Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Yes it was meant to.No, it wasn't; means testing proved that already; except in right-wing fantasy and we know right-wingers have no problems whatsoever, repeating historical mistakes.
Besides, we have a better understanding of economics now such that it is easily recognizable that equal protection of the laws for unemployment compensation can solve simple poverty. You prove it by having no valid arguments for rebuttal every time You resort to fallacy. Thanks for confirming my point of view.
No one has done so and I have stated no hatred of poverty of poor peopleYou wish, right-winger. Y'all prefer to try to find ways to criminalize poverty since the abolition of black codes.
I have valid arguments and have repeatedly used them to ruin your fallacies.Why should I have Any confidence in Your sincerity when you have no valid arguments only your right-wing fantasy?
You only have a fallacy of false Cause. Welfare as we currently know it is not meant to solve simple poverty only complex forms of poverty by "concentrating wealth" as indicated by the means tests. Trying to solve simple poverty is not what means testing can do under our current regime.
Only if you appeal to ignorance of economics and the law. At-will means something very specific as a Legal term under the Law.
You have no valid argument as to why simple poverty would not be solved on an at-will basis in any at-will employment State.
Or, you can simply present a valid argument instead of only manufacturing stories that are indistinguishable from straw man arguments.
Thanks for confirming my point of view regarding means tested welfare. It should be used to deliberately try to cure or mitigate complex poverty by "concentrating wealth" to do it.Welfare by definition is measnt in theory to solve poverty whether simple or otherwise.
Your ludicrous definitions change nothing about that fact
That is why it will never solve simple poverty.Means testing is strictly to determine whether or not a person has the means to take care of themselves. That is it.
And if means testing is how they deny welfare to those who do not need it, how do you claim it is a form of poverty by concentrating wealth? Without means testing, those who have wealth but no income are as eligible for welfare as those who are penniless.
Because it does nothing to correct for natural unemployment.How does means testing cause simple poverty?
That is why it will never solve simple poverty.
Because it does nothing to correct for natural unemployment.
Means testing is not getting people off the street. Any other questions?Oh, so you DO think means testing causes simple poverty. Please explain how that works.
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.LMAO!! It does nothing at all about any unemployment. It is merely a test to see if you have the means to support yourself.
Tell me how allowing those who have the means to support themselves to syphon off funds from, and clog up the welfare system would solve simple poverty?
Means testing is not getting people off the street. Any other questions?
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Faithful execution of at-will employment laws for unemployment compensation in at-will employment States is intended to get them off the street.Means testing never was intended to do that.
In fact, if someone had the resources to fail means testing, they wouldn't be on the street.
Our welfare clause is General not common and must provide a market friendly solution not just your right-wing socialism on a national basis that solves nothing and is merely conducive to right-wing Bigotry not any morality of "good Christians" with a McCarthy era phrase in our pledge.No answer, huh? Ok.
Faithful execution of at-will employment laws for unemployment compensation in at-will employment States is intended to get them off the street.
Defining employment relationships in an at-will employment State is enough; any abridgment to that employment relationship is unConstitutional since the legislature does not have that authority for Legal purposes according to our supreme Law of the land.Bullshit. The at will employment laws are intended to describe the at will employment relationships. That is all.
Defining employment relationships in an at-will employment State is enough; any abridgment to that employment relationship is unConstitutional since the legislature does not have that authority for Legal purposes according to our supreme Law of the land.
Not being able to quit on an at-will basis and collect unemployment compensation in an at-will employment State is an abridgment. Employment is at-will not for (good) Cause.Nobody abridged the at will employment laws. They still define the same thing the same way.
And I have already shown that not all the employees and employers have those rights and privileges. So the at will employment laws do not cover every part of employment related law in the state.
