• 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!

Snow days mean less food for many students

jallman said:
That is entirely untrue.
Click to expand...

We're talking a couple of days here, not 'Top Ramen' for life....:doh
One would hope that the PARENTS would learn from this situation & BE PREPARED for this in the future.....:roll:
 
Last edited:
jallman said:
That's not even close to an accurate assessment of the issue. "In a lot of cases" does not give any quantifying data to work with. It's too general. Also, what constitutes a "bad decision"? Got anything more than subjectivity?
Click to expand...
well, my mother married a no good alcoholic man, and had five kids. we are catholic. she finally divorced him before he killed her. we were then poor and needed assistance for a time.

i guess she should have known better.
 
Ockham said:
Stop changing the subject and answer the question tough guy. I offered solutions, you ignore them. I ask for a defitiion, you accuse me of not keeping up. You're the troll pal, not me.

I'll respond when you can put something that's above a 3rd grade level - until then, have a nice day.
Click to expand...

I just have a question for the rest of you rational, mature posters in this thread...

Why are you bothering to interact with this? If someone behaved like this in person, would you tolerate their poor upbringing for any length of time? Would you accept their rude demeanor, their childishness, or their obtusely cras hissy fits?
 
jallman said:
That's not even close to an accurate assessment of the issue. "In a lot of cases" does not give any quantifying data to work with. It's too general. Also, what constitutes a "bad decision"? Got anything more than subjectivity?
Click to expand...

You can dodge the issue with semantics all you want, but you know as well as I do that not all poor people are poor because they're disabled and can't provide for themselves, or they got ****ed over by the man. There are poor people out there that are poor because they don't have the gumption to improve their station in life.
 
apdst said:
You can dodge the issue with semantics all you want, but you know as well as I do that not all poor people are poor because they're disabled and can't provide for themselves, or they got ****ed over by the man. There are poor people out there that are poor because they don't have the gumption to improve their station in life.
Click to expand...

That did not answer a thing I asked. Try again.

I do commend you for attempting to be civil where ockham couldn't be bothered.
 
Partisan said:
Name calling does not make up for a weak arguement.....:prof
Click to expand...

That's not name calling. And when I take up the habit of getting debate tips from the weakest debator here at DP, I'll be sure to ask you or ockham.
 
jallman said:
That's not name calling. And when I take up the habit of getting debate tips from the weakest debator here at DP, I'll be sure to ask you or ockham.
Click to expand...

Sure it is.......;)
& from the weakness of your position, I'd say you need all of the help you can muster....;)
 
jallman said:
Yeah for about a month. And then who solves the problem of mom not having money next month because she cant get to work?

You guys act like the answer is so simple. "Oh well...derrrrrr...just stop being poor."

It's asinine fantasy approach to a real problem.
Click to expand...

How about Obama do something for Jobs so they can by food. Welfare is not the answer jobs is.
 
Partisan said:
Sure it is.......;)
& from the weakness of your position, I'd say you need all of the help you can muster....;)
Click to expand...

I have only presented one position so far and that's that those on public assistance should be required to drug test.

Can you try arguing that or presenting a position or are you just here to troll with your buddy Ockham?

By all means, Partisan...show us these great debate skills you seem to have been hiding away since day one...
 
jallman said:
That did not answer a thing I asked. Try again.

I do commend you for attempting to be civil where ockham couldn't be bothered.
Click to expand...

You started the insults, not me. You dodge the issue, not me. You name call me as a troll. Then you accuse me of not being civil. You accuse me of not providing solutions, I pointed out your mistake where I did. One day, I'm hoping you'll actually discuss the topic and grow up. Not sure what pissed you off today, but it's not me. So go kick someone else's dog.



Back to the topic before such a rude / ignorant interruption:

If the system is broken at the State level, there's not much the Fed can do about it. It's up to the States and I'd argue that it's in the States best interest to NOT continue to throw money or food in this case, at the problem, but to address it as I stated: Cut off a portion of the aid and motivate those with REAL problems to solutions with educational tools, skill building tools etc... those who are simply parasites on the system should be cut off and join the rest of society. That may not work well with the politics or morality of some, but it's a road to reducing hunger and a potential solution to lifting people out of poverty.
 
Ockham said:
You started the insults, not me. You dodge the issue, not me. You name call me as a troll. Then you accuse me of not being civil. You accuse me of not providing solutions, I pointed out your mistake where I did. One day, I'm hoping you'll actually discuss the topic and grow up. Not sure what pissed you off today, but it's not me. So go kick someone else's dog.
Click to expand...

Blah blah blah, troll troll troll, blame someone else. You're such a good lil' conservative with the personal responsibility, aren't ya? :lol:

Back to the topic before such a rude / ignorant interruption:

If the system is broken at the State level, there's not much the Fed can do about it. It's up to the States and I'd argue that it's in the States best interest to NOT continue to throw money or food in this case, at the problem, but to address it as I stated: Cut off a portion of the aid and motivate those with REAL problems to solutions with educational tools, skill building tools etc... those who are simply parasites on the system should be cut off and join the rest of society. That may not work well with the politics or morality of some, but it's a road to reducing hunger and a potential solution to lifting people out of poverty.
Click to expand...

That's fine for adults but in case you forgot, this thread is dealing with children in these situations.
 
jallman said:
I have only presented one position so far and that's that those on public assistance should be required to drug test.
Can you try arguing that or presenting a position or are you just here to troll with your buddy Ockham?

By all means, Partisan...show us these great debate skills you seem to have been hiding away since day one...
Click to expand...

If you are going to waste man hours & money on drug tests, you might as well just give them food......:roll:
 
Partisan said:
If you are going to waste man hours & money on drug tests, you might as well just give them food......:roll:
Click to expand...

I said nothing about not giving them food. Were you making a point?
 
ptif219 said:
I thought food was the topic. I don't understand your point here
Click to expand...

It's broader than just food... kids won the lunch program are a symptom of a larger issue which is the level of poverty. I suggest cutting the lunch program but the support for getting the family on their feet must be part of that cut or else we'll just be kicking poor people when they're down. Give them tools to better themselves so kids food or foodstamps no longer is the issue and will no longer be needed.

Cuts and identifying parasites shouldn't be carried out unless we can help those who want the help, out of their predicament.
 
Ockham said:
It's broader than just food... kids won the lunch program are a symptom of a larger issue which is the level of poverty. I suggest cutting the lunch program but the support for getting the family on their feet must be part of that cut or else we'll just be kicking poor people when they're down. Give them tools to better themselves so kids food or foodstamps no longer is the issue and will no longer be needed.

Cuts and identifying parasites shouldn't be carried out unless we can help those who want the help, out of their predicament.
Click to expand...

One thing I have never understood is why we don't have more daycare assistance programs for mothers with young children and more "workfare" type programs that could be used to boost income for families on public assistance while simultaneously creating a source of labor for infrastructure projects.
 
jallman said:
One thing I have never understood is why we don't have more daycare assistance programs for mothers with young children and more "workfare" type programs that could be used to boost income for families on public assistance while simultaneously creating a source of labor for infrastructure projects.
Click to expand...

Unions, for one.....;)
Back in the WPA days, the unions did not have the clout they do now.....
There are plenty of daycare programs, the real accomplishment would be to keep people from breeding while they are on welfare type assistance....
 
Last edited:
Partisan said:
I must have missed that amongst, "blah, blah, blah, troll, troll, troll".....:roll:
Click to expand...

Yes, I do believe what you missed was a point to make.

Look, if you're gonna contribute something, do it. If you're gonna bring another of your basement hissy fits upstairs, then let's just go ahead and report it now and get it out of the way.

Am I being clear?
 
jallman said:
Yes, I do believe what you missed was a point to make.

Look, if you're gonna contribute something, do it. If you're gonna bring another of your basement hissy fits upstairs, then let's just go ahead and report it now and get it out of the way.

Am I being clear?
Click to expand...

:alertVEGAS RULE VIOLATION:alert.............:2wave:
You're the one 'hissy fitting' anyway.....
 
Last edited:
Partisan said:
:alertVEGAS RULE VIOLATION:alert.............:2wave:
You're the one 'hissy fitting' anyway.....
Click to expand...

Fine. reported. And every post off topic will subsequently be reported. I am not going to tolerate this upstairs. Do whatever you want in the other forums, but you will not **** all over the debate forums.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom