Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: King Shizzo on March 02, 2015, 02:57:53 PM
-
Because they were tired of the British Parliament, and because they were tired of getting raped in taxes from across the pond.
Fast forward to 2015:
Americans bitch and moan about the government.
Americans are tired of paying taxes.
:D
What do you guys think really changed with us becoming our own country?
What would the American continent be like today, if we were still apart of the current UK?
-
i checked out the LEXINGTON AND CONCORD battle field last time i was in boston,
i wish the would of had a place to shoot some redcoat scare crows for tourist
(https://www.awesomestories.com/images/user/1222120330.62.jpg)
-
Shizzay's rebellion.
-
Because they were tired of the British Parliament, and because they were tired of getting raped in taxes from across the pond.
Fast forward to 2015:
Americans bitch and moan about the government.
Americans are tired of paying taxes.
:D
What do you guys think really changed with us becoming our own country?
What would the American continent be like today, if we were still apart of the current UK?
We aren't so much tired of paying taxes, we are tired of paying taxes so 5 generations of your family can live on welfare.
-
Just another rich man's war and poor man's fight
-
'Sons of Liberty', new TV series about American revolution, interesting but too soft.
:)
-
Just another rich man's war and poor man's fight
On that note:
-
What did those early American rebels really gain after the war ended? Sure later generations got the benefit of being a free country, but for the people who lived in that generation, it must have felt like a war for nothing.
Almost like how our population views the wars/conflicts we fight in today.
-
shizzo tried this thread about six months ago
another copy and paste special
come up with just one of your own shizz
you can do it :)
-
We aren't so much tired of paying taxes, we are tired of paying taxes so 5 generations of your family can live on welfare.
Well said.
-
shizzo tried this thread about six months ago
another copy and paste special
come up with just one of your own shizz
you can do it :)
It was semi funny the first 50 times you said it.
I provide links when I take ideas/articles from other places.
I come up with most of the threads on my own.
-
And we kicked their asses twice, the end.
-
Because they were tired of the British Parliament, and because they were tired of getting raped in taxes from across the pond.
Fast forward to 2015:
Americans bitch and moan about the government.
Americans are tired of paying taxes.
:D
What do you guys think really changed with us becoming our own country?
What would the American continent be like today, if we were still apart of the current UK?
47% or so of Americans don't pay income taxes. Why would they complain?
-
We became the nation of starbucks and not Liptons
-
47% or so of Americans don't pay income taxes. Why would they complain?
Elaborate good sir.
-
Elaborate good sir.
It's not just your family, there are many others.
-
Elaborate good sir.
The people who complain about taxes are the ones who have to pay them. A large segment of our population are dependent on government programs that depend on tax dollars. They have no reason to become upset over taxes. They see big government as a good thing therefore they see increasing taxes as a good thing.
-
The people who complain about taxes are the ones who have to pay them. A large segment of our population are dependent on government programs that depend on tax dollars. They have no reason to become upset over taxes. They see big government as a good thing therefore they see increasing taxes as a good thing.
No wonder the country is fucked. Its obvious the math doesnt add up.
-
No wonder the country is fucked. Its obvious the math doesnt add up.
eloborate
formulate a cohesive argument
rather than post the options to stimulate further posts
-
eloborate
formulate a cohesive argument
rather than post the options to stimulate further posts
Im not in an argument.
-
Im not in an argument.
its not an argument my friend
you can form an argument by formulating an opinion
its a diferent type of argument google it
-
its not an argument my friend
you can form an argument by formulating an opinion
its a diferent type of argument google it
My opinion is that there is no way that 47% of Americans should be exempt from paying taxes.
I am assuming that Archer is not counting children and retired senior citizens.
If you have a job ( doesn't matter if you are on welfare or foodstamps etc...) then you should have to pay something. Times "something" by millions of people, and you start to get somewhere.
We all now that America can't continue to operate in this manner. I doubt I will see any social security.
-
Because they were tired of the British Parliament, and because they were tired of getting raped in taxes from across the pond.
Fast forward to 2015:
Americans bitch and moan about the government.
Americans are tired of paying taxes.
:D
What do you guys think really changed with us becoming our own country?
What would the American continent be like today, if we were still apart of the current UK?
-Probably not a lot different from the U.K. at least in terms of social programs. To be honest, we aren't that different anyway. Most all developed countries are highly socialized.
My grandfather was a member of the SAR. I could be a member too, if I wanted to. I'm not sure what they do today though.
-
-Probably not a lot different from the U.K. at least in terms of social programs. To be honest, we aren't that different anyway. Most all developed countries are highly socialized.
My grandfather was a member of the SAR. I could be a member too, if I wanted to. I'm not sure what they do today though.
SAR?
-
Roughly half of Americans who pay no Federal income tax do so because they simply don't earn enough money. The other half doesn't pay taxes because of special provisions in the tax code that benefit certain taxpayers, notably the elderly and working families with children. For example, the tax code excludes a portion of Social Security income and gives larger standard deductions and tax credits to the elderly. And many working families with children qualify for both the child credit and the earned income tax credit. Together, the elderly and working families with children account for 74 percent of all nontaxable households that aren't excluded by income level alone [source: Williams].
-
SAR?
Sons of the American Revolution. It's the male counterpart to the DAR, Daughters of the American Revolution. In order to be a member, you have to prove your direct ancestors fought in the American Revolution.
-
Roughly half of Americans who pay no Federal income tax do so because they simply don't earn enough money. The other half doesn't pay taxes because of special provisions in the tax code that benefit certain taxpayers, notably the elderly and working families with children. For example, the tax code excludes a portion of Social Security income and gives larger standard deductions and tax credits to the elderly. And many working families with children qualify for both the child credit and the earned income tax credit. Together, the elderly and working families with children account for 74 percent of all nontaxable households that aren't excluded by income level alone [source: Williams].
Why would they have any reason to be upset about taxes?
-
Roughly half of Americans who pay no Federal income tax do so because they simply don't earn enough money. The other half doesn't pay taxes because of special provisions in the tax code that benefit certain taxpayers, notably the elderly and working families with children. For example, the tax code excludes a portion of Social Security income and gives larger standard deductions and tax credits to the elderly. And many working families with children qualify for both the child credit and the earned income tax credit. Together, the elderly and working families with children account for 74 percent of all nontaxable households that aren't excluded by income level alone [source: Williams].
I must be doing something wrong. My wife and I are elderly. We pay Federal and State income tax every year. We also pay a hefty property tax, gas taxes, and other taxes and levies. This year, I have to start drawing down various TSA's/IRA's to avoid paying penalties on these savings. The money I take out will be taxed as income. Lately crude oil production in the U.S. has soared. My wife has received some really hefty royalties from her holdings in Texas, Montana and Wyoming. We will pay capital gains tax on these payouts.
-
Why would they have any reason to be upset about taxes?
You never heard someone complain about paying taxes?
What about affluent people? I don't think they get the credit they deserve. They pay a huge amount in taxes.
Imagine the taxes on a football player making 10 million a year. How much taxes does an actor pay, who makes 20-25 million per film?
I think the debate on whether to raise taxes on middle class or the rich is moot. They need to tax (even if its a hundred bucks a year) the millions of people that you previously mentioned.
-
I must be doing something wrong. My wife and I are elderly. We pay Federal and State income tax every year. We also pay a hefty property tax, gas taxes, and other taxes and levies. This year, I have to start drawing down various TSA's/IRA's to avoid paying penalties on these savings. The money I take out will be taxed as income.
You are one of the good ones Prime. Proof that senior citizens can/should pay taxes too.
Can't afford it? Take 10 dollars from each social security check each month, and have that go back into the city/county that they live in.
-
You never heard someone complain about paying taxes?
What about affluent people? I don't think they get the credit they deserve. They pay a huge amount in taxes.
Imagine the taxes on a football player making 10 million a year. How much taxes does an actor pay, who makes 20-25 million per film?
I think the debate on whether to raise taxes on middle class or the rich is moot. They need to tax (even if its a hundred bucks a year) the millions of people that you previously mentioned.
I was referring back to what I said about people who don't pay taxes complaining taxes. You over tax businesses and they leave. Jobs that supported a healthy middle class are leaving in droves. Who will be left to pay taxes to support government spending when the middle class is gone? The rich? Tax the rich and they will leave as well.
-
I must be doing something wrong. My wife and I are elderly. We pay Federal and State income tax every year. We also pay a hefty property tax, gas taxes, and other taxes and levies. This year, I have to start drawing down various TSA's/IRA's to avoid paying penalties on these savings. The money I take out will be taxed as income. Lately crude oil production in the U.S. has soared. My wife has received some really hefty royalties from her holdings in Texas, Montana and Wyoming. We will pay capital gains tax on these payouts.
I'm doing something wrong as well...
I recently (last couple years) had to come to the realization that not everyone is outraged by this ridiculous tax system as I am. I couldn't figure out why everyone wasn't up in arms about how we are working our asses off and the government is taking 30% in various taxes (probably more) and pissing it away on everything from a winless war to a $222,000 bathroom remodel for the Secretary of the Department of Interior.. Seriously, this guy spent a quarter of a million dollars on renovating his office bathroom and we didn't take to the streets?!
Then it was explained to me that almost half of americans don't pay taxes and many of those MAKE money with Earned Income Credit. They don't have ANY problem with our tax code.. So nothing is going to change..
-
You are one of the good ones Prime. Proof that senior citizens can/should pay taxes too.
Can't afford it? Take 10 dollars from each social security check each month, and have that go back into the city/county that they live in.
Seems like a plan until you know someone who is barely getting by on their SSI or SSD. My much younger sister lives on SSD and a small retirement annuity. She gets about $1,600 a month combined. The assisted living place where she has a single apartment charges $1,250 for the apartment, meals and other incidental services. This leaves her around $350 a month for co-pays on prescriptions and incidentals. She's more fortunate then some folks in that she has some income in addition to SSD. There are people who are trying to survive on less than $1,000 a month which is next to impossible.
My sister gets every penny she pays in income tax back each year and then some (earned income credit). I do her taxes for her.
-
I was referring back to what I said about people who don't pay taxes complaining taxes. You over tax businesses and they leave. Jobs that supported a healthy middle class are leaving in droves. Who will be left to pay taxes to support government spending when the middle class is gone? The rich? Tax the rich and they will leave as well.
Tax the poor. If you drive down public roads, send your children to public school, use public transportation, and call on the police and fire dept in an emergency, then you need to pay something back.
-
Tax the poor. If you drive down public roads, send your children to public school, use public transportation, and call on the police and fire dept in an emergency, then you need to pay something back.
Tax what? They don't have anything to tax.
-
Tax the poor. If you drive down public roads, send your children to public school, use public transportation, and call on the police and fire dept in an emergency, then you need to pay something back.
Keep trying, you'll get to 100 posts!
-
Tax what? They don't have anything to tax.
Take 10 bucks away from food stamps or unemployment checks each month "tax deduction"
Done.
Everyone contributes. Not just leech.
-
Tax the poor. If you drive down public roads, send your children to public school, use public transportation, and call on the police and fire dept in an emergency, then you need to pay something back.
Again, that seems like a fair idea. Unfortunately, you can get money from people who don't have it.
Portland, OR seems to be a haven for the homeless. You see them everywhere, camped out under the freeway overpasses, panhandling at the on and off ramps. One of the reasons given for this is because apartments and other rental housing is in short supply and thus high demand in Portland. This drives up the rental rates. Coupled with this, Portland lacks sufficient homeless shelters.
Are these the poor you are referring to when you suggest everyone should pay their way? How do you propose collecting taxes from them? Perhaps the tax man could crash the emergency room at various local hospitals when these folks show up for treatment they will never be able to pay for.
-
Take 10 bucks away from food stamps or unemployment checks each month "tax deduction"
Done.
Everyone contributes. Not just leech.
You would be subtracting from something they didn't pay for to begin with. You wouldn't be taking anything from them.
-
Take 10 bucks away from food stamps or unemployment checks each month "tax deduction"
Done.
Everyone contributes. Not just leech.
Assuming they get food stamps or unemployment. http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/eligibility
-
:-\
-
:-\
That's fucked up. Hahahahahaha
-
Again, that seems like a fair idea. Unfortunately, you can get money from people who don't have it.
Portland, OR seems to be a haven for the homeless. You see them everywhere, camped out under the freeway overpasses, panhandling at the on and off ramps. One of the reasons given for this is because apartments and other rental housing is in short supply and thus high demand in Portland. This drives up the rental rates. Coupled with this, Portland lacks sufficient homeless shelters.
Are these the poor you are referring to when you suggest everyone should pay their way? How do you propose collecting taxes from them? Perhaps the tax man could crash the emergency room at various local hospitals when these folks show up for treatment they will never be able to pay for.
Ah the homeless, I have an idea for that. Create an agency called the PEA (Panhandling Enforcement Agency) and have them peruse the local bum hangouts across the country.
They catch someone asking for handouts? The bum has to give up 10% of whatever is in his bucket. He doesn't want to cooperate? Rough him up a bit. Nobody cares about bums anyway. Its time for America to get out of debt.
-
Again, that seems like a fair idea. Unfortunately, you can get money from people who don't have it.
Portland, OR seems to be a haven for the homeless. You see them everywhere, camped out under the freeway overpasses, panhandling at the on and off ramps. One of the reasons given for this is because apartments and other rental housing is in short supply and thus high demand in Portland. This drives up the rental rates. Coupled with this, Portland lacks sufficient homeless shelters.
Are these the poor you are referring to when you suggest everyone should pay their way? How do you propose collecting taxes from them? Perhaps the tax man could crash the emergency room at various local hospitals when these folks show up for treatment they will never be able to pay for.
Seattle is another haven for the homeless. Large tent cities are being erected. I'm sure there are good intentions but the end result will be to the detriment of the city.
-
Seattle is another haven for the homeless. Large tent cities are being erected. I'm sure there are good intentions but the end result will be to the detriment of the city.
Austin Texas is the Mecca for homeless in Texas.
-
Ah the homeless, I have an idea for that. Create an agency called the PEA (Panhandling Enforcement Agency) and have them peruse the local bum hangouts across the country.
They catch someone asking for handouts? The bum has to give up 10% of whatever is in his bucket. He doesn't want to cooperate? Rough him up a bit. Nobody cares about bums anyway. Its time for America to get out of debt.
None of what the goons you suggest rustle from the panhandlers would come from me. I make a point of not giving folks a handout. I am not sure your plan would be profitable. PEA employees would likely make much more per hour than they could every hope to extract at 10% of the panhandler's take. Really, you should think these ideas through a little before you post them.
The police in our neighbor make quick work of panhandlers and bums. I am not sure what local laws we have in West Linn, but on rare occasion when someone sets up shop at one of our freeway on or off ramps they disappear within a very short time....like a half hour later, they are long gone.
-
Austin Texas is the Mecca for homeless in Texas.
I'm all for helping the homeless but large tent cities aren't the answer. Affordable housing isn't either. If you can't afford to live in a city you should move. In Seattle these tent cities are causing a lot of problems. Many of the homeless are mentally ill and money should be spent to help or house the mentally ill.
-
I'm all for helping the homeless but large tent cities aren't the answer. Affordable housing isn't either. If you can't afford to live in a city you should move. In Seattle these tent cities are causing a lot of problems. Many of the homeless are mentally ill and money should be spent to help or house the mentally ill.
They don't come to Austin for a place to rent. They come here because we have gone out of our way to make it comfortable and lucrative for them. So moving isn't a consideration. As long as we provide shelter, or have moderate weather, soup kitchens and well meaning citizens that hand money out the window at intersections, a city council who can't or won't figure out how to create an ordinance against panhandling on the sidewalks and in the streets, we are going to be infested.
-
None of what the goons you suggest rustle from the panhandlers would come from me. I make a point of not giving folks a handout. I am not sure your plan would be profitable. PEA employees would likely make much more per hour than they could every hope to extract at 10% of the panhandler's take. Really, you should think these ideas through a little before you post them.
The police in our neighbor make quick work of panhandlers and bums. I am not sure what local laws we have in West Linn, but on rare occasion when someone sets up shop at one of our freeway on or off ramps they disappear within a very short time....like a half hour later, they are long gone.
I was trolling about the bums Prime :D
Im serious about the people on foodstamps and wellfare though.
Either give everyone 10% less across the board, or make them pay some amount of tax
Do you agree with people on wellfare or foodstamps not paying anything?
The "not able to afford it" dont fly.
-
My point is tha there should never be 47% of people who dont pay taxes.
Prime still pays all of his taxes, and he is really old.
Good for you Prime
-
I was trolling about the bums Prime :D
Im serious about the people on foodstamps and wellfare though.
Either give everyone 10% less across the board, or make them pay some amount of tax
Do you agree with people on wellfare or foodstamps not paying anything?
The "not able to afford it" dont fly.
If I give you $100 and I keep $5 of it are you actually "paying" anything? It's a faulty concept. We are bleeding tax money to subsidy programs and to every kid who's mother claims they are ADD so keeping $10 of money from someone who didn't pay a dime just doesn't add up if you are talking reducing the tax bill
-
Because they were tired of the British Parliament, and because they were tired of getting raped in taxes from across the pond.
Fast forward to 2015:
Americans bitch and moan about the government.
Americans are tired of paying taxes.
:D
What do you guys think really changed with us becoming our own country?
What would the American continent be like today, if we were still apart of the current UK?
They wanted taxation with representation back then.
Now we just bitch about the representation.
-
They don't come to Austin for a place to rent. They come here because we have gone out of our way to make it comfortable and lucrative for them. So moving isn't a consideration. As long as we provide shelter, or have moderate weather, soup kitchens and well meaning citizens that hand money out the window at intersections, a city council who can't or won't figure out how to create an ordinance against panhandling on the sidewalks and in the streets, we are going to be infested.
Seattle had the same problem. Once the word got out the homeless began to flood the city in mass.
-
I was trolling about the bums Prime
Bullshit! Your alcohol poisoned mind thought that was a legit plan. Now that your tremendous stupidity has been exposed for all to see you're feverishly attempting to back pedal. Not today, mohterfucker!
-
I'm all for helping the homeless but large tent cities aren't the answer. Affordable housing isn't either. If you can't afford to live in a city you should move. In Seattle these tent cities are causing a lot of problems. Many of the homeless are mentally ill and money should be spent to help or house the mentally ill.
I suspect it is a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation. Jobs are more available in big cities as are services. You suggested, "If you can't afford to live in a city then you should move." Move where?
The suburbs are often less affordable then more urban areas. Small towns rarely have much to offer in the way of work. Services can also be very limited in outlying areas.
Are you aware that Veteran's services, such as medical facilities are located in cities. Disabled veterans who live in rural areas have to travel to the city in order to access their benefits? One thing Portland has been noted for doing well is that finding housing for Veterans.
Many homeless folks are mentally ill, just as you suggest. A few decades ago, we decided mental facilities were a bad thing and that the mentally ill should be mainstreamed. Support for these folks has never been there. Many end up in county, state and federal prisons where they are fed and housed. A lot of other's who avoid incarceration are living on the streets.
There are no easy answers, just a lot of half-baked ideas.
-
If I give you $100 and I keep $5 of it are you actually "paying" anything? It's a faulty concept. We are bleeding tax money to subsidy programs and to every kid who's mother claims they are ADD so keeping $10 of money from someone who didn't pay a dime just doesn't add up if you are talking reducing the tax bill
By giving them $95 dollars instead of $100, you are saving $5 dollars per person. If they cant afford traditional taxation, then the next logical step would be to cut back a % of what the govt currently gives.
Remember, these programs were designed to help people in need, get help so they can get back up.
It was not designed to be s lifestyle.
-
I suspect it is a damned if you do and damned if you don't situation. Jobs are more available in big cities as are services. You suggested, "If you can't afford to live in a city then you should move." Move where?
The suburbs are often less affordable then more urban areas. Small towns rarely have much to offer in the way of work. Services can also be very limited in outlying areas.
Are you aware that Veteran's services, such as medical facilities are located in cities. Disabled veterans who live in rural areas have to travel to the city in order to access their benefits? One thing Portland has been noted for doing well is that finding housing for Veterans.
Many homeless folks are mentally ill, just as you suggest. A few decades ago, we decided mental facilities were a bad thing and that the mentally ill should be mainstreamed. Support for these folks has never been there. Many end up in county, state and federal prisons where they are fed and housed. A lot of other's who avoid incarceration are living on the streets.
There are no easy answers, just a lot of half-baked ideas.
Move to a place where the cost of living is cheaper and the opportunities are better. If you can't afford to live in the city then that's not the best place for you. Why is that such a hard concept for people to grasp? No one owes you a place to live.
Take the mentally ill off the street and help them. Able bodied men and women can make their own way. When you start forcing cities to create affordable housing or provide vouchers you end up with a Ferguson. At this point we've tried all of this before and it doesn't work.
-
I was trolling about the bums Prime :D
Im serious about the people on foodstamps and wellfare though.
Either give everyone 10% less across the board, or make them pay some amount of tax
Do you agree with people on wellfare or foodstamps not paying anything?
The "not able to afford it" dont fly.
Saying you can't afford to pay your share, should not "fly" as you suggest. Keep in mind though that there are people who are truly so poor they have nothing to pay. I will give you that there are also people who have become so sophisticated about scamming the system that although they can afford to live without handouts somehow still manage to get them. So I must agree that there are people on welfare and food stamps who should be paying something, but I cannot agree that this is true for all people in this situation.
In recent years, the requirements to qualify for social service programs have gotten tougher. There have also been some cuts in these programs which affect all who are in them. More needs to be done to insure only people in real need qualify and receive social services, thus reducing the number of people scamming the system.
Don't get me wrong, I am no bleeding heart. When my wife and I were young and dumb, we made some stupid decisions which adversely affected our finances. With help from family and friends and some serious belt tightening plus sometimes working in jobs that were not ideal for one reason or another, we pulled ourselves out of the mess we'd created, minus any help from social services.
We've also "paid forward" by opening our home to family in their time of need. My niece moved in with my wife and I when we'd only been married for 6 months because her parents were getting divorced. She stayed with us for several years. My mom lived with us for 3 years before she died from emphysema. More recently, my nephew who has been a real "screw-up" since his teen years stayed here until he got on his feet and could make it on his own. These are just a couple of examples of some of the folks we've helped.
My personal feeling is that families don't help their own as much as they should. A lot of old folks, like me, are on the streets or living in substandard situations because their kids aren't interested in helping them. My wife is seriously ill. She requires a lot of help to get through each day. Our daughter and son-in-law and I all work together to keep her at home where she is comfortable and in good surroundings.
-
Move to a place where the cost of living is cheaper and the opportunities are better. If you can't afford to live in the city then that's not the best place for you. Why is that such a hard concept for people to grasp? No one owes you a place to live.
Take the mentally ill off the street and help them. Able bodied men and women can make their own way. When you start forcing cities to create affordable housing or provide vouchers you end up with a Ferguson. At this point we've tried all of this before and it doesn't work.
You are being an idealist. Obviously, people should live where the opportunities are good and the cost of living is affordable. Suggest where that might be. There is reason why those two things don't often go hand in hand.
As far as owing someone a place to live, read my other post about family helping family out. Perhaps family doesn't owe anything to other family members either. Sometimes we do things just because it is the right thing to do.
-
You are being an idealist. Obviously, people should live where the opportunities are good and the cost of living is affordable. Suggest where that might be. There is reason why those two things don't often go hand in hand.
As far as owing someone a place to live, read my other post about family helping family out. Perhaps family doesn't owe anything to other family members either. Sometimes we do things just because it is the right thing to do.
I'm the opposite of an idealist. Being an idealist means you believe the government once again creating affordable housing is going to result in an outcome other than what it always has, ghettoization and property depreciation. The people who live in section 8 aren't working people who cant find reasonable priced housing in the city in ehich they work ,they are usually unemployed people on benefits. Creating an enclave for those people does nothing to improve the city. Crime goes up and property values go down. People will flee. I dont know where they should go but the facts indicate its not their current location. Im sure there are many places they could go.
Doing the right thing is the problem. First, what is the right thing and who decides what's right for everyone? The right thing is a completely subjective and self-serving concept. Secondly, the right thing might appear to be right in the short term but over the long run it causes major problems and more harm than good.
-
Saying you can't afford to pay your share, should not "fly" as you suggest. Keep in mind though that there are people who are truly so poor they have nothing to pay. I will give you that there are also people who have become so sophisticated about scamming the system that although they can afford to live without handouts somehow still manage to get them. So I must agree that there are people on welfare and food stamps who should be paying something, but I cannot agree that this is true for all people in this situation.
In recent years, the requirements to qualify for social service programs have gotten tougher. There have also been some cuts in these programs which affect all who are in them. More needs to be done to insure only people in real need qualify and receive social services, thus reducing the number of people scamming the system.
Don't get me wrong, I am no bleeding heart. When my wife and I were young and dumb, we made some stupid decisions which adversely affected our finances. With help from family and friends and some serious belt tightening plus sometimes working in jobs that were not ideal for one reason or another, we pulled ourselves out of the mess we'd created, minus any help from social services.
We've also "paid forward" by opening our home to family in their time of need. My niece moved in with my wife and I when we'd only been married for 6 months because her parents were getting divorced. She stayed with us for several years. My mom lived with us for 3 years before she died from emphysema. More recently, my nephew who has been a real "screw-up" since his teen years stayed here until he got on his feet and could make it on his own. These are just a couple of examples of some of the folks we've helped.
My personal feeling is that families don't help their own as much as they should. A lot of old folks, like me, are on the streets or living in substandard situations because their kids aren't interested in helping them. My wife is seriously ill. She requires a lot of help to get through each day. Our daughter and son-in-law and I all work together to keep her at home where she is comfortable and in good surroundings.
Many people are happy to receive benefits given to them. I would be ashamed to be on food stamps and welfare. You and your wife obviously did anything you possibly could to avoid that. That's what people with pride do.
-
Many people are happy to receive benefits given to them. I would be ashamed to be on food stamps and welfare. You and your wife obviously did anything you possibly could to avoid that. That's what people with pride do.
The problem comes when multiple generations of the same family are on benefits. Its at that point you realize something needs to change because there havent been any improvements
-
Remember, these programs were designed to help people in need, get help so they can get back up.
It was not designed to be s lifestyle.
Smartest thing you've ever copy and pasted and you still fucked it up.
-
Smartest thing you've ever copy and pasted and you still fucked it up.
:D
-
I'm the opposite of an idealist. Being an idealist means you believe the government once again creating affordable housing is going to result in an outcome other than what it always has, ghettoization and property depreciation. The people who live in section 8 aren't working people who cant find reasonable priced housing in the city in ehich they work ,they are usually unemployed people on benefits. Creating an enclave for those people does nothing to improve the city. Crime goes up and property values go down. People will flee. I dont know where they should go but the facts indicate its not their current location. Im sure there are many places they could go.
Doing the right thing is the problem. First, what is the right thing and who decides what's right for everyone? The right thing is a completely subjective and self-serving concept. Secondly, the right thing might appear to be right in the short term but over the long run it causes major problems and more harm than good.
You may think you are the opposite of an idealist, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Idealism is the practice of forming ideals, especially unrealistically. Realism is the practice of accepting a situation as is, and being prepared to deal ...
Ideally, things should be as you suggest, realistically they are not. What we need is working solutions. The solutions you've proposed are your ideal if what you'd like to see work rather than what actually would work.
You don't know where people should go, but you would ideally to go where they don't affect you. How can you be sure there are places for people to go when you don't know where that is. Perhaps we could send them to mars....I'm kidding.
Look, I live in a relatively crime free suburb. The racial mix is negligible. It is one of two suburbs in Portland with the highest income. Obviously, I have limited personal experience with homeless people, people on public assistance and criminals.
Truth be told, my wife and I once bought a home in what was considered the ghetto in Portland. We barely lasted a year before we sold it and moved. Interestingly enough, that area because of it's proximity to downtown Portland has been gentrified over the years and that house is worth quite a bit of money today. We were idealist who were ahead of our time. We didn't have the staying power to make it work for us.
-
You may think you are the opposite of an idealist, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Idealism is the practice of forming ideals, especially unrealistically. Realism is the practice of accepting a situation as is, and being prepared to deal ...
Ideally, things should be as you suggest, realistically they are not. What we need is working solutions. The solutions you've proposed are your ideal if what you'd like to see work rather than what actually would work.
You don't know where people should go, but you would ideally to go where they don't affect you. How can you be sure there are places for people to go when you don't know where that is. Perhaps we could send them to mars....I'm kidding.
Look, I live in a relatively crime free suburb. The racial mix is negligible. It is one of two suburbs in Portland with the highest income. Obviously, I have limited personal experience with homeless people, people on public assistance and criminals.
Truth be told, my wife and I once bought a home in what was considered the ghetto in Portland. We barely lasted a year before we sold it and moved. Interestingly enough, that area because of it's proximity to downtown Portland has been gentrified over the years and that house is worth quite a bit of money today. We were idealist who were ahead of our time. We didn't have the staying power to make it work for us.
Screw that shit! Homeless people have a choice. Maybe they didn't choose to be homeless, but they can sure as hell try to climb back out of it.
There is a reason why they call them bums. Most are worthless drifters
-
Screw that shit! Homeless people have a choice. Maybe they didn't choose to be homeless, but they can sure as hell try to climb back out of it.
There is a reason why they call them bums. Most are worthless drifters
Actually, some do chose to be homeless. My aunt was schizophrenic. She also was retired from the military and was married to an officer in the military for many years. The point being she had benefits. A psychotic break happened when her husband of almost twenty years left her supposedly with no warning. This triggered the schizophrenia.
She was always a little kooky, but funny and functional. She was my favorite of my two maternal aunts. Guess that says something about me.
Because she had Veteran's benefits, she had healthcare and lived in a small subsidized apartment for many years. I assume she also got SSD. One day she decided that the apartment she lived in was haunted or some such nonsense and she walked out with nothing more than the clothes on her back.
How she survived the last 20 + years of her life living on the streets of L.A. is a mystery to all of us. I imagine she was in and out of the VA hospital several times. She was 82 years old when she died. She outlived all of her siblings. She is survived by her 7 children, all but one of which was born before she flipped out.
It is not uncommon for the mentally ill to take to the streets. This is not my opinion, it is a fact that is particularly true for schizophrenics.
-
Screw that shit! Homeless people have a choice. Maybe they didn't choose to be homeless, but they can sure as hell try to climb back out of it.
There is a reason why they call them bums. Most are worthless drifters
Why point your finger at the homeless and demand they climb out of their economic situation when the U.S. has millions of able bodied minorities living in Section 8 housing and suckling at the government teat?
Hebrews look at welfare like it is owed to them or some kind of badge of honor
-
Why point your finger at the homeless and demand they climb out of their economic situation when the U.S. has millions of able bodied minorities living in Section 8 housing and suckling at the government teat?
Hebrews look at welfare like it is owed to them or some kind of badge of honor
Did I ever mention that I hate it when people are stereotyped?
I know two single white females, mother and daughter, who live off the system. They've worked in the past, but usually just enough to insure they can continue to milk the system. The daughter has a two year old, and yup, you got it, no husband. This helps with benefits because it is next to impossible to get ADC if you don't have children.
These women live in our neighborhood, just up the street in a town house the mother inherited from her grandmother. This explains how they can afford to live in a high rent area.
Politically, both mother and daughter are on the far right. They are the first to complain about all the moochers living off the system. Somehow, they justify their doing that very thing. They dislike African Americans, gays, abortion and pretty much anything that seems the least bit liberal. They hate Obamacare and yet have no problem being on the Oregon Health Plan which is only available to those with no means to pay for healthcare insurance.
These folks are true hypocrites. Why do I have the feeling they are not rare among people who scam the system?
-
You may think you are the opposite of an idealist, but this doesn't seem to be the case.
Idealism is the practice of forming ideals, especially unrealistically. Realism is the practice of accepting a situation as is, and being prepared to deal ...
Ideally, things should be as you suggest, realistically they are not. What we need is working solutions. The solutions you've proposed are your ideal if what you'd like to see work rather than what actually would work.
You don't know where people should go, but you would ideally to go where they don't affect you. How can you be sure there are places for people to go when you don't know where that is. Perhaps we could send them to mars....I'm kidding.
Look, I live in a relatively crime free suburb. The racial mix is negligible. It is one of two suburbs in Portland with the highest income. Obviously, I have limited personal experience with homeless people, people on public assistance and criminals.
Truth be told, my wife and I once bought a home in what was considered the ghetto in Portland. We barely lasted a year before we sold it and moved. Interestingly enough, that area because of it's proximity to downtown Portland has been gentrified over the years and that house is worth quite a bit of money today. We were idealist who were ahead of our time. We didn't have the staying power to make it work for us.
Idealism is what the fools in Seattle are doing when they form tent cities. Idealism is creating section 8 housing that destroys neighborhoods and cities. I understand the reality of what that type of policy has resulted in. Idealism is repeating those mistakes and hoping this time the results will be different. It's idealistic to assume there is a workable solution and that society is responsible for finding that solution.
Looking at the situation realistically means understanding that the way we've been handling these problems has failed. Being realistic is to understand that not all problems can be solved by throwing money at it. Being realistic means knowing that "doing what's right" and "good intentions" are not workable solutions. It might feel good but it does nothing to solve the problem.
Realistically, if you can't afford to live somewhere then the easiest and best solution for you and everyone else is to find greener pastures. Of course I don't know where those greener pastures are because their location depends on the individual. What I do know with 100% certainty is that it is not where they are now.
We are talking about able bodied people not the physically or mentally impaired. What's more realistic, spending large sums of money on accommodating a small subset of individuals who can't afford to live in a city they aren't even likely to be working in or those individuals seeking a livelihood elsewhere? What's a better allocation of resources? Leaving is better for them and for the city. History gives us ample evidence this is true. Every city destroyed by section 8 housing is an example of how "doing the right thing" results in disaster.
Did I ever mention that I hate it when people are stereotyped?
I know two single white females, mother and daughter, who live off the system. They've worked in the past, but usually just enough to insure they can continue to milk the system. The daughter has a two year old, and yup, you got it, no husband. This helps with benefits because it is next to impossible to get ADC if you don't have children.
These women live in our neighborhood, just up the street in a town house the mother inherited from her grandmother. This explains how they can afford to live in a high rent area.
Politically, both mother and daughter are on the far right. They are the first to complain about all the moochers living off the system. Somehow, they justify their doing that very thing. They dislike African Americans, gays, abortion and pretty much anything that seems the least bit liberal. They hate Obamacare and yet have no problem being on the Oregon Health Plan which is only available to those with no means to pay for healthcare insurance.
These folks are true hypocrites. Why do I have the feeling they are not rare among people who scam the system?
You can mention one off examples all you want. When it comes to who lives in section 8 housing it's a simple matter of doing a little research to determine which population group has the largest number of individuals living in public housing. It's not stereotyping when it's true. Who is being the naive idealist now.
-
Idealism is what the fools in Seattle are doing when they form tent cities. Idealism is creating section 8 housing that destroys neighborhoods and cities. I understand the reality of what that type of policy has resulted in. Idealism is repeating those mistakes and hoping this time the results will be different. It's idealistic to assume there is a workable solution and that society is responsible for finding that solution.
Looking at the situation realistically means understanding that the way we've been handling these problems has failed. Being realistic is to understand that not all problems can be solved by throwing money at it. Being realistic means knowing that "doing what's right" and "good intentions" are not workable solutions. It might feel good but it does nothing to solve the problem.
Realistically, if you can't afford to live somewhere then the easiest and best solution for you and everyone else is to find greener pastures. Of course I don't know where those greener pastures are because their location depends on the individual. What I do know with 100% certainty is that it is not where they are now. And we are talking about able bodied people not the physically or mentally impaired. What's more realistic, spending large sums of money on accommodating individuals who can't afford to live in a city they aren't even likely to work in or those individuals seeking a livelihood elsewhere? Leaving is better for them and for the city. History gives us ample evidence this is true.
You can mention one off examples all you want. When it comes to who lives in section 8 housing it's a simple matter of doing a little research to determine which population comprises the majority of occupants. It's not stereotyping when it's true. Who is being the naive idealist now.
You write a lot in your posts but offer nothing that is concrete, nothing workable. You argue with the definition of idealism verses realism. It is not my definition it is the definition. Look it up.
Yeah, if someone's life isn't working, they should change it. Duh! It should be just that simple. If it were there would be a lot of people living the life of Riley in this fantasy place you keep referencing.
My one off examples are real people. People I know or have known. You speak of generalities, not real people that you know personally, just know of. Incidentally, you'll notice I did not make excuses for them. These people I exampled are living or lived with their choices, whether they were intentional or not, as in the case with my aunt.
Explain to me why when I am in Germany, I don't see homeless people. Not in the villages and not in the cities. I asked my daughter-in-law who lives in Germany about this and she told me there is housing for everyone. If they are homeless, it is because they have chosen to be so.
I don't live in Seattle so I don't know what the housing situation is there but I can guess it is expensive. If there is a shortage of shelters and public housing like there is here in Portland, that certainly contributes to the number of folks living on the streets.
There is a reason the problem of homelessness is worse today than it was a few decades ago. There have been programs that worked in there time in the past, by the way. Ever read or hear about the WPA? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/dustbowl-wpa/ Instead of handouts, people were offered jobs repairing the infrastructure in the U.S. They didn't make a lot of money, but they retained their dignity.
-
You write a lot in your posts but offer nothing that is concrete, nothing workable. You argue with the definition of idealism verses realism. It is not my definition it is the definition. Look it up.
Yeah, if someone's life isn't working, they should change it. Duh! It should be just that simple. If it were there would be a lot of people living the life of Riley in this fantasy place you keep referencing.
My one off examples are real people. People I know or have known. You speak of generalities, not real people that you know personally, just know of. Incidentally, you'll notice I did not make excuses for them. These people I exampled are living or lived with their choices, whether they were intentional or not, as in the case with my aunt.
Explain to me why when I am in Germany, I don't see homeless people. Not in the villages and not in the cities. I asked my daughter-in-law who lives in Germany about this and she told me there is housing for everyone. If they are homeless, it is because they have chosen to be so.
I don't live in Seattle so I don't know what the housing situation is there but I can guess it is expensive. If there is a shortage of shelters and public housing like there is here in Portland, that certainly contributes to the number of folks living on the streets.
There is a reason the problem of homelessness is worse today than it was a few decades ago. There have been programs that worked in there time in the past, by the way. Ever read or hear about the WPA? http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/general-article/dustbowl-wpa/ Instead of handouts, people were offered jobs repairing the infrastructure in the U.S. They didn't make a lot of money, but they retained their dignity.
You live in a fantasy land where you think its the responsibility of others to find you a place to live and when they do find you a place to live the problem goes away. Thinking shelters and public housing are viable solutions for homelessness demonstrates how idealistic and naive you are. You think if only we build more shelters and public housing the problem will improve. All evidence indicates it doesn't and in many cases makes the problem worse. And you call me idealistic. You aren't offering anything workable. You're just serving up the same failed policy that didn't work but I'm sure in your mind it's "the right thing to do" and feels good.
There is public housing in Germany and it may have taken people off the street but it created a whole host of other problems. The same problems we have here. Apparently you think not seeing the homeless means all problems have been solved. Out of sight, out of mind. Again, you call me idealistic. The WPA was a joke that did nothing to alleviate poverty. They may have kept their dignity but in practical terms it didn't work. This is an example of how your "doing the right thing" feels good but does nothing. It wasn't a solution. Hell, it wasn't even a band aid. Band aids actually do something.
-
You live in a fantasy land where you think its the responsibility of others to find you a place to live and when they do find you a place to live the problem goes away. Thinking shelters and public housing are viable solutions for homelessness demonstrates how idealistic and naive you are. You think if only we build more shelters and public housing the problem will improve. All evidence indicates it doesn't and in many cases makes the problem worse. And you call me idealistic. You're just serving up the same failed policy that didn't work but I'm sure in your mind it's "the right thing to do" and feels good.
The WPA was a joke that did nothing to alleviate poverty. They may have kept their dignity but in practical terms it didn't work. This is an example of how your "doing the right thing" feels good but does nothing. It wasn't a solution. Hell, it wasn't even a band aid. Band aids actually do something.
Okay you win. Your capacity for arguing from a purely negative viewpoint is insufferable and frankly has become boring. Look me up when your ideas for fixing the problem with all these "deadbeats" that seem to be plaguing you has worked. Hey, here's an idea you might like; give these losers free passage on a cruise ship and then sink it when it's too far out for anyone to swim ashore.
WPA a failure? What a laugh!
"It was liquidated on June 30, 1943, as a result of low unemployment due to the worker shortage of World War II. The WPA had provided millions of Americans with jobs for 8 years. Most people who needed a job were eligible for at least some of its positions. Hourly wages were typically set to the prevailing wages in each area."
The WPA wasn't perfect for a variety of reasons, but it was sure better then what we aren't doing today.
http://www.wpatoday.org/WPA_History.html
-
Okay you win. Your capacity for arguing from a purely negative viewpoint is insufferable and frankly has become boring. Look me up when your ideas for fixing the problem with all these "deadbeats" that seem to be plaguing you has worked. Hey, here's an idea you might like; give these losers free passage on a cruise ship and then sink it when it's too far out for anyone to swim ashore.
WPA a failure? What a laugh!
"It was liquidated on June 30, 1943, as a result of low unemployment due to the worker shortage of World War II. The WPA had provided millions of Americans with jobs for 8 years. Most people who needed a job were eligible for at least some of its positions. Hourly wages were typically set to the prevailing wages in each area."
The WPA wasn't perfect for a variety of reasons, but it was sure better then what we aren't doing today.
http://www.wpatoday.org/WPA_History.html
It's dishonest of you to throw around pejoratives and attribute them to me. I never used any of the descriptions you're suggesting I did. The passage I underlined is just a way for you to right me off as a terrible person who hates the poor. I'm sure this gives you a smug sense of moral superiority.
You keep saying that I'm not offering "workable solutions" Why is it societies responsibility to provide workable solutions for an individuals problems? A problem they can solve themselves. People don't have the right to live where ever they want to. I can't live in the riches areas of the my state because I can't afford to. If I lived in Seattle I would be aghast at the prospect of creating a permanent underclass of public housing living welfare beneficiaries. Erecting huge tent cities and creating cheap housing will only destroy Seattle as it has destroyed other cities.
As I mentioned before, individuals with disabilities should be taken off the street and provided with the care they need. Those who are capable of working should seek out a better life else where. This is not an unreasonable solution. You haven't offered workable solutions. All you've offered up are the same costly and ineffective 60's era Great Society solutions that have proven repeatedly not to work. For you, as long as the poor and homeless are out of view and don't live near you all is good. Repercussions be damned.
The WPA was an absolute failure. It did nothing to raise people out of poverty. It didn't teach people skills they could use later. It was primarily busy work. You're mythologizing the WPA.
-
The WPA was an absolute failure. It did nothing to raise people out of poverty. It didn't teach people skills they could use later. It was primarily busy work. You're mythologizing the WPA.
You are entitled to your opinion no matter that it is a minority one. I am not mythologizing the WPA. The passage was in quotes. It's what historians say about the WPA. If it was a failure, it seems it is because after 8 years of supposed success, the economy became so robust, largely due to WWII, that it was no longer needed.
"Criticism of the WPA
It's been my observation that whenever the government--especially the federal government--performs an action, or creates a law or program, that is designed to help those in need, a flurry of criticism and panic ensues. This can be seen throughout America's history, during attempts to end slavery, or give women the right to vote, or prohibit small children from working in mines, or in the legislation to create Social Security, or Medicare, or the recent attempts to see that more Americans have access to affordable health insurance or have extended unemployment benefits while unemployment rates remain high." http://www.wpatoday.org/WPA_History.html
There is nothing dishonest in exampling personal experiences. I've clearly stated that I live in a neighborhood where if there are people on public assistance, they are largely invisible. Like you say you have, I've seen homeless camps in and around Portland, albeit from a distance. I agree that they are a plight on the city. They are also an embarrassment. If city officials could figure out how to make these camps disappear, they surely would.
HUD housing is mainly done via vouchers these days. HUD housing could be anywhere. Blocks of section 8 housing, ghettos if you prefer are largely a thing of the past. Although there is HUD housing in most cities in Oregon, there is none in West Linn, OR. Those wanting an upscale neighborhood with subsidized housing can find it in Lake Oswego, a neighboring suburb. Much of HUD housing is reserved for seniors and the disabled. My sister, who is disabled, lives in a subsidized assisted living/retirement community in Salem, OR.
-
You are entitled to your opinion no matter that it is a minority one. I am not mythologizing the WPA. The passage was in quotes. It's what historians say about the WPA. If it was a failure, it seems it is because after 8 years of supposed success, the economy became so robust, largely due to WWII, that it was no longer needed.
"Criticism of the WPA
It's been my observation that whenever the government--especially the federal government--performs an action, or creates a law or program, that is designed to help those in need, a flurry of criticism and panic ensues. This can be seen throughout America's history, during attempts to end slavery, or give women the right to vote, or prohibit small children from working in mines, or in the legislation to create Social Security, or Medicare, or the recent attempts to see that more Americans have access to affordable health insurance or have extended unemployment benefits while unemployment rates remain high." http://www.wpatoday.org/WPA_History.html
It was World War II that pulled the United States out of an economic downturn. Economic recovery had nothing what-so-ever to do with the WPA. The passage you quoted has no bearing on whether the WPA or the Great Society programs you favor have worked or failed. You might have well posted a recipe for banana bread.
-
As a matter of principle I don't think it's the responsibility of the government and by extension tax payers to subsidize an able bodied individuals living space. No one is entitled to live someplace simply because they want to. You go where the opportunities are. Where that is depends on the individual.
What's the point of living in a city where you can't find work or afford to live in. The only options is to be on government benefits and live in public housing. And once you go down that roads the odds of getting out are not good. Low income housing causes nothing but disaster and is not a viable solution. It creates a permanent dependent class that brings crime and drives away people and businesses. This is what happened to Ferguson Missouri. The section 8 voucher program killed the city.
Homeless shelters for women and children are a good thing and should be funded in part by tax dollars. And as I've stated many times, individuals with mental and physical disabilities need to be taken off the street and provided with care and treatment. This is the first part of a workable solution. The second part is increasing available housing.
The easiest and most effective way to increase available housing is to remove barriers that impede new construction like city regulation, ordinances, taxes and building fees. You also need to provide incentives for businesses to thrive. After all, people need jobs to pay for their apartments. That means not taxing and regulating them to death or burying them in bureaucratic red tape.
-
Actually, some do chose to be homeless. My aunt was schizophrenic. She also was retired from the military and was married to an officer in the military for many years. The point being she had benefits. A psychotic break happened when her husband of almost twenty years left her supposedly with no warning. This triggered the schizophrenia.
She was always a little kooky, but funny and functional. She was my favorite of my two maternal aunts. Guess that says something about me.
Because she had Veteran's benefits, she had healthcare and lived in a small subsidized apartment for many years. I assume she also got SSD. One day she decided that the apartment she lived in was haunted or some such nonsense and she walked out with nothing more than the clothes on her back.
How she survived the last 20 + years of her life living on the streets of L.A. is a mystery to all of us. I imagine she was in and out of the VA hospital several times. She was 82 years old when she died. She outlived all of her siblings. She is survived by her 7 children, all but one of which was born before she flipped out.
It is not uncommon for the mentally ill to take to the streets. This is not my opinion, it is a fact that is particularly true for schizophrenics.
Prime, In your Aunt's case, she absolutely deserved the benefits that she got.
-
As a matter of principle I don't think it's the responsibility of the government and by extension tax payers to subsidize an able bodied individuals living space. No one is entitled to live someplace simply because they want to. You go where the opportunities are. Where that is depends on the individual.
What's the point of living in a city where you can't find work or afford to live in. The only options is to be on government benefits and live in public housing. And once you go down that roads the odds of getting out are not good. Low income housing causes nothing but disaster and is not a viable solution. It creates a permanent dependent class that brings crime and drives away people and businesses. This is what happened to Ferguson Missouri. The section 8 voucher program killed the city.
Homeless shelters for women and children are a good thing and should be funded in part by tax dollars. And as I've stated many times, individuals with mental and physical disabilities need to be taken off the street and provided with care and treatment. This is the first part of a workable solution. The second part is increasing available housing.
The easiest and most effective way to increase available housing is to remove barriers that impede new construction like city regulation, ordinances, taxes and building fees. You also need to provide incentives for businesses to thrive. After all, people need jobs to pay for their apartments. That means not taxing and regulating them to death or burying them in bureaucratic red tape.
What about raising minimum wage a bit? Not everyone can be Wolfs of Wallstreet with Masters degrees.
The top companies make billions in profit each year. Time to kick back a little more.
-
Prime, In your Aunt's case, she absolutely deserved the benefits that she got.
I often wonder how she received those benefits once she decided to hit the streets. How do folks get SSD and Veteran's benefit checks when they have no address? Can these checks be sent to general delivery at a local post office? Since all her family lost contact with her, none of us know how she managed. Hopefully she had some network of friends and support. The fact that she lived to be as old as she did, suggests that she had something going for her.
I do know that occasionally she would act out and get arrested because the police would contact her oldest daughter who lives on the East Coast and couldn't do much to help. Perhaps my aunt spent time in the VA hospital. I know she did some time at the Camarillo mental hospital. Typical of schizophrenics, she was more normal acting when she took her meds. Also typical the meds have negative side effects and she'd go off them as soon as she could.
-
It was World War II that pulled the United States out of an economic downturn. Economic recovery had nothing what-so-ever to do with the WPA. The passage you quoted has no bearing on whether the WPA or the Great Society programs you favor have worked or failed. You might have well posted a recipe for banana bread.
You seem to be one of those people who are so closed-minded about certain issues that when you read something about it, you rewrite it in your head. WWII put a lot of folks to work in relatively good paying jobs. Unemployment was at an all time low when the WPA was retired. The WPA was instituted towards the end of the depression when unemployment was at an all time high. What I quoted was that economic recovery made the WPA unnecessary not that the WPA created economic recovery. Of course, people working even working in the WPA had income to spend. Spendable income fosters a stronger economy.
Which great society programs do I favor. You think you know so much about what I support, you should be able to answer this simple question.
-
You seem to be one of those people who are so closed-minded about certain issues that when you read something about it, you rewrite it in your head. WWII put a lot of folks to work in relatively good paying jobs. Unemployment was at an all time low when the WPA was retired. The WPA was instituted towards the end of the depression when unemployment was at an all time high. What I quoted was that economic recovery made the WPA unnecessary not that the WPA created economic recovery. Of course, people working even working in the WPA had income to spend. Spendable income fosters a stronger economy.
Which great society programs do I favor. You think you know so much about what I support, you should be able to answer this simple question.
And why was unemployment at an all time low and the WPA discontinued? You said it yourself, WWII. You can keep calling me names all you want. Someone isn't closed minded when they disagree with you. The only suggestion you've offered is more public housing and shelters. Public housing and all it's various incarnations like vouchers are a product and extension of the Great Society idealism that has proven again and again to be an utter failure.
-
What about raising minimum wage a bit? Not everyone can be Wolfs of Wallstreet with Masters degrees.
The top companies make billions in profit each year. Time to kick back a little more.
Actually there is a movement to raise minimum wage to $15 an hour in some states, Oregon being one of them. This is particularly interesting since Oregon's minimum wage is already one of the highest in the nation.
I am no economist, but when the minimum wage goes up so does the cost of goods and services. It would follow then that all wages gradually increase. This is inflation. We all have more money, but since what we spend it on costs more, we are no better off. Remember, I am an old dude who once bought gas for my car at .25 a gallon. That was 54 years ago. I think minimum wage was something like $1.25 an hour. Don't even get me started on real estate. My wife's dad bought the home she grew up in in North Beverly Hills for $50,000 when my wife was five years old. A few years ago, that home sold for $11,000,000. That's real estate inflation for you.
-
And why was unemployment at an all time low and the WPA discontinued? You said it yourself, WWII. You can keep calling me names all you want. Someone isn't closed minded when they disagree with you. The only suggestion you've offered is more public housing and shelters. Public housing and all it's various incarnations like vouchers are a product and extension of the Great Society idealism that has proven again and again to be an utter failure.
Not to completely change the subject because this is related to what we've written about, but there is an article in today's Oregonian regarding SNAP (food stamps to some). In Oregon the highest usage for SNAP is in Southwest Oregon. Portland is really the only major city in Oregon and it is in Northwest Oregon. What is in Southwest Oregon is a lot of small mining towns that are failing. It seems like there is a possibility some people actually took your advice and moved to places which have cheaper housing prices. Well, hopefully they at least have a roof over their heads even if they can't afford to buy their own meals.
-
Not to completely change the subject because this is related to what we've written about, but there is an article in today's Oregonian regarding SNAP (food stamps to some). In Oregon the highest usage for SNAP is in Southwest Oregon. Portland is really the only major city in Oregon and it is in Northwest Oregon. What is in Southwest Oregon is a lot of small mining towns that are failing. It seems like there is a possibility some people actually took your advice and moved to places which have cheaper housing prices. Well, hopefully they at least have a roof over their heads even if they can't afford to buy their own meals.
You have it in your head that I want to punish the poor because I dislike them. You are trying to turn this into an issue about my moral character instead of having rational discussion about a serious issue. There is nothing wrong with suggesting that able bodied person, particularly single men and women, seek opportunities elsewhere instead of being given housing in a city that can't support themselves in. All studies indicate that once you do that those people are unlikely to escape poverty.
-
"And the shot heard round the world was the start of the Revolution,
the minute men were ready and on the move"
-
You have it in your head that I want to punish the poor because I dislike them. You are trying to turn this into an issue about my moral character instead of having rational discussion about a serious issue. There is nothing wrong with suggesting that able bodied person, particularly single men and women, seek opportunities elsewhere instead of being given housing in a city that can't support themselves in. All studies indicate that once you do that those people are unlikely to escape poverty.
Nothing of the sort.
-
And why was unemployment at an all time low and the WPA discontinued? You said it yourself, WWII. You can keep calling me names all you want. Someone isn't closed minded when they disagree with you. The only suggestion you've offered is more public housing and shelters. Public housing and all it's various incarnations like vouchers are a product and extension of the Great Society idealism that has proven again and again to be an utter failure.
What names have I called you? I Suggested you are closed-minded. This is my opinion based on some of your replies. It is not name calling.
-
What names have I called you? I Suggested you are closed-minded. This is my opinion based on some of your replies. It is not name calling.
You've used pejoratives in place of arguments. What you mean by closed minded is that I'm not agreeing with you. Being open minded is contingent on the worth of the ideas being presented.
Okay you win. Your capacity for arguing from a purely negative viewpoint is insufferable and frankly has become boring. Look me up when your ideas for fixing the problem with all these "deadbeats" that seem to be plaguing you has worked. Hey, here's an idea you might like; give these losers free passage on a cruise ship and then sink it when it's too far out for anyone to swim ashore.
You're attributing the sentiment of the passage above to myself and my views. You've even used quotation marks on the word deadbeats to imply it is a word I used. I never used that word. Who are you quoting? Did I ever say I was being plagued by deadbeats? You also claim it is in my character to enjoy the idea of sinking a cruise ship of poor people. Like I said, you are trying to turn this discussion into an attack on my moral character.
-
You've used pejoratives in place of arguments. What you mean by closed minded is that I'm not agreeing with you. Being open minded is contingent on the worth of the ideas being presented.
You're attributing the sentiment of the passage above to myself and my views. You've even used quotation marks on the word deadbeats to imply it is a word I used. I never used that word. Who are you quoting? Did I ever say I was being plagued by deadbeats? You also claim it is in my character to enjoy the idea of sinking a cruise ship of poor people. Like I said, you are trying to turn this discussion into an attack on my moral character.
I will do others the favor of not reiterating what you've posted. I will also leave it to others to decide if your moral character is suspect.
-
I will do others the favor of not reiterating what you've posted. I will also leave it to others to decide if your moral character is suspect.
What a cop out. By the way, you haven't left it to others. You've attack my character more than my arguments. Again on the topic of not being open minded. What am I not open minded about? You haven't offered any new solutions for me to consider. You have the audacity to ask me for solutions while you provide nothing but the old failed policies. Maybe you should open your mind to other possibilities.
Are you referring to my arguments against public housing? There is a plethora of evidence that public housing is a roach motel for the poor. Once you crawl in you're not crawling back out. I would suggest that the closed minded person is you.
-
"And the shot heard round the world was the start of the Revolution,
the minute men were ready and on the move"
Clavin ! You broke 80 yet ?
-
Clavin ! You broke 80 yet ?
Shot an even 80 but haven't broke it yet >:(
-
Shot an even 80 but haven't broke it yet >:(
Nothing to be ashamed of. You will do it. By the way 70 here today.
-
Nothing to be ashamed of. You will do it. By the way 70 here today.
Nice but you guys almost had a North East winter ;)
....I was in Nashville right before that nasty ice storm.
-
Clavin ! You broke 80 yet ?
Hey! Where the hell you been, you Malaysian airplaning sumbitch?!
-
Nice but you guys almost had a North East winter ;)
....I was in Nashville right before that nasty ice storm.
We had about two weeks of iffy stuff. Lots of ice. Back to normal now.
-
Hey! Where the hell you been, you Malaysian airplaning sumbitch?!
Lol
Dominating the dojo.
-
We had about two weeks of iffy stuff. Lots of ice. Back to normal now.
We're suppose to reach 40 this weekend!
-
We're suppose to reach 40 this weekend!
Poor bastards. I am going to putt and chip and then fire up the grill.
-
What a cop out. By the way, you haven't left it to others. You've attack my character more than my arguments. Again on the topic of not being open minded. What am I not open minded about? You haven't offered any new solutions for me to consider. You have the audacity to ask me for solutions while you provide nothing but the old failed policies. Maybe you should open your mind to other possibilities.
Are you referring to my arguments against public housing? There is a plethora of evidence that public housing is a roach motel for the poor. Once you crawl in you're not crawling back out. I would suggest that the closed minded person is you.
I just heaved a huge sigh. It is not because I am exasperated with you, but because I realized I was going to reply to you again despite the strong feeling I have that this discussion has and will go nowhere.
If your perception is that I attacked you character, then I have failed to express my feelings adequately. I apologize for any misconceptions I may have given you. Truthfully, I haven't given your character much consideration one way or the other.
I haven't offered any solutions because, quite frankly, I don't have any. I have ideas based on what seems to be working fairly well in other developed countries, but I also don't know what the downside of their social programs are except that taxes in most of these countries are higher then they are here. The one problem I believe is attributable to today's culture, especially in the U.S. is that families don't stand together and help their own to the degree that they do in some other countries, like Germany. I mention Germany because I have family who live there which gives me a smattering of knowledge regarding the culture there.
I mentioned the WPA, because some folks believe that it was a good solution to a similar problem with poverty that occurred many years ago. Whether something like that would work today, I really don't know. I do believe giving people work where they can earn some money is preferable to giving them handouts.
I am not a fan of public housing either. Shelters are temporary solutions which seem necessary I believe because the alternative is to let folks freeze to death during cold weather. From what I've read about homeless camps, many of the people in them shun shelters anyway.
Your suggestion that folks move to places which offer more affordable opportunities isn't a bad idea, but I think it is somewhat flawed. Exampling my own experience, my wife and I moved from West Hollywood, CA to Oregon in the early 60's because we could afford better housing here and because we liked the more family friendly environment to raise our soon to be born son. Also, the company I worked for had a position available in Portland, so I knew I would have an income. Are you aware that in much of the U.S. small towns and smaller cities are failing? Housing is cheap in these places for a reason....there are few if any jobs.
My forefathers lived in a very quaint little town. Albion, MI has great housing. Main street is still paved in herringbone brick. The population there is small. Heck I could sell the home I live in here and buy several there on the proceeds because housing is so cheap. This would really work well for me financially. Why? Well because I am retired and don't need to work. The reason there are a lot of inexpensive properties there is because there are no jobs. Unfortunately this is not an isolated situation in small towns in the U.S.
If you know of smaller cities and towns where there are jobs and services and where there is inexpensive housing, please post this. Who knows, some homeless person with and Iphone might read your post spread the word.
I posted information about HUD housing today, which is a far cry from the public housing projects to which you refer. Those tenements and projects were exactly what you describe. One reason many landlords shun HUD is because low income folks have a bad reputation for maintaining their property. Whether it is deserved or not, I don't really know. I suspect there is some truth to it though.
As for homeless camps. In Portland, the city council has designated an area near the Pearl as a homeless camp. The folks who bought million dollar condos in the Pearl are understandably upset about having a homeless camp in their backyard. I don't blame them. If I lived there, I would be too.
-
I just heaved a huge sigh. It is not because I am exasperated with you, but because I realized I was going to reply to you again despite the strong feeling I have that this discussion has and will go nowhere.
If your perception is that I attacked you character, then I have failed to express my feelings adequately. I apologize for any misconceptions I may have given you. Truthfully, I haven't given your character much consideration one way or the other.
I haven't offered any solutions because, quite frankly, I don't have any. I have ideas based on what seems to be working fairly well in other developed countries, but I also don't know what the downside of their social programs are except that taxes in most of these countries are higher then they are here. The one problem I believe is attributable to today's culture, especially in the U.S. is that families don't stand together and help their own to the degree that they do in some other countries, like Germany. I mention Germany because I have family who live there which gives me a smattering of knowledge regarding the culture there.
I mentioned the WPA, because some folks believe that it was a good solution to a similar problem with poverty that occurred many years ago. Whether something like that would work today, I really don't know. I do believe giving people work where they can earn some money is preferable to giving them handouts.
I am not a fan of public housing either. Shelters are temporary solutions which seem necessary I believe because the alternative is to let folks freeze to death during cold weather. From what I've read about homeless camps, many of the people in them shun shelters anyway.
Your suggestion that folks move to places which offer more affordable opportunities isn't a bad idea, but I think it is somewhat flawed. Exampling my own experience, my wife and I moved from West Hollywood, CA to Oregon in the early 60's because we could afford better housing here and because we liked the more family friendly environment to raise our soon to be born son. Also, the company I worked for had a position available in Portland, so I knew I would have an income. Are you aware that in much of the U.S. small towns and smaller cities are failing? Housing is cheap in these places for a reason....there are few if any jobs.
My forefathers lived in a very quaint little town. Albion, MI has great housing. Main street is still paved in herringbone brick. The population there is small. Heck I could sell the home I live in here and buy several there on the proceeds because housing is so cheap. This would really work well for me financially. Why? Well because I am retired and don't need to work. The reason there are a lot of inexpensive properties there is because there are no jobs. Unfortunately this is not an isolated situation in small towns in the U.S.
If you know of smaller cities and towns where there are jobs and services and where there is inexpensive housing, please post this. Who knows, some homeless person with and Iphone might read your post spread the word.
I posted information about HUD housing today, which is a far cry from the public housing projects to which you refer. Those tenements and projects were exactly what you describe. One reason many landlords shun HUD is because low income folks have a bad reputation for maintaining their property. Whether it is deserved or not, I don't really know. I suspect there is some truth to it though.
As for homeless camps. In Portland, the city council has designated an area near the Pearl as a homeless camp. The folks who bought million dollar condos in the Pearl are understandably upset about having a homeless camp in their backyard. I don't blame them. If I lived there, I would be too.
You know exactly what you intended. Don't try to pass it off as a misunderstanding. What load of crap. Own your words and actions. Men who play games like you are attempting to do are not worthy of respect. You have no integrity. You've not only considered my character you've made judgement of it. You seem to believe I'm the type of person who would engage sinking a cruise ship full of poor people. You also attempt to tried to attribute the use of the word deadbeat to me when I never use the word. You're so dishonest.
Okay you win. Your capacity for arguing from a purely negative viewpoint is insufferable and frankly has become boring. Look me up when your ideas for fixing the problem with all these "deadbeats" that seem to be plaguing you has worked. Hey, here's an idea you might like; give these losers free passage on a cruise ship and then sink it when it's too far out for anyone to swim ashore.
-
:-\
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=567156.0;attach=603249;image)
(http://news.bbcimg.co.uk/media/images/71922000/jpg/_71922912_100_thinkstock.jpg)
-
two people that no one reads arguing for five pages
much success 8)
-
two people that no one reads arguing for five pages
much success 8)
:-*
-
two people that no one reads arguing for five pages
much success 8)
Thanks, man. I thought we was cool.
-
Thanks, man. I thought we was cool.
All this time, and people have not caught on. ;)
-
You know exactly what you intended. Don't try to pass it off as a misunderstanding. What load of crap. Own your words and actions. Men who play games like you are attempting to do are not worthy of respect. You have no integrity. You've not only considered my character you've made judgement of it. You seem to believe I'm the type of person who would engage sinking a cruise ship full of poor people. You also attempt to tried to attribute the use of the word deadbeat to me when I never use the word. You're so dishonest.
No offense intended, but you appear to need counseling.
-
No offense intended, but you appear to need counseling.
This is another example of you considering and judging my character. It's yet another example of you using insults instead of arguments and it's uncalled for. I must have gotten under your skin. What did I say that wasn't true? You said those things and are now slinking away like a bitch. Seriously, you're to old to be acting like a dishonest pussy. Own your actions.
-
This is another example of you considering and judging my character. It's yet another example of you using insults instead of arguments and it's uncalled for. I must have gotten under your skin. What did I say that wasn't true? You said those things and are now slinking away like a bitch. Seriously, you're to old to be acting like a dishonest pussy. Own your actions.
Seriously....get help!
-
Seriously....get help!
Where you a hippy Prime?
-
Seriously....get help!
You need to get help because you can't even remember the shit you say. What did I say that is untrue? What did I say that indicates I need to get help? Asking you to own what you say indicates I need help? You keep proving my point. You have nothing left but insults. Your feelings are hurt and you're acting out by being bitch.
Where you a hippy Prime?
The guy lacks enough integrity to be anything.
-
You need to get help because you can't even remember the shit you say. What did I say that is untrue? What did I say that indicates I need to get help? Asking you to own what you say indicates I need help? You keep proving my point. You have nothing left but insults. Your feelings are hurt and you're acting out by being bitch.
You are acting as if Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz poured a bucket of water on you.
Get help.
-
You are acting as if Dorothy from The Wizard of Oz poured a bucket of water on you.
Get help.
And you would be the cowardly lion. Man up and own how you're behaving. You started the insults when you got frustrated. You said I would enjoy seeing a cruise ship of poor people sink and that I used the word deadbeat. You denied doing this and pathetically tried to play off you behavior as a misunderstanding. Don't you have an ounce of integrity or honor? When I'm in the wrong I admit it. You should do that same.
-
Sometimes I go way overboard. This is one of those times. I apologize to all of Getbig for once again becoming tiresome and annoying. It's a poor excuse, but I just get caught up in the moment and lose track of what is appropriate here.
A lot of good stuff has been posted by several of you with regards to what is a huge problem in the U.S. Damn, but I wish we could pool our ideas and resolve this. I know I don't have the answers. I do have ideas and a lot of personal experience, some of which I have posted here.
Chops to Shizzo for realizing that when I talk about personal experiences, I am not blowing smoke. Like many people, I've done a lot of dumb shit, seen a lot more and some if it is family related. I suspect there are those of you among us who have more revealing stories to tell then I do, but choose to keep them private for reasons of your own.
We are one big human family. Each of us is an individual and yet there are a lot of similarities between us all, believe it or like it or not.
BTW, just to throw in some humor, this is not my eulogy. I am not dying yet. I intend to haunt this place insufferably for many more years. Since I still work out, this entire post is bodybuilding related.
-
Sometimes I go way overboard. This is one of those times. I apologize to all of Getbig for once again becoming tiresome and annoying. It's a poor excuse, but I just get caught up in the moment and lose track of what is appropriate here.
A lot of good stuff has been posted by several of you with regards to what is a huge problem in the U.S. Damn, but I wish we could pool our ideas and resolve this. I know I don't have the answers. I do have ideas and a lot of personal experience, some of which I have posted here.
Chops to Shizzo for realizing that when I talk about personal experiences, I am not blowing smoke. Like many people, I've done a lot of dumb shit, seen a lot more and some if it is family related. I suspect there are those of you among us who have more revealing stories to tell then I do, but choose to keep them private for reasons of your own.
We are one big human family. Each of us is an individual and yet there are a lot of similarities between us all, believe it or like it or not.
BTW, just to throw in some humor, this is not my eulogy. I am not dying yet. I intend to haunt this place insufferably for many more years. Since I still work out, this entire post is bodybuilding related.
Nice Archer induced meltdown Prime.
-
Nice Archer induced meltdown Prime.
Weird, I read his post and thought "Nicely written, well done" and you get "Meltdown"
-
Weird, I read his post and thought "Nicely written, well done" and you get "Meltdown"
Meltdown.
-
Meltdown.
:)