Why do poor communities exist in America?

[danielpalos]

Why do y'all believe simple poverty would not be solved with equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation?

 

[WinterBorn]

Why do y'all believe simple poverty would not be solved with equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation?

Has welfare solved simple poverty? The only significant difference between welfare and what you want unemployment compensation to become is the means testing. Do you think means testing is what keeps people in poverty? That is a special kind of stupid.

 

[danielpalos]

Has welfare solved simple poverty? The only significant difference between welfare and what you want unemployment compensation to become is the means testing. Do you think means testing is what keeps people in poverty? That is a special kind of stupid.

Means testing can't solve simple poverty since that is not what means testing is for. Means testing helps mitigate complex poverty by "concentrating wealth" to solve the problems of complex poverty.

Why do you believe something as automatic as the concept of employment at the will of either party would not solve simple poverty on an at-will basis. Go ahead and give me some examples.

 

[WinterBorn]

Means testing can't solve simple poverty since that is not what means testing is for. Means testing helps mitigate complex poverty by "concentrating wealth" to solve the problems of complex poverty.

Why do you believe something as automatic as the concept of employment at the will of either party would not solve simple poverty on an at-will basis. Go ahead and give me some examples.

Giving people money for not working is exactly what welfare does. And, as I said, the only difference between welfare and what you want unemployment compensation to be is means testing.

And means testing has nothing to do with concentrating wealth. It is simply to prevent people from getting tax payers money when they don't need it. Means testing is just you showing you cannot survive without assistance. If you can survive without assistance, then you have no business getting tax dollars for nothing.

 

[danielpalos]

Giving people money for not working is exactly what welfare does. And, as I said, the only difference between welfare and what you want unemployment compensation to be is means testing.

And means testing has nothing to do with concentrating wealth. It is simply to prevent people from getting tax payers money when they don't need it. Means testing is just you showing you cannot survive without assistance. If you can survive without assistance, then you have no business getting tax dollars for nothing.

According to you and perhaps right-wing legislators who understand nothing about economics. Means-testing should be used to mitigate complex poverty not be a temporary bandaid that makes no attempt to solve the underlying conditions that cause simple poverty.

Now, can you provide any examples of how an Automatic Stabilizer like unemployment compensation would not solve simple poverty on that same at-will basis? Go ahead and explain how it would not work like current welfare doesn't work now for that purpose.

 

[WinterBorn]

According to you and perhaps right-wing legislators who understand nothing about economics. Means-testing should be used to mitigate complex poverty not be a temporary bandaid that makes no attempt to solve the underlying conditions that cause simple poverty.

Now, can you provide any examples of how an Automatic Stabilizer like unemployment compensation would not solve simple poverty on that same at-will basis? Go ahead and explain how it would not work like current welfare doesn't work now for that purpose.

Means testing is to determine if someone has the resources to support themselves. Living off the tax payers is acceptable if it is the only way someone can survive. It is not acceptable if someone can survive on their own and just want someone else to fund their hobbies. If you want more money, get a job. There are lots of them out there right now.

 

[danielpalos]

Means testing is to determine if someone has the resources to support themselves. Living off the tax payers is acceptable if it is the only way someone can survive. It is not acceptable if someone can survive on their own and just want someone else to fund their hobbies. If you want more money, get a job. There are lots of them out there right now.

Means testing is to identify problems that create complex poverty.

Unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed can solve simple poverty. Can you explain how simple poverty would persist if labor could obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

 

[WinterBorn]

Means testing is to identify problems that create complex poverty.

Unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed can solve simple poverty. Can you explain how simple poverty would persist if labor could obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed?

Means testing is to identify people who have the means to support themselves. It does NOT create complex poverty.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Why do y'all believe simple poverty would not be solved with equal protection of the law for unemployment compensation?

We have equal protection of the law.

Poverty is not caused by any reason government can solve.

 

[danielpalos]

Means testing is to identify people who have the means to support themselves. It does NOT create complex poverty.

In other words, you have no counter-arguments as to why we could not solve simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. Thanks for supporting my argument.

 

[danielpalos]

We have equal protection of the law.

Poverty is not caused by any reason government can solve.

Can you explain how unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would not solve simple poverty on that same at-will basis in our at-will employment States?

Thanks for supporting my argument by having no valid argument for rebuttal.

 

[Soupnazi630]

In other words, you have no counter-arguments as to why we could not solve simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. Thanks for supporting my argument.

Yes he does and so do many others.

Government cannot solve poverty in any statement which is proven fact

Youyr argument is disproven

 

[Soupnazi630]

Can you explain how unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed would not solve simple poverty on that same at-will basis in our at-will employment States?

Thanks for supporting my argument by having no valid argument for rebuttal.

It already does not solve poverty

Your argument is destroyed

 

[danielpalos]

Yes he does and so do many others.

Government cannot solve poverty in any statement which is proven fact

Youyr argument is disproven

How would simple poverty not be solved if persons could obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed? We should have no homeless problem in our first world economy.

 

[danielpalos]

It already does not solve poverty

Your argument is destroyed

Is it any wonder nobody should take right-wingers seriously.

Simple poverty could easily be solved if persons could obtain unemployment compensation on an at-will basis simply for being unemployed in an at-will employment State.

Vote blue not red!

 

[Soupnazi630]

Is it any wonder nobody should take right-wingers seriously.

Simple poverty could easily be solved if persons could obtain unemployment compensation on an at-will basis simply for being unemployed in an at-will employment State.

Vote blue not red!

No it would not.

That is established historic fact

Votye for the opposiete of whatever some fool like Dani says

 

[Soupnazi630]

How would simple poverty not be solved if persons could obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed? We should have no homeless problem in our first world economy.

Because they would still have the same failings and short comings which made them poor in the first place you idiot

 

[sparky]

If someone could help me understand this basic question as it's been sufficiently elaborated (for those who are about to say TL;DR ) that would be great!

easy
it's disparity and inequity cloaked in the guise of racism , so we are at each other's throats instead of having another ( direly needed) bastille day

~S~

 

[WinterBorn]

In other words, you have no counter-arguments as to why we could not solve simple poverty on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States. Thanks for supporting my argument.

I gave the best counter argument. That welfare has been trying to solve simple poverty for decades and has failed. The only significant difference between welfare and the unemployment compensation you want is means testing. And for the overwhelming majority of the nation's poor, the means testing changes nothing.

The only people effected by means testing are those who CAN survive on their own, but want someone else's money too.

 

[WinterBorn]

How would simple poverty not be solved if persons could obtain unemployment compensation for simply being unemployed? We should have no homeless problem in our first world economy.

Welfare has not solved simple poverty. Unemployment compensation as you want it would become welfare and still fail.

Since the only significant difference between welfare and the unemployment you want is means testing, and you insist that UC as you want it will solve simple poverty, can you tell us why means testing is the cause of simple poverty?