[Wondergirl]

Yeah I know... there is no answer except keeping them perpetually in the dependency of the state

So that's the best you can do?

[tomder55]

Where do the poor get money for starting up?

Maybe you think it's a new idea or a poor person to go from nothing to prosperity . In fact millions of Americans have done it throughout our history .

[tomder55]

So that's the best you can do?

That appears to be the best the left can do

[Wondergirl]

Maybe you think it's a new idea or a poor person to go from nothing to prosperity . In fact millions of Americans have done it throughout our history .

And how many have tried and failed? Especially during the past ten years.

And have many millions succeeded during the past ten years?

[tomder55]

Always shifting the goal posts . Without knowing the numbers I would guess no because liberal policies have been a disincentive for the poor to take the initiative . I'm willing to bet with the required research I could give you anecdotal evidence that yes ,even in this economy ,a person with the drive can over come all the obstacles the left throws in their way ,and succeed and prosper . No doubt you would call that the exception .

By the way .46.5 million people live in poverty in the US . But the total collecting 'welfare 'like benefits is 151 million Americans (MORE than half the population) . That's means that only 43% of all those on welfare are officially considered poor. Think about that.

[Wondergirl]

By the way .46.5 million people live in poverty in the US

And 46.5 million people can come up with an idea for a start-up company and will make money?

During the early '90s, I had a terrific idea for a start-up company, gave it a jazzy name, am smart and cute, had a fantastic business plan and product, live in a high-density area with lots of potential customers, but couldn't get far with it. Marketing was the problem -- but I did try (and failed). So you're saying 46.5 million people will be able to outdo me in this economy?

[talaniman]

I know Tom, a living wage for workers cuts to deep into profits so its better to close a factory and go to a country and pay low wages and have no labor laws or unions to stop the flow of money to corporate pockets. Then YOU guys complain about government largess in filling the gaps.

Then vote against a jobs bill because its either too expensive or its not the job of government to create jobs but the private sector makes trillions and hoards it. And you ask why the economy slogs along.

I haven't even mentioned how you guys hold the door open for 1%,and shut it for the rest. Even yourself.

[paraclete]

A

By the way .46.5 million people live in poverty in the US . But the total collecting 'welfare 'like benefits is 151 million Americans (MORE than half the population) . That's means that only 43% of all those on welfare are officially considered poor. Think about that.

The issue isn't the number but the incentive, if the welfare is such that there is no need to try then it won't happen, but perhaps the definition of poverty needs revision. Here is a definition of poverty

Poverty is a state of privation, or a lack of the usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions

In the US this equates to an income if $23,000 a year, but such things are relative to where you live

[Tuttyd]

By the way .46.5 million people live in poverty in the US . But the total collecting 'welfare 'like benefits is 151 million Americans (MORE than half the population) . That's means that only 43% of all those on welfare are officially considered poor. Think about that.

Probably says something about the cost of living and the amount people are being paid. Not everyone wants to live in the hope of securing a second or third job so one day they can become independently wealthy. And why should they?

[tomder55]

Probably says something about the cost of living and the amount people are being paid. Not everyone wants to live in the hope of securing a second or third job so one day they can become independently wealthy. And why should they?

That would be in line with the personal choices we make. The left used to favor choice . They still do when it comes to the choice of wacking a baby... or what gender to "marry " . Beyond that ,choice is intolerable .

[tomder55]

The issue isn't the number but the incentive, if the welfare is such that there is no need to try then it won't happen, but perhaps the definition of poverty needs revision. Here is a definition of poverty

Quote:
Poverty is a state of privation, or a lack of the usual or socially acceptable amount of money or material possessions

In the US this equates to an income if $23,000 a year, but such things are relative to where you live

Yup

[smoothy]

Hello Carol:

In a nutshell, the right wing doesn't believe being on welfare provides an incentive to go to work. They believe HUNGER will.

excon

Its not what we believe... its they way it really is.

There is no timeline when Welfare ends, not months or years... not even after 4 or 5 generations..

When you can get a check without getting off the couch... why go out and work. Otherwise they would have... you could probably count the number of people that made the choice to get off welfare and go to work on their own initiative, since its inception on your fingers.

[Tuttyd]

That would be in line with the personal choices we make. The left used to favor choice . They still do when it comes to the choice of wacking a baby... or what gender to "marry " . Beyond that ,choice is intolerable .

I wouldn't know much about that. As far as I know in my country there is no abortion on demand, except in Victoria and there is no gay marriage. Other than that our choices are pretty good.

[paraclete]

I wouldn't know much about that. As far as I know in my country there is no abortion on demand, except in Victoria and there is no gay marriage. Other than that our choices are pretty good.

Other than the ACT which feels it must be in the forefront of everything. But I agree with you we are not oppressed in any sense, not by a phony war on drugs or a phony war on poverty. We have much less poverty, because we have health care available to all and I not speaking about emergency rooms although they are the care of choice for some. I don't know about abortion on demand though I observe that a young person in my family has been able to go down that road twice without any restrictions

[Tuttyd]

Other than the ACT which feels it must be in the forefront of everything. But I agree with you we are not oppressed in any sense, not by a phony war on drugs or a phony war on poverty. We have much less poverty, because we have health care available to all and I not speaking about emergency rooms although they are the care of choice for some. I don't know about abortion on demand though I observe that a young person in my family has been able to go down that road twice without any restrictions

Yes, I am not exactly sure myself. One would have to do some research into how the abortion laws operate in various states.

[tomder55]

Yes, I am not exactly sure myself. One would have to do some research into how the abortion laws operate in various states.

Imagine that... states have powers independent of the national government... what a concept ! So you haven't had an imperial court decide that wacking babies is a national natural right ?

[Tuttyd]

Imagine that... states have powers independent of the national government... what a concept ! So you haven't had an imperial court decide that wacking babies is a national natural right ?

As far as my understanding goes this is correct. I find what you are saying very interesting. For some reason we don't have Federalists jumping up and down demanding national abortion laws.

I don't really know why. Perhaps it is just part of the Australian psyche. I guess we accept that the states do things and the Federal government does things. Federalism versus statism is a non-issue.

Maybe because our Constitution is based on brevity. We have no Bill of Rights. I think the our Constitution does say that state laws must not be in conflict with Federal laws, but I can't really remember when this was ever an issue. Our Supreme Court has little work to do compared to yours.

I think we are actually a rather conservative lot when it comes to some issues. This is why I think it is rather amusing when you want to say Clete, and perhaps myself are left wing.

[talaniman]

Abortion in Australia - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[paraclete]

Yes, I am not exactly sure myself. One would have to do some research into how the abortion laws operate in various states.

I think it is a case of don't get caught

[paraclete]

I think we are actually a rather conservative lot when it comes to some issues. This is why I think it is rather amusing when you want to say Clete, and perhaps myself are left wing.

When did they get the impression I am left wing? By Australian political standards I am centre right, but that is a long way left of right of our US cousins.

The reality is you and I have lived with subsidised health care for a long time, It hasn't killed us yet despite the horror stories. We have lived with social restructuring, the government fiddling with everything from transport to taxation. We have lived with gun control. I can't really say I am worse off but I might be the exception. The only thing that has cost me any money is the crisis that arises in the US with monotonous regularity

The is a polarised electorate in the US and I don't think they know how to deal with this. They don't seem to understand you can't have your way all the time