• 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!

New Mexico to end food stamp supplement

VanceMack said:
How does this crap always devolve into an attack on successful people and organizations? Why is it that any time cuts to programs for the poor are mentioned it is always 'the rich are stealing from the poor!" Just how the hell is WalMart, as an entity that employs millions, provides entry level jobs and career opportunities for people that barely if at all made it through high school, that donates millions annually to charity, an organization that pays many millions in tax revenues, the 'bad guy' here? WalMart didnt tell those that failed to prepare for a future to spend more times on drugs and sex in high school than their education. WalMart didnt create the disability in those truly in need. Successful people dont oppress jack squat. The only people that are truly oppressed are the ones that are either victims of their own dismal effort at life or their parents. If people spent more time on taking care of themselves and on a doctrine of personal responsibility and less time blaming everyone else for their own dismal existence they would be a lot more successful. If there were a lot less failures as individuals there would be a lot more resources for those with legitimate needs.
Click to expand...

Post of the week. would you like to marry my daughter? :thumbs:
 
Yes, post of the week. Except that even successful people who are educated and who have tried are not failing because of laziness or stupidity, but because of terrible economic conditions brought on by decades of corruption (corporate and government). To deny that massive corruption and greed is responsible for this horrible mess we're in is either very dishonest or sadly delusional.
 
evanescence said:
Yes, post of the week. Except that even successful people who are educated and who have tried are not failing because of laziness or stupidity, but because of terrible economic conditions brought on by decades of corruption (corporate and government). To deny that massive corruption and greed is responsible for this horrible mess we're in is either very dishonest or sadly delusional.
Click to expand...

That plays into it, but that's also playing the "Victim" card.
I was unemployed for a while, I didn't take food stamps, welfare, or jobless bennies. My wife an dI cut spending, made sacrifices and worked on her pay check alone scarping by sometimes living off raman noodles for several days. I blamed no one, but myself for failing to a land a job, the economic situation made it difficult, but not impossible. I knew, if I suddenly was able to exist without a job and have money left over due to aide programs... it would make it easier for me to NOT find a job. Necessity is the greatest teacher.
 
winston53660 said:
I'm not attacking them you are being to sensitive.
Click to expand...

In this thread we have seen attacks on WalMart, and stealing from the poor to give to the rich...the same old tired saw.
 
Kandahar said:
Last year I donated about $15,000 to charities that work to eradicate malaria in Sub-Saharan Africa. I'm also in the process of starting my own non-profit charity to provide free online education to underprivileged children in failing schools in the United States (and perhaps eventually to children in developing countries as well). I do this in addition to working a full-time job.

What do you do again?
Click to expand...

I give to the Salvation Army, and help collect food for the local food bank. More importantly, I'm not a proponent of the government taking people's money and giving it to others.....AS YOU ARE.
 
evanescence said:
Yes, post of the week. Except that even successful people who are educated and who have tried are not failing because of laziness or stupidity, but because of terrible economic conditions brought on by decades of corruption (corporate and government). To deny that massive corruption and greed is responsible for this horrible mess we're in is either very dishonest or sadly delusional.
Click to expand...

No doubt...the economy is down. LOTS of factors and the government isnt helping things nor has it for a long long time. You forgot the individual greed that created the housing crisis...the people that bought homes and flipped them for outrageous profits, those that bought homes they could not in any way afford, those that were voluntarily stupid enough to jump into ARMs. Still...there IS work, there ARE jobs, and when we are talking the food stamp crowd I think you would be disengenuous if you suggested that the majority are people OTHER than the chronic 'downtrodden' of society.
 
hazlnut said:
What about letting people go hungry in the wealthiest country in the world... well, #2 anyway.
Click to expand...

Why don't you ask Kandahar, he's senting $15K to Africa.
 
American said:
I give to the Salvation Army, and help collect food for the local food bank. More importantly, I'm not a proponent of the government taking people's money and giving it to others.....AS YOU ARE.
Click to expand...

Relying on donations would never be enough to ease America's social problems. I think you know that.

I do believe in people being given the choice but if I were to take your stance seriously, we could apply the same argument to taxation as a whole. Why take your taxes so that your money can be used in programs that you don't support? Or anything for that matter? Every person I know - including myself - has some issue with the way the government spends money. If that were a reason for us all to not pay taxes, then our country would go under.

Are we a nation state, or are we just 310 million individuals in it for ourselves? I think you know the answer to that one too.

Mind you, with the way the government is run these days, I wouldn't have a problem if about 100 million people decided all at once one year to not pay their taxes. The reason is that I do not support the corrupt financial institutions and corporate powers which are currently running our country and overstepping our Republic.
 
