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

It is equal protection. If you get laid off from your job, you can collect unemployment. If I get laid off from my job, I can collect unemployment. Anybody who loses their job through no fault of their own can collect unemployment. Nobody is discriminated against. How can it be more equal than that?

Employment is at the will of either party, not just the employer, for unemployment compensation purposes. You have nothing but red herrings, right winger; simply learning how to fish for that, is worthless.

I'm trying to make out what you are saying; your punctuation is atrocious and I'm doing what I can to piece together your words to make a coherent sentence.

Yes, unemployment compensation is when you lose your job through no fault of your own. If it is your fault, say you threatened somebody at the company, you got caught stealing, coming to work late all the time, you don't get compensated for that because it's your fault (not your employers) that you got fired.

Insurance is to cover you for things you don't have control over.

 

[danielpalos]

nothing but fallacy? thanks for making it easy for me.

I'm glad to point out your errors.

Yes, it does, simply Because, Capital must circulate to produce a positive multiplier effect on our economy. No amount of right wing fantasy, can change that.

Handing money to layabouts is a waste of capital. Negative multiplier.
No amount of unemployed stoner whining can change that.

you are simply clueless and Causeless.

And yet, can still point out the huge holes in your "ideas".

No, you can't. You can't even come up with a better solution at lower cost; that is why, you have nothing but repeal.

 

[danielpalos]

It is not a true insurance program. It is a social safety net called, unemployment compensation insurance. It should be used more effectively.

In any case, administrative law does not preempt a federal doctrine or State law regarding the legal concept of employment at will.

EDD should be required to prove a for-Cause employment relationship to deny or disparage at-will employment compensation benefits.

We do have employment at will. You don't want to work, then don't work and don't get paid.

Yes, unemployment is an insurance program. The only unemployment safety net is federal unemployment, and that's only issued by the President during tough times when there are few jobs and people run out of state unemployment.

It is about equal protection of the law. Employment is at the will of either party, so is unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

It is equal protection. If you get laid off from your job, you can collect unemployment. If I get laid off from my job, I can collect unemployment. Anybody who loses their job through no fault of their own can collect unemployment. Nobody is discriminated against. How can it be more equal than that?

Employment is at the will of either party, not just the employer, for unemployment compensation purposes. You have nothing but red herrings, right winger; simply learning how to fish for that, is worthless.

Employment is at the will of either party, not just the employer, for unemployment compensation purposes.

Nope, just for employment purposes.
For unemployment, you don't qualify if you quit or never worked.

Is that State, an employment at will State, or not. It really is that simple.

 

[danielpalos]

Just right wing fantasy. Actually having solutions should increase market share.

No, the wealth of the blacks would be the downfall of the Democratic Party, now we know why the Democratic Party hates poor blacks.

some solutions that may not work are better than nothing but repeal.

You have no repeal, you want no repeal, repeal means your power ends. That is why you cry for no repeal, status quo is not your foe.

you wish. the right has no solutions; nothing but repeal. the democrats pushed through healthcare reform.

The Democrats passed health care because they hate poor blacks and want them to resign to the fact the democrats will always need poor blacks, no matter how hated they are by Democrats.

that makes no sense. more sense is, the right hates blacks, and refuse to come up with better solutions at lower cost, as a result.

i love to "compete" for fun and practice. Ask Boss or Ding.

 

[Redfish]

I'm glad to point out your errors.

Yes, it does, simply Because, Capital must circulate to produce a positive multiplier effect on our economy. No amount of right wing fantasy, can change that.

Handing money to layabouts is a waste of capital. Negative multiplier.
No amount of unemployed stoner whining can change that.

you are simply clueless and Causeless.

And yet, can still point out the huge holes in your "ideas".

No, you can't. You can't even come up with a better solution at lower cost; that is why, you have nothing but repeal.

a better solution than paying unemployment???? How about creating jobs? Pretty simple, but it only fixes it for people that want to work.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, you can. It is how most problems get solved, under Capitalism. Only the right wing, never gets it. The former Soviet Union, was socialist.

exactly, and is why it fails every time. socialism is a failure. so stop trying to push it.

dear, we have the best form of socialism in the entire world. The rich can get bailed out and keep their multimillion dollar bonuses while on means tested corporate welfare, and the poor can still have steak and lobster on their EBT cards.

