• 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!

Best US President

Who Was the Best US President?

  • Abraham Lincoln

    Votes: 15 19.0%
  • Franklin Roosevelt

    Votes: 20 25.3%
  • George Washington

    Votes: 9 11.4%
  • Thomas Jefferson

    Votes: 5 6.3%
  • Theodore Roosevelt

    Votes: 4 5.1%
  • Woodrow Wilson

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Andrew Jackson

    Votes: 2 2.5%
  • Harry Truman

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Lyndon Johnson

    Votes: 1 1.3%
  • Other (please list below)

    Votes: 22 27.8%

  • Total voters
    79
So you don't even know what you are bitching and moaning about.

In the mean time you like to brag about how rich you are:roll:

do you really want to pretend to claim you think you know what I know?

you like to whine how much others owe you something because you have crappy luck.

the cost of government is mainly driven by the middle class and paid for by the wealthy.
 
Because working is hard... :mrgreen:

I had a t-shirt that had a donkey lying in a hammock drinking a cocktail saying

VOTE DEMOCRAT IT SURE BEATS WORKING

good night all
 
Remind me why less is better

because its what the founders wanted

because it costs us less

and mainly, because I like seeing the teat sucklers have to find their own meals
 
do you really want to pretend to claim you think you know what I know?

you like to whine how much others owe you something because you have crappy luck.

the cost of government is mainly driven by the middle class and paid for by the wealthy.


Then make a lucid argument supporting your suppositions.
 
because its what the founders wanted

because it costs us less

and mainly, because I like seeing the teat sucklers have to find their own meals

Con Agra would most likely not support your POV.
 
I don't recall seeing any proof from you other than lame platitudes

Oops, gosh you must have missed it the 10,000 times I've posted it to you. Most recently 35 minutes ago:

As you know, intergenerational income mobility is much higher and poverty much lower in countries that spend more on poverty amelioration. That is, obviously, what one would expect to happen and in fact it does.

remind me why more government is better.

TD. You just run around in circles. You assert a position, somebody presents a counter argument against it, you don't even try to defend your position, you just toss out a new position, it gets countered, new position, and so on, until you're back at your first position again and you repeat.
 

From one link in that article where most of the links didn't work:

The SafeLink Wireless service will provide eligible low-income
households a free cell phone, mobile access to emergency services and
free 68 minutes of air time, monthly, for one year. The cell phone
offers in-demand features: voicemail, text, call waiting,
international calling to over 60 destinations and caller ID.

WOW they can all 911 in an emergency and have some minutes to possibly get a ring from a potential employer.
 
From one link in that article where most of the links didn't work:

The SafeLink Wireless service will provide eligible low-income
households a free cell phone, mobile access to emergency services and
free 68 minutes of air time, monthly, for one year. The cell phone
offers in-demand features: voicemail, text, call waiting,
international calling to over 60 destinations and caller ID.

WOW they can all 911 in an emergency and have some minutes to possibly get a ring from a potential employer.

Not my responsibility for them. They don't need international calling and, in terms of an employer, they can apply in person and check back later.
 
Not my responsibility for them. They don't need international calling and, in terms of an employer, they can apply in person and check back later.

Get real. it is the 21st century
 
Also assuming there library hasn't been shut down due to budget cuts.

their*

Anyway, if they need computer access: there are relatives which probably have a computer, there are neighbors, etc.
 
their*

Anyway, if they need computer access: there are relatives which probably have a computer, there are neighbors, etc.


Uhmm yeah odds are the poor live in guess what...a poor neighborhood.

And the one person with a 'puter might want to use it for themselves!
 
Anyway, if they need computer access: there are relatives which probably have a computer, there are neighbors, etc.

You don't understand serious urban poverty. No, there are not relatives or neighbors who have a computer. People who live in a community where people have computers generally aren't on welfare. People with those kinds of community resources have much, much, better options than being on welfare available to them.
 
Uhmm yeah odds are the poor live in guess what...a poor neighborhood.

And the one person with a 'puter might want to use it for themselves!

Well then take it up with them, not me or my taxes.
 
You don't understand serious urban poverty. No, there are not relatives or neighbors who have a computer. People who live in a community where people have computers generally aren't on welfare. People with those kinds of community resources have much, much, better options than being on welfare available to them.

I don't? You're telling me what I do and don't understand? That's rich. (pun intended)

There are options, you have to look for them. It's not our responsibility to say "oh you are looking for a job but can't afford a cell phone? Here's one of the taxpayers dime!"
 
I don't? You're telling me what I do and don't understand? That's rich. (pun intended)

Yeah, that you assumed somebody in that situation would have friends and neighbors who have computers is a strikingly obvious indication that you don't know what the life they lead is like at all. No clue. I used to run a program that worked with kids in abject poverty in DC. We did a goal setting activity once where we asked them to name somebody they knew that had a job that they would like to have one day. All of them- every single one- struggled to come up with an answer and when we pushed them, we only got one of four responses from each of them: teacher, police officer, probation officer or person that works for a program that works with kids in abject poverty in DC. Those were the only people they knew who had jobs. The cops, their probation officers, their teachers and us. That was it. None of their relatives had jobs, none of their neighbors had jobs, none of their friends' parents had jobs, there were no businesses in their neighborhoods except for the occasional store where their only interaction with the employee was through bulletproof glass. Somebody who is on welfare can't afford a computer and most the people in their community didn't qualify for welfare because they didn't have kids or because they had already exhausted their 5 years, so they were pretty much scrounging for food. That's the world these sorts of programs are designed to work in, not a world where people have neighbors with computers.

There are options, you have to look for them. It's not our responsibility to say "oh you are looking for a job but can't afford a cell phone? Here's one of the taxpayers dime!"

That doesn't even mean anything. It's just an empty slogan. Responsibility does have anything to do with it. Our economic success as a country- all of ours- depends on getting as many people out of poverty as possible. The median American generates $3 million of GDP in their lifetime. If we can get a person out of poverty for anything less than $3 million, that's a net gain for the country. That means more employees, more customers, more inventions, more new companies being started... The US leaves huge amounts of money on the table for no reason by underfunding poverty amelioration. There are tons and tons of opportunities to increase our GDP by millions just by spending thousands and we don't take them because the slogans of the right prevent them from seeing it. If giving somebody a cell phone enables even 1 out of 1,000 of them to get a job each month, that is a HUGE, WINDFALL profit for the country. 1,000 months of the cheapest possible cell phone coverage costs maybe $30,000, so if that one person gets out, that's a net gain for the country of $2,970,000.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom