9 out of 10 Americans completely wrong

Again,
I didn't cause his autism. I'm not the fault of his condition. Why do you think it is my responsibility to provide for him?

Saying things like "I could have aborted him", and "let him wander away and drown as a child in a nearby river", is taking things to an extreme. I've never advocated any such action on your part.

There used to be a time when people that were disabled were taken care of voluntarily by their community. Somehow, that has turned into forcing the taxpayer (community) to take care of them. Forcing me to give part of my earnings to support another is at best involuntary servitude (which is illegal for me to do) and at worst slavery (also illegal for me to do). Surely you agree that it is both legally and morally wrong for me to force you to financially support my children. The governments taxation actions may have made those acts legal (for the government to do), but it doesn't make them morally right.

Bullshit...they were put away in orphanges, then state schools and hospitals....unless you're going back to the Revolutionary war days...
Define orphan and you may find your answer.

The institution I work for? Has been open since the late 1800's. It was an epileptic colony in the very beginning then by 1900, it was talking in the developmentally disabled....but included in those ranks were autistics, mentally ill and kids that no one wanted.

I've been in this field for almost 25 years... trust me....you don't know Jack about this stuff.
 
I've been in this field for almost 25 years... trust me....you don't know Jack about this stuff.
That is SO true !!

But that creature doesn't know Jack about anything!!

The only possible excuse for him that I can see is that he is an antiquated relic of a bygone era who has gone completely ga-ga.
.
 
KG shouldn't call you a "welfare queen".
But why do think it is the states responsibility (tax payer) to support your son?
I didn't cause his autism. I'm not the fault of his condition. Why do you think it is my responsibility to provide for him?

Because as a civilized society we take care of our disabled and elderly. If you want to go back to primitive times, we can take him into the woods and leave him to die on his own, but today, we'd end up in jail for that. My husband has parkinson's, I have arthritis and other problems and we can't continue to handle an adult that disabled. He ripped out several walls in our home. Did you expect us to just let him kill us? He still would have ended up being taken care of by the state, at your expense. And of course, if we took him out into the woods, the state would have us institutionalized and you'd be paying for us instead. What exactly was my other choice? I suppose I could have aborted him, if I'd known he was going to have autism, but I didn't. I suppose I could have been a worse mother and let him wander away and drown as a child in a nearby river as happened to another autistic boy near here. I really don't understand what you want me to do here, please explain it.
Again,
I didn't cause his autism. I'm not the fault of his condition. Why do you think it is my responsibility to provide for him?

Saying things like "I could have aborted him", and "let him wander away and drown as a child in a nearby river", is taking things to an extreme. I've never advocated any such action on your part.

There used to be a time when people that were disabled were taken care of voluntarily by their community. Somehow, that has turned into forcing the taxpayer (community) to take care of them. Forcing me to give part of my earnings to support another is at best involuntary servitude (which is illegal for me to do) and at worst slavery (also illegal for me to do). Surely you agree that it is both legally and morally wrong for me to force you to financially support my children. The governments taxation actions may have made those acts legal (for the government to do), but it doesn't make them morally right.

You have yet to come up with any action that I can do to take him off of the dole. You have only blamed me for being a "welfare queen" and somehow forcing you to support my son. He's over 18 and was before we got any help for him at all. Do you really think parents who never expected or did anything to deserve special needs kids should be on the hook for the rest of their lives? You have provided no alternative for me. None. Tell me, what is my choice? What can I do? We do not have the health to continue to provide for him ourselves. We aren't rich. We don't have the money to provide for him. Tell me, what am I suppose to do, other than feel guilty for ever "forcing" you to use any of your tax dollars to support my son? What are my choices here? I don't see one, you don't offer one. All you offer is your condemnation and your selfishness. Neither of which help either of us.

So please, tell me, what am I suppose to do, because the only way I see to keep from "forcing" you to use your tax dollars to help support my son is a triple murder followed by a suicide. Is that what you really want? Is that what you think I should do?

I didn't cause his autism either. My kids were the first in either of our families to have autism. So again I ask you what can I do?
 
Amazon...you act as though people have a choice. Let's see..

A. Starve
B. Go on welfare
C. Take shitty job

Those are the "big three" choices that a HELL of a lot of Americans.are looking at. The fact that so many are choosing C over B should tell you that it's not LAZINESS that is the problem.

But...that's the mentality you guys have been trained to accept. Once again...80% of this country has only 7% of the wealth...there are banana Republics in Central America that has a better ratio than that.

I disagree it is laziness and it is lack of pride.

I'd take a shitty job any day over being a ward of the state.
And that is what most poor people do.

I've found if you treat your employees fairly, pay them a decent wage, and clearly define what you expect, they will give you a good days work for their pay. Unfortunately, there are too many businesses that screw their employees and then wonder why they take no pride in their work.
 
And that is what most poor people do.

I've found if you treat your employees fairly, pay them a decent wage, and clearly define what you expect, they will give you a good days work for their pay. Unfortunately, there are too many businesses that screw their employees and then wonder why they take no pride in their work.

I wish this rationale worked for the MTA, or the Post Office for that matter.
 
I have a pretty successful career. This isn't a "woe is me" story.

Sorry but when I hear the same old hackneyed blame the "rich" the corporations, the CEOs blah blah blah it all sounds like whining to me.

Yeah life's not fair. It never was. It never will be. It's not supposed to be.

But at the same time anyone can improve their situation if they have the desire and act upon it.

Saying "well, it's not totally fair, so we shouldn't care about ways we can make it less unfair" is a pretty weak argument, from my perspective. As for your last sentence, it's just not true.

More whining.
 
And why? I am very happy with my little job, I talk with the plant manager like 50 times a day and the owner when he is in town. Would I like to make $25~30 bucks an hour instead of what I make now? yup, but then I would have to drive an hour away and work for shit heads I dont like. The owner of my company pays me what he can afford and I get "thank you" texts all the time from the plant manager and the owner. Guess that means more to me now then chasing a buck...like I used to do.

nod... same here why fight tooth and nail to earn more money when it's not appreciated and your taxes go through the roof when you do? Why not earn less? It's not the end of the world... Heck the best things in life don't cost much if any money.

Yes...but do you two need Food Stamps or any other government subsidy to make ends meet?

No, but as a guy I dont shop for price either, I would rather go to the local mom and pop hardware or electrical store (yes we still have them) and pay more then go to lowes or home depot and wait in line or have to deal with $8 an hour employees that dont know what the heck they are selling.
 
That the best you got?
Oh, no!
I think these come nearer to your Heart of Evil.

789bb143f9c0aab5ccce9d0297954c75.JPG


perryexplosion_sorensen.jpg

Cartoons?

What are you 9 years old?
 
Amazon...you act as though people have a choice. Let's see..

A. Starve
B. Go on welfare
C. Take shitty job

Those are the "big three" choices that a HELL of a lot of Americans.are looking at. The fact that so many are choosing C over B should tell you that it's not LAZINESS that is the problem.

But...that's the mentality you guys have been trained to accept. Once again...80% of this country has only 7% of the wealth...there are banana Republics in Central America that has a better ratio than that.

I disagree it is laziness and it is lack of pride.

I'd take a shitty job any day over being a ward of the state.
And that is what most poor people do.

I've found if you treat your employees fairly, pay them a decent wage, and clearly define what you expect, they will give you a good days work for their pay. Unfortunately, there are too many businesses that screw their employees and then wonder why they take no pride in their work.

Give some examples of "businesses that screw their employees " and please use specifics.

Oh and I disagree that most poor people choose jobs over welfare.


[ame=http://youtu.be/Z5tqH7UrzOw]Obama Bucks - YouTube[/ame]
 
And why? I am very happy with my little job, I talk with the plant manager like 50 times a day and the owner when he is in town. Would I like to make $25~30 bucks an hour instead of what I make now? yup, but then I would have to drive an hour away and work for shit heads I dont like. The owner of my company pays me what he can afford and I get "thank you" texts all the time from the plant manager and the owner. Guess that means more to me now then chasing a buck...like I used to do.

nod... same here why fight tooth and nail to earn more money when it's not appreciated and your taxes go through the roof when you do? Why not earn less? It's not the end of the world... Heck the best things in life don't cost much if any money.

Yes...but do you two need Food Stamps or any other government subsidy to make ends meet?

Heck no. Hell no. Never... I've never been out of work, not one day, and I don't plan on ever being out of work. I've never collected a dime of government checks and I don't plan on ever having to either. That said, I've paid millions into the system, so if anything catastrophic ever happens and I end up unable to work for over a decade and my savings runs out and my family won't take me in... never mind just shoot me if that happens.
 
Last edited:
Academic success does not always assure financial success, especially if you come from a poor family.

Being born to a rich family? Almost always assures financial success.

That's a problem.

So you advocate that rich people not be allowed to pass their wealth onto their children? Whatever you say comrade.

Not at all.

That's quite a logical leap.

We live in reasonably well off society..and we got that way from the sweat of labor. It's not unreasonable to add some sort of parity into the mix.

As in, you should not ever go below a certain level in terms of poverty or above a certain level in terms of income.

It's not that hard a concept, and well within the keeping of both what the founders envisioned and what real capitalists advocate for..

And you think a guy like Bill Gates is entitled to a capped income the same amount as a guy who was born into a family business whose sole contribution was that he took over where his parents left off. Sorry, but some people work harder than others, and there is still such a thing as the American dream. If we capped people's income, what would inspire someone to work harder if they knew they reached their maximum income potential? That's right... Nothing would inspire them to make any further contributions to society if there was no longer anything in it for them.
 
Bullshit...they were put away in orphanges, then state schools and hospitals....unless you're going back to the Revolutionary war days...
Define orphan and you may find your answer.

The institution I work for? Has been open since the late 1800's. It was an epileptic colony in the very beginning then by 1900, it was talking in the developmentally disabled....but included in those ranks were autistics, mentally ill and kids that no one wanted.

I've been in this field for almost 25 years... trust me....you don't know Jack about this stuff.

So out of those people with autism, the mentally ill and kids that no one wanted, which one are you?
 
Because as a civilized society we take care of our disabled and elderly. If you want to go back to primitive times, we can take him into the woods and leave him to die on his own, but today, we'd end up in jail for that. My husband has parkinson's, I have arthritis and other problems and we can't continue to handle an adult that disabled. He ripped out several walls in our home. Did you expect us to just let him kill us? He still would have ended up being taken care of by the state, at your expense. And of course, if we took him out into the woods, the state would have us institutionalized and you'd be paying for us instead. What exactly was my other choice? I suppose I could have aborted him, if I'd known he was going to have autism, but I didn't. I suppose I could have been a worse mother and let him wander away and drown as a child in a nearby river as happened to another autistic boy near here. I really don't understand what you want me to do here, please explain it.
Again,
I didn't cause his autism. I'm not the fault of his condition. Why do you think it is my responsibility to provide for him?

Saying things like "I could have aborted him", and "let him wander away and drown as a child in a nearby river", is taking things to an extreme. I've never advocated any such action on your part.

There used to be a time when people that were disabled were taken care of voluntarily by their community. Somehow, that has turned into forcing the taxpayer (community) to take care of them. Forcing me to give part of my earnings to support another is at best involuntary servitude (which is illegal for me to do) and at worst slavery (also illegal for me to do). Surely you agree that it is both legally and morally wrong for me to force you to financially support my children. The governments taxation actions may have made those acts legal (for the government to do), but it doesn't make them morally right.

You have yet to come up with any action that I can do to take him off of the dole. You have only blamed me for being a "welfare queen" and somehow forcing you to support my son. He's over 18 and was before we got any help for him at all. Do you really think parents who never expected or did anything to deserve special needs kids should be on the hook for the rest of their lives? You have provided no alternative for me. None. Tell me, what is my choice? What can I do? We do not have the health to continue to provide for him ourselves. We aren't rich. We don't have the money to provide for him. Tell me, what am I suppose to do, other than feel guilty for ever "forcing" you to use any of your tax dollars to support my son? What are my choices here? I don't see one, you don't offer one. All you offer is your condemnation and your selfishness. Neither of which help either of us.

So please, tell me, what am I suppose to do, because the only way I see to keep from "forcing" you to use your tax dollars to help support my son is a triple murder followed by a suicide. Is that what you really want? Is that what you think I should do?

I didn't cause his autism either. My kids were the first in either of our families to have autism. So again I ask you what can I do?

For someone who "can't work to support her/himself" you sure seem capable of using the keyboard and posting on the internet. Maybe you could get a job?
 
Again,
I didn't cause his autism. I'm not the fault of his condition. Why do you think it is my responsibility to provide for him?

Saying things like "I could have aborted him", and "let him wander away and drown as a child in a nearby river", is taking things to an extreme. I've never advocated any such action on your part.

There used to be a time when people that were disabled were taken care of voluntarily by their community. Somehow, that has turned into forcing the taxpayer (community) to take care of them. Forcing me to give part of my earnings to support another is at best involuntary servitude (which is illegal for me to do) and at worst slavery (also illegal for me to do). Surely you agree that it is both legally and morally wrong for me to force you to financially support my children. The governments taxation actions may have made those acts legal (for the government to do), but it doesn't make them morally right.

You have yet to come up with any action that I can do to take him off of the dole. You have only blamed me for being a "welfare queen" and somehow forcing you to support my son. He's over 18 and was before we got any help for him at all. Do you really think parents who never expected or did anything to deserve special needs kids should be on the hook for the rest of their lives? You have provided no alternative for me. None. Tell me, what is my choice? What can I do? We do not have the health to continue to provide for him ourselves. We aren't rich. We don't have the money to provide for him. Tell me, what am I suppose to do, other than feel guilty for ever "forcing" you to use any of your tax dollars to support my son? What are my choices here? I don't see one, you don't offer one. All you offer is your condemnation and your selfishness. Neither of which help either of us.

So please, tell me, what am I suppose to do, because the only way I see to keep from "forcing" you to use your tax dollars to help support my son is a triple murder followed by a suicide. Is that what you really want? Is that what you think I should do?

I didn't cause his autism either. My kids were the first in either of our families to have autism. So again I ask you what can I do?

For someone who "can't work to support her/himself" you sure seem capable of using the keyboard and posting on the internet. Maybe you could get a job?

What? And screw up her monthly Obama check?? Never!! :)
 
nod... same here why fight tooth and nail to earn more money when it's not appreciated and your taxes go through the roof when you do? Why not earn less? It's not the end of the world... Heck the best things in life don't cost much if any money.

Yes...but do you two need Food Stamps or any other government subsidy to make ends meet?

Heck no. Hell no. Never... I've never been out of work, not one day, and I don't plan on ever being out of work. I've never collected a dime of government checks and I don't plan on ever having to either. That said, I've paid millions into the system, so if anything catastrophic ever happens and I end up unable to work for over a decade and my savings runs out and my family won't take me in... never mind just shoot me if that happens.

And that appears, is what they want me to do. Shoot my kids, my husband and myself so we won't end up on the dole. Civilization? I think we lost that a long time ago.
 
So you advocate that rich people not be allowed to pass their wealth onto their children? Whatever you say comrade.

Not at all.

That's quite a logical leap.

We live in reasonably well off society..and we got that way from the sweat of labor. It's not unreasonable to add some sort of parity into the mix.

As in, you should not ever go below a certain level in terms of poverty or above a certain level in terms of income.

It's not that hard a concept, and well within the keeping of both what the founders envisioned and what real capitalists advocate for..

And you think a guy like Bill Gates is entitled to a capped income the same amount as a guy who was born into a family business whose sole contribution was that he took over where his parents left off. Sorry, but some people work harder than others, and there is still such a thing as the American dream. If we capped people's income, what would inspire someone to work harder if they knew they reached their maximum income potential? That's right... Nothing would inspire them to make any further contributions to society if there was no longer anything in it for them.

Do you really believe that? I spend almost as many hours volunteering each week as the rest of you do working for a paycheck. I don't get paid for my volunteer hours but I enjoy them. The truth is that most people want to be productive. They don't want to sit around like zombies playing video games and watch TV.

BTW, I'm not alone, I know dozens of people who put in many hours volunteering each week, working at the food bank, the church, raising funds for cancer research, helping with the special Olympics and many, many of them do this in addition to working for a living. So, yes, I think if there were an upper income limit people would still work for that.
 
Last edited:
Again,
I didn't cause his autism. I'm not the fault of his condition. Why do you think it is my responsibility to provide for him?

Saying things like "I could have aborted him", and "let him wander away and drown as a child in a nearby river", is taking things to an extreme. I've never advocated any such action on your part.

There used to be a time when people that were disabled were taken care of voluntarily by their community. Somehow, that has turned into forcing the taxpayer (community) to take care of them. Forcing me to give part of my earnings to support another is at best involuntary servitude (which is illegal for me to do) and at worst slavery (also illegal for me to do). Surely you agree that it is both legally and morally wrong for me to force you to financially support my children. The governments taxation actions may have made those acts legal (for the government to do), but it doesn't make them morally right.

You have yet to come up with any action that I can do to take him off of the dole. You have only blamed me for being a "welfare queen" and somehow forcing you to support my son. He's over 18 and was before we got any help for him at all. Do you really think parents who never expected or did anything to deserve special needs kids should be on the hook for the rest of their lives? You have provided no alternative for me. None. Tell me, what is my choice? What can I do? We do not have the health to continue to provide for him ourselves. We aren't rich. We don't have the money to provide for him. Tell me, what am I suppose to do, other than feel guilty for ever "forcing" you to use any of your tax dollars to support my son? What are my choices here? I don't see one, you don't offer one. All you offer is your condemnation and your selfishness. Neither of which help either of us.

So please, tell me, what am I suppose to do, because the only way I see to keep from "forcing" you to use your tax dollars to help support my son is a triple murder followed by a suicide. Is that what you really want? Is that what you think I should do?

I didn't cause his autism either. My kids were the first in either of our families to have autism. So again I ask you what can I do?

For someone who "can't work to support her/himself" you sure seem capable of using the keyboard and posting on the internet. Maybe you could get a job?

Nice deflection, I even had two paragraphs written out before I realized you never did answer my question. What am I suppose to do? My husband and I do fine supporting ourselves, we could even support both our kids if our youngest didn't need so much help. How is my getting a job going to get my son out of the home? How is it going to help the fact that my husband and I are too old to care for him? That we will eventually die anyway and he will be left behind? Again, what are my choices?

Why do you think no one should have to go on disability? Because it's not your fault? Do you think it's their fault? Do you honestly think my son did something to deserve autism? Or that we in some way caused it? Do you think all our military that come back disabled should just be shot? Or do you draw that line at that? Where exactly do you draw the line?
 
You have yet to come up with any action that I can do to take him off of the dole. You have only blamed me for being a "welfare queen" and somehow forcing you to support my son. He's over 18 and was before we got any help for him at all. Do you really think parents who never expected or did anything to deserve special needs kids should be on the hook for the rest of their lives? You have provided no alternative for me. None. Tell me, what is my choice? What can I do? We do not have the health to continue to provide for him ourselves. We aren't rich. We don't have the money to provide for him. Tell me, what am I suppose to do, other than feel guilty for ever "forcing" you to use any of your tax dollars to support my son? What are my choices here? I don't see one, you don't offer one. All you offer is your condemnation and your selfishness. Neither of which help either of us.

So please, tell me, what am I suppose to do, because the only way I see to keep from "forcing" you to use your tax dollars to help support my son is a triple murder followed by a suicide. Is that what you really want? Is that what you think I should do?

I didn't cause his autism either. My kids were the first in either of our families to have autism. So again I ask you what can I do?

For someone who "can't work to support her/himself" you sure seem capable of using the keyboard and posting on the internet. Maybe you could get a job?

What? And screw up her monthly Obama check?? Never!! :)

I do not get a monthly Obama check. My son gets disability. We get nothing. My husband and I have been working together for years to raise this family. We've never been on the "dole" except for my son who is now in a home. I am supposedly a welfare queen because I can no longer physically care for my son who is low functioning autism, still in diapers, with the mind of a toddler. If there was a way we could have done it without relying on the state, we would have. In fact, I've asked several times what my options are, what it is you think I should do, I get nothing but insults. Apparently the only answer so far is a triple homicide followed by a suicide. That's the only way I can think of to make sure that my kids don't end up living off of any of your tax dollars. Now, do you have another option? I'm willing to listen.
 
There used to be a time when people that were disabled were taken care of voluntarily by their community. Somehow, that has turned into forcing the taxpayer (community) to take care of them.
Bullshit...they were put away in orphanges, then state schools and hospitals....
Mrs. Frances Trollope was the mother of the famous novelist, Anthony.
From her 1830 travel diary, Domestic Manners of the Americans :

Long, disabling and expensive fits of sickness are incontestibly more frequent in every part of America than in England, and the sufferers have no aid to look to, but what they have saved, or what they may be enabled to sell. I have never seen misery exceed what I have witnessed in an American cottage where disease has entered....

I suppose there is less alms-giving in America than in any other Christian country on the face of the globe. It is not in the temper of the people either to give or to receive.

I extract the following pompous passage from a Washington paper of Feb. 1829 (a season of uncommon severity and distress), which, I think justifies my observation.

"Among the liberal evidences of sympathy for the suffering poor of this city, two have come to our knowledge which deserve to be especially noticed: the one a donation by the President of the United States, to the committee of the ward in which he resides, of fifty dollars; the other a donation by a few of the officers of the War Department to the Howard and Dorcas societies, of seventy-two dollars."

When such mention is made of a gift of about nine pounds sterling as a contribution from the sovereign magistrate of the United States, and of thirteen pounds sterling as a contribution from one of the state departments, the inference is pretty obvious, that the sufferings of the destitute in America are not liberally relieved by individual charity.

.
[emphases added]
 
You have yet to come up with any action that I can do to take him off of the dole. You have only blamed me for being a "welfare queen" and somehow forcing you to support my son. He's over 18 and was before we got any help for him at all. Do you really think parents who never expected or did anything to deserve special needs kids should be on the hook for the rest of their lives? You have provided no alternative for me. None. Tell me, what is my choice? What can I do? We do not have the health to continue to provide for him ourselves. We aren't rich. We don't have the money to provide for him. Tell me, what am I suppose to do, other than feel guilty for ever "forcing" you to use any of your tax dollars to support my son? What are my choices here? I don't see one, you don't offer one. All you offer is your condemnation and your selfishness. Neither of which help either of us.

So please, tell me, what am I suppose to do, because the only way I see to keep from "forcing" you to use your tax dollars to help support my son is a triple murder followed by a suicide. Is that what you really want? Is that what you think I should do?

I didn't cause his autism either. My kids were the first in either of our families to have autism. So again I ask you what can I do?

For someone who "can't work to support her/himself" you sure seem capable of using the keyboard and posting on the internet. Maybe you could get a job?

Nice deflection, I even had two paragraphs written out before I realized you never did answer my question. What am I suppose to do? My husband and I do fine supporting ourselves, we could even support both our kids if our youngest didn't need so much help. How is my getting a job going to get my son out of the home? How is it going to help the fact that my husband and I are too old to care for him? That we will eventually die anyway and he will be left behind? Again, what are my choices?

Why do you think no one should have to go on disability? Because it's not your fault? Do you think it's their fault? Do you honestly think my son did something to deserve autism? Or that we in some way caused it? Do you think all our military that come back disabled should just be shot? Or do you draw that line at that? Where exactly do you draw the line?

Sort of hard to tell what's going on you are all over the map. That makes it hard to reply to your questions. Earlier in the thread you indicated you had disabilities that stopped you from supporting you son. Now you say you are a productive enough to work but you don't want to support your son, you want us to, and if we don't do what you demand it's the same as shooting him and all returning veterans, in the head?

Your posts indicate that you are at your wits end. I suspect this may be due in part to the manner in which you have decided to take care of your family member.

Do you not have any other family? Brothers, Sisters, other children? Are you a member of a church or do you know of any local support groups that might be able to help? Each kid with autism is different, different kids different levels of manageability.

Most folks that say they don't want the feds to run charity are not saying they want to end charity. You are confusing a desire to provide charity willingly at a local level with a demand for enslavement at a federal level. Charity should be provided locally and voluntarily. When you take money from someone and use it for charity, it's no longer Charity is it?

Or are you saying that my taxes are a required tithe to your church and your church is the Federal Government?

What sort of program is you son in that requires him to be in a managed care facility? How much does that cost? What did he get before he was 18? Did you have insurance? Is insurance covering the costs?
 
Last edited:

Forum List

Back
Top