I got mine

Your Virginia Tech Politics and Religion source
Forum rules
Be Civil. Go Hokies.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

awesome guy wrote:
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. :mrgreen:

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.
Well... maybe the issue is phrasing. What you refer to here are not "the poor" or "losers"... they are criminals. I do not defend criminals or any criminal acts. All of those involved in looting should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

Marine Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: 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.
Why? It is a glib statement, I will admit. But the USA is a free market economy. Some people win and some people lose. The two things that matter for those losers (or "those who take less advantage of our capitalist system" if you prefer that wording):

1) How do you conduct your business, raise your family, etc. in difficult times and circumstances?
2) How do the winners treat you?
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: I got mine

Post by awesome guy »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
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.

That's the liberal fallacy. Poverty spending creates poverty. Just look at your 60 year failed war on poverty. Poverty is created by the jobs destroyed to run such programs and the well documented situation of government paying better than real work for the poor. Government assistance is a roach hotel, not allowing those who enter to escape.

And really, you think I'm ignorant on minorities and life in the hood. You clearly are. EBT and government benefits are nothing more than currency for cigarettes and booze in those communities. There are of course some who need help and aren't gaming the system. But they're the minority. I've yet to meet one actually. The rest construct their lives to maximize government assistance and minimize work. Or if they have work, they're angry and bitter about it. As if the world owes them something and their job is beneath them. The way we deal with poverty is way out of whack, giving too much power and an undeserved assumption of innocence to the impoverished.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: I got mine

Post by awesome guy »

VoiceOfReason wrote:Well... maybe the issue is phrasing. What you refer to here are not "the poor" or "losers"... they are criminals. I do not defend criminals or any criminal acts. All of those involved in looting should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
it's one and the same. They were people with EBT cards. They're by definition impoverished or people gaming the system. That's the face of poverty in America today, the give MEs.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

awesome guy wrote: 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.
I made the assumption (from your pic and your rhetoric) that you are not a minority. If that assumption is not correct, my sincere apologies. If my assumption is correct... then get off your damn high horse.

Ehh... you can believe what you want about the elections. IMHO, if there was one distinguishing characteristic that help O win the election it was not the color of his skin... it was the fact he is a Democrat. We can test this theory in 2016, when the D candidate will almost certainly be white. She may however not be a white male :mrgreen:
User avatar
Marine Hokie
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
Location: Durham, NC

Re: I got mine

Post by Marine Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote: 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.
Do you understand that an attack on a state service is not an attack on the service itself? If you think the government using your money for allegedly anti-poverty programs is the best use of it, then feel free to donate more to the government, and stop donating to religious organizations.
The data does not support that the confiscation of wealth by the state for the war on poverty actually helps the poor. Economic freedom has been proven the best way to help the poor.
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

awesome guy wrote: That's the liberal fallacy. Poverty spending creates poverty. Just look at your 60 year failed war on poverty. Poverty is created by the jobs destroyed to run such programs and the well documented situation of government paying better than real work for the poor. Government assistance is a roach hotel, not allowing those who enter to escape.

And really, you think I'm ignorant on minorities and life in the hood. You clearly are. EBT and government benefits are nothing more than currency for cigarettes and booze in those communities. There are of course some who need help and aren't gaming the system. But they're the minority. I've yet to meet one actually. The rest construct their lives to maximize government assistance and minimize work. Or if they have work, they're angry and bitter about it. As if the world owes them something and their job is beneath them. The way we deal with poverty is way out of whack, giving too much power and an undeserved assumption of innocence to the impoverished.
My failed 60 year war? I am not a D, nor am I 60... but whatever.

I can feel you love for those in need based on your statements. If you have better ideas on how to help those in need up... I would love to hear them. I have no ideological axe to grind here... other than demonizing those among us who have the least is hardly a virtue or a sign of advanced intelligence.

Be clear, I am not exonerating the criminal in the article. I am saying those criminals represent the minority of those in need. I have met many people in my county who work hard, play by the rules and barely get by.
User avatar
Marine Hokie
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
Location: Durham, NC

Re: I got mine

Post by Marine Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
Marine Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote: 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.
Why? It is a glib statement, I will admit. But the USA is a free market economy. Some people win and some people lose. The two things that matter for those losers (or "those who take less advantage of our capitalist system" if you prefer that wording):

1) How do you conduct your business, raise your family, etc. in difficult times and circumstances?
2) How do the winners treat you?
You're looking at the wrong culprit for creating your losers. Free market capitalism does not create losers. Let's be clear that America does not have a free market.
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: I got mine

Post by awesome guy »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote: 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.
I made the assumption (from your pic and your rhetoric) that you are not a minority. If that assumption is not correct, my sincere apologies. If my assumption is correct... then get off your damn high horse.

Ehh... you can believe what you want about the elections. IMHO, if there was one distinguishing characteristic that help O win the election it was not the color of his skin... it was the fact he is a Democrat. We can test this theory in 2016, when the D candidate will almost certainly be white. She may however not be a white male :mrgreen:
You know that they say about assumptions? I'm not a minority, just grew up with them, was 1 of 3 whites in my school class, surrounded by minorities most of my life, and still spend a considerable amount of time in the ghetto. I figure you've learned of minorities watching sports on TV and Lifetime movies. So I'm staying on my position of knowledge, what you call a high horse.

I believe what was said about the election and what is plain, Obama won the racist/white guilt vote. And the poor soul running as a D in 2016 is going to inherit the rage created from his failure. So yeah, I'm looking forward to 2016. Really looking at how the minorities vote, especially considering how they are worse off by every economic indicator under the Obama years. Of all the people suffering through this Obama quagmire, minorities have been hit hardest. I'm optimistic they'll wise up and realise the war on poverty has the barrells set on them, not to defend them.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

Marine Hokie wrote: You're looking at the wrong culprit for creating your losers. Free market capitalism does not create losers. Let's be clear that America does not have a free market.
It is my poor wording. I do not blame free market capitalism at all. I don't see a problem with competition. It is competition that (by definition) creates winners and losers - and that's not a bad thing. I don't believe in participation trophies... that would be socialism :mrgreen:

(Don't even bother going there...)
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

awesome guy wrote: You know that they say about assumptions? I'm not a minority, just grew up with them, was 1 of 3 whites in my school class, surrounded by minorities most of my life, and still spend a considerable amount of time in the ghetto. I figure you've learned of minorities watching sports on TV and Lifetime movies. So I'm staying on my position of knowledge, what you call a high horse.

I believe what was said about the election and what is plain, Obama won the racist/white guilt vote. And the poor soul running as a D in 2016 is going to inherit the rage created from his failure. So yeah, I'm looking forward to 2016. Really looking at how the minorities vote, especially considering how they are worse off by every economic indicator under the Obama years. Of all the people suffering through this Obama quagmire, minorities have been hit hardest. I'm optimistic they'll wise up and realise the war on poverty has the barrells set on them, not to defend them.
Your assumption about my background is incorrect. Among other things, I have spent a good deal of time and resources with underprivileged in my community. I see who they are and how they act. They are not all angels and some of them mess up. Some do become criminals. But the vast majority deserve much more than our derision. We can agree to disagree I suppose.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

awesome guy wrote: You know that they say about assumptions? I'm not a minority, just grew up with them, was 1 of 3 whites in my school class, surrounded by minorities most of my life, and still spend a considerable amount of time in the ghetto. I figure you've learned of minorities watching sports on TV and Lifetime movies. So I'm staying on my position of knowledge, what you call a high horse.

I believe what was said about the election and what is plain, Obama won the racist/white guilt vote. And the poor soul running as a D in 2016 is going to inherit the rage created from his failure. So yeah, I'm looking forward to 2016. Really looking at how the minorities vote, especially considering how they are worse off by every economic indicator under the Obama years. Of all the people suffering through this Obama quagmire, minorities have been hit hardest. I'm optimistic they'll wise up and realise the war on poverty has the barrells set on them, not to defend them.
Your assumption about my background is incorrect. Among other things, I have spent a good deal of time and resources with underprivileged in my community. I see who they are and how they act. They are not all angels and some of them mess up. Some do become criminals. But the vast majority deserve much more than our derision. We can agree to disagree I suppose.
User avatar
BigDave
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:20 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Republican

Re: I got mine

Post by BigDave »

VoiceOfReason wrote: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.
Money is fungible. A bowl of soup is not.

There are people who abuse EBT cards by selling them, by using them for lobster dinners, or who don't exist in the first place.

While yes, you could still abuse a soup kitchen (go there and eat for free, while using your own money to buy video games), (1) I think people are less inclined to cheat on something like that than they are when you are handing out free money, (2) a soup kitchen where there is that personal interaction is more able to root out fraud and counsel people who need help making better life decisions, and, most importantly, (3) the churches giving out help and the people contributing to them are doing so of their own free will - not having tax dollars taken by them forcibly.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

BigDave wrote: Money is fungible. A bowl of soup is not.

There are people who abuse EBT cards by selling them, by using them for lobster dinners, or who don't exist in the first place.

While yes, you could still abuse a soup kitchen (go there and eat for free, while using your own money to buy video games), (1) I think people are less inclined to cheat on something like that than they are when you are handing out free money, (2) a soup kitchen where there is that personal interaction is more able to root out fraud and counsel people who need help making better life decisions, and, most importantly, (3) the churches giving out help and the people contributing to them are doing so of their own free will - not having tax dollars taken by them forcibly.
So should the government run Soup Kitchens instead of EBT cards? How else can we get help to areas not served by charitable organizations?
User avatar
Marine Hokie
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
Location: Durham, NC

Re: I got mine

Post by Marine Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
Marine Hokie wrote: You're looking at the wrong culprit for creating your losers. Free market capitalism does not create losers. Let's be clear that America does not have a free market.
It is my poor wording. I do not blame free market capitalism at all. I don't see a problem with competition. It is competition that (by definition) creates winners and losers - and that's not a bad thing. I don't believe in participation trophies... that would be socialism :mrgreen:

(Don't even bother going there...)
What do you define as a "loser"? Someone who has less money than someone else? Someone in the bottom x%? Someone who doesn't meet your standards of modern living?

I don't consider a poor person as a loser (I know you don't mean it as derogatory, so don't go there). A person may have less than someone else for a variety of reasons, increasing government involvement in the economy and restricting liberty makes this worse, not better. People at the bottom of the economic ladder are helped by new technology and an advancing economy. Taking away economic freedom and confiscating wealth hurts people at the bottom the most. It takes away their opportunities for advancement.
A person who has a job at Burger King isn't a "loser". Nobody took anything from them, they didn't lose anything. A person who has a job at Burger King because better options were taken away by the government, or doesn't even have a job at Burger King because of the loss of economic freedom is a loser. The culprit is the organization that uses force to restrict economic liberties, not "competition," which you mean as a euphemism for the free market (which again, isn't what we have).
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: I got mine

Post by awesome guy »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote: That's the liberal fallacy. Poverty spending creates poverty. Just look at your 60 year failed war on poverty. Poverty is created by the jobs destroyed to run such programs and the well documented situation of government paying better than real work for the poor. Government assistance is a roach hotel, not allowing those who enter to escape.

And really, you think I'm ignorant on minorities and life in the hood. You clearly are. EBT and government benefits are nothing more than currency for cigarettes and booze in those communities. There are of course some who need help and aren't gaming the system. But they're the minority. I've yet to meet one actually. The rest construct their lives to maximize government assistance and minimize work. Or if they have work, they're angry and bitter about it. As if the world owes them something and their job is beneath them. The way we deal with poverty is way out of whack, giving too much power and an undeserved assumption of innocence to the impoverished.
My failed 60 year war? I am not a D, nor am I 60... but whatever.

I can feel you love for those in need based on your statements. If you have better ideas on how to help those in need up... I would love to hear them. I have no ideological axe to grind here... other than demonizing those among us who have the least is hardly a virtue or a sign of advanced intelligence.

Be clear, I am not exonerating the criminal in the article. I am saying those criminals represent the minority of those in need. I have met many people in my county who work hard, play by the rules and barely get by.
You said you're a D because of a friend. Not so now? You're certainly great at using DNC talking points.

I'm not demonizing those with the least, I'm speaking the truth of them. If the truth demonizes them, then that means they're really not good people. Thinking one is noble because they're poor is hardly a sign of any intelligence at all. And it really points out why nothing can be done about poverty. Because liberals want to stick with this canard of the poor as hard working people falling on bad times. That's to make their situation as positive as possible as to not offend them and keep their vote. But those same vote seeking softhands also keep them down. Sometimes people need to hear the truth. If they're poor from their crappy decisions and illegal activities, then the truth should be spoken. Pretending they're victims of society just enables more of that behavior, encourages it. Just as the war on poverty has.

So what's my plan? Close the roach motel. Stop financing destructive behavior. Turn charity back over to individuals and charities, where it belongs. Where such individuals will get the help they need without being able to game the system so easily. That will return the environment to a natural one, where people will rebuild their families, help each other, help themselves, etc. Reward hard work and stop using the federal government as a nanny. I know that's going to sound radical, but that's the way the world has operated for millennium and with a population much better off than those living under nanny states.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

Marine Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
Marine Hokie wrote: You're looking at the wrong culprit for creating your losers. Free market capitalism does not create losers. Let's be clear that America does not have a free market.
It is my poor wording. I do not blame free market capitalism at all. I don't see a problem with competition. It is competition that (by definition) creates winners and losers - and that's not a bad thing. I don't believe in participation trophies... that would be socialism :mrgreen:

(Don't even bother going there...)
What do you define as a "loser"? Someone who has less money than someone else? Someone in the bottom x%? Someone who doesn't meet your standards of modern living?

I don't consider a poor person as a loser (I know you don't mean it as derogatory, so don't go there). A person may have less than someone else for a variety of reasons, increasing government involvement in the economy and restricting liberty makes this worse, not better. People at the bottom of the economic ladder are helped by new technology and an advancing economy. Taking away economic freedom and confiscating wealth hurts people at the bottom the most. It takes away their opportunities for advancement.
A person who has a job at Burger King isn't a "loser". Nobody took anything from them, they didn't lose anything. A person who has a job at Burger King because better options were taken away by the government, or doesn't even have a job at Burger King because of the loss of economic freedom is a loser. The culprit is the organization that uses force to restrict economic liberties, not "competition," which you mean as a euphemism for the free market (which again, isn't what we have).
I think we are now stuck on wording... and I have already admitted to the glibness of my comment and poor wording. In my glib comment... yes, those working minimum wages job are losers in the game. But, you and I do agree, they are not losers in life.

They could be the "poornado" that AG keeps talking about however...
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: I got mine

Post by awesome guy »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote: You know that they say about assumptions? I'm not a minority, just grew up with them, was 1 of 3 whites in my school class, surrounded by minorities most of my life, and still spend a considerable amount of time in the ghetto. I figure you've learned of minorities watching sports on TV and Lifetime movies. So I'm staying on my position of knowledge, what you call a high horse.

I believe what was said about the election and what is plain, Obama won the racist/white guilt vote. And the poor soul running as a D in 2016 is going to inherit the rage created from his failure. So yeah, I'm looking forward to 2016. Really looking at how the minorities vote, especially considering how they are worse off by every economic indicator under the Obama years. Of all the people suffering through this Obama quagmire, minorities have been hit hardest. I'm optimistic they'll wise up and realise the war on poverty has the barrells set on them, not to defend them.
Your assumption about my background is incorrect. Among other things, I have spent a good deal of time and resources with underprivileged in my community. I see who they are and how they act. They are not all angels and some of them mess up. Some do become criminals. But the vast majority deserve much more than our derision. We can agree to disagree I suppose.
how much time? Once a year? Once a month? Once in a lifetime?
Here's the thing, the poor don't "deserve" anything. That's the entitlement mentality. They receive aid, at our discretion. IE, voluntarily help them. They're at our mercy, not the other way around. The attitude you reflect contributes to their plight.
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
User avatar
BigDave
Posts: 8012
Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 11:20 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Republican

Re: I got mine

Post by BigDave »

VoiceOfReason wrote:So should the government run Soup Kitchens instead of EBT cards? How else can we get help to areas not served by charitable organizations?
First off, under our constitution, the national government shouldn't have anything to do with any of it.

And I wouldn't really be thrilled about state and local governments doing it either because that's just an open invitation to abuse. When government does anything, it's less efficient. They will serve a bowl of soup that costs taxpayers $20 and has maybe one piece of "meat-like substance" and one piece of carrot.

But that debate can be held at the state and local level.
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

awesome guy wrote: You said you're a D because of a friend. Not so now? You're certainly great at using DNC talking points.
Haha... nothing wrong with your memory. Indeed that is correct. I am a "registered D" because of a great man and friend... and because I live in a blue state and I like my votes to count.

Come general election time, I am free to cast votes for either party and frequently do.

Calling GOP talking points BS is not the same as espousing Donkey Talking Points... but that may be too fine a distinction to matter on this board.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

awesome guy wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote: You know that they say about assumptions? I'm not a minority, just grew up with them, was 1 of 3 whites in my school class, surrounded by minorities most of my life, and still spend a considerable amount of time in the ghetto. I figure you've learned of minorities watching sports on TV and Lifetime movies. So I'm staying on my position of knowledge, what you call a high horse.

I believe what was said about the election and what is plain, Obama won the racist/white guilt vote. And the poor soul running as a D in 2016 is going to inherit the rage created from his failure. So yeah, I'm looking forward to 2016. Really looking at how the minorities vote, especially considering how they are worse off by every economic indicator under the Obama years. Of all the people suffering through this Obama quagmire, minorities have been hit hardest. I'm optimistic they'll wise up and realise the war on poverty has the barrells set on them, not to defend them.
Your assumption about my background is incorrect. Among other things, I have spent a good deal of time and resources with underprivileged in my community. I see who they are and how they act. They are not all angels and some of them mess up. Some do become criminals. But the vast majority deserve much more than our derision. We can agree to disagree I suppose.
how much time? Once a year? Once a month? Once in a lifetime?
Here's the thing, the poor don't "deserve" anything. That's the entitlement mentality. They receive aid, at our discretion. IE, voluntarily help them. They're at our mercy, not the other way around. The attitude you reflect contributes to their plight.
At a minimum... that's a good song :mrgreen:
User avatar
awesome guy
Posts: 54187
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 7:10 pm
Party: After 10
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified

Re: I got mine

Post by awesome guy »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote: You know that they say about assumptions? I'm not a minority, just grew up with them, was 1 of 3 whites in my school class, surrounded by minorities most of my life, and still spend a considerable amount of time in the ghetto. I figure you've learned of minorities watching sports on TV and Lifetime movies. So I'm staying on my position of knowledge, what you call a high horse.

I believe what was said about the election and what is plain, Obama won the racist/white guilt vote. And the poor soul running as a D in 2016 is going to inherit the rage created from his failure. So yeah, I'm looking forward to 2016. Really looking at how the minorities vote, especially considering how they are worse off by every economic indicator under the Obama years. Of all the people suffering through this Obama quagmire, minorities have been hit hardest. I'm optimistic they'll wise up and realise the war on poverty has the barrells set on them, not to defend them.
Your assumption about my background is incorrect. Among other things, I have spent a good deal of time and resources with underprivileged in my community. I see who they are and how they act. They are not all angels and some of them mess up. Some do become criminals. But the vast majority deserve much more than our derision. We can agree to disagree I suppose.
how much time? Once a year? Once a month? Once in a lifetime?
Here's the thing, the poor don't "deserve" anything. That's the entitlement mentality. They receive aid, at our discretion. IE, voluntarily help them. They're at our mercy, not the other way around. The attitude you reflect contributes to their plight.
At a minimum... that's a good song :mrgreen:
you're missing how appropriate that song is to the context here, for a double awesome play. This is not my beautiful house...
Unvaccinated,. mask free, and still alive.
VoiceOfReason
Posts: 2182
Joined: Wed Oct 02, 2013 6:21 pm
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Every chance I get

Re: I got mine

Post by VoiceOfReason »

awesome guy wrote: you're missing how appropriate that song is to the context here, for a double awesome play. This is not my beautiful house...
Hahaha... don't push it :mrgreen:
User avatar
Marine Hokie
Posts: 2124
Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 9:50 pm
Location: Durham, NC

Re: I got mine

Post by Marine Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
Marine Hokie wrote:
VoiceOfReason wrote:
Marine Hokie wrote: You're looking at the wrong culprit for creating your losers. Free market capitalism does not create losers. Let's be clear that America does not have a free market.
It is my poor wording. I do not blame free market capitalism at all. I don't see a problem with competition. It is competition that (by definition) creates winners and losers - and that's not a bad thing. I don't believe in participation trophies... that would be socialism :mrgreen:

(Don't even bother going there...)
What do you define as a "loser"? Someone who has less money than someone else? Someone in the bottom x%? Someone who doesn't meet your standards of modern living?

I don't consider a poor person as a loser (I know you don't mean it as derogatory, so don't go there). A person may have less than someone else for a variety of reasons, increasing government involvement in the economy and restricting liberty makes this worse, not better. People at the bottom of the economic ladder are helped by new technology and an advancing economy. Taking away economic freedom and confiscating wealth hurts people at the bottom the most. It takes away their opportunities for advancement.
A person who has a job at Burger King isn't a "loser". Nobody took anything from them, they didn't lose anything. A person who has a job at Burger King because better options were taken away by the government, or doesn't even have a job at Burger King because of the loss of economic freedom is a loser. The culprit is the organization that uses force to restrict economic liberties, not "competition," which you mean as a euphemism for the free market (which again, isn't what we have).
I think we are now stuck on wording... and I have already admitted to the glibness of my comment and poor wording. In my glib comment... yes, those working minimum wages job are losers in the game. But, you and I do agree, they are not losers in life.

They could be the "poornado" that AG keeps talking about however...
We've established that you aren't calling them losers in life. You're the one stuck on it. We can call them "economic losers" if that makes it easier for you.
Answer the question.
A man is no less a slave because he is allowed to choose a new master once in a term of years.
133743Hokie
Posts: 11220
Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 12:29 am

Re: I got mine

Post by 133743Hokie »

VoiceOfReason wrote:
awesome guy wrote: 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.
I made the assumption (from your pic and your rhetoric) that you are not a minority. If that assumption is not correct, my sincere apologies. If my assumption is correct... then get off your damn high horse.

Ehh... you can believe what you want about the elections. IMHO, if there was one distinguishing characteristic that help O win the election it was not the color of his skin... it was the fact he is a Democrat. We can test this theory in 2016, when the D candidate will almost certainly be white. She may however not be a white male :mrgreen:
Obama won because he was a Dem, plain and simple. The 2008 vote was an anti Repub, anti Bush vote. The Dems could have run a house plant and won. Jesus Christ could have run as a Repub and lost. It was "just time" based on all that had transpired over the previous years.
Post Reply