 |
Well said. I'm generally not a fan of government aid because, among other reasons, it does not make a personal connection with the person. What they need is what you stated above which is really good.Quote:
Financial help isn't always what's needed to get someone energized. I've always enjoyed helping people figure out ways to help themselves and be hopeful.
I agree with the personal connection, but feel government has a crucial role to play as far as professional resources are concerned. As it stands the financial barely covers food.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Unless, of course, you include the housing and medical allowances as well as job training.Quote:
As it stands the financial barely covers food.
Typically those are paid to providers and the eligible recipient has no hand in those transactions. It's a process that your STATE controls.
It's still money being spent for the individual. To say the financial barely covers food is simply not correct. It covers a lot more than just food.
I would certainly like to live where welfare covers more than food and a few bare essentials
You don't have to move. Just start helping people from your personal income.
And I do. Plus, I pay taxes.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Section 8 housing. Food stamps. Medicaid.
As I've said before, no American has a right to another American's money. Mandatory charity is not charity.
How about people start helping me from their personal income which is greater than mine, don't see it happening. We should strip all millionaires, all billionaires down to basic income then maybe they would realise the misery capitalism visits on the world and get realistic taxation systems which tax the gross not the net, the real rather than the imaginary after deductions, if we got real, 10% would be a reasonable income tax for private individualsQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Not a fair statement. Capitalism has done more to lift poor people out of poverty than any other system by far. In the United States, the vast majority of poor people have some sort of disability, are too lazy to work, or have made poor life decisions that hinder their progress, but the problem is not capitalism. "Rags to riches" stories are abundant where capitalism prevails.Quote:
maybe they would realise the misery capitalism visits on the world
That's a great idea, but trying to get rid of deductions in the U.S. would be tough. At any rate, if we went to 10%, our national debt problem would become even worse than it is now since revenues would drop.Quote:
if we got real, 10% would be a reasonable income tax for private individuals
You don't get the point, the rich don't pay anything, half your population pays nothing, the whole system is an illusion that is why your debt is rising. The reason this is so is deductions, so lower the rate and abolish the deductions, revenue would riseQuote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
Now that statement is what we in the south call a "whopper"! The top 1% of income earners in America pay nearly half of federal income tax. The top 20% pay over 80%. The bottom 50% of earners, on the other hand, pay basically nothing.Quote:
the rich don't pay anything
Total income for 2017 was about 17 trillion. 10% of that would be 1.7 trillion, which is about where it is now in terms of income tax revenues, so revenue would not rise. Now I'm all in favor of doing it, but the liberal dems will raise cane about it so you can forget about that happening. They will say it is not progressive. They will also point out the person making 30 thou a year with two kids and a medical bill of 10 thou. How will you answer that? And the half that pay no income tax, take a wild guess who they vote for, and what the chances are that their political party will take part in making them pay taxes.
The problem is with spending, not with revenues. We would have to increase income tax revenue by 50% to cover the budget deficit. That simply is not going to happen, and certainly should not happen. Spending must be cut a lot. I'd really like to see us start a variable income tax that rises or falls as much as is needed to cover spending. You'd see spending cuts by the dozens if we did that.
Quote:
As I've said before, no American has a right to another American's money. Mandatory charity is not charity.
Mandatory charity is not about charity, It’s about the kind of country we want to be – who we back, who we reward, what we expect of people, the kind of signals we send to the next generation.
Quote:
I assure you the American dream is alive and well for those who are willing to work for it.
Quote:
What about those who are willing but unable to work for it?
I'm referring to those who have children and aren't married, live amongst family who give them emotional and perhaps financial support, who have never lived away from "home", who didn't do well in school and maybe don't even have a hs
diploma.
But those same people who come across the Border, (I'm referring to those who have children and aren't married, live amongst family who give them emotional and perhaps financial support, who have never lived away from "home", who didn't do well in school and maybe don't even have a hs diploma) believe in the "American dream" and are more than willing to work for it.
The American dream is alive...for those who believe.
It's more about the use of taxpayer funds to buy votes.Quote:
Mandatory charity is not about charity, It’s about the kind of country we want to be – who we back, who we reward, what we expect of people, the kind of signals we send to the next generation.
Like the big beautiful wall, or chanting lock her up, or make America great again? Oops, he wasn't buying votes he was rousting his base through fear, hate, and anger. It worked. Still works because he is still rousting his base. I suppose supplying red meat to his loonies is buying votes.
Build the wall. Build the wall. Build the wall.
The dufus won't have Clinton emails to kick around in the next election, but the dems should have a treasure trove of the dufus being the dufus in 2020.
https://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cac...86/1708609.jpghttps://www.arcamax.com/newspics/cac...97/1709735.jpg
Yep. Amazingly good economy. Someone who actually believes in doing something to have a secure southern border. Appointing court judges who really think the rule of law is important. Stands up against abortion. And he will have the gifts that just keep on giving such as AOC, Ilhan Omar, Bernie Sanders, and the Green New Deal. Now if he can just learn to speak with discipline, he will win. That is, of course, a big if.
So, if people south of our border want to find that dream and achieve a good life, why don't our own down-and-out citizens whose ancestors came here centuries ago (to find the American dream) do whatever they can to climb higher?Quote:
But those same people who come across the Border, (I'm referring to those who have children and aren't married, live amongst family who give them emotional and perhaps financial support, who have never lived away from "home", who didn't do well in school and maybe don't even have a hs diploma) believe in the "American dream" and are more than willing to work for it.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:20 PM. |