Liberals - Worst Sort of Racists

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
101

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
vroom wrote:
Doogie,

Interesting, but really, I suspect it is a sword that can cut both ways… as even the language in the preview available shows signs of of the very same adversarial nature it is describing.

In particular, I do think most people are willing to admit unintended consequences have been seen, I question the concept of the welfare state as an accepted dogma, but I am not aware of anyone having a viable solution to the current situation as of yet.

The question remains, how do we move forward without creating larger problems?

How?

You stop the free handouts and require work. There are tons of jobs that can and need to be done to support the infrastructure of the country. Having able-bodied people on welfare do this work is reasonable and if done correctly could lead to other opportunities. The program should also include vocational or college training. Give tax cuts to those companies that assist with this training.

There are many ways to accomplish this, but it is politically unpopular as no one wants to be the party that requires people on welfare to actually work. Who on welfare is going to vote for that? What feel-good liberal will be able to look past the “feelings” of it to see what will really be better in the long run?

There is an employment agency down the street from where I currently stay. Theer is usually a line of people out front by 6 in the morning. Mind you, I don’t currently even live in a big city. I think some of you are a little blind to the hassles of actually finding a job, let alone a decent one, when your skills are lacking. If you think everyone who is jobless right now simply doesn’t want to work, you are living in a fantasy land. I suppose it is nice and comfy there. The real world isn’t so “black and white”.
[/quote]

Hey Bro, I’m not the rich doctor, so you may want to curb that you “we all live in an ivory tower” mantra, because you fit that mold more that 95% of the guys on this site.

Next, read my post closer and you will see that I advocate training, not just work. I know first hand that getting a good job is difficult, especially if you are unskilled. So I believe the idea of tax cuts for businesses that offer training to welfare recipients is a win win; the business gets tax cuts and trained hirable people in the end, and the welfare person gets a skill and a good chance at a job from the place that delivered the training.

So I’m not just saying “get a job”. I’m saying we need to offer training and jobs instead of just giving money for nothing and chicks for free!

102

[quote]AZMojo wrote:
What are these infrastructure jobs you’re talking about? Just so I have some idea where you’re coming from on this.
[/quote]

Street sweeping, trash collecting, park maintenance, etc.

I don’t know how many eligible voters on welfare actually vote. But around election time it would appear that liberals believe that they all vote. I think they even buss them in to vote, or so I’ve heard.

[quote]
It seems easy to paint the “feel-good liberal” as the villian here, but they haven’t been in power for several years. How come the conservatives haven’t implimented this common sense solution of yours? They certainly don’t make their decisions based on how they make people feel. Maybe there’s more to it.[/quote]

Liberals are the villain because they want people to be dependant on them. “Keep Liberals in power and they will give you everything for nothing!” That is how they present their ideas.

And to answer your last question, Bush is the one who passed (signed) the bill to limit the time people can be on welfare. So they did do something. Was that the best approach? I don’t know, but it is some motivation for people. I personally think that training and skills would be a better approach, but no one listens to me.

So I don’t think that conservatives are doing what they should either. But, it wasn’t conservatives who created the big welfare State we have today, is was liberals.

103

[quote]Lorisco wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
What are these infrastructure jobs you’re talking about? Just so I have some idea where you’re coming from on this.

Street sweeping, trash collecting, park maintenance, etc.[/quote]

People already do these jobs. Some of them are well-paying, sought-after type jobs(as are most municipal jobs). I’m sure many on welfare would happily take them, as would many who are not. The problem is that they are municipal jobs. So, unless we want to create more taxpayer funded jobs just so we can see these people on the street working, we need a different solution. Otherwise, your money still gets spent the same, and goes to the same people.[quote]

How big is this “welfare vote” you’re speaking of? Do the welfare voters have the power to pass or defeat a bill? Who knew they were that influential?

I don’t know how many eligible voters on welfare actually vote. But around election time it would appear that liberals believe that they all vote. I think they even buss them in to vote, or so I’ve heard.[/quote]

I don’t think the “feelings” of a less than influential segment of our population are what’s dictating policy decisions in Washington. The big picture probably has more to do with it, like where these jobs are gonna come from, Especially, with so many unskilled labor positions being farmed out to other countries by corporate America.[quote]

It seems easy to paint the “feel-good liberal” as the villian here, but they haven’t been in power for several years. How come the conservatives haven’t implimented this common sense solution of yours? They certainly don’t make their decisions based on how they make people feel. Maybe there’s more to it.

Liberals are the villain because they want people to be dependant on them. “Keep Liberals in power and they will give you everything for nothing!” That is how they present their ideas. [/quote]

Every political party wants people to be dependant on them. It’s not just a liberal(read Democrat)thing. Doesn’t Bush Co. want us dependant on them for our security?[quote]

And to answer your last question, Bush is the one who passed (signed) the bill to limit the time people can be on welfare. So they did do something. Was that the best approach? I don’t know, but it is some motivation for people. I personally think that training and skills would be a better approach, but no one listens to me.

So I don’t think that conservatives are doing what they should either. But, it wasn’t conservatives who created the big welfare State we have today, is was liberals.
[/quote]

I concur that education and skill training are the answers, but in the meantime you can’t just pull the rug out from under millions of people and wish them luck. We shouldn’t be a country that allows it’s residents to starve in the street, even though we sometimes do. Motivation and punishment aren’t synonymous.

104

[quote]AZMojo wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
AZMojo wrote:
What are these infrastructure jobs you’re talking about? Just so I have some idea where you’re coming from on this.

Street sweeping, trash collecting, park maintenance, etc.

People already do these jobs. Some of them are well-paying, sought-after type jobs(as are most municipal jobs). I’m sure many on welfare would happily take them, as would many who are not. The problem is that they are municipal jobs. So, unless we want to create more taxpayer funded jobs just so we can see these people on the street working, we need a different solution. Otherwise, your money still gets spent the same, and goes to the same people.

How big is this “welfare vote” you’re speaking of? Do the welfare voters have the power to pass or defeat a bill? Who knew they were that influential?

I don’t know how many eligible voters on welfare actually vote. But around election time it would appear that liberals believe that they all vote. I think they even buss them in to vote, or so I’ve heard.

I don’t think the “feelings” of a less than influential segment of our population are what’s dictating policy decisions in Washington. The big picture probably has more to do with it, like where these jobs are gonna come from, Especially, with so many unskilled labor positions being farmed out to other countries by corporate America.

It seems easy to paint the “feel-good liberal” as the villian here, but they haven’t been in power for several years. How come the conservatives haven’t implimented this common sense solution of yours? They certainly don’t make their decisions based on how they make people feel. Maybe there’s more to it.

Liberals are the villain because they want people to be dependant on them. “Keep Liberals in power and they will give you everything for nothing!” That is how they present their ideas.

Every political party wants people to be dependant on them. It’s not just a liberal(read Democrat)thing. Doesn’t Bush Co. want us dependant on them for our security?

And to answer your last question, Bush is the one who passed (signed) the bill to limit the time people can be on welfare. So they did do something. Was that the best approach? I don’t know, but it is some motivation for people. I personally think that training and skills would be a better approach, but no one listens to me.

So I don’t think that conservatives are doing what they should either. But, it wasn’t conservatives who created the big welfare State we have today, is was liberals.

I concur that education and skill training are the answers, but in the meantime you can’t just pull the rug out from under millions of people and wish them luck. We shouldn’t be a country that allows it’s residents to starve in the street, even though we sometimes do. Motivation and punishment aren’t synonymous.

[/quote]

Good post.

105

You know, if it weren’t for the jackoffs making up some stance that nobody actually holds, there could actually be real discussion.

The reality of the situation is that you can’t just turn off the electricity to a whole town and expect things to stay sane, for example. Hurricane Katrina is an example.

So, when I ask for a realistic solution, I’m asking for some type of transition from what is supposedly an entitlement system to something else.

Instead, we get some mythology about how various people are being blamed and various other people are being told they deserve this and that and so on.

How fucking out of touch do you have to be to perpetuate these myths? We aren’t in the 70’s and 80’s anymore, they are bygone eras.

People with an ounce of empathy and compassion in their souls want to make sure that everyone gets an opportunity to live the American dream.

If only a certain select few get to partake in the American dream, then you are going to have a large unruly and unhappy group of people on your hands.

I know, many of you don’t care, but go read the other discussion about revolts and why and when people may choose to. Finally, people have been robbing the rich since the dawn of time. It is at least as old a profession as prostitution.

It isn’t going to go away… and making more people feel that they don’t have even have access to opportunities is almost certainly going to lead them further to choose crime as a means of getting ahead.

Hmmm.

The nature of humanity is a little more complex than this ideology or that ideology. It is more complex than this religion or that religion. Trying to put everyone into the same square holes is a losers game.

People, and the societies they live in are diverse and complex.

106

[quote]vroom wrote:

People with an ounce of empathy and compassion in their souls want to make sure that everyone gets an opportunity to live the American dream.

[/quote]

That’s exactly the kind of thing I was talking about before.

[quote]
Many times, the reason it is hard to come up with viable solutions (to social problems)is that the left prevents honest debate. They say that “smart, caring people” agree the lefts solution is right, and that it is right because “smart, caring people” agree with it. Just disagreeing with them means you are dumb and heartless. Even when it is clear that people were better off before the left intervened, to suggest that the left’s “solution” be repealed is treated as heartless and evil.[/quote]

107

[quote]doogie wrote:

That’s exactly the kind of thing I was talking about before.

[/quote]

Doogie, this statement"[quote]Many times, the reason it is hard to come up with viable solutions (to social problems)is that the left prevents honest debate.[/quote]" tries to assign blame to “The Liberals” for why there is no progress…yet the Republicans are supposedly in charge currently in Government. Exactly how blind does someone have to be to try to fault one political party over another especially when the one they fault is now the minority in power?

108

[quote]Professor X wrote:
doogie wrote:

That’s exactly the kind of thing I was talking about before.

Doogie, this statement"Many times, the reason it is hard to come up with viable solutions (to social problems)is that the left prevents honest debate." tries to assign blame to “The Liberals” for why there is no progress…yet the Republicans are supposedly in charge currently in Government. Exactly how blind does someone have to be to try to fault one political party over another especially when the one they fault is now the minority in power?[/quote]

The real question is, how retarded do you have to be to not understand we were discussing the contrasting styles the left and right use when debating these issues? Good lord, is there no reading comprehension section of the MCAT?

When the Republicans are in office and make an effort to reform the crimes of the left, they are labeled as heartless and evil. They are politicians before all else, and they inevitably cave out of fear of the labels sticking. There is no debate about what is actually in anyone’s best interest, because the left won’t allow it.

109

[quote]doogie wrote:
That’s exactly the kind of thing I was talking about before.
[/quote]

No, it isn’t, though I’m sure you would like it to be.

I’m perfectly willing to discuss these issues, but I’m not willing to have some caricature of my viewpoint presented as if it is my viewpoint.

If you feel I am mistaken in my assessment, then tell me about it. Tell me how it is in fact more compassionate to simply let families that can’t find good work starve on the streets.

The issues are up for discussion, but they need to actually be addressed.

For example, the following is not my belief, but someone could take the position and argue it…

Cutting off all social programs, cold turkey, while resulting in a short term effect on large quantities of people, would in the long term yield a more productive and integrated society making everyone better off in the long run.

Hopefully, such a statement could be backed up with some type of evidence. Then, if everyone bought it and it was put into effect, many would argue that cold turkey is not the way to go, but that some good plan for migrating towards a better solution should be followed.

110

Ahahahaha. And you don’t see statements like this as the other side of the sword I was talking about earlier?

Holy shit, step back from the nuclear weapons, neither side is inherently evil in this way.

You guys are freaking me out!

111

[quote]doogie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
doogie wrote:

That’s exactly the kind of thing I was talking about before.

Doogie, this statement"Many times, the reason it is hard to come up with viable solutions (to social problems)is that the left prevents honest debate." tries to assign blame to “The Liberals” for why there is no progress…yet the Republicans are supposedly in charge currently in Government. Exactly how blind does someone have to be to try to fault one political party over another especially when the one they fault is now the minority in power?

The real question is, how retarded do you have to be to not understand we were discussing the contrasting styles the left and right use when debating these issues? Good lord, is there no reading comprehension section of the MCAT?

When the Republicans are in office and make an effort to reform the crimes of the left, they are labeled as heartless and evil. They are politicians before all else, and they inevitably cave out of fear of the labels sticking. There is no debate about what is actually in anyone’s best interest, because the left won’t allow it.[/quote]

Why would they cave out of fear (of labels no less) if the majority of people in America agree with them?

112

[quote]vroom wrote:
the crimes of the left

Ahahahaha. And you don’t see statements like this as the other side of the sword I was talking about earlier?

Holy shit, step back from the nuclear weapons, neither side is inherently evil in this way.

You guys are freaking me out![/quote]

That was just to tweak, the Prof.

113

Check… stepping back down to DEFCON 3.

114

[quote]GDollars37 wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
vroom wrote:
Doogie,

Interesting, but really, I suspect it is a sword that can cut both ways… as even the language in the preview available shows signs of of the very same adversarial nature it is describing.

In particular, I do think most people are willing to admit unintended consequences have been seen, I question the concept of the welfare state as an accepted dogma, but I am not aware of anyone having a viable solution to the current situation as of yet.

The question remains, how do we move forward without creating larger problems?

How?

You stop the free handouts and require work. There are tons of jobs that can and need to be done to support the infrastructure of the country. Having able-bodied people on welfare do this work is reasonable and if done correctly could lead to other opportunities. The program should also include vocational or college training. Give tax cuts to those companies that assist with this training.

There are many ways to accomplish this, but it is politically unpopular as no one wants to be the party that requires people on welfare to actually work. Who on welfare is going to vote for that? What feel-good liberal will be able to look past the “feelings” of it to see what will really be better in the long run?

There is an employment agency down the street from where I currently stay. Theer is usually a line of people out front by 6 in the morning. Mind you, I don’t currently even live in a big city. I think some of you are a little blind to the hassles of actually finding a job, let alone a decent one, when your skills are lacking. If you think everyone who is jobless right now simply doesn’t want to work, you are living in a fantasy land. I suppose it is nice and comfy there. The real world isn’t so “black and white”.

Yup. Moreover, you guys sound like Ronald Reagan slamming “welfare queens,” not that there wasn’t some truth to that, but the welfare reform pushed through by the Republican Congress under Clinton was pretty comprehensive, and that was a while ago. Things have changed.

I highly doubt anyone participating in this discussion has ever been on welfare, I certainly haven’t, but the safety net in this country is really pretty thin. If you want to bitch about wastes of money, look at the screwed up health care system and all the handouts to agriculture and the like, not efforts to create some bare minimum of social programs for those who are going through tough times. Of course, Headhunter doesn’t seem to want to look at wasted money, but just attack his political opponents as evil geniuses.[/quote]

After reading what I’ve written, you assume I’m in favor of farm subsidies? LOL!!

I’m in favor of a truly human society, where ALL RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN HUMAN BEINGS ARE VOLUNTARY on all sides. Anyone who violates this principle is dealt with by the police/military/judicial system.

I am fascinated how some of you guys draw conclusions.

115

Vroom,

Asking for a civil discussion and beginning by calling others ‘jackoffs’ is a contradiction.

I’m surprised by how little faith you have in the American people. You first assume that most people will begin to plunder their neighbors. You then assume that they’d simply continue in their squalor.

Isn’t this a quite negative view of your fellow man?

Its my contention that liberals think just like this: “Most people are too incompetent to run their own lives and need government ‘assistance’.” Since power always attracts corrupt individuals, such a system must be abused. Any government that enters the private lives of individuals, instead of staying outside as an objective arbiter, can only be/become evil. How much simpler can I explain this?

116

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
I’m surprised by how little faith you have in the American people. You first assume that most people will begin to plunder their neighbors. You then assume that they’d simply continue in their squalor.[/quote]

There you go making assumptions again.

Let me point you to crime statistics. Funny, isn’t it usually liberals that are supposed to believe the world is Shangri-La and that we should all love one another?

Really? This is your grand insight into the minds of liberals? I’ll say again, it isn’t appropriate to go around and make up some strange stance so that you can argue against it.

Wait, I thought I was the one that was thinking bad things about people – that I did not have faith in my fellow man. You can’t have it both ways…

Perhaps you should explain “enters the private lives of individuals”, because this is going to mean a lot of different things to different people. The government has no choice but to influence our lives, simply by existing and enforcing laws.

Again, leaping directly to the “evil” button is a bit silly. There has never been a society that hasn’t had a power structure that interferes in the lives of individuals. I suspect their never will.

117

[quote]vroom wrote:
Headhunter wrote:
I’m surprised by how little faith you have in the American people. You first assume that most people will begin to plunder their neighbors. You then assume that they’d simply continue in their squalor.

There you go making assumptions again.

Let me point you to crime statistics. Funny, isn’t it usually liberals that are supposed to believe the world is Shangri-La and that we should all love one another?

Its my contention that liberals think just like this: “Most people are too incompetent to run their own lives and need government ‘assistance’.”

Really? This is your grand insight into the minds of liberals? I’ll say again, it isn’t appropriate to go around and make up some strange stance so that you can argue against it.

Since power always attracts corrupt individuals, such a system must be abused.

Wait, I thought I was the one that was thinking bad things about people – that I did not have faith in my fellow man. You can’t have it both ways…

Any government that enters the private lives of individuals, instead of staying outside as an objective arbiter, can only be/become evil. How much simpler can I explain this?

Perhaps you should explain “enters the private lives of individuals”, because this is going to mean a lot of different things to different people. The government has no choice but to influence our lives, simply by existing and enforcing laws.

Again, leaping directly to the “evil” button is a bit silly. There has never been a society that hasn’t had a power structure that interferes in the lives of individuals. I suspect their never will.[/quote]

There you go again, Vroom. Unbelievable! The main reason you give for having ‘government assistance’ is because the poor would rise up and revolt (could this be connected with plundering your neighbor?). You’ve said this repeatedly. You are truly something else…

And you question my sanity.

Then, because I say corrupt individuals will abuse their power, this somehow means that my statement about an entire population is ‘Shangri-la’.

You’re back to being the Jello Man.

Now for entering our ‘private lives’: Did you even read what I’ve written? You know my beliefs: all relationships between human beings must be VOLUNTARY on all sides. Break that rule and the police/military/judiciary are invoked. How simple do you need it?

I won’t call you a ‘jackoff’, because that is beneath my dignity. I will say that I have many students with a lot more intelligience; they don’t change their premises in the middle of a discussion. Sheeesh!!!

118

[quote]Headhunter wrote:
There you go again, Vroom. Unbelievable! The main reason you give for having ‘government assistance’ is because the poor would rise up and revolt (could this be connected with plundering your neighbor?). You’ve said this repeatedly. You are truly something else…[/quote]

You should look through history. When one group is rich and another is poor, the disparity causes problems. Stick your head in the sand all you want… this has been a fact of existence.

Hell, poor countries even invade resource rich countries, that’s the way the world works.

Buddy, you’re living in the US is voluntary, you are welcome to leave if you don’t like the same system that everyone else does. Does your staying there not qualify as voluntary?

Now you are just trolling. They don’t keep you very busy at work do they? You flip-flop on whether or not you should have faith in humanity, yet you mention the frailties of humanity with respect to corruption. You need to make up your mind.

Honestly, if you can put together and support a good argument, other than a half assed restatement of Rand, and if you can support that with some realistic politicy initiatives to get to a better place, then you’ll have something to say…

In the mean time, you are just baiting and trolling with ridiculous statements because you are bored at work and afraid to look at porn because they’ll find out and fire you.

119

[quote]AZMojo wrote:
People already do these jobs. Some of them are well-paying, sought-after type jobs(as are most municipal jobs). I’m sure many on welfare would happily take them, as would many who are not. The problem is that they are municipal jobs. So, unless we want to create more taxpayer funded jobs just so we can see these people on the street working, we need a different solution. Otherwise, your money still gets spent the same, and goes to the same people.
[/quote]

Congratulations for paying attention. Now just why do these low skilled jobs pay a lot? Should we pay $50k per year for a guy to drive a street sweeper truck?

You have nailed the very reason why the system is flawed; unchecked and unreasonable government spending.

But as fare as jobs available, check the government job listings, there as loads of open positions.

Another great point! Many companies hire cheap labor from other countries. Give these companies a tax incentive to hire welfare recipients and we could keep that money in the US.

As far as if they don’t want to work, then they don’t get welfare.

The difference is that security of the US is a constitutional requirement of the Federal Government; namely the Executive branch. So a conservative president promising to keep the US safe is part of his job.

Now what is not his job and NOT in the constitution is social architecture and the socialist agenda of the left.

So the conservatives want voters to need them for reasons outlined in the constitution and the liberals want voters to need them for other non-constitutional reasons.

Requiring someone who is able bodied to now work who is on welfare is not cutting them off. You give them time to get a job or a training program and then if they still don’t want to be productive you send them to Canada to live with vroom. Let him take care of them.

120

[quote]doogie wrote:
Professor X wrote:
doogie wrote:

That’s exactly the kind of thing I was talking about before.

Doogie, this statement"Many times, the reason it is hard to come up with viable solutions (to social problems)is that the left prevents honest debate." tries to assign blame to “The Liberals” for why there is no progress…yet the Republicans are supposedly in charge currently in Government. Exactly how blind does someone have to be to try to fault one political party over another especially when the one they fault is now the minority in power?

The real question is, how retarded do you have to be to not understand we were discussing the contrasting styles the left and right use when debating these issues? Good lord, is there no reading comprehension section of the MCAT?

When the Republicans are in office and make an effort to reform the crimes of the left, they are labeled as heartless and evil. They are politicians before all else, and they inevitably cave out of fear of the labels sticking. There is no debate about what is actually in anyone’s best interest, because the left won’t allow it.[/quote]

Great post! (and funny too!)