What's new
US Message Board 🦅 Political Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Why do poor communities exist in America?

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
73,989
Reaction score
5,030
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
I have not hated on the poor. Not once. So that is an outright lie.

I have, however, stated that I object to giving my hard earned money to someone who is capable of working, but refuses to do so. Someone who has called me a fool for working to support myself.
Nobody is making you work in an at-will employment State. Just quit and go on unemployment compensation; don't be a hypocrite.
 

Soupnazi630

Gold Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2013
Messages
11,369
Reaction score
2,680
Points
265
You can't blame all of it on Individuals. Besides, what good is means testing if they can't get people with actual (mental) disabilities off the street?

You make it seem like you don't believe in Capitalism.
Yes we can blame all of it on individuals
We do not use means testing
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
We have a Tenth Amendment. Any complex case can take that into consideration. It is a simple matter of faithfully executing existing federal doctrine regarding the concept of employment at will.

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

The 10th amendment says: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

How is that relevant to this discussion?

Also, "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work." speaks only to the relationship between employee and employer. It does not address the eligibility for assistance by any agency.
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
You can't blame all of it on Individuals. Besides, what good is means testing if they can't get people with actual (mental) disabilities off the street?

You make it seem like you don't believe in Capitalism.

I have not blamed it all on individuals. But I do think that poor choices often result in bad things for the individual.

Means testing will not have any affect on homeless individuals with actual mental disabilities.
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
Nobody is making you work in an at-will employment State. Just quit and go on unemployment compensation; don't be a hypocrite.

If you decide to be willfully unemployed, you have made a choice that you will not receive a paycheck. In a capitalist society people work for what they have and what they want.

I am not being a hypocrite. Your answer of "just quit and go on unemployment" is laughable. And despite you saying that many times, you never explain how many people can do that before it is completely unsupportable. What percentage of the population can be supported by those who take responsibility for their own lives?
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
Nobody is making you work in an at-will employment State. Just quit and go on unemployment compensation; don't be a hypocrite.

Daniel, you have repeatedly ridiculed people who work and having a work ethic.

But working to support yourself is what our capitalist society is based on. You don't want to work? That is fine. No one will make you work. But no one should be forcing to surrender the fruits of their labor just to provide you with extra money.

You talk of work ethic as if it were some primitive thing. It is not. It is being responsible for your own life and survival. It is being independent and self sufficient. If you cannot be bothered to put forth the effort to take care of your own needs, why should anyone else do it? Any society can only support a very small percentage of its population being a complete drain on the resources of the whole. Those who cannot work should be taken care of, as an act of compassion and charity. Those who are capable of taking care of themselves but refusing to do so are a completely different story. What makes you so special that you believe you deserve to be carried by those who also carry their own weight?
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
73,989
Reaction score
5,030
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
The 10th amendment says: "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people."

How is that relevant to this discussion?

Also, "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work." speaks only to the relationship between employee and employer. It does not address the eligibility for assistance by any agency.
Did you miss it Every time it came up?

This is federal doctrine:

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
73,989
Reaction score
5,030
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
I have not blamed it all on individuals. But I do think that poor choices often result in bad things for the individual.

Means testing will not have any affect on homeless individuals with actual mental disabilities.
So what. You keep missing the point that corporate welfare has even paid multimillion dollar bonuses instead of simply letting them fail.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

I agree to disagree. You simply make stuff up. Why bother with the Expense of means testing if it is worthless?
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
73,989
Reaction score
5,030
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
If you decide to be willfully unemployed, you have made a choice that you will not receive a paycheck. In a capitalist society people work for what they have and what they want.

I am not being a hypocrite. Your answer of "just quit and go on unemployment" is laughable. And despite you saying that many times, you never explain how many people can do that before it is completely unsupportable. What percentage of the population can be supported by those who take responsibility for their own lives?
Yes, you are simply being a hypocrite upon the less fortunate. Employment is at the will of either party for Any policies Public.
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
73,989
Reaction score
5,030
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
Daniel, you have repeatedly ridiculed people who work and having a work ethic.

But working to support yourself is what our capitalist society is based on. You don't want to work? That is fine. No one will make you work. But no one should be forcing to surrender the fruits of their labor just to provide you with extra money.

You talk of work ethic as if it were some primitive thing. It is not. It is being responsible for your own life and survival. It is being independent and self sufficient. If you cannot be bothered to put forth the effort to take care of your own needs, why should anyone else do it? Any society can only support a very small percentage of its population being a complete drain on the resources of the whole. Those who cannot work should be taken care of, as an act of compassion and charity. Those who are capable of taking care of themselves but refusing to do so are a completely different story. What makes you so special that you believe you deserve to be carried by those who also carry their own weight?
You have no standing under the legal Law; all you have is hypocrisy and apparent "hate on the Poor". Just quit if you don't have the moral cajones to work to better provide for yourself even if it means helping others. Good persons of Morals or Ethics, do.
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
Did you miss it Every time it came up?

This is federal doctrine:

At-will employment is generally described as follows: "any hiring is presumed to be 'at will'; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals 'for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all,' and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work."

I did not miss it at all. But apparently you missed the opportunity to tell me what changed in the at will employment laws when the unemployment compensation program came into play? Are you no longer allowed to quit, strike or otherwise cease work? Are employers no longer able to discharge individuals for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all?
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
So what. You keep missing the point that corporate welfare has even paid multimillion dollar bonuses instead of simply letting them fail.

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.

I agree to disagree. You simply make stuff up. Why bother with the Expense of means testing if it is worthless?

Means testing is not worthless. It prevents people who have the means to support themselves from drawing money from the tax coffers. That money is for those who NEED it, not just those who want it.

The corporate welfare nonsense is just an attempt to distract from the topic.
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
Yes, you are simply being a hypocrite upon the less fortunate. Employment is at the will of either party for Any policies Public.

No, I am not being a hypocrite. The at will employment laws simply describe the relationship between employee and employer. And even that is not an actual requirement, since there are numerous exceptions.

It does not describe anything other than the relationship between employer and employee. It does not cover all public policies.
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
You have no standing under the legal Law; all you have is hypocrisy and apparent "hate on the Poor". Just quit if you don't have the moral cajones to work to better provide for yourself even if it means helping others. Good persons of Morals or Ethics, do.

I have good moral standing. I do have standing under the law. And I have not "hated on the poor" at any time. I am all for helping those who NEED the help. I am simply against those who CAN work but instead choose to leech off those who do work.

I have the moral cajones to work to support me and my family. I provide for myself and for those who cannot provide for themselves. I provide for others through my taxes and my charitable donations.

I do not demand to be paid from the efforts of others who work, while denigrating them by calling them fools and calling a work ethic something from the iron Age.

You are the hypocrite. You mock people who work to support themselves, while demanding that those same people support you. When you are completely capable of supporting yourself.
 

WinterBorn

Diamond Member
Joined
Nov 18, 2011
Messages
43,239
Reaction score
12,896
Points
2,190
Location
Atlanta
Daniel, I will ask again. I understand that you will refuse to answer. But I am still wanting a response.

In order for taxes to provide an income for those who refuse to work, the majority of the people have to work and pay taxes. I accept that some people are unable to work.

But you are able to work. So you require that others work so that you can choose to stay home and do nothing. Why do you deserve to live without having to support yourself, when you being supported requires others to work?

Why are you special enough to be "kept" by the working population?
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
73,989
Reaction score
5,030
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
I did not miss it at all. But apparently you missed the opportunity to tell me what changed in the at will employment laws when the unemployment compensation program came into play? Are you no longer allowed to quit, strike or otherwise cease work? Are employers no longer able to discharge individuals for good cause, bad cause, or no cause at all?
If you had read any history at all, you would know that unemployment compensation was "invented" by FDR's administration. Black codes were still in effect back then. And, our understanding of economics was less than it is now.

What part of employment at the will of either party is so difficult to understand?
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
73,989
Reaction score
5,030
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
Means testing is not worthless. It prevents people who have the means to support themselves from drawing money from the tax coffers. That money is for those who NEED it, not just those who want it.

The corporate welfare nonsense is just an attempt to distract from the topic.
Why do we have a homeless problem if means testing works? Means testing should have solved that issue already.

And, corporate welfare is simply proof right-wingers don't really care about "means testing" or delivery on goals and objectives in order to qualify.
 

danielpalos

Diamond Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2015
Messages
73,989
Reaction score
5,030
Points
1,855
Location
Alta California, federalist.
No, I am not being a hypocrite. The at will employment laws simply describe the relationship between employee and employer. And even that is not an actual requirement, since there are numerous exceptions.

It does not describe anything other than the relationship between employer and employee. It does not cover all public policies.
You don't understand the concept. There is only one definition regarding employment at the will of either party for Any policies public.
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$295.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top