• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Record 31.8 million on food stamps

But what could "socialism" do without the capital created by "capitalism?"

Thats why I like hybrid systems.. Capitalism alone is just worthless. Capitalism with socialism is progress.

Capitalism-Socialism-Communism is something that could work out eventually.. Possibly the ONLY thing that can ever work in the long term.
 
Thats why I like hybrid systems.. Capitalism alone is just worthless. Capitalism with socialism is progress.

Capitalism-Socialism-Communism is something that could work out eventually.. Possibly the ONLY thing that can ever work in the long term.
Sources? Links?
 
Typical Republican BS....blame Liberals for the results that their failed policies created. Is anyone surprised?
It's your BS policies that are failing. Wall Street is already making their opinions known about Obama's policies. What's he doing about it. Nothing. The worst economy in years is being helped into ruin by your man.
 
Sources? Links?

brain2.jpg
 
It's your BS policies that are failing. Wall Street is already making their opinions known about Obama's policies. What's he doing about it. Nothing. The worst economy in years is being helped into ruin by your man.

Sources? Links?


:lol:
 
It's your BS policies that are failing. Wall Street is already making their opinions known about Obama's policies. What's he doing about it. Nothing. The worst economy in years is being helped into ruin by your man.

Get back to me in a year or so once the policies have actually had some effect...if the economy is still tanking at that point your argument would have some validity.
 
Get back to me in a year or so once the policies have actually had some effect...if the economy is still tanking at that point your argument would have some validity.
There are two people who believe in his policies. Obama and you.
 
There are two people who believe in his policies. Obama and you.

I don't know....seems like most of the country is...except for Rush Limbaugh and his radical right-wing fans. :doh

Most of us aren't hoping and praying for America to fail.
 
I don't know....seems like most of the country is...except for Rush Limbaugh and his radical right-wing fans. :doh

Most of us aren't hoping and praying for America to fail.

Rush is not praying for America to fail. Love how the left wing loves to take the words out others completely out of context.

As usual, you get the big FAIL.
 
Rush is not praying for America to fail. Love how the left wing loves to take the words out others completely out of context.

As usual, you get the big FAIL.

When you stubbornly and arrogantly hold to your failed right-wing ideals and hope that America tanks because of Obama's policies...you are praying for America to fail. Love how you Limbaugh fanatics love to spin your way out of it.
In all the years of GWB...I disliked the man and his policies but I never hoped that he or the Country would fail.
 
When you stubbornly and arrogantly hold to your failed right-wing ideals and hope that America tanks because of Obama's policies...you are praying for America to fail. Love how you Limbaugh fanatics love to spin your way out of it.
In all the years of GWB...I disliked the man and his policies but I never hoped that he or the Country would fail.

Its funny that these people said when Bush was in power "you should always follow and listen to your president and respect him, even if you disagree", yet now they are acting completely different when Obama is in power. The whole "commander in chief" card seems to be obsolete in their ideology and wish to bring down their own president.
 
I am suggesting that keeping low skill, low wage, production possibilities limiting jobs in this country as being a liberal position. If liberals really gave a damn about less fortunate people, instead of using their (the poor) existence as a gear towards more governmental control, they would be empowering them with education.

Instead they wish to offer oppression in disguise, willing to ship the most productive jobs (minority of all employment) overseas, while the majority of employment (low tech low productivity) stays here!

If a task can be completed with comparable production overseas, while limiting input costs, why do Americans even want them to stay here?

My question to those of you who share this sentiment: If jobs going overseas takes employment away from Americans, how come we have had job growth almost every year since the Clinton administration?

Hint: Look at what the top ten in demand jobs were in 1997, and compare the list to 2007.

I can agree with the bolded statement, but don't blame it all on liberals.
As for education, there will always be a portion of our kids who refuse to take what has been offered for free. And there will always be low skill jobs for them. Problem is, unless we get a LOT of scientists, engineers, etc. to create new products to manufacture and sell to the rest of the world, there will be few jobs for even the educated among us. We have nothing in the way of commodities to sell, except for some grain crops, and we can't be depending on crop failures in other countries to boost our economy.
So yes, we need better education, but first for those who have the brainpower to do something with it. As for those who refuse basic education and drop out of school, they need to be DRAFTED as early as age 16 and force fed their basic education in boot camps. Allowing citizens to be poorly educated and non-productive is a sure way to make them dependent on welfare and food stamps.
 
Be careful to listen to Obama though. He already ruined the American economy. :roll:

The strange thing reading some posts is that somehow he ruined the US economy even before he became President..
 
I'm calling complete BS on that. People would have to live within their means and eat less prepackaged foods.

They would not starve that is just a red herring.

Well we did have food riots in the Great Depression. So the history for doing without safety-nets for food is not exactly a good one even in a wealthy country like ours.
 
I don't think we are totally on different pages here. I agree that there are people who are on the system long-term who can definately work (when economic times are better than this.) However, with an unemployment now over 8% with no end in sight, you can't deny that there is definately a need to help those who are TEMPORARILY unemployed NOW.

I agree. The problem with relying on charity alone for a safety-net is that in times of economic hardship charitable giving falls way off. Food banks around the country are having a hard time right now.
 
The strange thing reading some posts is that somehow he ruined the US economy even before he became President..

Its the great republican logic.. Anyways, do like them, whenever they say something, just ask for source and link, even though it sounds logical enough.. You do know that nothing is real if its not possible to link to an internet article(even blogs), show stats(rather than use common sense) or have been said by Bill O'Reilly.
 
The strange thing reading some posts is that somehow he ruined the US economy even before he became President..

What's even worse is when aquapub, as well as some others, starts claiming democrats are responsible for 9-11, the failures in Iraq, the failures in Afghanistan, the national debt, and each and every traffic jam we have.

Which makes you wonder: If Republicans are so pathetic that even when they control both houses of congress and the Presidency, the Opposition is still able to run the country into the ground, what's the point of voting Republican?

Anyway, I wonder if all the people collecting unemployment now is vindicative of laziness....or high levels of unemployment.

Lastly, 'liberalism' is the anti-thesis of socialism. I have no problem with 'policies enacted by liberals,' but when you start saying 'liberalism' you're hijacking the definition of the term.
 
The strange thing reading some posts is that somehow he ruined the US economy even before he became President..

Yes, it definetely wasn't Bush, it was Clinton, because it always takes some time for economic policies to have effect.

And now its Obama's fault...

Its ironic in the end, the hypocrisy and anti-anti-anti statements just get spinned in an endless web of "being right" that in the end someone will believe their own lies, and their final logic will be so disrupted with ideology that they will never understand good old "common sense" or "neutral opinions".
 
It is tragic that so many conservatives here still don't realize why they lost the election. They have had their ass whooped in the election and still think that the current path of the GOP is valid. Times change, and so has the voting public. They know that what we had wasn't working, and voted out the GOP.
As for food stamps, the corrupt side of this has been around for many decades. I have watched people pay with food stamps for food that I could not afford, and then they go out to the parking lot and get in a big new car that I could not afford. That was in 1970. Last year, a neighbor with a net worth of half a million in assets and almost that much in savings, but low retirement income, gave me some of the free stuff he gets based on his income. It was nasty tasting peanut butter from India. I thought part of the commodities program was to help OUR farmers, not those of the rest of the world. Point is, he didn't need it, but took it anyway becasue it was free.
Local ads here in Utah show a single mom (dressed in a waitress outfit) having to put her little girl to bed without supper because there was no food in the house. That is hardly an accurate portrayal of the typical food bank recipeient, but it is meant to get people to donate food. If the people who get food from food banks were accurately portrayed, the donations would dry up. People standing in line smoking cigarettes (expensive habit), hair and nails done up, driving nice cars, and looking for free food. And so many of them are FAT !!!
Up until recently, I would have said that most of them got in their positions by making bad choices, dropping out of school, making themselves unemployable, etc. If it was just them, I would let them go hungry, but they have children, and some use their children to gain sympathy.
My own sister once complained to me about not having money for milk, while opening a carton of cigarettes. My chronically unemployed younger brother won't work for $10 per hour, as that amount is beneath his dignity. An older brother tried to borrow money from me to pay "credit card" debt, which turned out to be gambling debt. People like that, I want to slap them upside the head and take their kids away from them...
But now is a bit different...many are in bad shape due to losing their jobs and they are suffering for the sins of others.
A lot of churches are doing their part along with the govt and we will just have to keep doing this until the economy improves and people get their jobs back. As for those who avoid education and available jobs, we need to find a way to let them starve without harming their children....
 
Last edited:
What's even worse is when aquapub, as well as some others, starts claiming democrats are responsible for 9-11, the failures in Iraq, the failures in Afghanistan, the national debt, and each and every traffic jam we have.

Which makes you wonder: If Republicans are so pathetic that even when they control both houses of congress and the Presidency, the Opposition is still able to run the country into the ground, what's the point of voting Republican?

Anyway, I wonder if all the people collecting unemployment now is vindicative of laziness....or high levels of unemployment.

Lastly, 'liberalism' is the anti-thesis of socialism. I have no problem with 'policies enacted by liberals,' but when you start saying 'liberalism' you're hijacking the definition of the term.

Yes, of course, 911 was Clintons fault, since he didnt invade Iraq. :roll:


Its funny that what was happening in the start of the Bush term was blamed on Clinton(logically enough), since policies take time to come into effect, while the devastating situation now is blamed on Obama or Clinton, and not Bush and the Republicans.
Bush has been in office 8 years, the republicans have had majority for a long time,what we are seeing now at least could be blamed on their lousy policies and wrong focuses of the last decade..
 
Back
Top Bottom