• 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!

SIN BINS FOR WORST FAMILIES (aka the end of liberty in Britain)

Ethereal said:
You don't think this policy is extreme? What do you think Thomas Jefferson or Benjamin Franklin would have said?



First they came for the lazy, useless people, and I said nothing...
Click to expand...

I understand your point. You feel it will be a slippery slope. However, Franklin and Jefferson would have never approved the Welfare system. Secondly, if the people are mindful of government, then there is no worries of the slippery slope.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Not if they give-up the Welfare money. Let it be a choice. Take the money and be watched, stop taking the money and live as you like.
Click to expand...

So you were talking about it. This is dumb, this is opressive, this is a step towards horrible fascism. If you don't like it, then reform the system. But you cannot infringe upon the rights and liberties of the individual because they are taking advantage of a program we offer. If you want to do that, you're no better than any tyrant who has oppressed and suppressed his people and their ability to exercise their rights. That's all there is to it.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Not if they give-up the Welfare money. Let it be a choice. Take the money and be watched, stop taking the money and live as you like.
Click to expand...

I almost feel like crying after reading this thread.

I always knew there would be a future dark age; the cycle of history demands it. I just never seriously entertained the thought that I would live to see it until the last few years.

If you people do represent the prevailing mindset, then we're finished as a free society. What you've said should be repulsive to any American, or any other freedom-lover.

Enjoy your in-home cameras, because if you think it'll be limited to the "undesirables," you're complete and utter fools.
 
Ikari said:
Government needs to be mindful of ME! I own the damned thing.
Click to expand...

The government is the PEOPLE collectively. Thus, we must collectively be mindful of the steps elected leaders make.
 
Harshaw said:
I almost feel like crying after reading this thread.

I always knew there would be a future dark age; the cycle of history demands it. I just never seriously entertained the thought that I would live to see it until the last few years.

If you people do represent the prevailing mindset, then we're finished as a free society. What you've said should be repulsive to any American, or any other freedom-lover.

Enjoy your in-home cameras, because if you think it'll be limited to the "undesirables," you're complete and utter fools.
Click to expand...

Of course I love freedom. I would in no way think that people should be subject to having their right to privacy revoked through such means. However, it strikes me as funny, that you guys feel that those who will not do for themselves, and are essentially living on a subsocialist system, are run of the mill voters. These people fight to preserve the freeloading lifestyle they subsist on. So end the Welfare state and I will be happy.
 
tlmorg02 said:
The government is the PEOPLE collectively. Thus, we must collectively be mindful of the steps elected leaders make.
Click to expand...

No, the government and We the People are two separate entities. The government is a device, a tool created by We the People to accomplish that which must be accomplished on an aggregated scale and to ensure and proliferate the rights and liberties of the People. We the People are the creator and owner of the government. The government works towards our liberty and rights. It's important to see this difference. The government cannot infringe upon the rights of the individual, and that's not contingent upon not taking money from the government.
 
tlmorg02 said:
So end the Welfare state and I will be happy.
Click to expand...

Wanting to end welfare is different than wanting to infringe upon the rights and liberties of the individuals who use welfare.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Of course I love freedom. I would in no way think that people should be subject to having their right to privacy revoked through such means. However, it strikes me as funny, that you guys feel that those who will not do for themselves, and are essentially living on a subsocialist system, are run of the mill voters. These people fight to preserve the freeloading lifestyle they subsist on.
Click to expand...

At no time was entry into a welfare program contingent upon the acceptance of such draconian security measures. Only after these families became dependent upon welfare did the government seek to implement this policy. Basically, you are advocating government blackmail in the way of a retroactive ultimatum.

So end the Welfare state and I will be happy.
Click to expand...

Harshaw, Ikari, and I are certainly no fans of the welfare state, BUT if we, as liberty-loving individuals, have to choose between maintaining welfare or imposing draconian security measures on the "undesirables" the choice is easy. I choose liberty each and every time, as should you.
 
Ikari said:
No, the government and We the People are two separate entities. The government is a device, a tool created by We the People to accomplish that which must be accomplished on an aggregated scale and to ensure and proliferate the rights and liberties of the People. We the People are the creator and owner of the government. The government works towards our liberty and rights. It's important to see this difference. The government cannot infringe upon the rights of the individual, and that's not contingent upon not taking money from the government.
Click to expand...

Actually, if you the people start relying upon funds from other taxpayers to subsidize your life, you allow them input into how you live that life. The gummint has no life aside from what it is given by citizens.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Actually, if you the people start relying upon funds from other taxpayers to subsidize your life, you allow them input into how you live that life. The gummint has no life aside from what it is given by citizens.
Click to expand...

Could you show me where entry into a welfare program was contingent upon the acceptance of future government monitoring?
 
Ethereal said:
At no time was entry into a welfare program contingent upon the acceptance of such draconian security measures. Only after these families became dependent upon welfare did the government seek to implement this policy. Basically, you are advocating government blackmail in the way of a retroactive ultimatum.



Harshaw, Ikari, and I are certainly no fans of the welfare state, BUT if we, as liberty-loving individuals, have to choose between maintaining welfare or imposing draconian security measures on the "undesirables" the choice is easy. I choose liberty each and every time, as should you.
Click to expand...

Good enough for me, end Welfare.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Actually, if you the people start relying upon funds from other taxpayers to subsidize your life, you allow them input into how you live that life. The gummint has no life aside from what it is given by citizens.
Click to expand...

No I don't. If the government is giving out money, and I happen to take it; that means nothing. No one gets a say in my life. ****, government employees all the time take money from taxpayers. Banks lend money. None of that means abdication of rights in the least. And that's most definitely true with the government. The government may not infringe upon the rights and liberties of the People without due process of law. Being on welfare or social security or medicade/medicare or the wide breadth of social programs we have is not illegal, is not criminal, and because of that the government cannot infringe upon their rights.
 
Ethereal said:
Harshaw, Ikari, and I are certainly no fans of the welfare state, BUT if we, as liberty-loving individuals, have to choose between maintaining welfare or imposing draconian security measures on the "undesirables" the choice is easy. I choose liberty each and every time, as should you.
Click to expand...

Of course I would take the welfare system over draconian security measures. Spying on people, surveillance against our own people is imposing draconian security measures against undesirables. I think you're looking at pointing the finger elsewhere. That, or you misspoke.
 
Ikari said:
Of course I would take the welfare system over draconian security measures.
Click to expand...

That's what I said.

Spying on people, surveillance against our own people is imposing draconian security measures against undesirables.
Click to expand...

That's what I said.

I think you're looking at pointing the finger elsewhere.
Click to expand...

If I am pointing a finger it isn't at you.

That, or you misspoke.
Click to expand...

Or you misunderstood...:2wave:
 
tlmorg02 said:
Of course I love freedom. I would in no way think that people should be subject to having their right to privacy revoked through such means.
Click to expand...

You just spent the whole thread saying that you would.


However, it strikes me as funny, that you guys feel that those who will not do for themselves, and are essentially living on a subsocialist system, are run of the mill voters.
Click to expand...

I think they are full-fledged people under the jurisdiction of the United States of America, where all people are to be equal before the law and where civil liberties do not only apply to limited groups.


These people fight to preserve the freeloading lifestyle they subsist on. So end the Welfare state and I will be happy.
Click to expand...

I'm for ending it too. But I will not support such totalitarian measures under any circumstances.
 
Catz Part Deux said:
Actually, if you the people start relying upon funds from other taxpayers to subsidize your life, you allow them input into how you live that life. The gummint has no life aside from what it is given by citizens.
Click to expand...

These two statements have nothing to do with each other in any real way. The second is a nasty twisting of a noble concept. If your idea of government of the people, by the people, and for the people ever involves a group -- any group of non-convicts -- forced to abdicate their basic civil liberties, then you are either all screwed up, or a garden-variety totalitarian. Or both.
 
Harshaw said:
You just spent the whole thread saying that you would.
Click to expand...

Only the group of people who place their lives in the hands of the government, not tax paying, working Americans.




I think they are full-fledged people under the jurisdiction of the United States of America, where all people are to be equal before the law and where civil liberties do not only apply to limited groups.
Click to expand...

Sure, but they have determined that the government is better suited to running their lives than they are.




I'm for ending it too. But I will not support such totalitarian measures under any circumstances.
Click to expand...

How is it totalitarian? It is simply cameras for the purpose of ensuring people are taking care of their children. Apparently the majority of those on Welfare are not now doing so.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Only the group of people who place their lives in the hands of the government, not tax paying, working Americans.


Sure, but they have determined that the government is better suited to running their lives than they are.


How is it totalitarian? It is simply cameras for the purpose of ensuring people are taking care of their children. Apparently the majority of those on Welfare are not now doing so.
Click to expand...

"Simply." :doh

This is utter madness. You people are going to richly deserve the jackboot on your throats.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Only the group of people who place their lives in the hands of the government, not tax paying, working Americans.
Click to expand...

What about working Americans who lost their job and use government assistance till they can get a job again?

tlmorg02 said:
Sure, but they have determined that the government is better suited to running their lives than they are.
Click to expand...

No, the government offered a program to assist with the very poor, and they have opted to use that program. The government is not running their lives or raising their children, merely providing some financial support for them to do so. As it is a legal program, it cannot come with the infringement of rights. That's treason and tyranny of the highest caliber.

tlmorg02 said:
How is it totalitarian? It is simply cameras for the purpose of ensuring people are taking care of their children. Apparently the majority of those on Welfare are not now doing so.
Click to expand...

How is it not? Fascist, big brother government is what you're calling for. Most everyone takes advantage of a taxpayer program usually.
 
How about this?

You pay taxes in the state where you live.

You drive to another state and use its roads.

Because you're using a state service, that state decides to put a camera in your car to make sure you're not breaking any laws.

When you protest, they simply say "then pay for the use of our roads, you $&#&^@ freeloader." After all, you're getting government services other people are paying for.
 
Harshaw said:
"Simply." :doh

This is utter madness. You people are going to richly deserve the jackboot on your throats.
Click to expand...

Your being too dramatic. When the people stop abusing the system they will no longer be monitored. It never said that the program was indefinite.
 
tlmorg02 said:
Your being too dramatic. When the people stop abusing the system they will no longer be monitored. It never said that the program was indefinite.
Click to expand...

I'm being exactly as dramatic as it calls for. You're being far too complacent. You figure it's just "them" being oppressed, so it doesn't affect you.

Like I said, you might as well just round them up into camps.
 
Harshaw said:
How about this?

You pay taxes in the state where you live.

You drive to another state and use its roads.

Because you're using a state service, that state decides to put a camera in your car to make sure you're not breaking any laws.

When you protest, they simply say "then pay for the use of our roads, you $&#&^@ freeloader." After all, you're getting government services other people are paying for.
Click to expand...

No need, the police are there to ensure I do not break the laws on the highway. I am not free to drive without being stopped. The traffic police or highway patrol may stop me if they find it necessary. They may also search my vehicle if they have reasonable suspicion. Should we bar the police from doing these things as well?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom