I got mine

awesome guy · Post by **awesome guy** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 12:31 pm

http://m.ksla.com/#!/newsDetail/23679489

This is you can't help people in this segment of society, they're just looking to live off and take advantage of charity. EBT glitch, evil company tries to help, they loot the stores. I hope they're charged for their purchase onto previous months. To hell with people this greedy and trifling.

USN_Hokie · Post by **USN_Hokie** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 1:28 pm

awesome guy wrote:http://m.ksla.com/#!/newsDetail/23679489

This is you can't help people in this segment of society, they're just looking to live off and take advantage of charity. EBT glitch, evil company tries to help, they loot the stores. I hope they're charged for their purchase onto previous months. To hell with people this greedy and trifling.

Link is busted....assume you're talking about this:

http://www.ksla.com/story/23679489/walm ... ebt-glitch

awesome guy · Post by **awesome guy** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 1:35 pm

USN_Hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:http://m.ksla.com/#!/newsDetail/23679489

This is you can't help people in this segment of society, they're just looking to live off and take advantage of charity. EBT glitch, evil company tries to help, they loot the stores. I hope they're charged for their purchase onto previous months. To hell with people this greedy and trifling.

Link is busted....assume you're talking about this:

http://www.ksla.com/story/23679489/walm ... ebt-glitch

Correct, the poornado hitting Walmart.

Homebrew · Post by **Homebrew** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 1:43 pm

awesome guy wrote:http://m.ksla.com/#!/newsDetail/23679489

This is you can't help people in this segment of society, they're just looking to live off and take advantage of charity. EBT glitch, evil company tries to help, they loot the stores. I hope they're charged for their purchase onto previous months. To hell with people this greedy and trifling.

Take Take Take. That is the portion of society we are dealing with. The government has been successful in transforming a segment of society from church and charity-dependent to government-dependent. With this transformation, the government has successfully removed the "shackles" of morals from the "poor" and thus, we have a segment of society. No longer do the poor have to be exposed to the right and wrong preached by churches in exchange for charity.

The poor have moved away from the moral construct of churches to the "anything goes" jungle created by Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty (and Nixon's Medicaid FWIW). Nothing is right, nothing is wrong. Take your government allowance and take more if you can.

That is not to lay blame at the feet of atheists (as many have attacked religion). No, blame lies on the "government is the solution" portion of the population.
The "war on religion" portion of the population simply needs to be careful that, in their quest to shackle religion in society, they do not unshackle the monster that is government. Alas, I think the monster is loose and it is feeding ON our children.

awesome guy · Post by **awesome guy** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 1:59 pm

Homebrew wrote:
awesome guy wrote:http://m.ksla.com/#!/newsDetail/23679489

This is you can't help people in this segment of society, they're just looking to live off and take advantage of charity. EBT glitch, evil company tries to help, they loot the stores. I hope they're charged for their purchase onto previous months. To hell with people this greedy and trifling.
Take Take Take. That is the portion of society we are dealing with. The government has been successful in transforming a segment of society from church and charity-dependent to government-dependent. With this transformation, the government has successfully removed the "shackles" of morals from the "poor" and thus, we have a segment of society. No longer do the poor have to be exposed to the right and wrong preached by churches in exchange for charity.

The poor have moved away from the moral construct of churches to the "anything goes" jungle created by Lyndon Johnson's war on poverty (and Nixon's Medicaid FWIW). Nothing is right, nothing is wrong. Take your government allowance and take more if you can.

That is not to lay blame at the feet of atheists (as many have attacked religion). No, blame lies on the "government is the solution" portion of the population.
The "war on religion" portion of the population simply needs to be careful that, in their quest to shackle religion in society, they do not unshackle the monster that is government. Alas, I think the monster is loose and it is feeding ON our children.

Amen. I blame the poor too for accepting the poison pill given them and rejecting morality.

fatman · Post by **fatman** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:29 pm

"I got mine" is a great description that pervades our society today.. Not only do the poorer segments of society subscribe to this moral code, but so do wall street bankers, and CEO's who will move all their jobs to sweat-shops in Asia to increase their profit motive. (edit) Also Farmers who make a decent living, but gladly accept payouts from the Gov't that are per-capita one hell of a lot higher than the foot stamp welfare. they are big believers in "I got mine." (/edit)

I agree with all yous guys, the gov't welfare system has helped shatter the traditional family. Kids with 2 parents have advantages over those who don't.

VoiceOfReason · Post by **VoiceOfReason** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:31 pm

There has always been poverty and there always will be poverty. How a society responds to their poorest citizens is usually an indication of the advancement and morality of that society.

There is no defense for criminal actions and you will hear none from me. However, IMHO there are plenty of issues in this country that effect the economy for all citizens to work on... without scapegoating the poor.

USN_Hokie · Post by **USN_Hokie** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:42 pm

fatman wrote:"I got mine" is a great description that pervades our society today.. Not only do the poorer segments of society subscribe to this moral code, but so do wall street bankers, and CEO's who will move all their jobs to sweat-shops in Asia to increase their profit motive.

What exactly are you suggesting here? That we should start a trade war with China...or that the state should control the means of production for the widget factory so the eeevil bourgeoisie won't oppress the proletariat?

fatman wrote: I agree with all yous guys, the gov't welfare system has helped shatter the traditional family. Kids with 2 parents have advantages over those who don't.

They have had the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will

VoiceOfReason · Post by **VoiceOfReason** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:49 pm

USN_Hokie wrote: They have the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will

LOL! No, everyone in this country does not have the same opportunities. Some people were born on 3rd base and think they hit a triple.

If everyone has the same opportunities, then why do parents work so hard to give their kids a leg up?

I'm not saying there needs to be government solution for this, but I would never claim everyone has the same opportunities. Parents matter. Neighborhoods matter. Education matters.

USN_Hokie · Post by **USN_Hokie** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:53 pm

VoiceOfReason wrote:How a society responds to their poorest citizens is usually an indication of the advancement and morality of that society.

Are you suggesting that we judge the morality of a society by the actions of bureaucrats in gov't?

USN_Hokie · Post by **USN_Hokie** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 2:57 pm

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: They have the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will
LOL! No, everyone in this country does not have the same opportunities. Some people were born on 3rd base and think they hit a triple.

If everyone has the same opportunities, then why do parents work so hard to give their kids a leg up?

I'm not saying there needs to be government solution for this, but I would never claim everyone has the same opportunities. Parents matter. Neighborhoods matter. Education matters.

Sorry, I meant to say had the same opportunity. Their parents effed that up for them, but we can't have the ability to succeed without the ability to fail. The point remains.

awesome guy · Post by **awesome guy** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:00 pm

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: They have the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will
LOL! No, everyone in this country does not have the same opportunities. Some people were born on 3rd base and think they hit a triple.

If everyone has the same opportunities, then why do parents work so hard to give their kids a leg up?

I'm not saying there needs to be government solution for this, but I would never claim everyone has the same opportunities. Parents matter. Neighborhoods matter. Education matters.

To maximize the opportunity.

If their is an unfair advantage, it's for minorities who get special treatment based solely on their race. And even then, they go for the cheap and easy route. And those who tqke the opportunity end in positions they can't handle. People like Obama who got where they are based on low standards for minorities instead of accomplishment.

awesome guy · Post by **awesome guy** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:03 pm

USN_Hokie wrote: They have had the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will

Right, the parents trip them up out of the gate.

How about we start taxing them for illegitimate children instead of giving them a check? Would that not fix the issue?

Major Kong · Post by **Major Kong** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:57 pm

USN_Hokie wrote:They have had the same opportunity though, their parents grandparents just did a shirty job at setting them their parents up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will

FTFY...at least as how it pertains around here.

Marine Hokie · Post by **Marine Hokie** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 3:59 pm

fatman wrote:"I got mine" is a great description that pervades our society today.. Not only do the poorer segments of society subscribe to this moral code, but so do wall street bankers, and CEO's who will move all their jobs to sweat-shops in Asia to increase their profit motive. (edit) Also Farmers who make a decent living, but gladly accept payouts from the Gov't that are per-capita one hell of a lot higher than the foot stamp welfare. they are big believers in "I got mine." (/edit)

I agree with all yous guys, the gov't welfare system has helped shatter the traditional family. Kids with 2 parents have advantages over those who don't.

Why is a CEO setting up a factory in Asia a villain? Surely the asians who now have jobs don't thinks so, and the consumers buying cheaper products don't think so.

awesome guy · Post by **awesome guy** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 4:09 pm

Major Kong wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:They have had the same opportunity though, their parents grandparents just did a shirty job at setting them their parents up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will
FTFY...at least as how it pertains around here.

Good point. I think that's true everywhere. In addition, the current grandparents/great grandparents are the last ones to know anything about raising kids. Things are going to be much worse with next gen grandparents, the first to be raised by their grandparents. While their grandparents had a good chance of at least knowing a family with a working dad and married to the mom, few since then do. The path to government dependency is likely a one way street. And when the ride is over, their entire culture/society will have a massive reset. No tradition, no knowledge passed down other than how to game the system. It's going to be a bad day when the house of cards come down and these people have to provide on their own. Like the poornado times a million in every city. And then those that wait and or patient aren't to have anything left after the looters go through the stores.

You know though, put on the tin foil hat first... if you were to commit genocide without "committing genocide", what we're doing would be a great way to do it without creating international outrage. First step, create dependence. Second step, remove dependent service. Third step, watch them starve and kill each other off. Kidding a bit, I doubt anyone has set them up like this to kill them off. But the dependency has certainly put them in a risky situation where they're unable to care for themselves.

Marine Hokie · Post by **Marine Hokie** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 4:10 pm

VoiceOfReason wrote:There has always been poverty and there always will be poverty. How a society responds to their poorest citizens is usually an indication of the advancement and morality of that society.

There is no defense for criminal actions and you will hear none from me. However, IMHO there are plenty of issues in this country that effect the economy for all citizens to work on... without scapegoating the poor.

You're right, except that you think government programs are "society" acting. Before the progressive era and the new deal, members of society already helped the poor. Through advances in technology and the modernizing economy, their condition was rapidly improving, along with everyone else's. Government wealth transfer programs can never match economic freedom in reducing poverty. All they do is make democratic voters feel good about themselves, like they're somehow helping the poor with other people's money, without actually having to do anything.

BigDave · Post by **BigDave** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 4:17 pm

VoiceOfReason wrote:There has always been poverty and there always will be poverty. How a society responds to their poorest citizens is usually an indication of the advancement and morality of that society.

There is no defense for criminal actions and you will hear none from me. However, IMHO there are plenty of issues in this country that effect the economy for all citizens to work on... without scapegoating the poor.

We respond to our poorest citizens by making sure that they stay in poverty. What does that say of our morals?

If you are very low income, and you take an action to increase your income, you start to lose benefits and so you get little/nothing (or worse, even a net negative) until you get diminishing returns until you get up to around a salary of $35K-40K or so.

If I work at McDonald's making minimum wage, there are opportunities out there. If I do a really good job, I can work my way up to a promotional position within the company or to some other country. But if you're telling me that my effective takehome (after loss of benefits) isn't going to be much more than what it is now, you're disincentivizing me from doing anything.

VoiceOfReason · Post by **VoiceOfReason** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:19 pm

USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:How a society responds to their poorest citizens is usually an indication of the advancement and morality of that society.
Are you suggesting that we judge the morality of a society by the actions of bureaucrats in gov't?

Not necessarily. I stick by my original phrasing

VoiceOfReason · Post by **VoiceOfReason** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:21 pm

USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: They have the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will
LOL! No, everyone in this country does not have the same opportunities. Some people were born on 3rd base and think they hit a triple.

If everyone has the same opportunities, then why do parents work so hard to give their kids a leg up?

I'm not saying there needs to be government solution for this, but I would never claim everyone has the same opportunities. Parents matter. Neighborhoods matter. Education matters.
Sorry, I meant to say had the same opportunity. Their parents effed that up for them, but we can't have the ability to succeed without the ability to fail. The point remains.

Very true. For there to be winners, there MUST be losers. And that is not necessarily a bad thing. What matters after the winners have been decided is how the losers are treated. IMHO, the winners blaming the problems of society on the losers is not the right way to go.

VoiceOfReason · Post by **VoiceOfReason** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:25 pm

awesome guy wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: They have the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will
LOL! No, everyone in this country does not have the same opportunities. Some people were born on 3rd base and think they hit a triple.

If everyone has the same opportunities, then why do parents work so hard to give their kids a leg up?

I'm not saying there needs to be government solution for this, but I would never claim everyone has the same opportunities. Parents matter. Neighborhoods matter. Education matters.
To maximize the opportunity.

If their is an unfair advantage, it's for minorities who get special treatment based solely on their race. And even then, they go for the cheap and easy route. And those who tqke the opportunity end in positions they can't handle. People like Obama who got where they are based on low standards for minorities instead of accomplishment.

Yes, minorities do get special treatment from society - some positive and some negative. I really don't think you have a good grip on the issue of minorities in the country. And why should you? You are not one of them. You have no idea.

LOL! Is there a quota system for POTUS. Every 45 presidents... 1 must be black? No female quotas? Asians? Obama got to be POTUS because more people voted for him then the other guy. Are you against such a system?

awesome guy · Post by **awesome guy** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:27 pm

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: They have the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will
LOL! No, everyone in this country does not have the same opportunities. Some people were born on 3rd base and think they hit a triple.

If everyone has the same opportunities, then why do parents work so hard to give their kids a leg up?

I'm not saying there needs to be government solution for this, but I would never claim everyone has the same opportunities. Parents matter. Neighborhoods matter. Education matters.
Sorry, I meant to say had the same opportunity. Their parents effed that up for them, but we can't have the ability to succeed without the ability to fail. The point remains.
Very true. For there to be winners, there MUST be losers. And that is not necessarily a bad thing. What matters after the winners have been decided is how the losers are treated. IMHO, the winners blaming the problems of society on the losers is not the right way to go.

That doesn't make sense. Losers in life are the ones that break things, steal, go to jail, have kids out of wedlock, etc. They're by definition destructive. Their destructive nature even destroys their own lives and those of their children. They deserve blame for their hand in their plight and the destruction of our society. The exception to this are the handicapped who can't do anything to escape their poverty. They're a tiny fraction of those milking the system though. The rest, the losers...yep, total blame on them. Just look at this example. Walmart tried to be nice to them by allowing them to buy food on really good will. How do they respond? By looting and stealing. They didn't even have the courtesy to restock the items they had in the carts before the system came back online. That attitude is why they're poor in the first place. It's greed, sloth, and playing on liberal sympathies/taking the vote bait to get something for nothing.

Marine Hokie · Post by **Marine Hokie** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:30 pm

VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: They have the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will
LOL! No, everyone in this country does not have the same opportunities. Some people were born on 3rd base and think they hit a triple.

If everyone has the same opportunities, then why do parents work so hard to give their kids a leg up?

I'm not saying there needs to be government solution for this, but I would never claim everyone has the same opportunities. Parents matter. Neighborhoods matter. Education matters.
Sorry, I meant to say had the same opportunity. Their parents effed that up for them, but we can't have the ability to succeed without the ability to fail. The point remains.
Very true. For there to be winners, there MUST be losers. And that is not necessarily a bad thing. What matters after the winners have been decided is how the losers are treated. IMHO, the winners blaming the problems of society on the losers is not the right way to go.

That's a horrible way to look at things.

awesome guy · Post by **awesome guy** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:31 pm

VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote: They have the same opportunity though, their parents just did a shirty job at setting them up for success. This shouldn't be seen as a problem by anyone who believes in individual responsibility or free will
LOL! No, everyone in this country does not have the same opportunities. Some people were born on 3rd base and think they hit a triple.

If everyone has the same opportunities, then why do parents work so hard to give their kids a leg up?

I'm not saying there needs to be government solution for this, but I would never claim everyone has the same opportunities. Parents matter. Neighborhoods matter. Education matters.
To maximize the opportunity.

If their is an unfair advantage, it's for minorities who get special treatment based solely on their race. And even then, they go for the cheap and easy route. And those who tqke the opportunity end in positions they can't handle. People like Obama who got where they are based on low standards for minorities instead of accomplishment.
Yes, minorities do get special treatment from society - some positive and some negative. I really don't think you have a good grip on the issue of minorities in the country. And why should you? You are not one of them. You have no idea.

LOL! Is there a quota system for POTUS. Every 45 presidents... 1 must be black? No female quotas? Asians? Obama got to be POTUS because more people voted for him then the other guy. Are you against such a system?

Say again? You have no idea who I am or of my life experiences. How dare you be so arrogant.

Obama got elected on "it's time" for a black in the white house. A white wouldn't have been elected on such a thin background as a one term senator and communist agitator. And a white wouldn't have been reelected after failing the first term so miserably. Obama had the racist vote. Many voted for his reelection to give him a chance to redeem himself and not have the first black president be such a miserable failure.

VoiceOfReason · Post by **VoiceOfReason** » Mon Oct 14, 2013 5:33 pm

Marine Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:There has always been poverty and there always will be poverty. How a society responds to their poorest citizens is usually an indication of the advancement and morality of that society.

There is no defense for criminal actions and you will hear none from me. However, IMHO there are plenty of issues in this country that effect the economy for all citizens to work on... without scapegoating the poor.
You're right, except that you think government programs are "society" acting. Before the progressive era and the new deal, members of society already helped the poor. Through advances in technology and the modernizing economy, their condition was rapidly improving, along with everyone else's. Government wealth transfer programs can never match economic freedom in reducing poverty. All they do is make democratic voters feel good about themselves, like they're somehow helping the poor with other people's money, without actually having to do anything.

Government programs are one method of providing assistance. There are plenty of organizations (homeless shelters, womens shelters) out there today doing good works. Religious organizations (Catholic Charities, etc.) organize time and finding from their members as well. I have donated my time and money to many of these organizations and I suspect many on here have done so as well. (It's not a contest.)

Do you have the same disdain for soup kitchens as you do for food stamps? I mean, what do the poor do to earn that meal from the soup kitchen?

IMHO, the tax dollars spent to help people in need is the BEST use of my money. There are MuCH worse spending issues than poverty.

United We Stand - uwsboard.com

I got mine

I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine

Re: I got mine