Zyphlin said:
Miss Lovejoy, exactly how does AT&T relates to Arizon'a budget being problematic?

MY GOD WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!
Click to expand...

Easy. AT&T not only got away with paying absolutely nothing in the way of taxes, but they got themselves a government handout too. Who is paying for that? We are. How are we paying for it? By starving kids.
 
danarhea said:
Easy. AT&T not only got away with paying absolutely nothing in the way of taxes, but they got themselves a government handout too. Who is paying for that? We are. How are we paying for it? By starving kids.
Click to expand...

Because folks, only Government can feed children.

Jobs, in Arizona... PSHAW, jobs are nothing. Government hand outs how you live, where it's at.

(PS Your lean is still too far to the right, you should just go ahead and be completely honest about who you are, it's okay now... )
 
Temporal said:
Relying on donations would never be enough to ease America's social problems. I think you know that.

I do believe in people being given the choice but if I were to take your stance seriously, we could apply the same argument to taxation as a whole. Why take your taxes so that your money can be used in programs that you don't support? Or anything for that matter? Every person I know - including myself - has some issue with the way the government spends money. If that were a reason for us all to not pay taxes, then our country would go under.

Are we a nation state, or are we just 310 million individuals in it for ourselves? I think you know the answer to that one too.

Mind you, with the way the government is run these days, I wouldn't have a problem if about 100 million people decided all at once one year to not pay their taxes. The reason is that I do not support the corrupt financial institutions and corporate powers which are currently running our country and overstepping our Republic.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant even if true, and you haven't proven it.
 
Aunt Spiker said:
You know - they could solve all that if they just gave away food instead of throwing it in the trash at restaurants and grocery stores - consider it tax-deductable, require it to be donated to charity - cost to the state = $0.00. How many people can billions of pounds of a full variety of foods feed each year?
Click to expand...

I have been thinking that for YEARS.
 
VanceMack said:
No doubt...the economy is down. LOTS of factors and the government isnt helping things nor has it for a long long time. You forgot the individual greed that created the housing crisis...the people that bought homes and flipped them for outrageous profits, those that bought homes they could not in any way afford, those that were voluntarily stupid enough to jump into ARMs. Still...there IS work, there ARE jobs, and when we are talking the food stamp crowd I think you would be disengenuous if you suggested that the majority are people OTHER than the chronic 'downtrodden' of society.
Click to expand...

I hear this argument all the time. Banks aren't responsible because people were dumb enough to sign the contracts, so now they're SOL. I'm not buying it. Especially considering that even attorneys often struggle to comprehend the labyrinth of legal gobbledygook.

The fact is that the economy is playing a larger role in many foreclosures, bankruptcies, and unemployment than many people here are admitting. Pridefully looking down on others in terrible situations may provide a temporary source of self esteem but it isn't honest.

MrVicchio said:
That plays into it, but that's also playing the "Victim" card.
I was unemployed for a while, I didn't take food stamps, welfare, or jobless bennies. My wife an dI cut spending, made sacrifices and worked on her pay check alone scarping by sometimes living off raman noodles for several days. I blamed no one, but myself for failing to a land a job, the economic situation made it difficult, but not impossible. I knew, if I suddenly was able to exist without a job and have money left over due to aide programs... it would make it easier for me to NOT find a job. Necessity is the greatest teacher.
Click to expand...

I take it you and your wife have no kids. Because if you did, your gesture of self reliance would have put you out on the street/
 
American said:
I give to the Salvation Army, and help collect food for the local food bank. More importantly, I'm not a proponent of the government taking people's money and giving it to others.....AS YOU ARE.
Click to expand...

I refuse t9o give to the Salvation Army because they are anti-gay.
 
Kali said:
I refuse t9o give to the Salvation Army because they are anti-gay.
Click to expand...

That's a really stupid reason to not give to a charitable organization. So you wouldn't give to the Catholic Church either? Anyways, I am not 100% sure how SNAP works I thought it was funded through the government but really this sounds stupid to totally cut the program. They -could- cut the wages of the government in the state, temporarily cut any infrastructure spending, border security, and be more stringent on who gets the actual SNAP benefits such as persons with no children under a certain age, make sure they are American citizens, etc. I don't see it possible for them to actually totally ax the program.
 
This is a crime. To take a pittance... $25/month... away from the elderly and the disabled without cutting their own legislative salaries first, then cutting the free state cars and personal legislative perks, is an unacceptable travesty.

Perish the thought of actually, you know, raising taxes on people who have a taxable income of over $1,000,000/year.

