• 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!

Arizona Makes Painful Deficit Cuts, Including Welfare

Course if you have much of a clue about welfare you'd know a great deal of the money subsidizes WORKERS who, with double jobs, don't break above the benefit line. :doh

But it is fun to look at the 10% and rant the same old tired whines I have heard since the 70's when it comes to welfare.

Fact is the death of social security has been announced and denounced since it's very beginning, yet it continues to bounce along. I'd opine most who wail at it's failure WANT it to fail, it fix is easy enough IF done in a timely manner. our current 'troubles' come from a big bump in the birth rate after WWII, a big rat going down the belly of the python, more a one-off than a trend. IF those who use social security to arouse the under-informed on the CON rant wing were a bit more honest social security wouldn't be a big issue.

Another fun fact is most of our society lives paycheck to paycheck and if they stopped spending and started saving many who thought they were well to do would be out of work! :shock:

Try reading about a consumer based economy sometime before pronouncing a generation doesn't save is THE ill of our nation. :peace

Social safety nets should be limited. A reliance on social safety nets (what we have today) is harmful.
 
SS is also brazenly unconstitutional since setting up an old-benefits system is NOT one of the listed powers of congress. So is obamacare and 99% of what the feds do. The Supreme Court says otherwise but it's not their call to make.

Wrong. It IS their call to make since they are the ultimate interpreter of the constitution. It's a matter of getting those who are loyal only to the constitution, not a politician.
 
SS is also brazenly unconstitutional since setting up an old-benefits system is NOT one of the listed powers of congress. So is obamacare and 99% of what the feds do. The Supreme Court says otherwise but it's not their call to make.

YOu have no concept of what the constitution is or does. Take it up with your ultra conservative ruled SCOTUS who seem to disagree with you.
 
It seems that some of the posters here who object to 5 year olds getting "hand outs" would be happier in ghetto arizona
 
Social safety nets should be limited. A reliance on social safety nets (what we have today) is harmful.

There is a fine line between a safety net and a hammock.
 
Conservatives keep trying to kill it and it just doesn't die. It's a government program that has not missed one single payment in its what... eighty years? It's currently running a $2.8 trillion surplus and that's with that stupid cap on the wealthy. Even with conservatives handicapping the program it can currently payout 100% payments as it always has for until 2037 no problem. Remove the cap and it would remain solvent.

removing the cap brings with it higher benefits payouts to those whom put in more.....


well, unless y'all don't want to pay additional benefits to those whom put in more... but that changes the whole program from a retirement insurance scheme to a means tested welfare scheme.
 
No one should get handouts.

Legal or not.

Handouts are moronic.

Handouts are moronic?

I agree that welfare is out of control...but are you saying that the government helping emotionally and physically handicapped people (who cannot work) is 'moronic'?

Are you saying handouts to orphaned children is 'moronic'?

Are you saying that handouts - say income supplements or healthcare cost assistance - for injured veterans is 'moronic'?
 
I'm OK with people not having to pay for others.

Kids would most likely go to an orphanage. It isn't pretty by any means.

I love this utopia that the libertarians envision. There are no taxes and thus no social safety net, no healthcare, no schools. Government is small and they don't regulate your guns. People get to eat what they kill. The riches go only to the smart, the powerful and the well connected.

On earth, we do have such a place: a libertarian paradise. Its called Somalia.

While is fine td advocate for smaller government and a thinner safety net, its absurd (and naive) to think you can have a civilization completely devoid of them. Sorry pal, libertarianism is a nice little theory, but its complete fantasy. It's an ill-conceived political philosophy that somehow believes all the ills and misfortunes of the world can be willed away.
 
Last edited:
Social safety nets should be limited. A reliance on social safety nets (what we have today) is harmful.
Uh, SNAP and TANF are "limited", as is UE. Not having "safety nets" can be deadly, but then again....that is what some want. Particularly those with fascist monikers.
 
Handouts are moronic?

I agree that welfare is out of control...but are you saying that the government helping emotionally and physically handicapped people (who cannot work) is 'moronic'?

Are you saying handouts to orphaned children is 'moronic'?

Are you saying that handouts - say income supplements or healthcare cost assistance - for injured veterans is 'moronic'?
What else would you expect from Herr Luftwaffe?
 
What else would you expect from Herr Luftwaffe?

True.

But I am giving him a chance to not 'throw the baby out with the bath water'.

Life is rarely black and white...usually it's (imo) light grey and dark grey.
 
I love this utopia that the libertarians envision. There are no taxes and thus no social safety net, no healthcare, no schools. Government is small and they don't regulate your guns. People get to eat what they kill. The riches go only to the smart, the powerful and the well connected.

On earth, we do have such a place: a libertarian paradise. Its called Somalia.

While is fine td advocate for smaller government and a thinner safety net, its absurd (and naive) to think you can have a civilization completely devoid of them. Sorry pal, libertarianism is a nice little theory, but its complete fantasy. It's an ill-conceived political philosophy that somehow believes all the ills and misfortunes of the world can be willed away.

When did I say to get rid of taxes or schools?
 
Uh, SNAP and TANF are "limited", as is UE. Not having "safety nets" can be deadly, but then again....that is what some want. Particularly those with fascist monikers.

The German word for Air Force is fascist?

Cool, the more I know I guess.
 
Handouts are moronic?

I agree that welfare is out of control...but are you saying that the government helping emotionally and physically handicapped people (who cannot work) is 'moronic'?

Are you saying handouts to orphaned children is 'moronic'?

Are you saying that handouts - say income supplements or healthcare cost assistance - for injured veterans is 'moronic'?

Not good examples.

Injured veterans were injured doing work for the government. There was work being inputted into the system and a reward was generated. That right there would be more akin to workers compensation as compared to straight up welfare.

"Emotionally and physically handicapped"

Emotionally handicapped? Eeehhhhhh. Physically handicapped? Depends on what they were doing before.

"Handouts to orphaned children are moronic?"

Can children work? No. Therefore, if their parents cannot take care of them and they go to an orphanage then said orphanages can be subsidized. However, once those kids reach working age, any and all handouts (including living in the orphanage) should end immediately.
 
Only public schools and tax on the wealthy.

When did I say that? I went to public schools for the majority of my life. Why would I want to get rid of them?

Also, I've always proposed that the wealthy pay more in taxes while the middle class gets some tax relief.
 
When did I say that? I went to public schools for the majority of my life. Why would I want to get rid of them?

Also, I've always proposed that the wealthy pay more in taxes while the middle class gets some tax relief.
Wow, ya through Me for a loop, Keep on goose-stepping man, thumbs up.
 
Wrong. It IS their call to make since they are the ultimate interpreter of the constitution. It's a matter of getting those who are loyal only to the constitution, not a politician.

Really? Where does the constitution say the supreme court is the ultimate interpreter of the constitution.? In fact where does it say anything about who has authority to interpret the constitution.?

Fact is the issue is never mentioned, which means, by the tenth amendment, that the states have the authority.
 
When did I say to get rid of taxes or schools?

Sorry man, I was not talking about you, but using you as a prop to rail against the fallacies of libertarianism.

Many in the libertarian movement are against government schools. I realize there are no ideological purists (thank god). Hopefully, all of us, be it progressive, conservative, libertarian, socialist.... whatever, are at the end of the day pragmatists and can recognize the extremes of any political ideology are bad.
 
Sorry man, I was not talking about you, but using you as a prop to rail against the fallacies of libertarianism.

Many in the libertarian movement are against government schools. I realize there are no ideological purists (thank god). Hopefully, all of us, be it progressive, conservative, libertarian, socialist.... whatever, are at the end of the day pragmatists and can recognize the extremes of any political ideology are bad.

Have I used you as a prop to rail against "progressivism" because there was a lot of STUPID **** passed by progressives.

Alcohol prohibition and massive gun control and excessive social safety nets being among the top three.

But of course, whatever.
 
The German word for Air Force is fascist?

Cool, the more I know I guess.
If a poster wants to create an online personality that includes nativist, anti-liberal, randian/fascist argument while naming themselves after a commonly understood reference associated with fascist Germany, it is entirely his prerogative, but it is the height of absurdity for him to express surprise when a casual observer notices the goose stepping rhetoric combined with said moniker. If the poster wants to play innocent, they can, but they are not fooling many.
 
If a poster wants to create an online personality that includes nativist, anti-liberal, randian/fascist argument while naming themselves after a commonly understood reference associated with fascist Germany, it is entirely his prerogative, but it is the height of absurdity for him to express surprise when a casual observer notices the goose stepping rhetoric combined with said moniker. If the poster wants to play innocent, they can, but they are not fooling many.

Advocating for the weakening of welfare is inherently fascist? LOL
 
Advocating for the weakening of welfare is inherently fascist? LOL
"uh-huh-huh-huh, I can't understand that anti-welfare is a right-wing/authoritarian position that does align with fascist ideology, uhuhhuhuh.."
 
"uh-huh-huh-huh, I can't understand that anti-welfare is a right-wing/authoritarian position that does align with fascist ideology, uhuhhuhuh.."

That's bull**** and you know it.

Are you saying that before the depression America was just a huge ball of fascism in the north and south?
 
Back
Top Bottom