....and yet a Middle Class still exists. USA Exceptionalism......no socialist or socialist wannabee could achieve this. Income Inequality????

We have a mixed market economy; socialism is like Palmolive, you are soaking in it.

Limited Socialism, Greater Capitalism. The moment Socialism exceeds Capitalism here in the US, our economy will look like the failed and limited models elsewhere in the world. At that point, there will be no Middle Class to speak of.

I like to blame the right wing for our fiscal dilemma. Our Founding Fathers were wise enough to limit the amount of socialism in our Government, to paying the Debts, and providing for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; not, every Thing and any Thing, the fantastical right wing would have us believe may be necessary, for not merely the common defense, but also the common offense and the general warfare.

 

[danielpalos]

It is not a true insurance program. It is a social safety net called, unemployment compensation insurance. It should be used more effectively.

In any case, administrative law does not preempt a federal doctrine or State law regarding the legal concept of employment at will.

EDD should be required to prove a for-Cause employment relationship to deny or disparage at-will employment compensation benefits.

We do have employment at will. You don't want to work, then don't work and don't get paid.

Yes, unemployment is an insurance program. The only unemployment safety net is federal unemployment, and that's only issued by the President during tough times when there are few jobs and people run out of state unemployment.

It is about equal protection of the law. Employment is at the will of either party, so is unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

It is equal protection. If you get laid off from your job, you can collect unemployment. If I get laid off from my job, I can collect unemployment. Anybody who loses their job through no fault of their own can collect unemployment. Nobody is discriminated against. How can it be more equal than that?

Employment is at the will of either party, not just the employer, for unemployment compensation purposes. You have nothing but red herrings, right winger; simply learning how to fish for that, is worthless.

I'm trying to make out what you are saying; your punctuation is atrocious and I'm doing what I can to piece together your words to make a coherent sentence.

Yes, unemployment compensation is when you lose your job through no fault of your own. If it is your fault, say you threatened somebody at the company, you got caught stealing, coming to work late all the time, you don't get compensated for that because it's your fault (not your employers) that you got fired.

Insurance is to cover you for things you don't have control over.

A Person has a Cause in any open Court in the several, United States.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it does, simply Because, Capital must circulate to produce a positive multiplier effect on our economy. No amount of right wing fantasy, can change that.

Handing money to layabouts is a waste of capital. Negative multiplier.
No amount of unemployed stoner whining can change that.

you are simply clueless and Causeless.

And yet, can still point out the huge holes in your "ideas".

No, you can't. You can't even come up with a better solution at lower cost; that is why, you have nothing but repeal.

a better solution than paying unemployment???? How about creating jobs? Pretty simple, but it only fixes it for people that want to work.

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment; it is a natural rate of inefficiency from a social perspective of full employment of human capital resources. Unemployment compensation can correct for that capitalism based inefficiency, via the socialism of equal protection of the law, for Labor, as the least wealthy in our Republic.

 

[Redfish]

Handing money to layabouts is a waste of capital. Negative multiplier.
No amount of unemployed stoner whining can change that.

you are simply clueless and Causeless.

And yet, can still point out the huge holes in your "ideas".

No, you can't. You can't even come up with a better solution at lower cost; that is why, you have nothing but repeal.

a better solution than paying unemployment???? How about creating jobs? Pretty simple, but it only fixes it for people that want to work.

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment; it is a natural rate of inefficiency from a social perspective of full employment of human capital resources. Unemployment compensation can correct for that capitalism based inefficiency, via the socialism of equal protection of the law, for Labor, as the least wealthy in our Republic.

correct, there will always be a small % of unemployed under any system. Most of them will be those who are mentally or physically unable to work----and the system should take care of those people.

But, unfortunately, what we have today in the US is a group of unemployable people, either by their personal choice or because they have not gained the skills needed to do any kind of work. We have generations of unemployed in our central cities and in some rural areas. Our system does nothing to solve this problem, continuing the giveaways, as you libs want to do, does not solve the problem, it perpetuates it.

Now, if those chronically unemployed were required to clean the streets and public buildings in exchange for their UE checks, you would see many of them finding jobs.

 

[LeftofLeft]

exactly, and is why it fails every time. socialism is a failure. so stop trying to push it.

dear, we have the best form of socialism in the entire world. The rich can get bailed out and keep their multimillion dollar bonuses while on means tested corporate welfare, and the poor can still have steak and lobster on their EBT cards.

....and yet a Middle Class still exists. USA Exceptionalism......no socialist or socialist wannabee could achieve this. Income Inequality????

We have a mixed market economy; socialism is like Palmolive, you are soaking in it.

Limited Socialism, Greater Capitalism. The moment Socialism exceeds Capitalism here in the US, our economy will look like the failed and limited models elsewhere in the world. At that point, there will be no Middle Class to speak of.

I like to blame the right wing for our fiscal dilemma. Our Founding Fathers were wise enough to limit the amount of socialism in our Government, to paying the Debts, and providing for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; not, every Thing and any Thing, the fantastical right wing would have us believe may be necessary, for not merely the common defense, but also the common offense and the general warfare.

The blame is on the Left wing that insists on egregious spending to the point that it calls a lower-than-requested increase in spending a "cut" and such "cut" will hurt the general welfare.

 

[Redfish]

dear, we have the best form of socialism in the entire world. The rich can get bailed out and keep their multimillion dollar bonuses while on means tested corporate welfare, and the poor can still have steak and lobster on their EBT cards.

....and yet a Middle Class still exists. USA Exceptionalism......no socialist or socialist wannabee could achieve this. Income Inequality????

We have a mixed market economy; socialism is like Palmolive, you are soaking in it.

Limited Socialism, Greater Capitalism. The moment Socialism exceeds Capitalism here in the US, our economy will look like the failed and limited models elsewhere in the world. At that point, there will be no Middle Class to speak of.

I like to blame the right wing for our fiscal dilemma. Our Founding Fathers were wise enough to limit the amount of socialism in our Government, to paying the Debts, and providing for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; not, every Thing and any Thing, the fantastical right wing would have us believe may be necessary, for not merely the common defense, but also the common offense and the general warfare.

The blame is on the Left wing that insists on egregious spending to the point that it calls a lower-than-requested increase in spending a "cut" and such "cut" will hurt the general welfare.

agree, it amazes me that when the clowns in DC reduce the rate of increase in a budget line, they call it a cut. So instead of adding 10% to a budget, they only add 8% and call it a cut when the budget is actually 108% of the previous years budget.

 

[danielpalos]

you are simply clueless and Causeless.

And yet, can still point out the huge holes in your "ideas".

No, you can't. You can't even come up with a better solution at lower cost; that is why, you have nothing but repeal.

a better solution than paying unemployment???? How about creating jobs? Pretty simple, but it only fixes it for people that want to work.

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment; it is a natural rate of inefficiency from a social perspective of full employment of human capital resources. Unemployment compensation can correct for that capitalism based inefficiency, via the socialism of equal protection of the law, for Labor, as the least wealthy in our Republic.

correct, there will always be a small % of unemployed under any system. Most of them will be those who are mentally or physically unable to work----and the system should take care of those people.

But, unfortunately, what we have today in the US is a group of unemployable people, either by their personal choice or because they have not gained the skills needed to do any kind of work. We have generations of unemployed in our central cities and in some rural areas. Our system does nothing to solve this problem, continuing the giveaways, as you libs want to do, does not solve the problem, it perpetuates it.

Now, if those chronically unemployed were required to clean the streets and public buildings in exchange for their UE checks, you would see many of them finding jobs.

You are merely mistaking this simple solution for what you are already used to.

How will correcting for capitalism's natural rate of (poverty inducing) unemployment be Bad and not Good for Labor, in the Age of Corporate Welfare, not the Age of Iron?

 

[danielpalos]

dear, we have the best form of socialism in the entire world. The rich can get bailed out and keep their multimillion dollar bonuses while on means tested corporate welfare, and the poor can still have steak and lobster on their EBT cards.

....and yet a Middle Class still exists. USA Exceptionalism......no socialist or socialist wannabee could achieve this. Income Inequality????

We have a mixed market economy; socialism is like Palmolive, you are soaking in it.

Limited Socialism, Greater Capitalism. The moment Socialism exceeds Capitalism here in the US, our economy will look like the failed and limited models elsewhere in the world. At that point, there will be no Middle Class to speak of.

I like to blame the right wing for our fiscal dilemma. Our Founding Fathers were wise enough to limit the amount of socialism in our Government, to paying the Debts, and providing for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; not, every Thing and any Thing, the fantastical right wing would have us believe may be necessary, for not merely the common defense, but also the common offense and the general warfare.

The blame is on the Left wing that insists on egregious spending to the point that it calls a lower-than-requested increase in spending a "cut" and such "cut" will hurt the general welfare.

It is the right wing that believes it must be real times of Peace, so we can, "stand down" and rely on our Commerce Clause; by lowering taxes.

 

[danielpalos]

....and yet a Middle Class still exists. USA Exceptionalism......no socialist or socialist wannabee could achieve this. Income Inequality????

We have a mixed market economy; socialism is like Palmolive, you are soaking in it.

Limited Socialism, Greater Capitalism. The moment Socialism exceeds Capitalism here in the US, our economy will look like the failed and limited models elsewhere in the world. At that point, there will be no Middle Class to speak of.

I like to blame the right wing for our fiscal dilemma. Our Founding Fathers were wise enough to limit the amount of socialism in our Government, to paying the Debts, and providing for the common Defense and general Welfare of the United States; not, every Thing and any Thing, the fantastical right wing would have us believe may be necessary, for not merely the common defense, but also the common offense and the general warfare.

The blame is on the Left wing that insists on egregious spending to the point that it calls a lower-than-requested increase in spending a "cut" and such "cut" will hurt the general welfare.

agree, it amazes me that when the clowns in DC reduce the rate of increase in a budget line, they call it a cut. So instead of adding 10% to a budget, they only add 8% and call it a cut when the budget is actually 108% of the previous years budget.

I would agree with you; if the right wing in Congress could tell the difference between the common offense and the common defense.

 

[jc456]

No, the wealth of the blacks would be the downfall of the Democratic Party, now we know why the Democratic Party hates poor blacks.

some solutions that may not work are better than nothing but repeal.

You have no repeal, you want no repeal, repeal means your power ends. That is why you cry for no repeal, status quo is not your foe.

you wish. the right has no solutions; nothing but repeal. the democrats pushed through healthcare reform.

The Democrats passed health care because they hate poor blacks and want them to resign to the fact the democrats will always need poor blacks, no matter how hated they are by Democrats.

that makes no sense. more sense is, the right hates blacks, and refuse to come up with better solutions at lower cost, as a result.

i love to "compete" for fun and practice. Ask Boss or Ding.

I already explained, the right gave respect back to welfare folks in the 90s. you all took that away in 2009. WTF? you should learn history.

 

[jc456]

Handing money to layabouts is a waste of capital. Negative multiplier.
No amount of unemployed stoner whining can change that.

you are simply clueless and Causeless.

And yet, can still point out the huge holes in your "ideas".

No, you can't. You can't even come up with a better solution at lower cost; that is why, you have nothing but repeal.

a better solution than paying unemployment???? How about creating jobs? Pretty simple, but it only fixes it for people that want to work.

Capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment; it is a natural rate of inefficiency from a social perspective of full employment of human capital resources. Unemployment compensation can correct for that capitalism based inefficiency, via the socialism of equal protection of the law, for Labor, as the least wealthy in our Republic.

which it does today. you're just flopping around out of water fish!!!

 

[Papageorgio]

I don't know what point you're after here.

Why am I not surprised, by the right wing.

We could solve simple poverty and improve the efficiency of our economy at the same time.

And the Democrats don't want to do that, they would lose the base of voters. No wonder liberals hate poor blacks.

Just right wing fantasy. Actually having solutions should increase market share.

No, the wealth of the blacks would be the downfall of the Democratic Party, now we know why the Democratic Party hates poor blacks.

some solutions that may not work are better than nothing but repeal.

The Democrats want power, they keep power by keeping the low and down trodden, low and down trodden, however you knew that because you subscribe to the theory.