• 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!

California Considers Flat Tax and Completely Eliminating Welfare

I agree with most of your post above.My thought is illegal immigrants have helped put our state in the hole over the last 10 years.
I have no problems with legal immigrants living here at all,that's what has made our country a great nation,all the different ideas,and thoughts put together by different people of different nations.
And yes Ca. needs to get businesses back in the state.
 
Goobieman said:
A statement you cannot, in any way, support.

Another statement you cannot, in any way, support.
Click to expand...

If I was wrong, people wouldn't have their firearms stolen and used in crimes. People wouldn't have accidents at the rates we do. People wouldn't keep loaded firearms around. But people do. And people get injured and killed.

The notion that people aren't stupid and that stupidity in combination with firearms isn't a bad idea is pretty much insane.

So tell me, are there no guns stolen from owners who failed to secure their weapons? No one is ever injured from lack of firearms training? No one is ever hurt from loaded firearms kept around the houses?

My dig isn't with the weapons. It's with the idiots behind the weapon.
 
Goobieman said:
Why should a society pay people to not be criminals?
Click to expand...

Because the cost of jailing and prosecuting them is too high? Not to mention the paralyzing effect it would have on the economy? Would you go out when there was a good chance you'd get mugged? When you had to defend all of your property with firearms? When everyone you saw could be someone potentially going to rob you?

I'd rather pay a bit in taxes for welfare than have to carry around a sub machine gun everywhere I went for safety. Don't know about you. But as Dav pointed out, on this boards, people often adhere to ideology rather than reality and practicality as you are doing here. Do I like welfare? For the most part no. Do I realize what it actually is? Yes. And I've come to terms with it.

What lesson is learned by people who are paid to not be criminals?
Shouldnt they not be criminals under any condition?
Click to expand...

See above. You fail to understand the argument.

The fact that you havent shown it to be true.
Click to expand...

Well, given that you have a long history of rejecting everything you don't like to the point where you were considered the #1 dishonest poster here, I'm not going to care much about that statement.

Tell me, do you benefit from not being in prison? Are their any benefits the government gives to you for not being a criminal?

So, the effect of elimitating welfare, in terms of your argument of there being more crime, isn't as terrible as you suggested. Noted.
Click to expand...

Come again? Can you read?
 
jallman said:
Like calling the poor "maggots"? Hardly.
Click to expand...

Sure, inflammatory and hyperbolic terminology like this . . .

jallman said:
You can say until you are blue in the face, but that doesn't change the fact that the law does not agree with you because the majority of the country aren't base, depraved baby killing barbarians.
Click to expand...
 
obvious Child said:
If I was wrong, people wouldn't have their firearms stolen and used in crimes.People wouldn't have accidents at the rates we do. People wouldn't keep loaded firearms around. But people do. And people get injured and killed.
Click to expand...
Your statement described MOST gun owners.
Nothing you state above in any way supports that statement.
Disagree?
Show that MOST gun owners have their guns stolen.
Show that MOST gun owners have gun accidents.
Show that the avid collectors dont have the best preactices.
 
obvious Child said:
Well, given that you have a long history of rejecting everything you don't like to the point where you were considered the #1 dishonest poster here, I'm not going to care much about that statement.
Click to expand...
Glad to see you took over that #1 spot.
 
obvious Child said:
Because the cost of jailing and prosecuting them is too high?
Click to expand...
I see. Pay people to obey the law because the other option is "too hard".
With attitudes like this as prevelant as they are, its no wonder that our society is on a fast downhill slide.

Not to mention the paralyzing effect it would have on the economy? Would you go out when there was a good chance you'd get mugged?
Click to expand...
You say that as if it doesnt exit now. Walk thru a large city much?

When you had to defend all of your property with firearms? When everyone you saw could be someone potentially going to rob you?
Click to expand...
You say that as if it doesnt exist now. Walk thru a large city much?

I'd rather pay a bit in taxes for welfare than have to carry around a sub machine gun everywhere I went for safety.
Click to expand...
Hmm. False dichotomy, anyone?

But as Dav pointed out, on this boards, people often adhere to ideology rather than reality and practicality as you are doing here.
Click to expand...
As -I- am doing here?
:rofl
 
obvious Child said:
If I was wrong, people wouldn't have their firearms stolen and used in crimes. People wouldn't have accidents at the rates we do. People wouldn't keep loaded firearms around. But people do. And people get injured and killed.

The notion that people aren't stupid and that stupidity in combination with firearms isn't a bad idea is pretty much insane.

So tell me, are there no guns stolen from owners who failed to secure their weapons? No one is ever injured from lack of firearms training? No one is ever hurt from loaded firearms kept around the houses?

My dig isn't with the weapons. It's with the idiots behind the weapon.
Click to expand...

This is so patently false, I don't know where to begin.

Simply put, it is extremely rare to have an gun-related accident. We have about a billion guns in Texas, and you almost never hear of a child accidentally shooting themself or someone else.

When people get shot, it's almost entirely from guns purchased illegally, and it's almost always drug or gang related.
 
Erod said:
This is so patently false, I don't know where to begin.
Click to expand...
The post you responded to is a prime example of OC not adhereing to ideology, but to reality and practiciality...
:rofl
 
Voidwar said:
Sure, inflammatory and hyperbolic terminology like this . . .
Click to expand...

That wasn't inflammatory. It was an honest observation that didn't mince words. Calling the poor (or whoever he was actually calling, he still doesn't know) "maggots" was senseless and idiotic.
 
Goobieman said:
I see. Pay people to obey the law because the other option is "too hard".
With attitudes like this as prevelant as they are, its no wonder that our society is on a fast downhill slide.
Click to expand...

So you'd be okay with jailing even more numbers of people and paying more taxation, significently more than you would in welfare transfer payments?

Interesting, you're against big government welfare, but big government prisons are okay.

You say that as if it doesnt exit now. Walk thru a large city much?
Click to expand...

Rational people here have often stated that cutting welfare off will result in large riots. And given mugging rates across the country, it actually is pretty safe aside from a few select cities and areas. Throw in masses of starving people and you're going to get mugged a hell of a lot more.

You say that as if it doesnt exist now. Walk thru a large city much?
Click to expand...

I wasn't aware that the average citizen had multiple firearms and that residential theft was only prevented by firearms. Care to show me evidence of this?

Hmm. False dichotomy, anyone?
Click to expand...

Care to look at 1990s Somalia? Lots of starving, poor people = lots of crime.

As -I- am doing here?
:rofl
Click to expand...

Pretty much. Tell me, do you really think nothing will change if welfare dries up entirely? That the millions on welfare will not change their behaviors? Care to tell me, how does crime and poverty work together? During the recession of the 70s and 80s, what was the crime rate compared to the booms of the 90s and 2000s? You know, like economic data analysis?
 
Erod said:
This is so patently false, I don't know where to begin.
Click to expand...

If it was so false, why did you agree that accidents happen? And accidents happen in those who deliberately bought guns.

Simply put, it is extremely rare to have an gun-related accident. We have about a billion guns in Texas, and you almost never hear of a child accidentally shooting themself or someone else.
Click to expand...

Hearing is irrelevant, just because you did not hear about it does not mean it did not occur. While firearm accidents are relatively low, remember that generally people who have the accidents deliberately purchased the weapon. Now, imagine those who did not WANT to have a firearm, but got one under celticlord's plan now own firearms. But without the expertise, training and safety understanding. Accidents among those who deliberately bought firearms are unacceptably high. Toss in inexperience and ignorance with firearms and tell me, do you think accidents rates are going to go up or going to go down? Gun owners themselves do stupid stuff with their firearms. Cops for crying out loud get their firearms stolen.

Top cop's gun stolen?

THE POLICE CHIEF FOR CRYING OUT LOUD. Of all people who should understand firearms best practices....

When people get shot, it's almost entirely from guns purchased illegally, and it's almost always drug or gang related.
Click to expand...

Almost entirely? Tell me, is 10~15% almost nothing?
frontline: hot guns: "How Criminals Get Guns" | PBS

While you are correct that most of the illegals are from illegal purchases, the stolen do account for a sizable portion. Giving handguns to everyone, the most stolen firearm, will invariably lead to even more stolen firearms used in crime.

Inexperience/ignorance/lack of training + firearms = Bad Outcomes

I suspect both you and Goobieman agree with that.

Again, my problem isn't with the firearm. It's with the idiot behind the weapon.
 
obvious Child said:
So you'd be okay with jailing even more numbers of people and paying more taxation, significently more than you would in welfare transfer payments?
Click to expand...

This question does not even matter. We have to decide whether or not it is good that we should give our money to those who are trying to rob us. Which man do you see as doing the better action, the one who gives his money, or the one who refuses to be abused?
 
obvious Child said:
Care to look at 1990s Somalia? Lots of starving, poor people = lots of crime.
Click to expand...

California is not a lawless third world nation with no opportunity.

Tell me, do you really think nothing will change if welfare dries up entirely? That the millions on welfare will not change their behaviors?
Click to expand...

I think their behavior absolutely will change. I think they'll start looking for a job pretty damn quick when the freebies run out.
 
Don't Tase Me Bro said:
California is not a lawless third world nation with no opportunity.
Click to expand...

At the moment it is not.

I think their behavior absolutely will change. I think they'll start looking for a job pretty damn quick when the freebies run out.
Click to expand...

Probably. But remember that many people on welfare don't exactly have the skills required to obtain jobs that can meet their financial needs. Remember that a lot of people on welfare HAD jobs at one time and were productive members of society. When they take the goods jobs, the rest of the welfare scum who don't have skills will eventually succumb to crime. Furthermore, what if there aren't jobs. Like now.

Furthermore, cutting welfare like the EITC is stupid. We want to reward work.
 
phattonez said:
This question does not even matter. We have to decide whether or not it is good that we should give our money to those who are trying to rob us.
Click to expand...

I was not aware that all on welfare are otherwise trying to rob us. Tell me, my friend who use to work for investment banking who is now unemployed, is she trying to rob us? :2wave:

No one ever said that everyone on welfare is trying to rob us. But no one is arguing that no one on welfare won't rob us.

Which man do you see as doing the better action, the one who gives his money, or the one who refuses to be abused?
Click to expand...

Question that ignores reality. Which is better, living in a world where you pay minimal taxes to welfare, or a world where crime is through the roof and one must defend their property with guns on a regular basis?
 
obvious Child said:
I was not aware that all on welfare are otherwise trying to rob us. Tell me, my friend who use to work for investment banking who is now unemployed, is she trying to rob us? :2wave:
Click to expand...

Is she applying for welfare?

Then yes, she is.

obvious Child said:
No one ever said that everyone on welfare is trying to rob us. But no one is arguing that no one on welfare won't rob us.
Click to expand...

You're right.

If they're on welfare, they're robbing us, not trying to.

obvious Child said:
Question that ignores reality. Which is better, living in a world where you pay minimal taxes to welfare, or a world where crime is through the roof and one must defend their property with guns on a regular basis?
Click to expand...

If every household avails themselves of their guaranteed freedom to own guns, as many of any type they wish, then crime doesn't go through the roof, the mortuary business for criminals does, for a little while. The smarter ones figure it out eventually.

Since people have to defend their property now with guns, what's the difference? I'd rather be shooting criminals than feeding politicians my money.
 
obvious Child said:
I was not aware that all on welfare are otherwise trying to rob us. Tell me, my friend who use to work for investment banking who is now unemployed, is she trying to rob us? :2wave:

No one ever said that everyone on welfare is trying to rob us. But no one is arguing that no one on welfare won't rob us.
Click to expand...

Obviously just a personal attack. Your argument is to pay people not to rob us. So let's continue.

Question that ignores reality. Which is better, living in a world where you pay minimal taxes to welfare, or a world where crime is through the roof and one must defend their property with guns on a regular basis?
Click to expand...

How does it ignore reality? Was crime "through the roof" in this country before welfare? Answer my question.
 
obvious Child said:
Probably. But remember that many people on welfare don't exactly have the skills required to obtain jobs that can meet their financial needs.
Click to expand...

Thats what "charity" is for.

Not government handouts of someone else's involuntary taxation.

Those welfare people had a choice in public school, to sit down, shut up, pay attention and lear, or to goof off. If they choose goof off, good for them, I bet they had a wonderful childhood (don't bother) and now they're expecting someone else to pay for their miserable little lives now.

Too bad for them, I say.

Pass a law requiring homes without guns to post a sign in the front yard making this plain to everyone, so the barely literate welfare people know where to go.

obvious Child said:
Furthermore, cutting welfare like the EITC is stupid. We want to reward work.
Click to expand...

No, what "we" want is fair taxation so that people who don't pay taxes don't get a "refund" of taxes they haven't paid, and so that the people who do pay taxes aren't carrying the burden of feeding those who won't work.

That is one of the principles that made this country thrive, and abandoning it is what's caused this country to wilt.
 
phattonez said:
Obviously just a personal attack. Your argument is to pay people not to rob us. So let's continue.
Click to expand...

You made a ridiculous comment. So I mocked you a bit for it. Advice; don't make ridiculous comments.

How does it ignore reality? Was crime "through the roof" in this country before welfare? Answer my question.
Click to expand...

How do we defined "before welfare?" What period are we looking at?
 
obvious Child said:
How do we defined "before welfare?" What period are we looking at?
Click to expand...

Make a mountain out of a molehill much? The US before welfare was instituted.

What is the better moral action? Giving in or not?
 
obvious Child said:
Rational people here have often stated that cutting welfare off will result in large riots.
Click to expand...
Oh -- they 'stated' that. It MUST be true. :roll:
If that's the best you can do -- save us the trouble and give up now.
 
obvious Child said:
If I was wrong, people wouldn't have their firearms stolen and used in crimes. People wouldn't have accidents at the rates we do. People wouldn't keep loaded firearms around. But people do. And people get injured and killed.

The notion that people aren't stupid and that stupidity in combination with firearms isn't a bad idea is pretty much insane.
Click to expand...
Your statement described MOST gun owners.
Nothing you state above in any way supports that statement.
Disagree?
Show that MOST gun owners have their guns stolen.
Show that MOST gun owners have gun accidents.
Show that the avid collectors dont have the best preactices.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom