There are two Americas!

[Jerk]

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/126158626-L.jpg

(sorry if this has already been posted)

[Okla-homey]

He should spend some of his millions on landscaping. Danged nouveau riche hillbilly. I like the four-story climate controlled deer stand though.

[crawfish]

He wasn't politicking. He was bragging. :D

[Chuck Bao]

Wasn't he a litigation lawyer before becoming a politician?

I'm lost now. What's the point?

We'd rather have people who fail at business to become politicians? Like...um...Dub'ya?

Anyway, his own personal wealth doesn't make his statements true or false. I still think that he is pretty spot on.

Nice house too!

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Yep, made his millions suing companies for class action lawsuits so you could get a voucher or coupon or something...

Yeah, he is a real populist...:rolleyes:

[Hatfield]

agree with chuck.

the jackassery of the monster house in no way dimishes his quoted passage.

though some people would like to insinuate that it does in some abstract way.

[OklahomaTuba]

Ahh, class warfare. Gotta love it. Its so 1960's socialist revolutionary of him. Maybe if we elect him, we will have ONE America, where we are all equal because the Government controls our wages, production & consumption.

Heh, like he knows a damn thing about work.

He could hardly show up to work to vote as a friggin senator.

BTW, I wonder how much energy he uses heating and cooling that place? Looks like he mowed down a fair number of trees as well. Surely he is an environmentalist, and not one of those hypocritical limousine liberal.

[crawfish]

agree with chuck.

the jackassery of the monster house in no way dimishes his quoted passage.

though some people would like to insinuate that it does in some abstract way.

I guess being filthy rich is only wrong if you're a Republican, then. ;)

[85Sooner]

I guess being filthy rich is only wrong if you're a Republican, then. ;)
Thats what the dims seem to think from what I can tell.

[JohnnyMack]

Heh, like he knows a damn thing about work.


In complete contrast of course to that touching heartfelt story of how W came from nothing and pulled himself up by his bootstraps. :rolleyes:

[Tear Down This Wall]

Hmm. I wonder if the treehugging lobby stayed silent as the house was built among the trees in that forest. Or, maybe he just magically found a spot so clear of trees in North Carolina.

Bottom line - Edwards is as phony as the rest of 'em.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

In complete contrast of course to that touching heartfelt story of how W came from nothing and pulled himself up by his bootstraps. :rolleyes:EXPOSED! It's now been revealed how "W" despises and avoids work.

[NormanPride]

A politician is a hypocrite? Say it ain't so! :rolleyes:

[VeeJay]

He's even got a covered walkway from the house to the barn.

So's his hair won't get wet when it's raining.

Or is that a barn?

What the hell is that red building?

[Rhino]

Politicians make a lot of money?

Who knew?

[TheHumanAlphabet]

Politicians make a lot of money?

Who knew?

No, suing businesses and being the North Carolina Hammer chasing ambulances makes lots of money...

[OklahomaTuba]

In complete contrast of course to that touching heartfelt story of how W came from nothing and pulled himself up by his bootstraps. :rolleyes:

Hmm, interesting, I don't recall Dubya going off the deepend using tactics such as class warfare or being a champion of the poor saps that think the government should support them from the cradle to the grave.

[OklahomaTuba]

He's even got a covered walkway from the house to the barn.

So's his hair won't get wet when it's raining.

Or is that a barn?

What the hell is that red building?

HAHA! That walkway thing is hideous. Kind of like his debating skills against Cheney. Dude got eaten alive.

[Bourbon St Sooner]

Politicians make a lot of money?

Who knew?

In Louisiana, that goes without saying.

[TUSooner]

In Louisiana, that goes without saying.
Plus they get their salaries.

One of my best friends is a plaintiffs' lawyer (maritime PI & med-mal). But mostly, plaintiffs' lawyers like Edwards are the cheesiest amoral hypocrites in the world, and they disgust me.

[jacru]

One making decisions and forming opinions based on emotion and what feels good and the other using logic, morality, and commom sense considers what will actually work.

[VeeJay]

Does anyone else think he looks sorta like Jack Tripper in that picture?

[Stoop Dawg]

the jackassery of the monster house in no way dimishes his quoted passage.

I agree. The fact that he's rich doesn't make the comment wrong. The fact that the comment is wrong makes the comment wrong.

There are actually 3 Americas:

One is the poor.
Some of these people have had a rough go of it. They need help getting their act together. Some of the people are lazy and content to live in poverty so long as they don't actually have to work for their money.

One is the middle class.
Not poor, but most of these people don't have enough money to just rest on their laurels. The majority of these people work their *** off (or their spouse does).

One is the rich.
Some of these inherited their money. Some made it by working hard and/or being smart. Others picked the right numbers. We like to complain about this class of people (and all those unfair tax breaks that they get) - but the fact of the matter is that they pay the VAST MAJORITY of the taxes that the rest of us live on.

Bitch about the rich. Bitch about the poor. Bitch about race. Bitch about healthcare. Bitch about gender or sexual preferences.

I wish people would spend as much time trying to improve their situation as they do bitching about it.

[OklahomaTuba]

The great thing is, a person can move freely inbetween all 3 Mericas. Anyone can move up if they work hard, get an education and act honestly. And, anyone can move down if they don't and expect someone else to take responsiblity for them, which seems to be what this this jack *** edwards would like to see happen.

He is nothing more than a socialist with nice head of hair (and a bigass house).

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Didn't the ATF burn that place down?

[TopDawg]

I come up with at least three:

North America
South America
Latin America...

[Vaevictis]

Hmm, interesting, I don't recall Dubya going off the deepend using tactics such as class warfare or being a champion of the poor saps that think the government should support them from the cradle to the grave.

Pfft. The GOP uses similar tactics, they just target different groups. The religious right wedge is a clear example of that. It's something common to politicians in general -- identify various groups, separate them, and then pander to them.

And as far as class warfare goes, it's better to pay attention to it and get on it when it's still just "class warfare" and not literal class warfare, is it not?

[Stoop Dawg]

And as far as class warfare goes, it's better to pay attention to it and get on it when it's still just "class warfare" and not literal class warfare, is it not?

Of course. But it's tricky.

Pandering to the "rich" gives you revolution (a la France).

Pandering to the "poor" gives you bread-lines (a la Russia).

So the question is: How do you help the poor without encouraging lazy behavior? How do you allow the rich to reap the benefits of their labor without allowing a nobility to emerge?

Once you figure it out it should be a best seller.

[Stoop Dawg]

I come up with at least three:

North America
South America
Latin America...

That's what I said: 3 Americas.

[Stoop Dawg]

The great thing is, a person can move freely inbetween all 3 Mericas. Anyone can move up if they work hard, get an education and act honestly.

I tend to agree, but ... a couple of points.

1. You say "move freely" as if it were easy. Clearly it's easier for some than others. I can see where it would be extremely frustrating to watch someone else have an easier go of it.

2. Acting honestly is not always (usually?) the best way to advance your socio-economic status. ;)

[jacru]

How do you help the poor without encouraging lazy behavior?
Economic opportunity. Provide excellent environment for business operation and formation. It insures available jobs or makes starting your own business easy. Opportunity can be seized or ignored. Plus, a prosperous populous is more charitable to the poor. Allow people to give instead of taking from them so the gov't can give. Allow the lazy to be poor. let work be their only out.
How do you allow the rich to reap the benefits of their labor without allowing a nobility to emerge?
This is not a problem with America because of a large middle class and the ability to change your "class" if you purpose to do so.

[jacru]

I tend to agree, but ... a couple of points.

1. You say "move freely" as if it were easy. Clearly it's easier for some than others. I can see where it would be extremely frustrating to watch someone else have an easier go of it.
ANYTHING is always easier for some than for others.

[FaninAma]

This scumbucket made a lot of his money riding the lawsuit wave of making OB doctors resposnible for children with cerebral palsy. He even channeled one of the CP patient's whose parents he was representing in a trial. Forget the fact that 95% of all cerebral palsy cases are due to factors that occured way before delivery or the cause is unknown. If you ever find it difficult to find an obstetrician, especially if you or a spouse has a high risk pregnancy, you can, in part, thank ol John Boy.

[FaninAma]

I tend to agree, but ... a couple of points.

1. You say "move freely" as if it were easy. Clearly it's easier for some than others. I can see where it would be extremely frustrating to watch someone else have an easier go of it.

2. Acting honestly is not always (usually?) the best way to advance your socio-economic status. ;)

You're right. Some people have a much easier time of being successful. Their parents are rich. They didn't have to contend with bad parents and poor family situations, they have inside connections most of us didn't have, etc. etc, etc. But you know what? Life isn't fair. In the end you are responsible for what you do with your life. Not me, not the President, not the Congress. Even the poorest American has more resources and more opportunity than 99% of the rest of the World's population.

If you want to cry and lament your misfortune and suck off the public tit the rest of your life then that's your choice. If you want to make an effort to better yourself then that's your choice also.

It's just sad that more and more people are taking the path of least resistance.

[bri]

I guess being filthy rich is only acceptable if you're a Republican, then. ;)

Fixed. :D

[Stoop Dawg]

ANYTHING is always easier for some than for others.

True. For example, jail time would be extremely difficult for me. Therefore I try exceptionally hard not to end up there.

For others, jail is easy and holding down a full-time job is hard.

Pretending that everyone has the same work ethic creates poor social policy. For example, "let the lazy be poor" is akin to saying "let's create high crime by ignoring poverty".

[TopDawg]

Then you've also got:

Central America (which I guess is kinda Latin America)
America, Netherlands
America, Buenos Aires
America (the band)
America (the XM radio channel)
America (the video game)

[BlondeSoonerGirl]

America - Neil Diamond

\m/ !!!

[Jerk]

Pretending that everyone has the same work ethic creates poor social policy. For example, "let the lazy be poor" is akin to saying "let's create high crime by ignoring poverty".

You have much more compassion than I do. If someone has the ability both mentally and physically to work, but won't because they're too lazy...then their being poor is not my problem. Surely you don't believe that people who do have a work ethic should be responsible for those who don't?

[PhxSooner]

America - Neil Diamond

\m/ !!!
I admit, I made my mom buy me "The Jazz Singer" record just for that song.


As you were.

[TopDawg]

Surely you don't believe that people who do have a work ethic should be responsible for those who don't?

Surely you don't believe that people who post on Soonerfans all day have the right to talk about other people's work ethic.

;)

[Stoop Dawg]

You have much more compassion than I do. If someone has the ability both mentally and physically to work, but won't because they're too lazy...then their being poor is not my problem. Surely you don't believe that people who do have a work ethic should be responsible for those who don't?

Actually, I have almost no compassion for lazy people - and especially for fat, lazy people who don't even be bother to take care of their own health.

However, simply ignoring the fact that those people exist IS your problem - and mine.

Let's ask these questions:

"If someone DOES NOT have the ability both mentally and physically to work, what is to be done about it?" Followed closely by "Who decides which people are able both mentally and physically to work and how much money do I have to pay those people to sit around all day and decide?"

Another:

"If someone has the ability both mentally and physically to work, but can't find a job that pays well enough to support their family ... what should be done about it?" You say it's not your problem that this guy is poor. Given the choice between robbing your house or watching his kids starve to death - which do you think he'll choose?

Then there's this one:

"Have the rules I've put in place (including wage laws, etc.) actually made it easier (or more profitable) to steal for a living than to hold down a full-time job?" I'm a big fan of capitalism, but if you just let it have free reign you will end up with sweat-shops and child labor abuses. Those laws weren't passed "just in case" - those were real problems at one time.

As for whether I believe that those with a work ethic are responsible for those without - the answer is a resounding "YES!". Parents should help their kids get started. Kids should help their parents retire. Brothers and sisters should help each other out in hard times. Churches and social groups should give a helping hand to their friends in need. Now, do I want the government deciding these things for me? Not really. But do I believe the people will just "take care of it" if left to their own devices? Not really.

I'm not sure what the answer is, but I'm pretty sure that sticking my head in the sand and saying "it's not my problem" ain't it.

[Stoop Dawg]

Surely you don't believe that people who post on Soonerfans all day have the right to talk about other people's work ethic.

;)

You've got almost twice as many posts, so I must have roughly twice your work ethic.

[Jerk]

"If someone has the ability both mentally and physically to work, but can't find a job that pays well enough to support their family ... what should be done about it?" You say it's not your problem that this guy is poor. Given the choice between robbing your house or watching his kids starve to death - which do you think he'll choose?



Incredible logic there. Here we have a hypothetical guy who is too lazy to work, so you think he should have a cut of my earnings, "or else he'll rob you." That's almost blackmale.."support these lazy people or they will kill you!"

Dude, that's why we have guns, and the make my day law...to blow such worthless scumbags away.

And...are you talking about my health with that first paragraph? My being 30 pounds overweight doesn't affect you. A bunch of people who won't work but leach off the public treasury does.

[Jerk]

Surely you don't believe that people who post on Soonerfans all day have the right to talk about other people's work ethic.

;)

Mmmmmmkay there mister 8700 posts.

[Frozen Sooner]

If there's two Americas, can I sign up to be in the one with the pron?

plzthx.

[Jerk]

If there's two Americas, can I sign up to be in the one with the pron?

plzthx.

Well, you can either join the "pull up your boot straps and do it yourself" crowd

or the "I'm incompetent at living so someone please do it for me" half.

Your choice.:pop:

[Frozen Sooner]

Can I be in the one that puts themselves through college, makes good money on their own, has never taken a dime from someone else, yet doesn't mind giving a helping hand to those in need?

[Jerk]

Can I be in the one that puts themselves through college, makes good money on their own, has never taken a dime from someone else, yet doesn't mind giving a helping hand to those in need?

That's cool that you donate to charity. Serious.

[SleestakSooner]

As for whether I believe that those with a work ethic are responsible for those without - the answer is a resounding "YES!". Parents should help their kids get started. Kids should help their parents retire. Brothers and sisters should help each other out in hard times. Churches and social groups should give a helping hand to their friends in need.

The me first attitude that prevails in our current culture is a telling example of how hypocritical many of us have become. A great deal of us like to refer to ourselves as Christian but when it comes to espousing Christian beliefs a lot of those so called Christians like to say **** 'em. This is one reason I never could understand the term "Christian right".

[Jerk]

What kind of people are you two talking about (Sleez and Stoop)? Is it grandma who can't make ends meat on her ss check, or someone young, healthy, but would has no work ethic and would rather live of whatever gov't subsidies that they can qualify for? Because I have said, from the start, that my problem is with people who are not physically or mentally handicapped, who are able to work but won't. I'm not talking about people who can't work. There is a difference. Then along come both of you and act like I want old people to starve to death.

[SoonerBorn68]

"If someone has the ability both mentally and physically to work, but can't find a job that pays well enough to support their family ... what should be done about it?" You say it's not your problem that this guy is poor. Given the choice between robbing your house or watching his kids starve to death - which do you think he'll choose?


It's funny you mention this, as this was my exact situation about 3 years ago. I was fired from a job & had trouble finding another one in my field. The kids were still hungry so I went from a $50K parts manager's job to driving a parts truck for $6.50 an hour. This put me way short in paying my bills. I mowed yards, worked on people's computers, sold stuff on Ebay--any and everything legal to make a buck. I lost one of my vehicles to a reposession & got way behind on other bills--but I never once thought about stealing.

I chose to work harder.

[OklahomaTuba]

The me first attitude that prevails in our current culture is a telling example of how hypocritical many of us have become. A great deal of us like to refer to ourselves as Christian but when it comes to espousing Christian beliefs a lot of those so called Christians like to say **** 'em. This is one reason I never could understand the term "Christian right".

Yeah, cause Christians don't give ANYTHING to people unless the government does it for them.

Might check out Catholic Charities, Salvation Army, John 3:16, etc. Cause chances are, no other group of people give more money to the poor than the Christian Right.

[usmc-sooner]

The me first attitude that prevails in our current culture is a telling example of how hypocritical many of us have become. A great deal of us like to refer to ourselves as Christian but when it comes to espousing Christian beliefs a lot of those so called Christians like to say **** 'em. This is one reason I never could understand the term "Christian right".

the me first attitude is nature's first law of survival.

Christians are human and they sin but they as a group have done much more good than bad. You got to remember that the Bible does cover the subject of wanna be Christians, or wolves in sheeps clothing. But then that would destroy your liberal logic that if one person who claims to be Christian goes afoul we are all bad, but how dare anyone call Muslims on their BS even though their religion calls for holy jihads.

[FaninAma]

Can I be in the one that puts themselves through college, makes good money on their own, has never taken a dime from someone else, yet doesn't mind giving a helping hand to those in need?

Mike, define "helping hand".

Is it 20%, 30%, 40% of my income or more? The open ended terminology, especially when dealing with liberal democrats(not necessarily meaning you) makes me somewhat nervous.

[Penguin]

http://www.smugmug.com/photos/126158626-L.jpg

(sorry if this has already been posted)

I apologize if this has already been mentioned. I have not read a single word of this thread.


Please, oh please, don't tell me people have made an argument based on this pic.

Anyone with a 65 IQ can tell this is fake. Extremely cartoonish. Good Lord. Even SimCity 2000 drew a better farm than that.


This is snopes material.

[JohnnyMack]

Well, you can either join the "pull up your boot straps and do it yourself" crowd

or the "I'm incompetent at living so someone please do it for me" half.

Your choice.:pop:

I think he wants to "pull on his boot strap". See:


If there's two Americas, can I sign up to be in the one with the pron?

plzthx.

[Penguin]

LOL! I CAN'T STOP LAUGHING!!!!!


THAT PHOTO IS CLEARLY A SKI SLOPE IN THE SUMMER!!!!

SOME CARTOONIST DREW IN A ROAD AND A HOUSE AND A FARMHOUSE!!!!!


HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D

[TopDawg]

Mmmmmmkay there mister 8700 posts.

That"S justdo to my superoir typnig skills,

[TopDawg]

You've got almost twice as many posts, so I must have roughly twice your work ethic.

Oops. I should've responded to this first since Jerk just stole your joke.

See, this is how I get twice as many posts. I don't consolidate.

[Jerk]

Well...I guess I need to lose my 30 pounds so no one will think I'm lazy. Then I need to STFU about personal matters so no butt-munch can use them against me later on. Maybe I got too comfortable around here. Hell, I made a post a few months ago that was not serious at all, then later on got a personal insult through pm about it, as though I was serious.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

My thing is that if you are on Welfare, why does the government let those people sit on their asses and eat doritos all day. I mean technically the government is paying them. There shouldn't be any trash on ANY road between us making our prisoners and welfare people clean it. We shouldn't ever have any road construction problems because we can always get the welfare people to help there as well. Another thing that ****es me off is that I get drug tested so that I can remain employeed....why don't we drug test welfare people and if they fail guess what, no more money.

[OklahomaTuba]

Another thing that ****es me off is that I get drug tested so that I can remain employeed....why don't we drug test welfare people and if they fail guess what, no more money.

In John Edward's glorious American socialist paradise, drugs would be legal.

[Vaevictis]

Incredible logic there. Here we have a hypothetical guy who is too lazy to work, so you think he should have a cut of my earnings, "or else he'll rob you." That's almost blackmale.."support these lazy people or they will kill you!"

It doesn't matter if it sounds like blackmail, because blackmail or no, that's what happens. Just ask the French or the Russians.


Dude, that's why we have guns, and the make my day law...to blow such worthless scumbags away.

That reminds me of a time my father and I were at a liquor store near closing; I commented that I bet it was a good time to rob the store. Guy behind the counter said, "It's never a good time to rob this store, I'm packing." My father laughed at him and said, "That's smart. Now he knows to shoot first."

If it gets bad enough, all of the people who are looking to rob you are going to have guns too. And sooner or later, they'll start shooting first. What then?

(Note: This should not be construed as saying that guns shouldn't be in private hands. I'm not saying that at all. I'm just saying that to rely only on guns as a first line of defense is a bad idea.)

[Frozen Sooner]

There's a reason why banks rarely employ armed security guards anymore and never allow non-security personnel to carry on the premises.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

Just in my opinion, I would bet the people we are giving a big ****load of my paycheck to are in most cases still the ones committing crimes anyway. Because they are usually ones that are looking for a nice shortcut.

[Jerk]

One down, many more to go
http://www.newsok.com/article/3005842

[Stoop Dawg]

Incredible logic there. Here we have a hypothetical guy who is too lazy to work, so you think he should have a cut of my earnings, "or else he'll rob you." That's almost blackmale.."support these lazy people or they will kill you!"

Dude, that's why we have guns, and the make my day law...to blow such worthless scumbags away.

And...are you talking about my health with that first paragraph? My being 30 pounds overweight doesn't affect you. A bunch of people who won't work but leach off the public treasury does.

Coupla things:

1. I specifically said the guy was willing to work and couldn't find a job that pays well enough to feed his family.

2. If you're too busy with your job to attend political rallies, I assume you're also too busy to stay at home all day and guard your house.

3. Don't flatter yourself by thinking I've made any personal comments. I don't know you from Adam.


Edit: And fat people do affect me. They are at much higher risk for heart problems, diabetes, and other health risks, which drive up my health insurance premiums.

[Stoop Dawg]

It's funny you mention this, as this was my exact situation about 3 years ago. I was fired from a job & had trouble finding another one in my field. The kids were still hungry so I went from a $50K parts manager's job to driving a parts truck for $6.50 an hour. This put me way short in paying my bills. I mowed yards, worked on people's computers, sold stuff on Ebay--any and everything legal to make a buck. I lost one of my vehicles to a reposession & got way behind on other bills--but I never once thought about stealing.

I chose to work harder.

That's great. My dad did the same thing after the oil bust.

There are people who choose the "pull themselves up by their bootstraps" and those who don't. Ignoring lazy people with no jobs doesn't make them go away. And while shooting all of them might seem like a good idea to some people, I think we all know it's not a real option.

[Stoop Dawg]

Mike, define "helping hand".

EXACTLY!!!

It's not really a question of whether we, as a society, should offer a "helping hand". That question is easy to answer. It's a question of "how much of a helping hand?", "who decides what kind of helping hand?", and "should we be REQUIRED to give a helping hand by the govt?".

This whole "let me throw up a stupid question then give a simple answer to make myself look smart" thing that's going on around here is getting tired.

Or maybe it got tired a few years ago.

[TopDawg]

EXACTLY!!!

It's not really a question of whether we, as a society, should offer a "helping hand". That question is easy to answer. It's a question of "how much of a helping hand?", "who decides what kind of helping hand?", and "should we be REQUIRED to give a helping hand by the govt?".

This whole "let me throw up a stupid question then give a simple answer to make myself look smart" thing that's going on around here is getting tired.

Or maybe it got tired a few years ago.

Yeah. I'm a supporter of the welfare system when it offers a helping hand. Not so much when it's hand-holding.

[Jerk]

Let me repeat this word for word from post #51 one more motherfn' time



What kind of people are you two talking about (Sleez and Stoop)? Is it grandma who can't make ends meat on her ss check, or someone young, healthy, but has no work ethic and would rather live of whatever gov't subsidies that they can qualify for? Because I have said, from the start, that my problem is with people who are not physically or mentally handicapped, who are able to work but won't. I'm not talking about people who can't work. There is a difference. Then along come both of you and act like I want old people to starve to death.


This whole time you have been acting like I have been talking about people who CAN'T work.

I'm talking about lazy people!

Sheeesh...

Come on now, be like Veav....defend lazy basterds with no work ethic so they go commit crimes. At least he had the balls to say "We've got to do it" (take care of them) or we'll surrender to the muslims like the French did last summer. Dude, anyone who tried that here in red state America would get obliterated.

[Frozen Sooner]

EXACTLY!!!

It's not really a question of whether we, as a society, should offer a "helping hand". That question is easy to answer. It's a question of "how much of a helping hand?", "who decides what kind of helping hand?", and "should we be REQUIRED to give a helping hand by the govt?".

This whole "let me throw up a stupid question then give a simple answer to make myself look smart" thing that's going on around here is getting tired.

Or maybe it got tired a few years ago.

Well pardon me for breathing, I'm sure. I was presented a false dichotomy so gave an answer that may have seemed flippant to you. I happen to believe that there is value in hard work and self-reliance while believing there's nothing wrong with being asked to help out those in need.

FaninAma then asked me a disingenous question regarding marginal tax rates, when he knows damn well and good that spending on the social safety net doesn't account for anywhere near what his tax burden might be.

[Pricetag]

The me first attitude that prevails in our current culture is a telling example of how hypocritical many of us have become.
True dat. Maybe I'm jaded by the corporate world, but it seems like a great number of us got to where we are now not by accomplishing great things, but by simply treading water. We sure like to talk big, though, and look down on others for treading water in an environment that happens to be below ours.

Oh, yeah. Here's another America:

http://www.monstersandcritics.com/artman/uploads/1_013.jpg

[Vaevictis]

Come on now, be like Veav....defend lazy basterds with no work ethic so they go commit crimes. At least he had the balls to say "We've got to do it" (take care of them) or we'll surrender to the muslims like the French did last summer. Dude, anyone who tried that here in red state America would get obliterated.

Pfft, I said no such thing. I said that it doesn't matter whether it sounds like blackmail or not, it's just the way it is. If you let too much of the population descend into deep enough poverty, you're going to have civil unrest on your hands.

It's not a matter of defending "lazy basterds", it's just a simple observation based on many, many historical events.

[Frozen Sooner]

Pfft, I said no such thing. I said that it doesn't matter whether it sounds like blackmail or not, it's just the way it is. If you let too much of the population descend into deep enough poverty, you're going to have civil unrest on your hands.

It's not a matter of defending "lazy basterds", it's just a simple observation based on many, many historical events.

I'm not trying to flame you here or call you a communist, but man-that's right out of Das Kapital.

[Vaevictis]

I'm not trying to flame you here or call you a communist, but man-that's right out of Das Kapital.

Well holee ****, it looks like Marx might have been right about something after all. :eek:

But seriously, you get a bunch of desperate people together, and they'll start doing desperate things. Usually, those things involve violence. It's just the nature of the beast.

[Jeopardude]

In John Edward's glorious American socialist paradise, drugs would be legal.

