Page 7 of 18 [ 278 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ... 18  Next

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

10 Aug 2011, 10:02 pm

Raptor wrote:
marshall wrote:
Raptor wrote:
You can have a balanced budget and simplified government programs AND help the downtrodden at the same time. I don’t see how a balanced budget could hurt the downtrodden, anyway. Even in the best of economic times there are plenty of downtrodden and some (not all) of them won’t lift a finger to improve their lot even when they can. This is something YOU seem to be blind to.
I support and always will support maintaining a social safety net but not a social safety hammock.
Being on the dole for life is neither conductive to wellbeing or self-respect.

Don't twist my words. I'm talking about people who truly CANNOT find work, people who have a CHRONIC ILLNESS they cannot afford to treat, etc... NOT people with no obsticles who simply don't want to work. You're not going to tell me with a straight face that cutting programs like medicaid will not affect these people negatively? If you say cuts are only going to affect lazy people who refuse to work you are a bald faced liar.


You can't save everyone! Maybe if the US were the size of Luxembourg we could but not a country of this size and population not to mention the ever fluctuating economy. I never said that everyone on relief was lazy I clearly said that some and not all so don't twist MY words.
I can see it's no use discussing this further with you because you've already made your mind up that 2+2=3.
Time to move on...........

You are correct that I will never accept your opinion that people are expendable. If you weren't trying to twist my words why didn't you notice where I said "through no fault of their own" and drop the mention of "lazy people".



YippySkippy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Feb 2011
Age: 43
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,986

11 Aug 2011, 8:37 am

Quote:
You can't save everyone! Maybe if the US were the size of Luxembourg we could but not a country of this size and population not to mention the ever fluctuating economy.


No, the U.S. CHOOSES not to look after its sick and its weak. They don't contribute $$, which is the only thing that matters here anymore.



zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 56
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,613

11 Aug 2011, 8:42 am

YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
You can't save everyone! Maybe if the US were the size of Luxembourg we could but not a country of this size and population not to mention the ever fluctuating economy.


No, the U.S. CHOOSES not to look after its sick and its weak. They don't contribute $$, which is the only thing that matters here anymore.


I shall correct you.

The "globalist thinkers" who are pushing most all western societies do not value the sick and weak.

Of the most "expendable" of humans, the elderly and children are at the top of the list. Children are tolerated because they are the future generation.

In the eyes of these people, once you no longer are an effective producer and consumer, your value in the world no longer justifies what it take to preserve your existence.

These are some very sick people, and they ARE NOT limited to the USA....they are dictating policy on a global scale.



Zeno
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 633
Location: Singapore

12 Aug 2011, 6:22 pm

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... ml?hpid=z5

http://live.washingtonpost.com/outlook- ... -0815.html

When the Washington Post raises the question, you know the topic of social dislocation in America has become mainstream. The worries are now public and increasingly voiced by elites within the establishment.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,997
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

12 Aug 2011, 8:54 pm

YippySkippy wrote:
Quote:
You can't save everyone! Maybe if the US were the size of Luxembourg we could but not a country of this size and population not to mention the ever fluctuating economy.


No, the U.S. CHOOSES not to look after its sick and its weak. They don't contribute $$, which is the only thing that matters here anymore.


How about this?
It's an excerpt from a Wikipedia article on St. Judes in Memphis.
Take note of the last sentence, underlined by me so you won't miss it.
Do you want me to find more examples of how we look after our sick and weak, goddamnit? :x

"All medically eligible patients who are accepted for treatment at St. Jude are treated without regard to the family's ability to pay. St. Jude is one of a few pediatric research organizations in the United States where families never pay for treatments that are not covered by insurance, and families without insurance are never asked to pay. In addition to providing medical services to eligible patients, St. Jude also assists families with transportation, lodging, and meals. Three separate specially-designed patient housing facilities—Grizzly House for short-term (up to one week), Ronald McDonald House for medium-term (one week to 3 months), and Target House for long-term (3 months or more)—provide housing for patients and up to three family members, with no cost to the patient. These policies, along with research expenses and other costs, cause the hospital to incur more than $2.4 million in operating costs each day. Around $180,000 is covered by patient insurance; the remaining $2.22 million/day is funded by charitable contributions."



Zeno
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 633
Location: Singapore

01 Oct 2011, 7:40 pm

The protests in America are picking up steam. I expect the situation to get a lot rougher as we head towards the 2012 elections.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

01 Oct 2011, 9:12 pm

Zeno wrote:
The protests in America are picking up steam. I expect the situation to get a lot rougher as we head towards the 2012 elections.


