Old, but for those who don't know...

[skeptik]

You are an asshole if you're okay with people failing because they were fucked over and couldn't do anything about it, absolutely. People who fail because of their own faults I don't have a problem with, but when people can't make it because they're oppressed and preventing from getting ahead unjustly, there's a problem, and nobody should be okay with this.

edit: IMO

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

How do we tell apart those who are actually trying and failing and those who aren't even trying to help themselves? I think this is what it comes down to tbh.

 

[AchrisK]

Truth in that.

 

[Cythraul]

You are an asshole if you're okay with people failing because they were fucked over and couldn't do anything about it, absolutely. People who fail because of their own faults I don't have a problem with, but when people can't make it because they're oppressed and preventing from getting ahead unjustly, there's a problem, and nobody should be okay with this.

edit: IMO

Why don't you go spew your my pals-loving Christian sentiments at somebody who gives a shit?

 

[The Ozzman]

I lol'd

 

[skeptik]

Why don't you go spew your my pals-loving Christian sentiments at somebody who gives a shit?

Why don't you go change my tires?

 

[cookiecutter]

How do we tell apart those who are actually trying and failing and those who aren't even trying to help themselves? I think this is what it comes down to tbh.

There are many ways, but if it comes down to it I'd rather have some lazy person being helped than a hardworking person suffer.

Cythraul, I think you read the article more sympathetically than I did, but you did help clear up a lot of my objections, although I still disagree with you about the plausibility of the idea and the viability of Libertarian economic theory.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

Yes, there may be many ways, but it would require a giant government constantly in everyone's shit making sure people aren't being lazy, and this is where my agreements with the left end.

 

[cookiecutter]

I'm not an expert on this by any means, but one thing I like that the NDP (Social Democrats basically) in Canada want to do is spend welfare money on job training and education, rather than just a check, not only does this help the individual have success, it helps the country become more competitive economically.

 

[Dak]

How do we tell apart those who are actually trying and failing and those who aren't even trying to help themselves? I think this is what it comes down to tbh.

Yes, there may be many ways, but it would require a giant government constantly in everyone's shit making sure people aren't being lazy, and this is where my agreements with the left end.

Most intelligent 2 posts I've seen by V5 in one thread in Social.

There are many ways, but if it comes down to it I'd rather have some lazy person being helped than a hardworking person suffer.

That statement comes making the asumption that the welfare programs we have now do that. But they really don't.There is already an imbalance as it is in the difficulties between the lazy [those on the public dole / in subsidized housing] and the hard working (look at the layoff/foreclosure situation in Michigan for example). Continuing the trend you support is going to continue to reward the non-productive while ultimately punishing the hardworking member of a society.

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

That's true, they kind of don't, and this is where I am definitely more of a centrist.

 

[King Richard]

Dear god, I should have started reading this thread a long time ago. I haven't laughed this hard in a while.

 

[Heat Mizer]

Dear god, I should have started reading this thread a long time ago. I haven't laughed this hard in a while.

This thread is one of my favorites. :Smokin::Smokin:

 

[zabu of nΩd]

That statement comes making the asumption that the welfare programs we have now do that. But they really don't.There is already an imbalance as it is in the difficulties between the lazy [those on the public dole / in subsidized housing] and the hard working (look at the layoff/foreclosure situation in Michigan for example). Continuing the trend you support is going to continue to reward the non-productive while ultimately punishing the hardworking member of a society.

Please stop making these fucking generalisations without providing evidence. We all know you can't stand the idea of lazy people getting a handout. You've said it 523094 different ways by now. But if you're going to go as far as to assert that there is more unjust welfare than just welfare in our society, you need to show some facts. You can't just bullshit them out of thin air because you believe a certain way.

 

[Dak]

You completely missed the point of the qoute of mine you highlighted. The injustice I am referring too is how those already on the dole are not being hit very hard by the current economic issues, while many of those who were previously contributing are getting screwed 6 ways to sunday.
Your reading comprehension fails. As far as evidence provided I am not where I would get statistics to back this up (doubt anyone has done work comparing the effects of the current economic state on the welfare supported vs the working), but just taking a step back and looking at the current situation should suffice. But you would have to open your eyes for that.
You keep asking for me to produce evidence that the welfare system is providing a valuable and [mostly just] service. I ask you to present evidence of the opposite.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

Nice strawman there. In case you aren't aware, I was attacking your assertion, not making an assertion of my own. I certainly wouldn't go out there to say that welfare is working fine until I'd looked up some figures (which I don't feel like doing atm). All I'm saying is that your own assertion is worthless without evidence. I do not need evidence to point out to you that you're pulling conclusions out of your ass. Please learn how to debate for fuck's fucking sake.

 

[Dak]

As I stated before, I am pretty sure there are no studies/statistics done to show this information. That doesn't mean it isn't plainly visible. So although I can't hand you a bundle of papers or list of links to back up what I am saying, I really don't consider it out of my ass.
If you aren't going to challange my lack of evidence with any of your own you may as well not speak, since I didn't claim to have any hard data, just for any person of average or better intelligence to just look around at the current situation in the US.
Edit: You are arguing for the sake of arguing on this one purely because you don't like my conclusion, considering you've said 523094 times you consider the existence of haves an injustice to the have-nots.

 

[Heat Mizer]

Just out of curiousity Dak. How much did you pay for your free education in the military.. If you are really in the military. Which I highly doubt due to the fact that you don't believe in public services. Which the military clearly can be considered.

 

[Dak]

What free education in the military are you referring too? The GI Bill? Tuition assistance? Job-related military education? None of these are "free" since I've given 4 years (working on number 5 next month) of service to the US Marine Corp/ the United States citizens. I earned them.
I'm against welfare services, not all public service. Example of difference: Everyone in the US benefits from military protection, police protection,etc. Only some get benefits of welfare, food stamps, public education, etc.

 

[zabu of nΩd]

As I stated before, I am pretty sure there are no studies/statistics done to show this information. That doesn't mean it isn't plainly visible. So although I can't hand you a bundle of papers or list of links to back up what I am saying, I really don't consider it out of my ass.
If you aren't going to challange my lack of evidence with any of your own you may as well not speak, since I didn't claim to have any hard data, just for any person of average or better intelligence to just look around at the current situation in the US.
Edit: You are arguing for the sake of arguing on this one purely because you don't like my conclusion, considering you've said 523094 times you consider the existence of haves an injustice to the have-nots.

I hope you understand that it's meaningless to just say "dur look around you" as if anecdotal observation can in any way support statistical claims. All I'm saying is that you should show a little intellectual honesty and acknowledge that you have insufficient evidence to assert that welfare is doing more injustice than justice.

Also, be careful how you characterise my view on this. I've never said that the very existence of haves is an injustice to have-nots. I said that people who have money which they did not earn are not entitled to keep that money when others in their society are suffering because the odds of success are grossly stacked against them.