:confused:

[C&CDean]

Well holee ****, it looks like Marx might have been right about something after all. :eek:

But seriously, you get a bunch of desperate people together, and they'll start doing desperate things. Usually, those things involve violence. It's just the nature of the beast.

And your answer is to give them $$ so they won't attack us? Are you out of your ****ing mind? Wait, don't answer that.

[Frozen Sooner]

Well holee ****, it looks like Marx might have been right about something after all. :eek:

But seriously, you get a bunch of desperate people together, and they'll start doing desperate things. Usually, those things involve violence. It's just the nature of the beast.

The problem with danegeld is that once you pay him, the Dane doesn't leave.

[Vaevictis]

And your answer is to give them $$ so they won't attack us? Are you out of your ****ing mind? Wait, don't answer that.

So far, I haven't advocated anything. But ask yourself, do you honestly think it's a coincidence that the US Communist Party's membership peaked during the Great Depression?

And since you asked, my answer is really to head off the problem before it gets to that point by encouraging people to make the most of the opportunities available to them, and to help provide them with the tools necessary to do so.

In a nutshell, get the poor people an education, and ensure that the neither the top nor the bottom of the economic ladder gets too much power over the other.

[Gandalf_The_Grey]

I just think it is total bull****..the whole welfare system in this country. Just as a story, I was living in University Greens and we were short one roommate and they move in this welfare guy. First of all the guy has 3 kids(that I know about) and he is like maybe 25 or 26 years old. The Government is paying his rent and got something like 400$ a month in food. I don't know if you have ever seen 400$ of food but it is a ****load of food. Guess what he DID every day he lived there. Every day when I was leaving to go to work, he would say "I should go try to get a job today" Guess what he did, he sit on the couch all day and watched tv and drunk beer. So let's get this straight, I spend at least 40 hours a week of my time working so that A) my rent is paid B) I have food and C) I can actually have money to go drinking, dancing, or hanging out with my girlfriend and friends and he can do the same things I can do but not work at all, that doesn't really motivate him to get a job. Welfare is not a bad concept in general. However we need to limit what people can receive. Like say 3 to 6 months worth for each person. There is 900 Help Wanted signs just in Norman. If you can't find a job in 3 months to 6 months you are clinically retarded. But also it would help mothers who get abandoned by men, they would have a couple of months to get settled and then through special like day care programs, you could get them cheap to free day care and they could get a job and still give them a little help by helping them with smaller items such as diapers and baby health type things because she WOULD be actually trying. Reward the people who are making an effort and punish the people who are so damm lazy that they would even say something like, well if I don't get Welfare, I will just rob you.

[C&CDean]

So far, I haven't advocated anything. But ask yourself, do you honestly think it's a coincidence that the US Communist Party's membership peaked during the Great Depression?

And since you asked, my answer is really to head off the problem before it gets to that point by encouraging people to make the most of the opportunities available to them, and to help provide them with the tools necessary to do so.

In a nutshell, get the poor people an education, and ensure that the neither the top nor the bottom of the economic ladder gets too much power over the other.

Oh. So you're saying the right does not encourage people to make the most of the opportunities presented them? You're saying that those that work the hardest and pay the most taxes should give even more to those that don't? No thanks comrade.

[Ike]

I just think it is total bull****..the whole welfare system in this country. Just as a story, I was living in University Greens and we were short one roommate and they move in this welfare guy. First of all the guy has 3 kids(that I know about) and he is like maybe 25 or 26 years old. The Government is paying his rent and got something like 400$ a month in food. I don't know if you have ever seen 400$ of food but it is a ****load of food. Guess what he DID every day he lived there. Every day when I was leaving to go to work, he would say "I should go try to get a job today" Guess what he did, he sit on the couch all day and watched tv and drunk beer. So let's get this straight, I spend at least 40 hours a week of my time working so that A) my rent is paid B) I have food and C) I can actually have money to go drinking, dancing, or hanging out with my girlfriend and friends and he can do the same things I can do but not work at all, that doesn't really motivate him to get a job. Welfare is not a bad concept in general. However we need to limit what people can receive. Like say 3 to 6 months worth for each person. There is 900 Help Wanted signs just in Norman. If you can't find a job in 3 months to 6 months you are clinically retarded. But also it would help mothers who get abandoned by men, they would have a couple of months to get settled and then through special like day care programs, you could get them cheap to free day care and they could get a job and still give them a little help by helping them with smaller items such as diapers and baby health type things because she WOULD be actually trying. Reward the people who are making an effort and punish the people who are so damm lazy that they would even say something like, well if I don't get Welfare, I will just rob you.

I mostly agree with you. While I like the idea that welfare is there, the reason I like it is for the safety net it provides to those willing to get off their hump and make something of their lives. Unfortunately, this is not the only way that people use welfare. My wife tells of one woman she worked with in the past who quit the job (a relatively easy one) she had because she "made more money living off of welfare and would get to spend more time with her kids that way".

In an ideal world, the welfare recipient would have to provide proof that he or she was actively seeking gainful employment (through copies of job applications or what not), which the welfare office would follow up on by calling the employers to check on the status of the recipient's application. Those who have repeated trouble finding jobs should be required to undergo some education/training to make them more attractive to employers. Perhaps some budget counseling as well for those that consistently have trouble managing their money.

I sincerely believe in using my tax dollars to help create opportunities for people that want to work and support their families, and I think that at the heart of any welfare program, that ought to be what we think about. Not how much money we are giving them, but the breadth and quality of the opportunities we can offer them.

[Vaevictis]

Oh. So you're saying the right does not encourage people to make the most of the opportunities presented them?

Where did I say that? Or even imply that? Other than in your imagination, that is.


You're saying that those that work the hardest and pay the most taxes should give even more to those that don't? No thanks comrade.

Nor did I say that. Since you're having a hard time following, I'll recap it all in one place.



"If someone has the ability both mentally and physically to work, but can't find a job that pays well enough to support their family ... what should be done about it?" You say it's not your problem that this guy is poor. Given the choice between robbing your house or watching his kids starve to death - which do you think he'll choose?


To which Jerk responded:


Incredible logic there. Here we have a hypothetical guy who is too lazy to work, so you think he should have a cut of my earnings, "or else he'll rob you." That's almost blackmale.."support these lazy people or they will kill you!"

Dude, that's why we have guns, and the make my day law...to blow such worthless scumbags away.

To which I responded:


It doesn't matter if it sounds like blackmail, because blackmail or no, that's what happens. Just ask the French or the Russians.

Following so far? Good. Have I so far so much as mentioned "the right" or raising taxes? No.

Now here's where people start putting words in my mouth.


Come on now, be like Veav....defend lazy basterds with no work ethic so they go commit crimes. At least he had the balls to say "We've got to do it" (take care of them) or we'll surrender to the muslims like the French did last summer. Dude, anyone who tried that here in red state America would get obliterated.


Pfft, I said no such thing. I said that it doesn't matter whether it sounds like blackmail or not, it's just the way it is. If you let too much of the population descend into deep enough poverty, you're going to have civil unrest on your hands.

It's not a matter of defending "lazy basterds", it's just a simple observation based on many, many historical events.

See? No advocacy of any kind. No impuning of "the right."


I'm not trying to flame you here or call you a communist, but man-that's right out of Das Kapital.


Well holee ****, it looks like Marx might have been right about something after all. :eek:

But seriously, you get a bunch of desperate people together, and they'll start doing desperate things. Usually, those things involve violence. It's just the nature of the beast.

Still no advocacy. Never even mentioned "the right." Oh wait, here's where you enter the conversation.


And your answer is to give them $$ so they won't attack us? Are you out of your ****ing mind? Wait, don't answer that.


So far, I haven't advocated anything. But ask yourself, do you honestly think it's a coincidence that the US Communist Party's membership peaked during the Great Depression?

And since you asked, my answer is really to head off the problem before it gets to that point by encouraging people to make the most of the opportunities available to them, and to help provide them with the tools necessary to do so.

In a nutshell, get the poor people an education, and ensure that the neither the top nor the bottom of the economic ladder gets too much power over the other.

Still no advocacy of any kind really, much less raising of taxes. No mention of the right.

And yet, somehow, you figure the following:


Oh. So you're saying the right does not encourage people to make the most of the opportunities presented them? You're saying that those that work the hardest and pay the most taxes should give even more to those that don't? No thanks comrade.

So, it's all in one place now. All caught up and understanding what I've said so far?

If you're going to pillory me for what I've said, at least have the decency to pillory me for what I've actually said..

kthnx.

[Harry Beanbag]

In an ideal world, the welfare recipient would have to provide proof that he or she was actively seeking gainful employment (through copies of job applications or what not), which the welfare office would follow up on by calling the employers to check on the status of the recipient's application. Those who have repeated trouble finding jobs should be required to undergo some education/training to make them more attractive to employers. Perhaps some budget counseling as well for those that consistently have trouble managing their money.


This doesn't happen? They do all of this for people collecting unemployment benefits.

[Ike]

This doesn't happen? They do all of this for people collecting unemployment benefits.

do they? I have no idea. Do they actually follow up on these people?

[Harry Beanbag]

do they? I have no idea. Do they actually follow up on these people?


I know they are supposed to do these things, in Arizona at least, in order to collect unemployment benefits. How well they follow through I have no idea. It's a government bureaucracy so I would guess that they don't do a real thorough job.

But Unemployment is different than Welfare. That is a serious problem if they don't have those rules for Welfare recipients.

[Ike]

I know they are supposed to do these things, in Arizona at least, in order to collect unemployment benefits. How well they follow through I have no idea. It's a government bureaucracy so I would guess that they don't do a real thorough job.

But Unemployment is different than Welfare. That is a serious problem if they don't have those rules for Welfare recipients.

Well, see it's the following up that made me preface it with "In an ideal world". Because in an ideal world the budget would be in place to do this, and the people working there would believe in giving these people a helping hand. Holding them accountable for finding a job should be priority number one, and if necessary, people should be available for counseling the more problematic reciepients. I imagine thats usually the stated aim of most unemployment (and maybe welfare) programs, but I often wonder if it really gets practiced that way, and if it doesn't, why not.

[Harry Beanbag]

Well, see it's the following up that made me preface it with "In an ideal world". Because in an ideal world the budget would be in place to do this, and the people working there would believe in giving these people a helping hand. Holding them accountable for finding a job should be priority number one, and if necessary, people should be available for counseling the more problematic reciepients. I imagine thats usually the stated aim of most unemployment (and maybe welfare) programs, but I often wonder if it really gets practiced that way, and if it doesn't, why not.


You should know by now that an ideal world is impossible to achieve. :)

[Ike]

You should know by now that an ideal world is impossible to achieve. :)

yeah, but if you want to solve problems, you have to at least know what the ideal world solution looks like, and modify accordingly.

[OklahomaTuba]

In a nutshell, get the poor people an education, and ensure that the neither the top nor the bottom of the economic ladder gets too much power over the other.

So you're advocating class profiling then????

How communist of you. :rolleyes:

[Harry Beanbag]

yeah, but if you want to solve problems, you have to at least know what the ideal world solution looks like, and modify accordingly.


I understand this, but the people in power need the "want to" in the first place. One side of the aisle is invested in the Welfare population as a voting block and the other side doesn't have the balls or votes to do anything about it. So here we are.

[RUSH LIMBAUGH is my clone!]

I understand this, but the people in power need the "want to" in the first place. One side of the aisle is invested in the Welfare population as a voting block and the other side doesn't have the balls or votes to do anything about it. So here we are.That "other side" is appropriately skeert of the MSM in all their might, labeling them with all kinds of crap labels that would be intended to insure political defeat. It's a sad situation.

[Ike]

I understand this, but the people in power need the "want to" in the first place. One side of the aisle is invested in the Welfare population as a voting block and the other side doesn't have the balls or votes to do anything about it. So here we are.

well, my opinion about "the other side" there, is that they simply don't care about fixing (or in some cases, even acknowledging) the problem, but thats an entirely different debate. Otherwise, I completely agree.

I much prefer politicians who have a strong desire to fix problems over those who have a strong affinity for any particular position with respect to a given issue. If we had more of those, social security could be fixed, and in such a way that taxes and the retirement age aren't raised and benefits aren't cut, and peoples retirement isn't put at risk, within a week. But instead, politicians are tied to one set of solutions or another and refuse to discuss or acknowledge the merits of another solution or the weaknesses of their own.

[Stoop Dawg]

Where did I say that? Or even imply that? Other than in your imagination, that is.



Nor did I say that. Since you're having a hard time following, I'll recap it all in one place.

Don't waste your time. Dean's schtick is to make up something absurd, claim you said it, then proceed to ridicule it.

"So, you're saying that we should just shoot all the poor people? Are a freakin' moron? Wait, don't answer that!"

What moronic way to try to make a point.

[C&CDean]

Where did I say that? Or even imply that? Other than in your imagination, that is.



Nor did I say that. Since you're having a hard time following, I'll recap it all in one place.



To which Jerk responded:



To which I responded:



Following so far? Good. Have I so far so much as mentioned "the right" or raising taxes? No.

Now here's where people start putting words in my mouth.





See? No advocacy of any kind. No impuning of "the right."





Still no advocacy. Never even mentioned "the right." Oh wait, here's where you enter the conversation.





Still no advocacy of any kind really, much less raising of taxes. No mention of the right.

And yet, somehow, you figure the following:



So, it's all in one place now. All caught up and understanding what I've said so far?

If you're going to pillory me for what I've said, at least have the decency to pillory me for what I've actually said..

kthnx.

How much time did you spend on that? Geez.

[Stoop Dawg]

Well pardon me for breathing, I'm sure. I was presented a false dichotomy so gave an answer that may have seemed flippant to you. I happen to believe that there is value in hard work and self-reliance while believing there's nothing wrong with being asked to help out those in need.

FaninAma then asked me a disingenous question regarding marginal tax rates, when he knows damn well and good that spending on the social safety net doesn't account for anywhere near what his tax burden might be.

Actually, I didn't even remember that Fan was replying to one of your posts. He said something that made sense and I jumped on it. The fact that it happened to be in response to one of your posts was apparently an unfortunate coincidence.

One more time - I agree that those who work hard for a living should reap those benefits. I'm a huge fan of capitalism. But to ignore poverty is a mistake.

[TopDawg]

From Vaevictis' post:


Here we have a hypothetical guy who is too lazy to work, so you think he should have a cut of my earnings, "or else he'll rob you." That's almost blackmale..

Did Jerk really say that?! Holy crap.

Paging Dr. Freud.

[Harry Beanbag]

well, my opinion about "the other side" there, is that they simply don't care about fixing (or in some cases, even acknowledging) the problem, but thats an entirely different debate. Otherwise, I completely agree.

I much prefer politicians who have a strong desire to fix problems over those who have a strong affinity for any particular position with respect to a given issue. If we had more of those, social security could be fixed, and in such a way that taxes and the retirement age aren't raised and benefits aren't cut, and peoples retirement isn't put at risk, within a week. But instead, politicians are tied to one set of solutions or another and refuse to discuss or acknowledge the merits of another solution or the weaknesses of their own.


Totally agreed here. You must be as disgusted with current politics as I am then.

[Ike]

Totally agreed here. You must be as disgusted with current politics as I am then.

you have no idea.

[VeeJay]

If the mansion was photoshopped on a ski slope, it still begs for one to find out the truth.

Edwards talks about his humble upbringings as a way to deflect attention from his current status as a member of the elite class, whether he's feeling any guilt or shame or not.

Edwards can live the life of an aristocrat as his every right, but don't go bitching and whining about "two America's" with a populist bent.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/05/06/AR2005050600908.html

I sure as hell am not living in John Edwards' America.

Wonder if he ever got that PlayStation 3 for the kids?

[TheHumanAlphabet]

It wasn't photoshopped. The original came from Edwards local paper. This is his house and they discussed his tax bill, the largest in the county - to some 2 million $.