It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by Cuervo
reply to post by Alxandro
Yes, because we all know one person is perfectly capable of representing an entire demographic. Which is why all white people like genocide, all black people like to steal, and all Asians have robot slaves.
Originally posted by getreadyalready
Those are not "poor" people, those are homeless people. The vast majority of them are either mentally ill in some way, or criminal in nature. Blast me all you want, but I have worked closely with the homeless for years as well. It is very rare to see a family just down on their luck, it is much, much more common to see alcholics/drug addicts, criminals, and mentally ill.
Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by strafgod
Don't look for small businesses to add "extra shifts" anytime soon. All you social entitlement proponents who were all over the new healthcare law are to thank for this. They will work the hell out of what they have so they don't have to hire new and face the new taxes that come with the new law.
I'm so sick and tired of the have-nots whining about spreading the wealth. Tough s**t! Make your OWN money and leave mine alone! Why should I work hard, pay for my own education so I can make more just so some lazy ass can demand they are entitled to some of it because they are too lazy to do the same? Sorry, but that dog don't hunt! You can call me whatever you want, but I earn my money and I intend to keep it! I don't give to charity unless 100% goes to the intended recipient. I have bought food for homeless people because giving them cash promotes drug/alcohol consumption and NOT nutrition. You want the state to take care of you then move to another country like Cuba and have at it!
Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by shushu
If it is anything like where I used to live, you see them buying food with food stamps, then go get into an Acura or Lexus and drive away.
Originally posted by haarvik
reply to post by shushu
If it is anything like where I used to live, you see them buying food with food stamps, then go get into an Acura or Lexus and drive away.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
. Depite the news reports of America's poor living in shanty towns and tent cities, the reality is far different.
Its time to call what the current debate is all about and that is about redistributionism and socialism. Is it any wonder that the minority of folks who pay the taxes in this country don't want to pay more?
Its about time we had an honest discussion about what the objectives of our social policy are really all about because the current one, the one we have employeed since the Great Society in the 60s has been plain old socialism. The debate today is all about how far we want to extend it.
Originally posted by Maxmars
from: www.nationalreview.com...
National Review (NR) is a biweekly magazine founded by the late author William F. Buckley, Jr., in 1955 and based in New York City. It describes itself as "America's most widely read and influential magazine and web site for conservative news, commentary, and opinion."
The source is the e-version.
from: Wiki
While I respect the publication, there is no doubt that it is intended as political fodder for a debate in which the current flavor of 'conservative' traditionally postures themselves by vilifying the poor as 'pampered' and 'disproportionately' rewarded.
I have always wondered how the logic of characterizing the poor as well-off enough not to be entitled to anything outside what they already have comes about.
The objections are always emanating from the discussion that a poor person is not poor unless they live n a dirt-floor shack and eat local rodents and wild plants for sustenance. They must have no power, no communications devices, be devoid of any means to access public information and must immediate sell any marketable item they get for cash to eat. The prevailing meme includes that the poor must be stupid, lazy, probably fat, drunk, or on drugs, and either be a promiscuous sloppy lot, or somehow criminal.
Sad, sad, sad.
"When my nephew made a gift of his old X-box to my son, I didn't know we were no longer poor.... funny that."
"Poverty" should not be about possessions, but the inability to save and eventually improve one's future.
But since we a re all programmed for materialistic consumerism, it's not surprising that this meme took hold, after all ... the media says so.edit on 19-7-2011 by Maxmars because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by haarvik
And yes, I know what it is to be poor. My mother was on food stamps and we were in section 8 housing way back in the late 60's early 70's when welfare actually worked. I know what it's like to miss a meal and go hungry. I know what it's like to have Xmas without presents So don't try to throw your leftist bulls**t on me.
I scratched my way to what I have now. No one handed it to me. I started my first HVAC business with $400 and an old beat up ford van. I didn't even have a garage! Poor are poor because they are not willing to sacrifice and do what needs to be done to make more of themselves. True, that is a stereotype but by and large it is the truth, like it or not. I have traveled from coast to coast in previous jobs and it is the same wherever you go. You can whine and insult me all you want. I know where I came from and what it took to get where I am today. I did it, it was not handed to me.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by LoneGunMan
Making assumptions and basing policy on those assumptions is an extremely slippery slope. All rich folks were not crooks in the same manner that all great atheletes are not taking juice.
Improve laws that root out corruption if thats the issue, but based on the Obama class warfare schemes, the rich are not folks like Warren Buffett or the Kennedys. The rich are folks like Joe Blow who owns the plumbing supply store down the street and declares all of his business income as personal income.
Go ahead and take all the money from everyone who has more than $500M and see where your at. Not too hard to find that place because its where you are right now.
The problem is institutionalized entitlement. Lets all realize that many of the "poor" folks with the video games get:
Free medical care via Medicaid
Free or subsidized housing
Subsizided utilities including internet in some places
Free job training
Free schooling
Free mass transit passes
Food stamps and WIC cash
All of these things being paid for by others and they still have more than 1 TV and a cell phone? At least be honest. You don't like the fact that there are really rich folks and you want to take their money away. You want to define "fair". Thats cool, just be honest about it.
Originally posted by dolphinfan
reply to post by cenpuppie
The thread in my earlier post which lists those programs available to people below the poverty line is from the federal government website.
My entire point is two-fold. That these things have value and as such should be factored into the description of what is considered poor. We define poor as simply a dollar amount of annual income and the left purposefully neglects to state those programs which the poor can take advantage of. Logically, were you to have a government handout of $100K in cash a year but only made $20K/year on your own would you be considered poor? The same logic applies here as well. It is no different that the executive who has access to the company jet. Is that not compensation? Of course it is and should be considered as such.
The second point is that, as you can see in this thread, there is no qualification of poor. If someone has a nice car, but can't sell it without losing money on it that justifies his not selling it, either to buy a cheaper car or take public transit. Now he can get access to all of the government programs despite the fact that he's driving around a car that has a value greater than the poverty level. Somehow folks think thats OK. I don't. I think he should sell his ride.
I also don't think that the folks in line in the supermarket with me should be buying raspberrys and grapes and nice cuts of fish with food stamps when I'm buying pasta and ground beef to feed my family, but thats just me
Originally posted by Cuervo
Originally posted by dolphinfan
What a ridiculous article. The obvious intent (from Heritage Foundation, no less) is to make "haaaard wurkin' non-welfare" people think that all of these people are leaching off the government and are not working.
Almost all of those people are hardworking and half the people that will get steamed towards the "poor" people reading this are poor themselves and just don't know it. Poverty line for a single person is $35,000 by most standards. There are a lot of "poor" people who don't even know they are poor. It's not their fault that people like Heritage Foundation are whining on their behalf.
It detracts from the very real problem of a large portion of American society who truly does struggle day to day in order to pay electricity and feed their families. This article is a work of obvious propaganda to foster a class-war. Disgusting.edit on 19-7-2011 by Cuervo because: deleted long quote