There will be some minor scuffles but no Revolution. Sorry Comrade

ruveyn



Zeno
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 633
Location: Singapore

02 Oct 2011, 2:18 am

ruveyn wrote:
There will be some minor scuffles but no Revolution. Sorry Comrade

ruveyn


There are a lot of stupid people out there like the Wall Street protesters who mostly do not know why they are even protesting. Never underestimate what stupid people will do when their tempers start to flare. Across the nation, states and cities are facing another dismal budget year that promises more painful cuts. It will not be a revolution, but the breakdown in law and order will happen soon enough.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 Oct 2011, 11:43 am

Zeno wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
There will be some minor scuffles but no Revolution. Sorry Comrade

ruveyn


There are a lot of stupid people out there like the Wall Street protesters who mostly do not know why they are even protesting. Never underestimate what stupid people will do when their tempers start to flare. Across the nation, states and cities are facing another dismal budget year that promises more painful cuts. It will not be a revolution, but the breakdown in law and order will happen soon enough.


Make a prediction when the Revolution will begin. Real years and real numbers please.

ruveyn



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

02 Oct 2011, 11:45 am

A riot might happen over a sports game or maybe some sort of a police brutality controversy but there isn't any sign of them on a large scale.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 Oct 2011, 11:48 am

AceOfSpades wrote:
A riot might happen over a sports game or maybe some sort of a police brutality controversy but there isn't any sign of them on a large scale.


In the scheme of things. that is a minor scuffle and that is not what the OP had in mind (I believe).

ruveyn



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,754
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

02 Oct 2011, 11:53 am

ruveyn wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
A riot might happen over a sports game or maybe some sort of a police brutality controversy but there isn't any sign of them on a large scale.


In the scheme of things. that is a minor scuffle and that is not what the OP had in mind (I believe).

ruveyn
That was the point...



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 41
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

02 Oct 2011, 2:18 pm

Zeno wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
There will be some minor scuffles but no Revolution. Sorry Comrade

ruveyn


There are a lot of stupid people out there like the Wall Street protesters who mostly do not know why they are even protesting. Never underestimate what stupid people will do when their tempers start to flare. Across the nation, states and cities are facing another dismal budget year that promises more painful cuts. It will not be a revolution, but the breakdown in law and order will happen soon enough.


Which is what people on the left have wanted for years for their new world order.



Zeno
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 633
Location: Singapore

02 Oct 2011, 7:36 pm

No one is talking about revolution. Even the people who got themselves arrested for blocking traffic at the Brooklyn Bridge cannot articulate what they would replace the present system with. But there is a sense of outrage at how a decent, middle class existence seems to be slipping beyond the grasp of many. But unlike in Greece, where the riots are fed by massive financial dislocation, or in Britain, where there has been a long running culture of social malfeasance, what we will see in America reflects deeper problems that cannot be explained or solved easily.

Little things like the new $5 monthly charge that the banks are going to impose on debit card holders can seem incredibly unfair to people who believe that the large banks, bailed out with the people's money, should serve the people and not abuse them. When people lose faith in the system, they chuck aside the law. Why play along when you are destined to lose? And so they riot.

If you want a date, I would say that 2012 would a year to watch. Not only is it an election year, for an alarming number of people, 2012 is the year the world is supposed to end. Nibiru anyone?



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 87
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

02 Oct 2011, 9:32 pm

Zeno wrote:

If you want a date, I would say that 2012 would a year to watch. Not only is it an election year, for an alarming number of people, 2012 is the year the world is supposed to end. Nibiru anyone?


I will laugh at your (or with you) on Jan 1, 2013.

ruveyn



Zeno
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jun 2006
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 633
Location: Singapore

02 Oct 2011, 9:49 pm

ruveyn wrote:
I will laugh at your (or with you) on Jan 1, 2013.

ruveyn


Oh come on! :) I have been right about the riots thus far. An exact date is impossible to pin down, but I do not think the status quo can continue on much longer. Too many bad things are happening and there are way too many stupid and ignorant people out there. Plus you have these hard core fight club anarchists who are itching to turn the world upside down. That said, 2012 is looking like it will be a bad year for America. The problem with these idiotic prophecies is that they have a way of becoming self-fulfilling in that the people who believe in it act out and make it a nightmare for everyone.