Danarhea was right. They might just as well line up their old, their disabled, their starving poor and dump them into a mass grave. It would be kinder in the long run.
 
evanescence said:
I hear this argument all the time. Banks aren't responsible because people were dumb enough to sign the contracts, so now they're SOL. I'm not buying it. Especially considering that even attorneys often struggle to comprehend the labyrinth of legal gobbledygook.
Click to expand...
I dont care if you are buying it or not...its reality. The banks didnt grab people buy the throats and make them take the loans. The people sought the banks ought. They agonized over their budget and played pretend finance and convinced themselves that when the fixed rate period was over they could either refi or they would be making enough to cover the loans by then. I dont excuse the banks role, I just pointed out the component you missed...every single individual that intentionally took out a loan they knew damn good and well they couldnt afford.
 
MrVicchio said:
Because folks, only Government can feed children.
Click to expand...
Only the government has the resources to reach all children. Most charitable organization, churches, etc., only reach a few, and some of the recipients of these organizations, churches, etc., are double dipping while many don't get anything from them.

Jobs, in Arizona... PSHAW, jobs are nothing. Government hand outs how you live, where it's at.
Click to expand...
Compared to what government hands out to the wealthy "corporate welfare" - it's really not that much.
 
Interesting bit from the London papers. This pretty much mirrors what I see from county and state run agencies. The tragic legacy means the legitimatly disabled and needy individuals for which these programs were created are being choked out of existence by those that just never bothered to try. I'm pissed as a provider and a taxpayer. I'd be doubly pissed if I was someone that actually NEEDED the resources and I'd be DEMANDING real reform.

Families where no one has ever worked doubled under Labour
By Tim Shipman
"Between 1997 and 2010 the number of households in which no one has ever had a job almost doubled from 184,000 to 352,000.
This equates to more than 550,000 people for whom worklessness has become a way of life, according to the Office for National Statistics. Furthermore, seven out of ten adults in those households admit they have no intention of ever going to work. Critics say the figures are a reminder of the way a culture of benefit dependency has grown up, leaving a generation in some parts of Britain totally ignorant of the work ethic.

And in a startling confirmation of how this is passed on through the generations, the official figures show there are 265,000 under 16 years old living in households where none of the adults has ever worked.
Shockingly, 68 per cent of adults surveyed in these homes said they were ‘not seeking a job and would not like to work’.
Another 16 per cent claimed they would like to work but were not bothering to look for a job.
Just 13 per cent of those questioned were both unemployed and looking for work."

Families where no one has ever worked doubled under Labour | Mail Online

Wakey wakey...
 
DiAnna said:
This is a crime. To take a pittance... $25/month... away from the elderly and the disabled without cutting their own legislative salaries first, then cutting the free state cars and personal legislative perks, is an unacceptable travesty.
Click to expand...
There are unlimited needs when free things are given. The crime would be to spend money the state does not have.

DiAnna said:
Perish the thought of actually, you know, raising taxes on people who have a taxable income of over $1,000,000/year.
Click to expand...
How much of the tax burden do you think the top 1% of tax payers should pay? 30%? 40%? 50%? All?

DiAnna said:
Danarhea was right. They might just as well line up their old, their disabled, their starving poor and dump them into a mass grave. It would be kinder in the long run.
Click to expand...
Liberals could join together and begin to give their own money instead of other people's money. First, it would be refreshing. Secondly, it would turn many of them into conservatives who do actually give their own money. We would all benefit from a nation with fewer liberals and more conservatives.
 
mertex said:
Only the government has the resources to reach all children. . . .
Compared to what government hands out to the wealthy "corporate welfare" - it's really not that much.
Click to expand...
Which line item in the budget should I look for to see how much money the government is giving to wealthy corporations?
 
VanceMack said:
I dont care if you are buying it or not...its reality. The banks didnt grab people buy the throats and make them take the loans. The people sought the banks ought. They agonized over their budget and played pretend finance and convinced themselves that when the fixed rate period was over they could either refi or they would be making enough to cover the loans by then. I dont excuse the banks role, I just pointed out the component you missed...every single individual that intentionally took out a loan they knew damn good and well they couldnt afford.
Click to expand...

I'm really not arguing that individuals have absolutely no fault, but what I am arguing is that the current economic condition of the country is mainly the result of a corrupt government serving bankers and corporations instead of the people. Why else would the government deregulate the banks? The safety nets set up after the Great Depression have been all but removed, and now we see the results of high unemployment and stagnate wages. This didn't happen in a vacuum. And one can, of course, argue that no one who signed these contracts were under duress. But those types of contracts, full of complicated legal terms, are required to be signed for practically everything a person does from turning on their utilities to getting a cell phone. Page after page of terms, conditions, and loopholes that only corporate lawyers can understand. Facts are, we currently have banks and corporations, and a government with no accountability to the American people. We are now seeing the results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom