It won't be a popular view though.Originally posted by: Ulfwald
I think he hit the nail on the head. But then again, the truth always hurts doesn't it?
You already stated what was 'wrong' with it.The person is just voiceing an oppinion that is not PC.
Originally posted by: GermyBoy
The problem is that the parents of these little buggers don't have birth control. Stupidity is like a right these days. We should take away breeding rights of those who cannot be good parents. Chop it off, tie it up or whatever. Little "monsters" like this never should have been born. God doesn't love them.
Originally posted by: JuMpR629
I think it's an intelligent article with good ideas but I can't take it seriously unless there are statistics to back up all the facts he makes about blacks. How do you KNOW they're having sex, selling drugs, etc?
The statistics are very well documented. He didn't point to them due to a constricting article length.Originally posted by: JuMpR629
I think it's an intelligent article with good ideas but I can't take it seriously unless there are statistics to back up all the facts he makes about blacks. How do you KNOW they're having sex, selling drugs, etc?
It was sarcasm to poke fun at people who say kids do it because of how they dress, like "We never used to wear baggy pants like that. How disrespectful. Kids these days! No wonder they kill each other!"Originally posted by: notfred
What the hell was the point of the whole "baggy pants" thing?
Originally posted by: shinerburke
It won't be a popular view though.Originally posted by: Ulfwald
I think he hit the nail on the head. But then again, the truth always hurts doesn't it?
Welfare should be for extreme circumstances. Clearly with the number on it this is not the case. Society needs to ween itself away from welfare saving it for those who truly need it. Of course this has to be gradual. If tomorrow suddenly all these millions of people found themselves without money it would be castastrophic.Originally posted by: LordSnailz
The article brings up a good issue but I totally do not agree with some of the points in the article, the one that stood out was his last sentence, "stop welfare payments, and you'll end the madness" . That is ridiculus, stop welfare is exactly what we do not want to do. The so called "monsters" are barely getting through life with the welfare they are given, imagine what would happen if there are no welfare, the problems he listed will just get will many times worse. So no stopping welfare payments is not the answer.
my 2 cents.
Originally posted by: Skoorb
Welfare should be for extreme circumstances. Clearly with the number on it this is not the case. Society needs to ween itself away from welfare saving it for those who truly need it. Of course this has to be gradual. If tomorrow suddenly all these millions of people found themselves without money it would be castastrophic.Originally posted by: LordSnailz
The article brings up a good issue but I totally do not agree with some of the points in the article, the one that stood out was his last sentence, "stop welfare payments, and you'll end the madness" . That is ridiculus, stop welfare is exactly what we do not want to do. The so called "monsters" are barely getting through life with the welfare they are given, imagine what would happen if there are no welfare, the problems he listed will just get will many times worse. So no stopping welfare payments is not the answer.
my 2 cents.