One Day’s Worth of Millionaire Tax Cuts Would Feed Needy Families for a Year

[Bill]

Originally Posted by ft laud mike

Here is a wild idea, if your poor or underprivileged, or whatever the flavor of the day is, how about not having more family than you can support. Just a thought, I have had hard times, and I worked through them. I ddin't ask or recieve any assistance.
I do not support any charities except the humane society, my choice. All these azzhats giving my tax $$ to some loser who makes no effort to better their situation is crap

This is the real problem, right here. "Well, you can't deprive my child, my child has a right to everything life has to offer."

Perhaps we should end welfare entitlements and parents could then look inward to see why their kid doesn't have food on his plate.

Why am I the taxpayer expected to pay for YOUR kid. I didn't even knock up the mom. I had nothing to do with having a kid I knew in advance I couldn't pay medical insurance for, provide food and clothing for, etc., and yet, here I am being forced to pay for those kids.

Can I get some WIC moms and kids to come over and do some housecleaning and mow my lawn? After all, they expect me to pay for them, I expect a little service in exchange for my money.

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by ft laud mike

Here is a wild idea, if your poor or underprivileged, or whatever the flavor of the day is, how about not having more family than you can support. Just a thought, I have had hard times, and I worked through them. I ddin't ask or recieve any assistance.
I do not support any charities except the humane society, my choice. All these azzhats giving my tax $$ to some loser who makes no effort to better their situation is crap

Sounds like a great idea ... now what?

[sanchez]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Sounds like a great idea ... now what?

Stop subsidizing that behavior.

[AC54ME]

Originally Posted by bill_daniels

This is the real problem, right here. "Well, you can't deprive my child, my child has a right to everything life has to offer."

Perhaps we should end welfare entitlements and parents could then look inward to see why their kid doesn't have food on his plate.

Why am I the taxpayer expected to pay for YOUR kid. I didn't even knock up the mom. I had nothing to do with having a kid I knew in advance I couldn't pay medical insurance for, provide food and clothing for, etc., and yet, here I am being forced to pay for those kids.

Can I get some WIC moms and kids to come over and do some housecleaning and mow my lawn? After all, they expect me to pay for them, I expect a little service in exchange for my money.

Bill,

Well stated.

The issue is NOT that some need some assistance to see them through a tough time, it is that the 'tough time' syndrome has become to represent anything that the politicians can envision in order to spend others hard earned income in supporting those will minimal morals (I.e., unmarried, with several children by different, many times unknown, fathers, etc.) and/or those that stuffed their mouths with 5000+ calories per day for 20 years and never get up off the couch (other than to defaecate, or raid the cookie jar, etc.), and/or those that made a conscious decision to not take advantage of what schooling is available to every US citizen, thus are unable to read, write of communicate in a manner that makes them eligible for a job, and/or are 'generational' welfare recipients, a more than common occurrence.

White/black/brown/poke - e- dot - matters not a wit to me on the color of these individuals - they either proceed to get up and participate in the areas of 'work for pay' or sit around and die on the vine, or solicit from charities the money needed to survive.

For those unable to participate due to issues totally beyond their control (I.e., born with no arms, no legs) society as a whole should have sympathy for them - and there was a means for assisting them (private charities) before the welfare state was imposed by the Progressives.

[LATB]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

Sounds like a great idea ... now what?

drug test welfare recipients, so they are not stoned and make bad life choices.

sterilize welfare mothers/fathers who already have kids and show no effort to improve their place in life.

take away food stamps to all but the most extreme cases...make folks go to food exchanges/churches & other charitable organizations. this gets them into a network where people can help.

as you know, networking works!

there is a start...

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by LarsAtTheBeach

drug test welfare recipients, so they are not stoned and make bad life choices.

sterilize welfare mothers/fathers who already have kids and show no effort to improve their place in life.

take away food stamps to all but the most extreme cases...make folks go to food exchanges/churches & other charitable organizations. this gets them into a network where people can help.

as you know, networking works!

there is a start...

I think that’s an excellent Conservative Platform that the GOP should adopted today for any Presidential Candidate.

[sanchez]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

I think that’s an excellent Conservative Platform that the GOP should adopted today for any Presidential Candidate.

The Florida Goveneror is trying to institute it now. People are having apoplexy about it.

[LATB]

Originally Posted by sanchez

The Florida Goveneror is trying to institute it now. People are having apoplexy about it.

only the bleeding heart liberal fools are experiencing apoplexy

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by sanchez

The Florida Goveneror is trying to institute it now. People are having apoplexy about it.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/How_to_Win_Friends_and_Influence_People

[73sbVert]

Originally Posted by ChasC5

I think that’s an excellent Conservative Platform that the GOP should adopted today for any Presidential Candidate.

Why should it be a GOP only position? Don't you think that ALL parties should ascribe to personal responsibility?

Or do you think that this is a losing position and the Dems should NEVER adopt that because they would lose their power over the individual?

[ChasC5]

Originally Posted by 73sbVert

Why should it be a GOP only position? Don't you think that ALL parties should ascribe to personal responsibility?

Or do you think that this is a losing position and the Dems should NEVER adopt that because they would lose their power over the individual?

I’m personally responsible and I don’t have anyone controlling me.

So let’s see; this one (1), do you think there can be two (2) of us?

And if there’s two (2) of us, is it safe to say Generalizations are wrong?

[sanchez]

Originally Posted by LarsAtTheBeach

only the bleeding heart liberal fools are experiencing apoplexy

Which is so good it just ahs to be fattening.

It would be great if they could tie birth control two welfare. If you are on the dole, you should not be knocking out more kids.

[RetiredSFC 97]

Originally Posted by LarsAtTheBeach

only the bleeding heart liberal fools are experiencing apoplexy

No I don't like it either.

Everything has unintended consequences and this is no exception, so where does this end?

Drug test for drivers license? Drug test for HC? drug test for my monthly retirement stipend? Drug test at random for all citizens?

This isn't the answer. the answer is to reduce welfare without expanding costs in other areas. he stands to gain in this personally as he owns clinics. yeah I heard he sold, or whatever, but if anyone believes that I will sell the Statue of Liberty to them.

The answer is limit who receives asistance and for how long. More kids gets you no extra benefit, if you have a husband then you may still receive assistance if you qualify.

There are many ways to reduce welfare without coming up with drug tests. They are about as effective as an employee drug test. All of the users, except for the addicts, can pass a one time test if it means getting free money or even a job.

The only ones it will affect are the addicts who they will then send to rehab on our dime. it's already been talked about in Missouri and they suggested treatment for the addicts at tax payer expense.

Where and when the **** will the spending end? Take it from one and hand it to another? How does this help?

[AC54ME]

[ChasC5]

[Entropy]

Originally Posted by sanchez

Stop subsidizing that behavior.

This.

Interesting observation on my trip to Ohio this week. Almost everybody had a carry on bag. Why? Because Delta has instituted a $25/flight fee for checked luggage. Interesting what people will do when it starts to cost them personally.

[LATB]

Originally Posted by Entropy

This.

Interesting observation on my trip to Ohio this week. Almost everybody had a carry on bag. Why? Because Delta has instituted a $25/flight fee for checked luggage. Interesting what people will do when it starts to cost them personally.

which is a good argument for paying employees gross...

make them each responsible for paying their taxes and other withholding...

watch change happen to the tax code...fast