AllUrHiveRblong2usBy Your Powers Combined...Join Date: 2002-12-20Member: 11244Members
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Aug 28 2004, 10:32 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Aug 28 2004, 10:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Aug 28 2004, 10:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Aug 28 2004, 10:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Do you think that these charitable donations even come close to the ammount of money nessesary to support public education? Let alone all of the other things nessesary to create oportunity for all in a society?
I find it funny that conservatives are so willing to let their tax dollars be spent on.... you know what? I'm just not going to go there. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I never said that rich people should pay for everything...so I don't understand what this is all about with rich people supporting public education. TBH I appreciate public education and regard it as necessary, I was just curious to see why other people thought it was the province of the government. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Why wouldn't public education be the responsibility of the government? The private sector certainly wouldn't do it without charging or otherwise trying to make a profit with it, thus negating the point of having public schools.
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Aug 28 2004, 10:32 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Aug 28 2004, 10:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Aug 28 2004, 10:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Aug 28 2004, 10:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Do you think that these charitable donations even come close to the ammount of money nessesary to support public education? Let alone all of the other things nessesary to create oportunity for all in a society?
I find it funny that conservatives are so willing to let their tax dollars be spent on.... you know what? I'm just not going to go there. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I never said that rich people should pay for everything...so I don't understand what this is all about with rich people supporting public education. TBH I appreciate public education and regard it as necessary, I was just curious to see why other people thought it was the province of the government. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ive always wondered about welfare (esp. those of the European countries) alot. Why do people think that health services, education, employment, and a decent standard of living are rights to be granted and enforced by the government?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Furthermore, should this be the province of the government? I've always thought that personal charity is much more effective than state-enforced charity.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So help me out here. Just what is this "personal charity" paying for if not the things you mentioned in the first quote?
We've already shown why those things are nessesary and if the government doesn't pay for them, who will? I assumed that by your "I've always thought that personal charity is much more effective than state-enforced charity." remark was meant to mean that such things could be funded by by charitable donations.
You can't have it both ways. Either you have these services available, and everyone has an oportunity. Or you don't and only those who were born out of the right wombs have an oportunity. The money has to come from somewhere.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And I find it funny that conservatives aren't willing to let their tax dollars be spent on bureaucratic waste.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yet seem perfectly happy to practically hemorage money in support of a war launched on a questionable premise? See why I wasn't going to go there?
<!--QuoteBegin-Cronos+Aug 28 2004, 09:32 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Cronos @ Aug 28 2004, 09:32 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> A person shouldnt have a child they couldnt support? Hello?!
Having a child is hardly a choice. You can try and have one with your partner most certainly of course but once it's there you cant exactly undo the decision and if the government says your up **** creek without a paddle or canoe your only choices are to send the kid to an orphanage where he'll most likely get sexually abused or sell him/her into prostitution.
Being fired from ones job is ALSO not a choice. Your employer might decide he doesnt like the way you tie your shoes and fire you there and then, there goes your salary, your savings go down the toilet trying to support your family and your stuck rummaging through garbage to get food.
And last time I checked it was government medical programs that helped to conquer TB, Whooping cough and other easily curable but deadly diseases. Government sponsored medical research is comparable to military spending and the defense budget.
Education serves to break the poverty cycle so that ALL CITEZENS OF A COUNTRY HAVE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. Welfare serves keep you out of the poverty cycle (I have NEVER seen an unshaven shabbily clothed man get a job. I wonder why, something to do with appearence perchance?) and keep you afloat. Kind of like the branch that saves you from falling off a cliff. You still have to pull yourself up.
Free healthcare wins on grounds of compassion alone. A society in good health is a society that can work for longer and harder then one that doesnt from a utilitarian point.
Chem, I'm truly sorry you see things such as free education, welfare and healthcare as negative things but honestly if you had no money and no job and were utterly unable to earn any kind of money legitamately, you may see the benefit of the system.
The people that exploit the system on the other hand, deserve to be cut off from the system. It's there to ensure that you can get back on your feet and become a productive member of society once more.
Unless you can prove that you are looking for a job and have been knocked back repeatedly you should honestly be cutoff from welfare.
By the way, for those that dont know about the poverty cycle...
1. Mr. Breadwinner gets fired due to circumstances beyond his control.
2. Savings quickly evaporate due to buying necessities (food, clothing, bills).
3. Debt begins to mount, ends fail to meet
4. Nobody wants to employ Mr. Breadwinner because of
A. Shabby Clothen/Unclean appearence (due to poverty) B. His skills are unneeded by any business or firm C. Someone with better skills then Mr. Breadwinner comes along (due to affluent family and excellent education).
5. Mr. Breadwinner finally gets a job after his family is booted out of it's home working on roads. It pays 80 cents an hour becuase thats all they would take him for.
6. The Breadwinner family move to more affordable accomadation after spending a week or so sleeping in the streets. Their Five Star Suite comes complete with urine soaked matress, rats, and peeling wallpaper.
7. Mr. Breadwinner dies on the job because his employer was pushing him and others to work harder, leading to the unsafe conditions that lead to Mr. Breadwinners demise. Since the company doesnt give rats **** about Mr. Breadwinner because there were a hundred more unemployed goons after HIS job, no compensation is awarded to the Breadwinner family.
8. Mrs. Breadwinner goes into prostitution to earn money to put dinner on a three legged and very creaky dinner table.
9. The kids, not in school and becoming ever more aware of their povertious plight go to picking pockets for a living, bringing in a modest income.
10. Years pass with no improvement. Charlie Breadwinner gets thrown in jail after being caught robbing a house for food and some money. Julie Breadwinner has gone into prostitution as well. Mrs. Breadwinner has died of Syphilis and other sexually transmitted diseases either due to unprotected sex or because of faulty condoms.
11. Charlie Breadwinner eventually gets out of jail and comes back a hundred times worse then before. Julie Breadwinner is raped and murdered in a dark alleyway.
12. Charlie Breadwinner manages to find someone special in this time. He's a proffessional thug now, a drunk, a drug addict, and extremely brutal at times. The second generation of Breadwinners have a lot to look forward to.
Welfare, Healthcare and Education prevent Crime and enable all to become prosperous without having to resort to desperate measures. If you think that these are unnecessary and should be removed I'd like to see what happens should you yourself get fired and are unable to get a job or legitamately earn money.
When you fall on desperate times you will want somone to prop you up until you can get back on your feet. When you are well off, your tax dollars go to helping those less fortunate then yourself (amongst other things of course).
In all honesty I'd like to hear the opinion of someone who doesnt have a job and isnt on welfare. Oh wait, I forgot, they dont have an internet connection OR a home and because they havent had much of an education they probably wouldnt be very articulate.
GG. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Having a child IS a choice, a very simple choice to. Either A. don't have vaginal sex B. Use adequate contraception or C. get an abortion. Any child born from consensual sex is a choice, if someone has sex they know the risks.
First of all, I have very rarely heard of an employer fire someone for a reason so asinine, and if it did happen, the person who was fired could take it to court. Also, once you lose a job it is very important to find other employment RIGHT away before your standard of living faulters.
Government medical programs arn't welfare at all, and wasn't it the private sector that came up with cures for a LOT of other diseases?
Education should be free, but if someone gets so run down as to be unemployable it is their own fault really.
Free healthcare, the delemnas that spew from that. Hypothtical situation, Child A has a rare form of cancer that although potentially curable would cost hundreds of thousands of dollarsx to cure, mean while several thousand other children suffer from easily and cheaply curable bacterial infections. There is only enough money for one. Also, all the money in the world won't cure a disease that requires a transplant where none is available.
How can we cut off those who don't deserve to be in the system? We can't spy on everyone to see what they're doing. Now, on to the story.
1. Ok, he gets fired, or laid off, probably should have worked harder to make himself more valuable to his employers but ok let's say he gets fired for reasons he cant control.
2. Savings evaporate, why isn't he getting a job now.
3. Still hasn't gotten a job?
4.
A. He should have found employment LONG before his outward physical appearence begins to suffer, laundromats arn't insanely expensive. B. Menial labor, no training needed, and many are quite well paying if your lucky enough to get one(construction especially), but he should be able to find at least one job, even garbagemen get paid. C. In menial labor it means someone is basically stronger/faster/quicked than you. With no extra equipment but a floor you can easily get into good shape. Push ups and sit ups work wonders.
5. Unless you're working in a 3rd world country, no job would bay this little. And if you WERE that 80 cents of an American dollar would buy a lot wherever you were. Unless it's a sweatshop or other such business. Those SHOULD be illegal (and are in most [all?] industrialized countires). And if you arn't being paid enough to support your entire family have your wife get a job as well. Many many businesses and commodities can be run right from the home, especially if the kids help.
6. Shouldn't happen if you work hard enough (and your family)
7. Illegal (except in some places, thats because their government just isn't good really) Plently of lawyers would take a case like that for free (percent of settlement) if they think they could win it.
8. Mr. Breadwinner either A. Shouldn't be dead or B. his family should have gotten a lot of money for wrongful death and/or insurance (insurance is very important to protect against accidents that are noone's fault) So his wife shouldn't have to go into prostitution, and if there wasn't compensation the children should go to a foster home temporarily if Mrs. Breadwinner can't find/start a job that can support their family.
9. Why wouldn't they be in school? Are we assuming this is in some made up country that is pure capitalist and not even education is free? Some socialism is good, just not a lot of it. Same goes for capitalism.
10. Shouldn't happen if this were real life and they wern't lazy/scumbags.
11. Illegal, murder happens regardless of class and has nothing to do with socialism, it has to do with horrible people preying on the weak and those living high risk lifestyles.
12. Again, crime is the result of bad parenting and a bad environment combined with some people's own wickidness. Even the most socialist countries have crime.
Since many countries do have welfare, free healthcare, and free education, and still have crime, we can see that this statement is obviously false. There is no country in the world where everyone is prosperous and there is no crime or murder.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->2. Savings evaporate, why isn't he getting a job now.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> What you fail to realize, is that sometimes jobs are not available. Take the depression for example (or any recession), there were plenty of people willing to work, and no jobs available for them.
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Aug 28 2004, 11:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Aug 28 2004, 11:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yet seem perfectly happy to practically hemorage money in support of a war launched on a questionable premise? See why I wasn't going to go there? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> That's what governments are for, protection, right? By your own logic?
Btw, yes, the government does what the people want, but if in the future the majority for some reason don't want public education, would you condemn the government for not providing it? I think you would.
The story is a hypothetical. It's not a reflection of reality but a proto-reality with the welfare/equal opportunity conditions neatly weeded out.
Prostitution is most definitely illegal, but if the alternative is starvation and death, I think prostitution is the lesser of both evils.
@ Mr. Breadwinner getting fired for an obscure reason: Take a little artistic license with that. "Your shoes arent tied neatly" or, more plausibly "We feel your attitude does not reflect company policy" or even "Your services are no longer required by this company. Collect your paycheck and never come back again. kthx". Shoelaces were the first thing that entered my mind, sue me <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
4 A: **looks about** nearest laundromat where I live is about 30 Km away over freeways and through some rough neighbourhoods and without concession cards train tickets are expensive as hell. Just speaking from a local point of view I guess (or the washing machine got repo'd).
4 B: Remove equal opportunity constraints due to purely capitalistic hypothetical
4 C: Was in reference to better paying non-menial labour (software programming for example). Your point is not relevant, though valid.
5. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary.
6. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary.
7. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary.
8. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary. Take note of what I said about orphanages.
9. You've got the right idea so I wont repeat the answer to 5 6 and 7 again <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
10. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary. Nobody wants to employ them because they appear to be lazy/scumbags. My point is, how are they going to cease being lazy/scumbags if nobody wants to employ them. Considering they are doing they're best to survive (stealing/prostitution) I'd hardly call them lazy.
11. Consider the reason for high risk lifestyle (knock on effects of unmitigated unfair dismissal with no severance pay). Consider that the neighbourhood is equible with "The Bronx" and theres a fairly high chance of murder/rape. Like it or not, even in affluent countries there are areas where crime is more likely to happen.
12. Partly true, but education stems a lot of crime. It would be far far far worse if there were no education at all, worse then a rapidly industrialising britian 150(?) years ago.
On a personal note, I would go so far as to say that education is the right of every child, and that it would nigh on criminal negligence on the part of society to not give that child at least a decent education. Knowledge is the key to breaking any cycle of poverty.
What I'm arguing for is at the very least the bare minimum required to live.
Enough government money to pay for necessities (food, water, clothing etc) and rent. A decent education and adequate healthcare that can take care of the most common ailments (from heart attack to the common cold) with premium services costing extra for all.
Granted my story was a bit extreme and I should have mentioned that it was a rather extreme example of a purely capitalist society but my points do stand. Education is the key, welfare keeps people out of debt and families stable while the healthcare keeps them alive if need be.
On another tack, Farmers definitely need to be payed more then they are. The middlemen are simply squeezing them out of all proportion while they jack up the prices to unbelievable levels. I think 60 Minutes did a short on it a while back but my memory fizzles so much at just yesterday I'm not sure if I imagined it or actually saw it =\
As for the comedian, Laughter is the best medicine, and if you can induce laughter in thousands of people in a room your doing them a service far better then cough syrup can (making them feel good). Society needs it's comedians as much as it's farmers, but the price differential in pay is nigh criminal.
Just to clarify, I don't mind government-provided public services. I enjoy them greatly - I go to the library almost daily during summer breaks. I was just trying to challenge the whole "I'm entitled" mentality that comes attached with a lot of socialist/welfare ideals. So don't start automatically labeling me conservative, cause though I am, I'm a lot more moderate than it would seem.
Not to worry, I dont even know the difference between Conservative/Whateverthehellistheoppositeofconservativeandhashugejoinedwords.
People have their views, whats the point of attempting to label them and put them in neat little boxes?
And if anyone tries to educate me on the difference; Dont bother. I asked for help a while ago and nobody bothered to help. I now prefer to remain ignorant out of spite (if people arent willing to help out, even via linkage what the hell is the point).
I am completely opposed to a Socialist government simply because it once again steals away from the freedom that people have. Only allowing you to go so high, do so much...etc. Capital is limited, etc.
Where as in a Capitalist government I could become a trillionaire some day, and not have to share my hard earned, college level education living with the drunken slime who beats his wife for kicks and giggles. Natural Selection baby, natural selection. It's part of nature, we're part of nature...live with it.
And if I do end up sucking the **** out of a gutter later on in my life, I will learn to accept it...and strive to better myself, not go crying to the government for handouts because I suck.
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Aug 29 2004, 01:12 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Aug 29 2004, 01:12 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Aug 28 2004, 11:17 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Aug 28 2004, 11:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Yet seem perfectly happy to practically hemorage money in support of a war launched on a questionable premise? See why I wasn't going to go there? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> That's what governments are for, protection, right? By your own logic?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I don't ever recall making that claim. But even if I did, it seems pretty clear to me that the current administration has done nothing for protecting me and everything for protecting its own interests.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Btw, yes, the government does what the people want, but if in the future the majority for some reason don't want public education, would you condemn the government for not providing it? I think you would.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> How should I say this... hmm... You see, the government isn't supposed to do what people want, its supposed to uphold the constitution and protect the rights of the MINORITY. Thats right, the minority. If it only did what the majority wanted God knows what kind of christian run theocratical hell this country would be. And you're right, if it did abolish public education I would condemn it, because as I've said before it is a nessesary part of ensuring that oportunity exists for all US citizens.
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Aug 29 2004, 02:00 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Aug 29 2004, 02:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> How should I say this... hmm... You see, the government isn't supposed to do what people want, its supposed to uphold the constitution and protect the rights of the MINORITY. Thats right, the minority. If it only did what the majority wanted God knows what kind of christian run theocratical hell this country would be. And you're right, if it did abolish public education I would condemn it, because as I've said before it is a nessesary part of ensuring that oportunity exists for all US citizens. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->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. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Public education is not a constitutionally-defended right. That's why schools are *edit* primarily state- and locally-funded.
In fact, the very reason public schools are state- and locally- run is to protect the minority.
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Aug 29 2004, 02:14 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Aug 29 2004, 02:14 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Public education is not a constitutionally-defended right. That's why schools are *edit* primarily state- and locally-funded. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> We've been over this. The right to the persuit of happiness IS a constitutionally protected right. Public education falls under this because without it no one would be able to work their way up from poverty.
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Aug 29 2004, 02:21 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Aug 29 2004, 02:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> We've been over this. The right to the persuit of happiness IS a constitutionally protected right. Public education falls under this because without it no one would be able to work their way up from poverty. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> That is a ridiculous statement. And already disproved by several people in this forum.
<!--QuoteBegin-Wheeee+Aug 29 2004, 02:23 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Wheeee @ Aug 29 2004, 02:23 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Aug 29 2004, 02:21 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Aug 29 2004, 02:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> We've been over this. The right to the persuit of happiness IS a constitutionally protected right. Public education falls under this because without it no one would be able to work their way up from poverty. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> That is a ridiculous statement. And already disproved by several people in this forum. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Where? If it has been done, it certainly hasn't been done to my satisfaction. Why don't you explain to me how a child wearing rags for clothing could ever hope to be anything more if he can't get an education?
Or did you mean to say that the persuit of hapiness isn't a constitutional right? Well I suppose you've got me there, its technically part of the Declairation of Indipendance. However, if every American doesn't have the oportunity to better themselves, than how the hell can you argue that if the "lazy poor people" would just work a little harder they'd be alright? That certainly doesn't make sense.
And hell, if this country wasn't all about oportunity, then why do people keep telling me its the greatest country on earth? I mean, certain parts of it are pretty, and when the psycho religious groups aren't out preaching that aids cures homosexuality its pretty civil. But I can get that anywhere, I thought this was supposed to be a bastion of hope on the rest of the world, a land of oportunity where ANYONE could lead a decent life. Guess I was wrong.
<!--QuoteBegin-CommunistWithAGun+Aug 29 2004, 07:56 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CommunistWithAGun @ Aug 29 2004, 07:56 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I never get tired of hearing some ignorant person say "The only reaon they are poor is they are lazy!" <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Some people get the rough end of the stick in life, and I feel genuinely sorry for them. No matter what happens, its like the deck of life has been stacked against them and they are losing it. These people deserve our help and support.
But when someone points at me and says "You owe me something" just because I happen to have an education, then I get angry. At my highschool, everyone made fun of me. My nickname was "povo", because my family was NOT rich. Dad worked as a school teacher, and was supporting 5 kids and wife on it. I had holes in the knees of my school pants, had a job from the age of 14 and a house on the edge of the "slum" area.
I support Government funded primary and secondary schools. I do not support wholely Government supported Universities. In Australia, we have a balance between socialist ideas and common sense. Our medicare consumes 1/5 of our GDP, and on top of that we have a massive Government paid for workers compensation, dole, and Youth/Study allowances. I feel that very, very few people in my country have the right to complain about getting the short end of the stick.
Hell, even university is, for all events and purposes, free. You go to uni, and the goverment automatically pays your fees. And it wont ask you to pay them back until you graduate and are earning over $25,000 a year.
I agree that the goverment dosent need to support universitys. High School is enough (or should be) to get a decent enough job so you can pay for any further education. Allowing people to take lones when studying at a university is also good.
Personally I think money is overated. I mean I want financial security and all but if I got millions of dollars I would probubly end up donating most of it anyway. Money is still a vital part of any modern society though. But too much money becomes IMO just a waste.
<!--QuoteBegin-BlindFire+Aug 29 2004, 06:00 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (BlindFire @ Aug 29 2004, 06:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I agree that the goverment dosent need to support universitys. High School is enough (or should be) to get a decent enough job so you can pay for any further education. Allowing people to take lones when studying at a university is also good.
Personally I think money is overated. I mean I want financial security and all but if I got millions of dollars I would probubly end up donating most of it anyway. Money is still a vital part of any modern society though. But too much money becomes IMO just a waste. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> The government should provide jobs, even if its enough to just get by. Right now it dosen't
<!--QuoteBegin-SkulkBait+Aug 29 2004, 02:43 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (SkulkBait @ Aug 29 2004, 02:43 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Where? If it has been done, it certainly hasn't been done to my satisfaction. Why don't you explain to me how a child wearing rags for clothing could ever hope to be anything more if he can't get an education?
Or did you mean to say that the persuit of hapiness isn't a constitutional right? Well I suppose you've got me there, its technically part of the Declairation of Indipendance. However, if every American doesn't have the oportunity to better themselves, than how the hell can you argue that if the "lazy poor people" would just work a little harder they'd be alright? That certainly doesn't make sense.
And hell, if this country wasn't all about oportunity, then why do people keep telling me its the greatest country on earth? I mean, certain parts of it are pretty, and when the psycho religious groups aren't out preaching that aids cures homosexuality its pretty civil. But I can get that anywhere, I thought this was supposed to be a bastion of hope on the rest of the world, a land of oportunity where ANYONE could lead a decent life. Guess I was wrong. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> There once was a man that was the son of poor farmers. When he was little, the Japanese invaded his island home and disrupted everything. He never got the chance to go to school. Through hard work and learning from his parents, he managed to learn something useful and set up a small bakery. He had 5 kids. He put them all through college, and managed to send his firstborn, a daughter, to the best university in the country. That person graduated from the university with a master's degree. There, she met my father and married him.
Now, my grandfather doesn't exactly live in luxury, but he lives fairly comfortably. So nyah.
After my dad declared bankruptcy, lost his business, was in a divorce, he still manged to
a: Go on welfare for six months, then he found work, working 8 to 12 hours a day for about 10 years
b: Feed his two kids and get them clothes every day
c: Pull himself off the ground and onto his feet
d: Today, he just started up his own motorcycle business with hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in it from investors.
Please, do not even ATTEMPT to try and feed me this horsecrap that "Oh, once you become poor you are dooooommmeeddd FOREVER!!!!"
It is very possible to bring yourself out of the slums, it is very possible to become rich, it takes hard work, and you need to stop blaming society and start working.
The current welfare system is flawed mainly in the fact that people go on it forever and stay on it. It should be a max of 6 months.
Wait a minute. If when you're poor you're dooooooomeed, and if the aristocracy always takes care of it's own and never gets poor, then where in the hell did the healthy middle class of the United States come from?
<!--QuoteBegin-Forlorn+Aug 29 2004, 11:34 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Aug 29 2004, 11:34 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Very little?! Middle class = largest class in teh USA <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Very little referring to the trickledown effect, middleclass makes up for 60% of the population if I remember correctly.
<!--QuoteBegin-CommunistWithAGun+Aug 29 2004, 09:04 AM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CommunistWithAGun @ Aug 29 2004, 09:04 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> The government should provide jobs, even if its enough to just get by. Right now it dosen't <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Well that's easier said then done, the government just can't wave the magic job wand and poof businesses just start popping up all over the country.
We have a major problem in this country job wise, our population is rising steadily ether through immigration or natural birth, and our jobs are slowly leaving us via outsourcing.
Personally I think something needs to be done to stop outsourcing immediately the entire concept behind it is like a kick in the face to America’s workforce. We keep playing down as if it's a normal part of the perfectly fine system, well sooner or later we're going to lose more jobs then we can afford to lose.
However CWAG, there is always the military, I know you say it's playing right into their little scheme, but the government will take care of you, and pay you fairly well to go off and fight it's wars. You can’t say the government isn’t providing jobs, when you have the army in dire need of troops staring you in the face on the news every day.
<!--QuoteBegin-reasa+Aug 29 2004, 05:41 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (reasa @ Aug 29 2004, 05:41 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> ...there is always the military, I know you say it's playing right into their little scheme, but the government will take care of you, and pay you fairly well to go off and fight it's wars. You can’t say the government isn’t providing jobs, when you have the army in dire need of troops staring you in the face on the news every day. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Someone didn't watch Farenheit 9/11...
To me , the military is just like prostitution , only instead of surrendering your body to anyone's perverted desires , you sacrifice your life to politicians' interests.
What you were implying , is that you don't care about the poorer people's lives. If they can't find a normal job , they deserve to die in the next absurd war.
The military should not be an alternative to poverty. Citizens should join the Army when their country is actually threatened , not when they need money.
<!--QuoteBegin-Stakhanov+Aug 29 2004, 12:15 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Stakhanov @ Aug 29 2004, 12:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> To me , the military is just like prostitution , only instead of surrendering your body to anyone's perverted desires , you sacrifice your life to politicians' interests.
What you were implying , is that you don't care about the poorer people's lives. If they can't find a normal job , they deserve to die in the next absurd war.
The military should not be an alternative to poverty. Citizens should join the Army when their country is actually threatened , not when they need money. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Yes because joining the army automatically means you’re going to die....
Do not put words in my mouth, the only thing I was implying is that CWAG said the government is not providing any jobs, when in fact they are providing plenty of opportunities.
If you can't find a job at all, I don't see why the army would be a bad option, they pay you well, you are given many benefits that you don't get with any other job that this hypothetical person couldn't get anyway. Just because you disagree with the war in Iraq doesn’t make the army any less of a carrier path.
Comments
Do you think that these charitable donations even come close to the ammount of money nessesary to support public education? Let alone all of the other things nessesary to create oportunity for all in a society?
I find it funny that conservatives are so willing to let their tax dollars be spent on.... you know what? I'm just not going to go there. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I never said that rich people should pay for everything...so I don't understand what this is all about with rich people supporting public education. TBH I appreciate public education and regard it as necessary, I was just curious to see why other people thought it was the province of the government. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Why wouldn't public education be the responsibility of the government? The private sector certainly wouldn't do it without charging or otherwise trying to make a profit with it, thus negating the point of having public schools.
Do you think that these charitable donations even come close to the ammount of money nessesary to support public education? Let alone all of the other things nessesary to create oportunity for all in a society?
I find it funny that conservatives are so willing to let their tax dollars be spent on.... you know what? I'm just not going to go there. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I never said that rich people should pay for everything...so I don't understand what this is all about with rich people supporting public education. TBH I appreciate public education and regard it as necessary, I was just curious to see why other people thought it was the province of the government. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ive always wondered about welfare (esp. those of the European countries) alot. Why do people think that health services, education, employment, and a decent standard of living are rights to be granted and enforced by the government?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Furthermore, should this be the province of the government? I've always thought that personal charity is much more effective than state-enforced charity.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
So help me out here. Just what is this "personal charity" paying for if not the things you mentioned in the first quote?
We've already shown why those things are nessesary and if the government doesn't pay for them, who will? I assumed that by your "I've always thought that personal charity is much more effective than state-enforced charity." remark was meant to mean that such things could be funded by by charitable donations.
You can't have it both ways. Either you have these services available, and everyone has an oportunity. Or you don't and only those who were born out of the right wombs have an oportunity. The money has to come from somewhere.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
And I find it funny that conservatives aren't willing to let their tax dollars be spent on bureaucratic waste.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yet seem perfectly happy to practically hemorage money in support of a war launched on a questionable premise?
See why I wasn't going to go there?
Having a child is hardly a choice. You can try and have one with your partner most certainly of course but once it's there you cant exactly undo the decision and if the government says your up **** creek without a paddle or canoe your only choices are to send the kid to an orphanage where he'll most likely get sexually abused or sell him/her into prostitution.
Being fired from ones job is ALSO not a choice. Your employer might decide he doesnt like the way you tie your shoes and fire you there and then, there goes your salary, your savings go down the toilet trying to support your family and your stuck rummaging through garbage to get food.
And last time I checked it was government medical programs that helped to conquer TB, Whooping cough and other easily curable but deadly diseases. Government sponsored medical research is comparable to military spending and the defense budget.
Education serves to break the poverty cycle so that ALL CITEZENS OF A COUNTRY HAVE EQUAL OPPORTUNITY. Welfare serves keep you out of the poverty cycle (I have NEVER seen an unshaven shabbily clothed man get a job. I wonder why, something to do with appearence perchance?) and keep you afloat. Kind of like the branch that saves you from falling off a cliff. You still have to pull yourself up.
Free healthcare wins on grounds of compassion alone. A society in good health is a society that can work for longer and harder then one that doesnt from a utilitarian point.
Chem, I'm truly sorry you see things such as free education, welfare and healthcare as negative things but honestly if you had no money and no job and were utterly unable to earn any kind of money legitamately, you may see the benefit of the system.
The people that exploit the system on the other hand, deserve to be cut off from the system. It's there to ensure that you can get back on your feet and become a productive member of society once more.
Unless you can prove that you are looking for a job and have been knocked back repeatedly you should honestly be cutoff from welfare.
By the way, for those that dont know about the poverty cycle...
1. Mr. Breadwinner gets fired due to circumstances beyond his control.
2. Savings quickly evaporate due to buying necessities (food, clothing, bills).
3. Debt begins to mount, ends fail to meet
4. Nobody wants to employ Mr. Breadwinner because of
A. Shabby Clothen/Unclean appearence (due to poverty)
B. His skills are unneeded by any business or firm
C. Someone with better skills then Mr. Breadwinner comes along (due to affluent family and excellent education).
5. Mr. Breadwinner finally gets a job after his family is booted out of it's home working on roads. It pays 80 cents an hour becuase thats all they would take him for.
6. The Breadwinner family move to more affordable accomadation after spending a week or so sleeping in the streets. Their Five Star Suite comes complete with urine soaked matress, rats, and peeling wallpaper.
7. Mr. Breadwinner dies on the job because his employer was pushing him and others to work harder, leading to the unsafe conditions that lead to Mr. Breadwinners demise. Since the company doesnt give rats **** about Mr. Breadwinner because there were a hundred more unemployed goons after HIS job, no compensation is awarded to the Breadwinner family.
8. Mrs. Breadwinner goes into prostitution to earn money to put dinner on a three legged and very creaky dinner table.
9. The kids, not in school and becoming ever more aware of their povertious plight go to picking pockets for a living, bringing in a modest income.
10. Years pass with no improvement. Charlie Breadwinner gets thrown in jail after being caught robbing a house for food and some money. Julie Breadwinner has gone into prostitution as well. Mrs. Breadwinner has died of Syphilis and other sexually transmitted diseases either due to unprotected sex or because of faulty condoms.
11. Charlie Breadwinner eventually gets out of jail and comes back a hundred times worse then before. Julie Breadwinner is raped and murdered in a dark alleyway.
12. Charlie Breadwinner manages to find someone special in this time. He's a proffessional thug now, a drunk, a drug addict, and extremely brutal at times. The second generation of Breadwinners have a lot to look forward to.
Welfare, Healthcare and Education prevent Crime and enable all to become prosperous without having to resort to desperate measures. If you think that these are unnecessary and should be removed I'd like to see what happens should you yourself get fired and are unable to get a job or legitamately earn money.
When you fall on desperate times you will want somone to prop you up until you can get back on your feet. When you are well off, your tax dollars go to helping those less fortunate then yourself (amongst other things of course).
In all honesty I'd like to hear the opinion of someone who doesnt have a job and isnt on welfare. Oh wait, I forgot, they dont have an internet connection OR a home and because they havent had much of an education they probably wouldnt be very articulate.
GG. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Having a child IS a choice, a very simple choice to. Either A. don't have vaginal sex B. Use adequate contraception or C. get an abortion. Any child born from consensual sex is a choice, if someone has sex they know the risks.
First of all, I have very rarely heard of an employer fire someone for a reason so asinine, and if it did happen, the person who was fired could take it to court. Also, once you lose a job it is very important to find other employment RIGHT away before your standard of living faulters.
Government medical programs arn't welfare at all, and wasn't it the private sector that came up with cures for a LOT of other diseases?
Education should be free, but if someone gets so run down as to be unemployable it is their own fault really.
Free healthcare, the delemnas that spew from that. Hypothtical situation, Child A has a rare form of cancer that although potentially curable would cost hundreds of thousands of dollarsx to cure, mean while several thousand other children suffer from easily and cheaply curable bacterial infections. There is only enough money for one. Also, all the money in the world won't cure a disease that requires a transplant where none is available.
How can we cut off those who don't deserve to be in the system? We can't spy on everyone to see what they're doing. Now, on to the story.
1. Ok, he gets fired, or laid off, probably should have worked harder to make himself more valuable to his employers but ok let's say he gets fired for reasons he cant control.
2. Savings evaporate, why isn't he getting a job now.
3. Still hasn't gotten a job?
4.
A. He should have found employment LONG before his outward physical appearence begins to suffer, laundromats arn't insanely expensive.
B. Menial labor, no training needed, and many are quite well paying if your lucky enough to get one(construction especially), but he should be able to find at least one job, even garbagemen get paid.
C. In menial labor it means someone is basically stronger/faster/quicked than you. With no extra equipment but a floor you can easily get into good shape. Push ups and sit ups work wonders.
5. Unless you're working in a 3rd world country, no job would bay this little. And if you WERE that 80 cents of an American dollar would buy a lot wherever you were. Unless it's a sweatshop or other such business. Those SHOULD be illegal (and are in most [all?] industrialized countires). And if you arn't being paid enough to support your entire family have your wife get a job as well. Many many businesses and commodities can be run right from the home, especially if the kids help.
6. Shouldn't happen if you work hard enough (and your family)
7. Illegal (except in some places, thats because their government just isn't good really) Plently of lawyers would take a case like that for free (percent of settlement) if they think they could win it.
8. Mr. Breadwinner either A. Shouldn't be dead or B. his family should have gotten a lot of money for wrongful death and/or insurance (insurance is very important to protect against accidents that are noone's fault) So his wife shouldn't have to go into prostitution, and if there wasn't compensation the children should go to a foster home temporarily if Mrs. Breadwinner can't find/start a job that can support their family.
9. Why wouldn't they be in school? Are we assuming this is in some made up country that is pure capitalist and not even education is free? Some socialism is good, just not a lot of it. Same goes for capitalism.
10. Shouldn't happen if this were real life and they wern't lazy/scumbags.
11. Illegal, murder happens regardless of class and has nothing to do with socialism, it has to do with horrible people preying on the weak and those living high risk lifestyles.
12. Again, crime is the result of bad parenting and a bad environment combined with some people's own wickidness. Even the most socialist countries have crime.
Since many countries do have welfare, free healthcare, and free education, and still have crime, we can see that this statement is obviously false. There is no country in the world where everyone is prosperous and there is no crime or murder.
Get a loan, or have a friend back you.
What you fail to realize, is that sometimes jobs are not available. Take the depression for example (or any recession), there were plenty of people willing to work, and no jobs available for them.
See why I wasn't going to go there? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's what governments are for, protection, right? By your own logic?
Btw, yes, the government does what the people want, but if in the future the majority for some reason don't want public education, would you condemn the government for not providing it? I think you would.
Prostitution is most definitely illegal, but if the alternative is starvation and death, I think prostitution is the lesser of both evils.
@ Mr. Breadwinner getting fired for an obscure reason: Take a little artistic license with that. "Your shoes arent tied neatly" or, more plausibly "We feel your attitude does not reflect company policy" or even "Your services are no longer required by this company. Collect your paycheck and never come back again. kthx". Shoelaces were the first thing that entered my mind, sue me <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
4 A: **looks about** nearest laundromat where I live is about 30 Km away over freeways and through some rough neighbourhoods and without concession cards train tickets are expensive as hell. Just speaking from a local point of view I guess (or the washing machine got repo'd).
4 B: Remove equal opportunity constraints due to purely capitalistic hypothetical
4 C: Was in reference to better paying non-menial labour (software programming for example). Your point is not relevant, though valid.
5. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary.
6. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary.
7. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary.
8. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary. Take note of what I said about orphanages.
9. You've got the right idea so I wont repeat the answer to 5 6 and 7 again <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->
10. Look at 4 B and adjust as necessary. Nobody wants to employ them because they appear to be lazy/scumbags. My point is, how are they going to cease being lazy/scumbags if nobody wants to employ them. Considering they are doing they're best to survive (stealing/prostitution) I'd hardly call them lazy.
11. Consider the reason for high risk lifestyle (knock on effects of unmitigated unfair dismissal with no severance pay). Consider that the neighbourhood is equible with "The Bronx" and theres a fairly high chance of murder/rape. Like it or not, even in affluent countries there are areas where crime is more likely to happen.
12. Partly true, but education stems a lot of crime. It would be far far far worse if there were no education at all, worse then a rapidly industrialising britian 150(?) years ago.
On a personal note, I would go so far as to say that education is the right of every child, and that it would nigh on criminal negligence on the part of society to not give that child at least a decent education. Knowledge is the key to breaking any cycle of poverty.
What I'm arguing for is at the very least the bare minimum required to live.
Enough government money to pay for necessities (food, water, clothing etc) and rent. A decent education and adequate healthcare that can take care of the most common ailments (from heart attack to the common cold) with premium services costing extra for all.
Granted my story was a bit extreme and I should have mentioned that it was a rather extreme example of a purely capitalist society but my points do stand. Education is the key, welfare keeps people out of debt and families stable while the healthcare keeps them alive if need be.
On another tack, Farmers definitely need to be payed more then they are. The middlemen are simply squeezing them out of all proportion while they jack up the prices to unbelievable levels. I think 60 Minutes did a short on it a while back but my memory fizzles so much at just yesterday I'm not sure if I imagined it or actually saw it =\
As for the comedian, Laughter is the best medicine, and if you can induce laughter in thousands of people in a room your doing them a service far better then cough syrup can (making them feel good). Society needs it's comedians as much as it's farmers, but the price differential in pay is nigh criminal.
People have their views, whats the point of attempting to label them and put them in neat little boxes?
And if anyone tries to educate me on the difference; Dont bother. I asked for help a while ago and nobody bothered to help. I now prefer to remain ignorant out of spite (if people arent willing to help out, even via linkage what the hell is the point).
Must. Stop. Rambling. Now.
Where as in a Capitalist government I could become a trillionaire some day, and not have to share my hard earned, college level education living with the drunken slime who beats his wife for kicks and giggles. Natural Selection baby, natural selection. It's part of nature, we're part of nature...live with it.
And if I do end up sucking the **** out of a gutter later on in my life, I will learn to accept it...and strive to better myself, not go crying to the government for handouts because I suck.
See why I wasn't going to go there? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That's what governments are for, protection, right? By your own logic?
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't ever recall making that claim. But even if I did, it seems pretty clear to me that the current administration has done nothing for protecting me and everything for protecting its own interests.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Btw, yes, the government does what the people want, but if in the future the majority for some reason don't want public education, would you condemn the government for not providing it? I think you would.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> How should I say this... hmm... You see, the government isn't supposed to do what people want, its supposed to uphold the constitution and protect the rights of the MINORITY. Thats right, the minority. If it only did what the majority wanted God knows what kind of christian run theocratical hell this country would be. And you're right, if it did abolish public education I would condemn it, because as I've said before it is a nessesary part of ensuring that oportunity exists for all US citizens.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->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. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Public education is not a constitutionally-defended right. That's why schools are *edit* primarily state- and locally-funded.
In fact, the very reason public schools are state- and locally- run is to protect the minority.
*edit* grammar
We've been over this. The right to the persuit of happiness IS a constitutionally protected right. Public education falls under this because without it no one would be able to work their way up from poverty.
That is a ridiculous statement. And already disproved by several people in this forum.
That is a ridiculous statement. And already disproved by several people in this forum. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Where? If it has been done, it certainly hasn't been done to my satisfaction. Why don't you explain to me how a child wearing rags for clothing could ever hope to be anything more if he can't get an education?
Or did you mean to say that the persuit of hapiness isn't a constitutional right? Well I suppose you've got me there, its technically part of the Declairation of Indipendance. However, if every American doesn't have the oportunity to better themselves, than how the hell can you argue that if the "lazy poor people" would just work a little harder they'd be alright? That certainly doesn't make sense.
And hell, if this country wasn't all about oportunity, then why do people keep telling me its the greatest country on earth? I mean, certain parts of it are pretty, and when the psycho religious groups aren't out preaching that aids cures homosexuality its pretty civil. But I can get that anywhere, I thought this was supposed to be a bastion of hope on the rest of the world, a land of oportunity where ANYONE could lead a decent life. Guess I was wrong.
Some people get the rough end of the stick in life, and I feel genuinely sorry for them. No matter what happens, its like the deck of life has been stacked against them and they are losing it. These people deserve our help and support.
But when someone points at me and says "You owe me something" just because I happen to have an education, then I get angry. At my highschool, everyone made fun of me. My nickname was "povo", because my family was NOT rich. Dad worked as a school teacher, and was supporting 5 kids and wife on it. I had holes in the knees of my school pants, had a job from the age of 14 and a house on the edge of the "slum" area.
I support Government funded primary and secondary schools. I do not support wholely Government supported Universities. In Australia, we have a balance between socialist ideas and common sense. Our medicare consumes 1/5 of our GDP, and on top of that we have a massive Government paid for workers compensation, dole, and Youth/Study allowances. I feel that very, very few people in my country have the right to complain about getting the short end of the stick.
Hell, even university is, for all events and purposes, free. You go to uni, and the goverment automatically pays your fees. And it wont ask you to pay them back until you graduate and are earning over $25,000 a year.
Personally I think money is overated. I mean I want financial security and all but if I got millions of dollars I would probubly end up donating most of it anyway. Money is still a vital part of any modern society though. But too much money becomes IMO just a waste.
Personally I think money is overated. I mean I want financial security and all but if I got millions of dollars I would probubly end up donating most of it anyway. Money is still a vital part of any modern society though. But too much money becomes IMO just a waste. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
The government should provide jobs, even if its enough to just get by. Right now it dosen't
Where? If it has been done, it certainly hasn't been done to my satisfaction. Why don't you explain to me how a child wearing rags for clothing could ever hope to be anything more if he can't get an education?
Or did you mean to say that the persuit of hapiness isn't a constitutional right? Well I suppose you've got me there, its technically part of the Declairation of Indipendance. However, if every American doesn't have the oportunity to better themselves, than how the hell can you argue that if the "lazy poor people" would just work a little harder they'd be alright? That certainly doesn't make sense.
And hell, if this country wasn't all about oportunity, then why do people keep telling me its the greatest country on earth? I mean, certain parts of it are pretty, and when the psycho religious groups aren't out preaching that aids cures homosexuality its pretty civil. But I can get that anywhere, I thought this was supposed to be a bastion of hope on the rest of the world, a land of oportunity where ANYONE could lead a decent life. Guess I was wrong. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
There once was a man that was the son of poor farmers. When he was little, the Japanese invaded his island home and disrupted everything. He never got the chance to go to school. Through hard work and learning from his parents, he managed to learn something useful and set up a small bakery. He had 5 kids. He put them all through college, and managed to send his firstborn, a daughter, to the best university in the country. That person graduated from the university with a master's degree. There, she met my father and married him.
Now, my grandfather doesn't exactly live in luxury, but he lives fairly comfortably. So nyah.
a: Go on welfare for six months, then he found work, working 8 to 12 hours a day for about 10 years
b: Feed his two kids and get them clothes every day
c: Pull himself off the ground and onto his feet
d: Today, he just started up his own motorcycle business with hundreds of thousands of dollars invested in it from investors.
Please, do not even ATTEMPT to try and feed me this horsecrap that "Oh, once you become poor you are dooooommmeeddd FOREVER!!!!"
It is very possible to bring yourself out of the slums, it is very possible to become rich, it takes hard work, and you need to stop blaming society and start working.
The current welfare system is flawed mainly in the fact that people go on it forever and stay on it. It should be a max of 6 months.
Very little referring to the trickledown effect, middleclass makes up for 60% of the population if I remember correctly.
Well that's easier said then done, the government just can't wave the magic job wand and poof businesses just start popping up all over the country.
We have a major problem in this country job wise, our population is rising steadily ether through immigration or natural birth, and our jobs are slowly leaving us via outsourcing.
Personally I think something needs to be done to stop outsourcing immediately the entire concept behind it is like a kick in the face to America’s workforce.
We keep playing down as if it's a normal part of the perfectly fine system, well sooner or later we're going to lose more jobs then we can afford to lose.
However CWAG, there is always the military, I know you say it's playing right into their little scheme, but the government will take care of you, and pay you fairly well to go off and fight it's wars. You can’t say the government isn’t providing jobs, when you have the army in dire need of troops staring you in the face on the news every day.
Someone didn't watch Farenheit 9/11...
To me , the military is just like prostitution , only instead of surrendering your body to anyone's perverted desires , you sacrifice your life to politicians' interests.
What you were implying , is that you don't care about the poorer people's lives. If they can't find a normal job , they deserve to die in the next absurd war.
The military should not be an alternative to poverty. Citizens should join the Army when their country is actually threatened , not when they need money.
What you were implying , is that you don't care about the poorer people's lives. If they can't find a normal job , they deserve to die in the next absurd war.
The military should not be an alternative to poverty. Citizens should join the Army when their country is actually threatened , not when they need money. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Yes because joining the army automatically means you’re going to die....
Do not put words in my mouth, the only thing I was implying is that CWAG said the government is not providing any jobs, when in fact they are providing plenty of opportunities.
If you can't find a job at all, I don't see why the army would be a bad option, they pay you well, you are given many benefits that you don't get with any other job that this hypothetical person couldn't get anyway. Just because you disagree with the war in Iraq doesn’t make the army any less of a carrier path.