Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

SCOTUS aren't morons....today.Follow

#152 Jul 10 2014 at 7:50 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
Lol, being poor is like being short.

Poverty is a naturally occurring condition. I suppose then being rich is also naturally occurring. Like rain and earthquakes.

Quote:
What is *not* justice, or fairness, or anything remotely like that, is the idea that I must provide you with a better life because you were born poor.
It's not humane, I'll give you that.


____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
#153 Jul 10 2014 at 8:52 AM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Being born poor is a condition. No one's stealing your money from you. That sucks and all, but just like being born short, the rest of society is not to blame for it, nor should any concept of "justice" require that others adjust for your lack of height (or wealth).


True, unless of course being born into poverty wasn't a choice on a big wheel spun at the birthing factory where children pop out a door. If, instead, it was the result of intentional ghettoizing of large segments of society to create a permanent underclass then society is completely to blame for it and should make reparations.

Strong argument for reparations you've made, brother. What are 40 acres and a mule worth accounting for inflation and compound interest? A few million per descendent? Sounds good. I like the way you think.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#154 Jul 10 2014 at 9:20 AM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
With modern factory farming techniques, we could get that down to a half acre and a Garden Weaselâ„¢.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#155 Jul 10 2014 at 9:26 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
But we have an urban gardening initiative!
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#156 Jul 10 2014 at 1:35 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
gbaji wrote:
If I charge you more for something because of your skin color, I'm taking an action which harms you.
But you're totally okay with different business practices based on beliefs.


The word "but" in your sentence only makes sense if that sentence contradicts the sentence I wrote. It doesn't though, so what's your point? I'm also okay with people deciding whether to wear a hat when getting dressed. That's just as irrelevant to the issue of racial discrimination.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#157 Jul 10 2014 at 1:37 PM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
The word "but" in your sentence only makes sense if that sentence contradicts the sentence I wrote.
Since it does contradict the sentence you wrote, I guess we're square. Good game.

Rogue s removal.

Edited, Jul 10th 2014 3:43pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#158 Jul 10 2014 at 1:42 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Elinda wrote:
Lol, being poor is like being short.

Poverty is a naturally occurring condition. I suppose then being rich is also naturally occurring. Like rain and earthquakes.


I said "Being born poor is a condition". That extra word actually does serve an important function in the sentence and isn't there by accident.

Quote:
Quote:
What is *not* justice, or fairness, or anything remotely like that, is the idea that I must provide you with a better life because you were born poor.
It's not humane, I'll give you that.


Again though you are ignoring key words in my post. The word "must" is significant. I'm free to choose to help those less fortunate than myself. The issue is whether the government should force me to do so. That's where the issue stops being about people making humane choices, and becomes about governments imposing themselves on their citizenry. Let me decide the most humane way to help someone in need. Because when the government does it, we run the risk of the systems of "help" ceasing to be about people helping other people, but a means of control and power for those in charge of "helping". Which is precisely the problem with many of our social programs today.

Edited, Jul 10th 2014 12:42pm by gbaji
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#159 Jul 10 2014 at 9:31 PM Rating: Excellent
Tracer Bullet
*****
12,636 posts
gbaji wrote:
Again though you are ignoring key words in my post. The word "must" is significant. I'm free to choose to help those less fortunate than myself. The issue is whether the government should force me to do so. That's where the issue stops being about people making humane choices, and becomes about governments imposing themselves on their citizenry. Let me decide the most humane way to help someone in need. Because when the government does it, we run the risk of the systems of "help" ceasing to be about people helping other people, but a means of control and power for those in charge of "helping". Which is precisely the problem with many of our social programs today.

Haha. The problem with the world is that we are just giving too much help to poor people. The system of power that controls major governments is just so consumed with going out of their way to help poor people, that it's really just ******** everything up. Smiley: lolSmiley: laughSmiley: lol
#160 Jul 11 2014 at 7:50 AM Rating: Excellent
*******
50,767 posts
gbaji wrote:
I'm free to choose to help those less fortunate than myself.
It's just a coincidence that the people you choose to help are only white, male, Christian, hetero, and share the exact political views.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#161 Jul 11 2014 at 9:43 AM Rating: Excellent
Prodigal Son
******
20,643 posts
If human nature were that benevolent, we wouldn't be in this situation in the first place. Again, it goes back to the core issue of capitalism. You're either being entirely naive out dishonest to think that the majority of people would take it upon themselves to help out the less fortunate in their immediate vicinity, without any other motivating factor. But paying a little into a system to spread the help around makes it more palatable. You know, like a government.
____________________________
publiusvarus wrote:
we all know liberals are well adjusted american citizens who only want what's best for society. While conservatives are evil money grubbing scum who only want to sh*t on the little man and rob the world of its resources.
#162 Jul 11 2014 at 10:10 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
It's easier to help the unwashed masses when you don't have to interact with them directly. Smiley: nod
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#163 Jul 11 2014 at 10:12 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
That's why flamethrowers were invented. Smiley: schooled
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#164 Jul 11 2014 at 10:19 AM Rating: Excellent
Meat Popsicle
*****
13,666 posts
Carrot and stick approach? Or do we lure them in with promises of Obamaphones and turn on them?
____________________________
That monster in the mirror, he just might be you. -Grover
#165 Jul 11 2014 at 10:20 AM Rating: Good
*******
50,767 posts
Superglue an iPhone 5 to the sidewalk.
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#166 Jul 11 2014 at 6:04 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
trickybeck wrote:
gbaji wrote:
Again though you are ignoring key words in my post. The word "must" is significant. I'm free to choose to help those less fortunate than myself. The issue is whether the government should force me to do so. That's where the issue stops being about people making humane choices, and becomes about governments imposing themselves on their citizenry. Let me decide the most humane way to help someone in need. Because when the government does it, we run the risk of the systems of "help" ceasing to be about people helping other people, but a means of control and power for those in charge of "helping". Which is precisely the problem with many of our social programs today.

Haha. The problem with the world is that we are just giving too much help to poor people. The system of power that controls major governments is just so consumed with going out of their way to help poor people, that it's really just ******** everything up. Smiley: lolSmiley: laughSmiley: lol


We're talking just about the US here. And the problem isn't with quantity, but with how it's directed. The political left in the US targets government "help" more on the basis of how it benefits them politically than on the actual need of the people. AA is just an extreme example of this. It's done to win over black votes. And at the risk of cross thread shenanigans, Obama's "help" of illegal minors via DACA had everything to do with winning Latino votes. The long term effects (often negative) on those being "helped" is secondary to those immediate political benefits.

And yes, private charities are vastly better at targeting help to those in need, based on that need. I'm not saying don't help those in need. I'm saying that the way the Left proposes to do it is terrible at helping them and great at helping the Left. I'd prefer that our help not come with such political baggage.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#167 Jul 11 2014 at 6:22 PM Rating: Excellent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

And yes, private charities are vastly better at targeting help to those in need, based on that need.


Cite? Just kidding.

You're wrong.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#168 Jul 11 2014 at 6:24 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
gbaji wrote:
The long term effects (often negative) on those being "helped" is secondary to those immediate political benefits.

That's true. Later on, you might get ignorant dumbfucks who weren't even aware of what the policy said blaming it for various things it had little to do with. Smiley: thumbsup
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#169 Jul 11 2014 at 6:30 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts

That's true. Later on, you might get ignorant ********* who weren't even aware of what the policy said blaming it for various things it had little to do with.


Let's not forget "have no idea they benefit from government hand outs". "I'm sure there would be 30 year loans without government guarantees", "Keep your government hands off my medicare", etc. etc.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#170 Jul 11 2014 at 6:55 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,568 posts
Smasharoo wrote:

And yes, private charities are vastly better at targeting help to those in need, based on that need.


Cite? Just kidding.


Sure. One of the first hits on google. I picked this one because it itself contains references to the sources used by the author. I'm sure I could find more though.

Quote:
You're wrong.


Lol.
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#171 Jul 11 2014 at 7:03 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Libertarian blogger on libertarian site cites her libertarian book's use of libertarian studies from National Center for Policy Analysis and Journal of Libertarian Studies.

Sounds legit.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#172 Jul 11 2014 at 7:13 PM Rating: Excellent
Will swallow your soul
******
29,360 posts
It's a privately funded echo chamber, Joph. That makes it okay.

____________________________
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

#173 Jul 11 2014 at 10:30 PM Rating: Good
****
4,135 posts
Short answers, my ***! Smiley: mad
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#174 Jul 11 2014 at 10:54 PM Rating: Decent
Lunatic
******
30,086 posts
Sure. One of the first hits on google. I picked this one because it itself contains references to the sources used by the author. I'm sure I could find more though.

K. Find one. Let me know.
____________________________
Disclaimer:

To make a long story short, I don't take any responsibility for anything I post here. It's not news, it's not truth, it's not serious. It's parody. It's satire. It's bitter. It's angsty. Your mother's a *****. You like to jack off dogs. That's right, you heard me. You like to grab that dog by the bone and rub it like a ski pole. Your dad? Gay. Your priest? Straight. **** off and let me post. It's not true, it's all in good fun. Now go away.

#175 Jul 12 2014 at 1:50 AM Rating: Good
Sage
**
670 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Libertarian blogger on libertarian site cites her libertarian book's use of libertarian studies from National Center for Policy Analysis and Journal of Libertarian Studies.

Sounds legit.

Its totally legit. Sure, the studies are almost 20 years old with 1996 being the most recent thing I've seen, but thats OK. Unlike science, economics is stable enough that it never needs updating.
#176 Jul 13 2014 at 6:49 AM Rating: Good
Skelly Poker Since 2008
*****
16,781 posts
gbaji wrote:
Smasharoo wrote:

And yes, private charities are vastly better at targeting help to those in need, based on that need.


Cite? Just kidding.


Sure. One of the first hits on google. I picked this one because it itself contains references to the sources used by the author. I'm sure I could find more though.

Quote:
You're wrong.


Lol.

The validity of the research aside, the point being made it more about dollar vs dollar cost to provide a thing to a group. I didn't see much about how effectively the dollars spent changed the economic curve.

This premise that it's based on...

Quote:
about 75% of the tax dollars that are targeted to welfare programs actually go to the middle-class administrators rather than the needy. In contrast, private programs give about 75% of donated dollars to the poor. Thus, the poor get more when charitable giving is private.
...even if true doesn't really address the economics. Sure, churches can get little old ladies to volunteer their time to serve up lunches every Tuesday and Thursday at the local soup kitchen. I'm sure the non-profit that is providing this lunch can do it cheaper than the DHHS but it's not providing a social structure to ensure on-going equitable distribution of resources to ALL that might be in need.
____________________________
Alma wrote:
I lost my post
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 190 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (190)