Americans More Dependent Than Ever on Independence Day

[tracerbullet]

An Economy which is not—sorry Barack—recovering, an economic system that has still not been reformed or restructured in any fundamental way. As some of us raise the flag alongside the fireworks and barbecues this July 4th, let’s recognize on this independence day that we now live in an age of Interdependence and have to start acting like it.

If you're going to plagiarize you should at least credit your source.

 

[JSt0rm]

Except Obama has taken far less days off than dubya, approx 170 vs 500+ for Bush, even Reagan took nearly 400. Carter only took 79.

dont break the bubble.

 

[Hugo Drax]

If you can rationalize aid to the poor on the chance they may threaten violence otherwise, I could rationalize aid to the wealthy if they represented a credible threat of violence. Probably more aid in fact since the rich could afford better weaponry with which to riot.

Or you could be an adult and say that poverty isn't an excuse for violence and if it did occur that society would be completely justified in using violence in turn to restore order. Stop excusing away violence in order to support your policy preferences to give welfare. Arguing from cowardice is the worst possible way to determine how to spend government money.

Why don't you go back and read some history and see what happens to Fiefdoms that fail to throw a bone or two to its people.

Trump going to be driving the tank? and Dick Fuld will be wearing his armor and carrying around a rifle to fire back at the hungry masses?

Poverty is an excuse for violence, if you are starving to death your animal instincts will kick in and your gonna get your piece to fill your stomach. We are animals that is a fact, what keeps things in check is keeping the Animal fed and provided some shelter.

The only reason the 1% provide all kinds of welfare/food stamps is because they do not want to repeat history, they do not want their heads on stakes and their family shot up in a bedroom and buried in some pit like the Romanovs.



1%er family who forgot to throw a bone to the masses.

 

[glenn1]

No need man. Government will just distribute $ from collected Taxes to those that need it. No violence needed, just the understanding that living in a Civilized Society has a Cost.

Ah, there you go with the magic word "need." I could argue (and have) that society owes nothing to the poor beyond ensuring their basic subsistence needs are met. Those who support higher social spending argue for a higher standard based that will meet more of the aspirational wants of the poor on the premise that "they might French Revolution otherwise which I have held is not only cowardly but despicable and immoral to accept as a premise. You don't reward the specter of violence by paying off those who you fear would commit it.

 

[glenn1]

Why don't you go back and read some history and see what happens to Fiefdoms that fail to throw a bone or two to its people.

Trump going to be driving the tank? and Dick Fuld will be wearing his armor and carrying around a rifle to fire back at the hungry masses?

Poverty is an excuse for violence, if your starving to death your animal instincts will kick in and your gonna get your piece to fill your stomach. We are animals that is a fact, what keeps things in check is keeping the Animal fed and provided some shelter.

The only reason the 1% provide all kinds of welfare/food stamps is because they do not want to repeat history, they do not want their heads on stakes and their family shot up in a bedroom and buried in some pit like the Romanovs.


1%er family who forgot to throw a bone to the masses.

You are a coward. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Hugo Drax]

Why don't you crack open some history books. You do not seem to get the concept.

 

[glenn1]

Being a progressive means you have no cognitive dissonance in telling a middle-class white guy "tell rapists not to rape" and "the way I dress is not an invitation to rape," but turn around and tell a poor black person "poverty is an excuse for violence." It infantilizes the poor and reveals the stark immorality of the person saying it.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

Righties don't need no history. Rush/Hannity/O'Reilly/Savage said it so you can just accept it as fact without looking any deeper. That would just require work and thinking anyway.

 

[sandorski]

Ah, there you go with the magic word "need." I could argue (and have) that society owes nothing to the poor beyond ensuring their basic subsistence needs are met. Those who support higher social spending argue for a higher standard based that will meet more of the aspirational wants of the poor on the premise that "they might French Revolution otherwise which I have held is not only cowardly but despicable and immoral to accept as a premise. You don't reward the specter of violence by paying off those who you fear would commit it.

No one is actually threatening you or anyone. We are just reminding you of the inevitable result of not meeting the needs(a word you whinced at with my use of it, then proceeded to use yourself) of People.

Your whining here is especially suspect when the Wealthy are making money hand over fist. You retort with such ridiculous arguments merely because some of us suggest that it is an unfair situation that those Working for these same people do not receive benefit in any sense equivalent to the Wealth being created.

 

[sandorski]

Being a progressive means you have no cognitive dissonance in telling a middle-class white guy "tell rapists not to rape" and "the way I dress is not an invitation to rape," but turn around and tell a poor black person "poverty is an excuse for violence." It infantilizes the poor and reveals the stark immorality of the person saying it.

Your willingness to turn a blind eye to your neighbours plight is the real immorality.

 

[glenn1]

Your willingness to turn a blind eye to your neighbours plight is the real immorality.

What plight is that? People aren't dying en masse from starvation or exposure in the west. Am I supposed to feel bad that people already having their basic needs supplied by society are angry that someone else has more than them? Oh what horrors, he can afford a yacht and yet all I have is food stamps and Section 8 housing, so give me more money else I might riot? Fuck that.

 

[sandorski]

What plight is that? People aren't dying en masse from starvation or exposure in the west. Am I supposed to feel bad that people already having their basic needs supplied by society are angry that someone else has more than them? Oh what horrors, he can afford a yacht and yet all I have is food stamps and Section 8 housing, so give me more money else I might riot? Fuck that.

How about those who are doing the Labour that makes their Business Owners increasingly Wealthy at record rates. Should they continue to struggle seeing no return on their Labour, falling further behind, or never knowing if their Job will exist after the next Pay Cheque because their Business Owners choose to send their Jobs elsewhere?

 

[justoh]

If you're going to plagiarize you should at least credit your source.

How could he plagiarize and credit his source?

 

[glenn1]

How about those who are doing the Labour that makes their Business Owners increasingly Wealthy at record rates. Should they continue to struggle seeing no return on their Labour, falling further behind, or never knowing if their Job will exist after the next Pay Cheque because their Business Owners choose to send their Jobs elsewhere?

Again, there is a huge chasm in between "I'm uncertain about my future job prospects" and "I'm going to riot if my welfare check gets reduced." No one in the U.S. or Canada is poor enough to riot, none. Anyone who does commit violence in the name of economic inequality as it exists in the U.S. deserves to get a baton to the head and the left should be the ones saying that the loudest. You don't justify violence, you don't excuse it away.

 

[sandorski]

Again, there is a huge chasm in between "I'm uncertain about my future job prospects" and "I'm going to riot if my welfare check gets reduced." No one in the U.S. or Canada is poor enough to riot, none. Anyone who does commit violence in the name of economic inequality as it exists in the U.S. deserves to get a baton to the head and the left should be the ones saying that the loudest. You don't justify violence, you don't excuse it away.

If you take away the only thing meeting their Needs, yes, they will riot. Because then they will be "poor enough".

 

[Linux23]

The term poverty is elusive. I am beginning to think that we should raise the minimum wage simply because the rich keep getting richer and they should be paying everyone more. I still don't understand how we can bail out a bank while they charge people 18%-40% on a credit card and only pay 0-.25% interest when they borrow money. That is extortion.

legal loansharking.

 

[sm625]

SNAP needs to be completely overhauled. The foods you can buy with EBT card should be limited to meats, produce and raw ingredients like beans, rice, flour, sugar, large cans of coffee, tea bags. Things that should not be covered by SNAP: Instant anything, things like K-cup coffee, boxed meals, Kraft frickin mac and cheese. By the way, that Kraft mac and cheese is a shining example of who has really profited from this food stamp binge. Here is a product that has tripled in price during Obama's reign. Tripled! We used to buy boxes of mac and cheese for 3 for $1 on sale, and 0.49 when not on sale. Now they are a dollar when on sale, and $1.49 regular price. WTF??? Meanwhile Kraft stock is in the upper stratosphere. Why? Because they are able to jack the price on all this stuff that people pay for with SNAP. But there's no reason SNAP should cover products like that. The ingredients of a box of mac and cheese cost no more than 15 cents, including the packaging. There is no reason anyone should accept a 1000% markup on a simple staple food item. That goes away instantly as soon as SNAP stops covering it. People want mac and cheese? Fine, go buy a big box of noodles, some milk, some butter, and a bag of powdered cheese. One $7 bag of powdered cheese can make like 40 boxes worth of mac and cheese.

 

[sm625]

An even bigger problem with SNAP is that its just so wasteful and inefficient. The program costs more than $100 million per day. $100 million per day is enough to hire 10-20 million workers and build roughly 1000 completely government funded buffet style restaurants where people can go eat for free. Like a 21st century soup kitchen, with free wifi. The scale of this waste is beyond belief. If we're really intent on spending that kind of money, then why not create 10 or 20 million jobs on the back of it? But nobody is even thinking about things like this, that's how far gone our country is. Nobody understands the scale of the fraud and abuse and those who do do not have the spine to even begin to try and tackle it. It simply does NOT cost that much money to feed a whole lot of people if done right.

 

[MongGrel]

Except Obama has taken far less days off than dubya, approx 170 vs 500+ for Bush, even Reagan took nearly 400. Carter only took 79.

Preach the squid brother !!!

:biggrin:

 

[glenn1]

An even bigger problem with SNAP is that its just so wasteful and inefficient. The program costs more than $100 million per day. $100 million per day is enough to hire 10-20 million workers and build roughly 1000 completely government funded buffet style restaurants where people can go eat for free. Like a 21st century soup kitchen, with free wifi. The scale of this waste is beyond belief. If we're really intent on spending that kind of money, then why not create 10 or 20 million jobs on the back of it? But nobody is even thinking about things like this, that's how far gone our country is. Nobody understands the scale of the fraud and abuse and those who do do not have the spine to even begin to try and tackle it. It simply does NOT cost that much money to feed a whole lot of people if done right.

Feeding people is only the stated goal of the program, the effective goal is the looting of taxpayer funds.

 

[Victorian Gray]

Obama: I will not rest ...

"However, compared to past presidents, Obama has taken relatively few vacation days. At this point in his second term, former President George W. Bush had taken a whopping 405 vacation days. Before him, Bill Clinton took a total of 174 days for himself. Another big vacationer was Ronald Reagan, who took a total of 390 days during his time in office. In comparison, Obama has only taken 161 vacation days to date."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/compared-to-past-presidents-obama-takes-few-vacations/

 

[MongGrel]

I forget the reference I used to have about people wearing red ribbons on their throats going to Guillotine parties once up a time.

 

[glenn1]

I forget the reference I used to have about people wearing red ribbons on their throats going to Guillotine parties once up a time.

Only the people being guillotined nowadays are the same poor who the left desperately hope will riot in order to gain a few more welfare concessions. How many millions of poor and mostly minority folks are imprisoned nowadays, and how many rich people do you see on death row? For that matter, when was the last time a rich person was killed by a mob of poors? If you can say "not within the lifetime of anyone alive on this board" then you win the no-shit-sherlock prize. The rich not only aren't scared of a prole revolution because of wealth inequality, they'd welcome it so they could have legal cause to unleash the pinkertons to carry out a massive beatdown.

 

[nickqt]

Only the people being guillotined nowadays are the same poor who the left desperately hope will riot in order to gain a few more welfare concessions. How many millions of poor and mostly minority folks are imprisoned nowadays, and how many rich people do you see on death row? For that matter, when was the last time a rich person was killed by a mob of poors? If you can say "not within the lifetime of anyone alive on this board" then you win the no-shit-sherlock prize. The rich not only aren't scared of a prole revolution because of wealth inequality, they'd welcome it so they could have legal cause to unleash the pinkertons to carry out a massive beatdown.

Holy shit, I think this is the second meta post I've agreed with you on today.

The rich, who own and operate this country for their own behalf, are not worried about the rabble rioting. The rabble have cell phones on which to play candy crush, post their locations to Facebook/NSA, and swipe left or right to have their genitals carelessly handled by strangers. And if they're at home, they're sitting in front of their idiot box burning neurons by the thousands.

The rich, who own and operate this country for their own behalf, have written the laws and captured the regulators, ensuring that they'll remain wealthy and powerful. And as you've stated, their "Pinkertons" are simply private security officers who are as we speak being writen laws for concealed carry and open carry in the 50 states. CCW and "Stand Your Ground" laws aren't designed to allow some poor member of the rabble to defend his/her home from someone. They are designed to provide civil liability for private security officers hired by the rich who own and operate this country for their own behalf. The second amendment continues to exist because it allows for personal mercenary forces. Especially if shit hits the fan.

 

[MongGrel]