How do we stop "the poor" from being so problematic?

[Papageorgio]

What's the GOP plan? Starve them? Kill them? Sterilize them? What?

The Donald would want them to actually work for a living, the democrats and most republicans do not want to point out the fact they have dramatically lower IQs and savage behavioral issues incompatible with Western society. Indeed the humane thing is to sterilized them but I have no problem using more direct methods to stop the attack on humanity.

Most of them by far vote GOP.

You do realize criminals vote Democrat over Republican by a significant margin. In 2014 it was 7 out of 10 were Democrats but you always seem to distort the truth.

 

[sealybobo]

Nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics. The tax cuts were financed and added to the debt; there were no cuts in spending except for token amounts from the poor; after the rich got richer faster.

Translation from useful idiotspeak:

"Leftwingers deny the reality of economics and pretend high taxes and socialism improve the economy. It's a lie. We all know it's a lie. But we will continue to squawk the lie because, as useful idiots, that is our only purpose in life."

Capitalism died in 1929. The rich already got bailed out last time. Corporate welfare even pays multimillion dollar bonuses, but the right wing only complains about the poor getting steak and lobster on their ebt cards.

Lol! You are so funny, way off but funny. Alfred thanks you for your amusement.

There is some truth to the liberal position but our way did not win the election.

We ran on the idea that corporate welfare was the problem not welfare to the poor and we lost the election so the focus is going to be on welfare abuse from the poor. Get a job and get off the welfare. I hope th gop changes welfare so you have to work for the help.

And don’t let guys like my 50 year old drunk buddy Jeff get foodstamps. That’s just more money at the horse tracks. He needs a probation officer and drug testing. I’m sorry but guys like him shouldn’t qualify for foodstamps. Or give him bread peanut butter and oatmeal

I’m all for ending corporate welfare, neither party will do that, it is just not a good idea for the politicians to cut off those that donate so much.

I am all for welfare, it should be a stepping stone and temporary help for those that really need it.

It shouldn’t be what it has grown to be. Now this is coming from my middle class perspective. It’s quite possible I’m wrong and would know that if I were poor but that’s my vote.

If poor people think I’m wrong they can show up and vote.

 

[deanrd]

What's the GOP plan? Starve them? Kill them? Sterilize them? What?

The Donald would want them to actually work for a living, the democrats and most republicans do not want to point out the fact they have dramatically lower IQs and savage behavioral issues incompatible with Western society. Indeed the humane thing is to sterilized them but I have no problem using more direct methods to stop the attack on humanity.

Most of them by far vote GOP.

You do realize criminals vote Democrat over Republican by a significant margin. In 2014 it was 7 out of 10 were Democrats but you always seem to distort the truth.

Oh please, get real.

How many unarmed whites are shot by police?

Remember Cliven Bundy and the armed stand off with state troopers?
Do you really think blacks or Hispanics could get away with that?
Case against Cliven Bundy, Nevada rancher involved in 2014 armed standoff, declared a mistrial

Remember Katrina?
Blacks "loot" but whites "find"?

So anytime your kind makes these arguments, I look at where they are coming from.

 

[sealybobo]

What's the GOP plan? Starve them? Kill them? Sterilize them? What?

The Donald would want them to actually work for a living, the democrats and most republicans do not want to point out the fact they have dramatically lower IQs and savage behavioral issues incompatible with Western society. Indeed the humane thing is to sterilized them but I have no problem using more direct methods to stop the attack on humanity.

Most of them by far vote GOP.

You do realize criminals vote Democrat over Republican by a significant margin. In 2014 it was 7 out of 10 were Democrats but you always seem to distort the truth.

Oh please, get real.

How many unarmed whites are shot by police?

Remember Cliven Bundy and the armed stand off with state troopers?
Do you really think blacks or Hispanics could get away with that?
Case against Cliven Bundy, Nevada rancher involved in 2014 armed standoff, declared a mistrial

Remember Katrina?
Blacks "loot" but whites "find"?

So anytime your kind makes these arguments, I look at where they are coming from.

Welcome to America.

Consider this. When a tornado hits a middle class white community it hits people who pay taxes and vote. Of course the politicians response is different.

 

[deanrd]

We KNOW what Republicans think of the poor.

How do we know? They tell us.

We only have to listen to what they say:



Just listen. They tell us who they are and what they stand for

 

[sealybobo]

We KNOW what Republicans think of the poor.

How do we know? They tell us.

We only have to listen to what they say:



Just listen. They tell us who they are and what they stand for

So why don’t 80% of the poor show up and vote? We’re middle class. Show me republicans talking shit about the middle class.

I’m going to sound like a broken record but the definition of a bad citizen is one that doesn’t vote. Republicans are right they don’t matter. The world needs ditch diggers. Capitalism relies on them.

We could totally afford free basic healthcare for all and $15 minimum wage but the poor don’t even want it enough to show up and vote every two years.

Are you poor yourself or their caregiver?

 

[Papageorgio]

What's the GOP plan? Starve them? Kill them? Sterilize them? What?

The Donald would want them to actually work for a living, the democrats and most republicans do not want to point out the fact they have dramatically lower IQs and savage behavioral issues incompatible with Western society. Indeed the humane thing is to sterilized them but I have no problem using more direct methods to stop the attack on humanity.

Most of them by far vote GOP.

You do realize criminals vote Democrat over Republican by a significant margin. In 2014 it was 7 out of 10 were Democrats but you always seem to distort the truth.

Oh please, get real.

How many unarmed whites are shot by police?

Remember Cliven Bundy and the armed stand off with state troopers?
Do you really think blacks or Hispanics could get away with that?
Case against Cliven Bundy, Nevada rancher involved in 2014 armed standoff, declared a mistrial

Remember Katrina?
Blacks "loot" but whites "find"?

So anytime your kind makes these arguments, I look at where they are coming from.

“Your kind”? You sound like a bigot.

I’m not making an argument, I’m stating a fact.

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

In fact it is so important for Democrats to restore felons voting rights, that they push for it in most every state. Virginia for one, Democrats Just Won A Massive Victory For Voting Rights In Virginia | HuffPost

Pretty simple facts. Democrats portray themselves as victims, criminals will portray themselves as victims.

 

[sealybobo]

What's the GOP plan? Starve them? Kill them? Sterilize them? What?

The Donald would want them to actually work for a living, the democrats and most republicans do not want to point out the fact they have dramatically lower IQs and savage behavioral issues incompatible with Western society. Indeed the humane thing is to sterilized them but I have no problem using more direct methods to stop the attack on humanity.

Most of them by far vote GOP.

You do realize criminals vote Democrat over Republican by a significant margin. In 2014 it was 7 out of 10 were Democrats but you always seem to distort the truth.

Oh please, get real.

How many unarmed whites are shot by police?

Remember Cliven Bundy and the armed stand off with state troopers?
Do you really think blacks or Hispanics could get away with that?
Case against Cliven Bundy, Nevada rancher involved in 2014 armed standoff, declared a mistrial

Remember Katrina?
Blacks "loot" but whites "find"?

So anytime your kind makes these arguments, I look at where they are coming from.

“Your kind”? You sound like a bigot.

I’m not making an argument, I’m stating a fact.

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

In fact it is so important for Democrats to restore felons voting rights, that they push for it in most every state. Virginia for one, Democrats Just Won A Massive Victory For Voting Rights In Virginia | HuffPost

Pretty simple facts. Democrats portray themselves as victims, criminals will portray themselves as victims.

If you’ve served your time you should be able to vote. Rand Paul agrees but in Kentucky ex felons can’t vote

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

How many unarmed whites are shot by police?

Glad you asked:

In 2015, the police fatally shot 36 unarmed black males, according to The Washington Post’s typology, and 31 unarmed white males. The Post’s classification of victims as “unarmed” is literally accurate but sometimes misleading. The label can fail to convey the charged situation facing the officer who used deadly force.

At least five “unarmed” black victims had tried to grab the officer’s gun, or had been beating the cop with his own equipment. Some were shot from an accidental discharge triggered by their own assault on the officer. One had the officer on the ground and was beating him on the head so violently, breaking bones and causing other injuries, as to risk the officer’s loss of consciousness. And one individual included in the Post’s “unarmed black male victim” category was a bystander unintentionally struck by an officer’s bullet after an illegal-gun trafficker opened fire at the officer and the officer shot back. If a victim was not the intended target of a police shooting, race could have had no possible role in his death.

Opinion | Police shootings and race

You see, you are the epitome of liberalism. You only go by what the MSM sensationalizes, and think it's Gospel.

 

[Papageorgio]

The Donald would want them to actually work for a living, the democrats and most republicans do not want to point out the fact they have dramatically lower IQs and savage behavioral issues incompatible with Western society. Indeed the humane thing is to sterilized them but I have no problem using more direct methods to stop the attack on humanity.

Most of them by far vote GOP.

You do realize criminals vote Democrat over Republican by a significant margin. In 2014 it was 7 out of 10 were Democrats but you always seem to distort the truth.

Oh please, get real.

How many unarmed whites are shot by police?

Remember Cliven Bundy and the armed stand off with state troopers?
Do you really think blacks or Hispanics could get away with that?
Case against Cliven Bundy, Nevada rancher involved in 2014 armed standoff, declared a mistrial

Remember Katrina?
Blacks "loot" but whites "find"?

So anytime your kind makes these arguments, I look at where they are coming from.

“Your kind”? You sound like a bigot.

I’m not making an argument, I’m stating a fact.

Jail survey: 7 in 10 felons register as Democrats

In fact it is so important for Democrats to restore felons voting rights, that they push for it in most every state. Virginia for one, Democrats Just Won A Massive Victory For Voting Rights In Virginia | HuffPost

Pretty simple facts. Democrats portray themselves as victims, criminals will portray themselves as victims.

If you’ve served your time you should be able to vote. Rand Paul agrees but in Kentucky ex felons can’t vote

I agree, I’m just refuting deans statement that criminals vote for Republicans.

 

[hazlnut]

What can and or will be done about it politically?
In keeping with current board rhetoric let's not be scared to get real honest here.
Our poor are our worst parents...they create more of their same.
Our poor suck the most government tit.
Our poor commits the most crime.
Our poor does the most drugs.
Our poor drinks and smokes the most.
Our poor have the most children they can't afford.
Our poor litters and vandalizes the most.
Our poor drives uninsured.
Our poor commits the most animal cruelty.
I could go on and on...and no Libby's, let's not deflect and divert to Wall Street criminals, big corporations..blah, blah, blah...Let's get real, let's get serious about our taxpayer draining bottom feeders....Whatta ya say?

Jonathan Swift offered a Modest Proposal

 

[Papageorgio]

We KNOW what Republicans think of the poor.

How do we know? They tell us.

We only have to listen to what they say:



Just listen. They tell us who they are and what they stand for

So why don’t 80% of the poor show up and vote? We’re middle class. Show me republicans talking shit about the middle class.

I’m going to sound like a broken record but the definition of a bad citizen is one that doesn’t vote. Republicans are right they don’t matter. The world needs ditch diggers. Capitalism relies on them.

We could totally afford free basic healthcare for all and $15 minimum wage but the poor don’t even want it enough to show up and vote every two years.

Are you poor yourself or their caregiver?

Careful, you are beginning to sound like a Republican more and more lately.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

They only pay lip service. Our alleged wars on crime, drugs, and terror are simple socialism on a national, and international basis.

Personally, I agree with that take, and I'd add to that list the war on poverty, which ultimately boils down to redistributive coddling and generally puts zero effort to actually upwardly mobilizing anyone, and all effort into making people as comfortable as possible in pseudo-impoverished stasis.

That said, it's not a desire for socialistic policy that makes right wingers support the wars on crime and drugs, but rather social conservatism that, insofar as right wingers do support that war, simply outweighs their desire for decentralized economics. Most people that support these wars pay little consideration to the economic aspects of them at all.

With the war on terror, it's just simple threat perception. People tend to get hawkish when they perceive a threat to their values. Right wingers, right or wrong, tend to perceive Islamic terror to be the greatest currently active threat to those values and, insofar as they support the war on terror, simply place more importance on the protection of those values than on the economic implications of the implementation of that defense.

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution, providing for the general warfare is not.

In all fairness, the wars on crime, drugs, and terror are every bit as valid as the war on poverty in terms of promoting the general welfare. Positive sounding and poorly implemented economic black holes.

Those are not real wars in any sense of the word. They are social problems that we don't how to address. IMHO, these problems will be with us for a long time.

Very simple fix to wealth inequality. The 80% of the poor who aren’t good citizens because they don’t vote need to show up and vote every two years. If they did then ceos wouldn’t make $30 million while paying $15 hr. The poor would be able to raise a family on one 40 hr a week job.

The rich vote and have convinced the poor voting doesn’t matter so I’m done advocating for the poor. Don’t vote don’t matter. Bad citizens.

Which rich people convince the poor voting doesn't matter? Any names?

And how would the poor voting change what a company pays their CEO or employees? Do you want government to run businesses too???

 

[sealybobo]

Personally, I agree with that take, and I'd add to that list the war on poverty, which ultimately boils down to redistributive coddling and generally puts zero effort to actually upwardly mobilizing anyone, and all effort into making people as comfortable as possible in pseudo-impoverished stasis.

That said, it's not a desire for socialistic policy that makes right wingers support the wars on crime and drugs, but rather social conservatism that, insofar as right wingers do support that war, simply outweighs their desire for decentralized economics. Most people that support these wars pay little consideration to the economic aspects of them at all.

With the war on terror, it's just simple threat perception. People tend to get hawkish when they perceive a threat to their values. Right wingers, right or wrong, tend to perceive Islamic terror to be the greatest currently active threat to those values and, insofar as they support the war on terror, simply place more importance on the protection of those values than on the economic implications of the implementation of that defense.

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution, providing for the general warfare is not.

In all fairness, the wars on crime, drugs, and terror are every bit as valid as the war on poverty in terms of promoting the general welfare. Positive sounding and poorly implemented economic black holes.

Those are not real wars in any sense of the word. They are social problems that we don't how to address. IMHO, these problems will be with us for a long time.

Very simple fix to wealth inequality. The 80% of the poor who aren’t good citizens because they don’t vote need to show up and vote every two years. If they did then ceos wouldn’t make $30 million while paying $15 hr. The poor would be able to raise a family on one 40 hr a week job.

The rich vote and have convinced the poor voting doesn’t matter so I’m done advocating for the poor. Don’t vote don’t matter. Bad citizens.

Which rich people convince the poor voting doesn't matter? Any names?

And how would the poor voting change what a company pays their CEO or employees? Do you want government to run businesses too???

Government is the ultimate referee.

Not only can government advocate better for the poor and middle class in business they can also tax companies to strengthen social security

 

[sealybobo]

Personally, I agree with that take, and I'd add to that list the war on poverty, which ultimately boils down to redistributive coddling and generally puts zero effort to actually upwardly mobilizing anyone, and all effort into making people as comfortable as possible in pseudo-impoverished stasis.

That said, it's not a desire for socialistic policy that makes right wingers support the wars on crime and drugs, but rather social conservatism that, insofar as right wingers do support that war, simply outweighs their desire for decentralized economics. Most people that support these wars pay little consideration to the economic aspects of them at all.

With the war on terror, it's just simple threat perception. People tend to get hawkish when they perceive a threat to their values. Right wingers, right or wrong, tend to perceive Islamic terror to be the greatest currently active threat to those values and, insofar as they support the war on terror, simply place more importance on the protection of those values than on the economic implications of the implementation of that defense.

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution, providing for the general warfare is not.

In all fairness, the wars on crime, drugs, and terror are every bit as valid as the war on poverty in terms of promoting the general welfare. Positive sounding and poorly implemented economic black holes.

Those are not real wars in any sense of the word. They are social problems that we don't how to address. IMHO, these problems will be with us for a long time.

Very simple fix to wealth inequality. The 80% of the poor who aren’t good citizens because they don’t vote need to show up and vote every two years. If they did then ceos wouldn’t make $30 million while paying $15 hr. The poor would be able to raise a family on one 40 hr a week job.

The rich vote and have convinced the poor voting doesn’t matter so I’m done advocating for the poor. Don’t vote don’t matter. Bad citizens.

Which rich people convince the poor voting doesn't matter? Any names?

And how would the poor voting change what a company pays their CEO or employees? Do you want government to run businesses too???

I hear republicans all the time arguing that there’s no difference between the two parties.

If I started a thread that more poor people should be voting it would be republicans who would disagree

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

What I was implying was that the act of selling someone drugs, in and of itself, is a victimless crime.

Try telling that to my friend who's sons funeral was two weekends ago.

The fact that your friend now has a deeply charged emotional reason to disagree with me doesn't make me wrong. The fact that his recent loss would also make this an awkward conversation also doesn't make me wrong.

If someone chooses, of their own volition, to buy drugs, that's on them. Not the dealer, the buyer. If they decide to use a greater amount than is safe, also on them. Drug users have agency.

I didn't say it was entirely the dealers fault, but it takes two to Tango.

All those killings in Chicago and Detroit? Yes, many of them due to drug sales. When a person kills themselves with drugs, they bought those drugs from somebody, and that somebody is at least partly responsible for the deaths his product produced.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution, providing for the general warfare is not.

In all fairness, the wars on crime, drugs, and terror are every bit as valid as the war on poverty in terms of promoting the general welfare. Positive sounding and poorly implemented economic black holes.

Those are not real wars in any sense of the word. They are social problems that we don't how to address. IMHO, these problems will be with us for a long time.

Very simple fix to wealth inequality. The 80% of the poor who aren’t good citizens because they don’t vote need to show up and vote every two years. If they did then ceos wouldn’t make $30 million while paying $15 hr. The poor would be able to raise a family on one 40 hr a week job.

The rich vote and have convinced the poor voting doesn’t matter so I’m done advocating for the poor. Don’t vote don’t matter. Bad citizens.

Which rich people convince the poor voting doesn't matter? Any names?

And how would the poor voting change what a company pays their CEO or employees? Do you want government to run businesses too???

I hear republicans all the time arguing that there’s no difference between the two parties.

If I started a thread that more poor people should be voting it would be republicans who would disagree

Only because when the poor vote, they get to vote money out of other people's wallets.

But to be honest, if you started a topic on it, I don't think many of us on the right would care. There are people who believe that only taxpayers should be allowed to vote, but that's about it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Providing for the general welfare is in our Constitution, providing for the general warfare is not.

In all fairness, the wars on crime, drugs, and terror are every bit as valid as the war on poverty in terms of promoting the general welfare. Positive sounding and poorly implemented economic black holes.

Those are not real wars in any sense of the word. They are social problems that we don't how to address. IMHO, these problems will be with us for a long time.

Very simple fix to wealth inequality. The 80% of the poor who aren’t good citizens because they don’t vote need to show up and vote every two years. If they did then ceos wouldn’t make $30 million while paying $15 hr. The poor would be able to raise a family on one 40 hr a week job.

The rich vote and have convinced the poor voting doesn’t matter so I’m done advocating for the poor. Don’t vote don’t matter. Bad citizens.

Which rich people convince the poor voting doesn't matter? Any names?

And how would the poor voting change what a company pays their CEO or employees? Do you want government to run businesses too???

Government is the ultimate referee.

Not only can government advocate better for the poor and middle class in business they can also tax companies to strengthen social security

So how does taxing companies help the poor? You can tax companies at 50%, and not one poor person will see a dime.

You may make government richer, but they are the only ones.

If you want to help the poor, write to your politicians and tell them to start promoting two-parent families. That's the root of the poor's problem.

 

[sealybobo]

In all fairness, the wars on crime, drugs, and terror are every bit as valid as the war on poverty in terms of promoting the general welfare. Positive sounding and poorly implemented economic black holes.

Those are not real wars in any sense of the word. They are social problems that we don't how to address. IMHO, these problems will be with us for a long time.

Very simple fix to wealth inequality. The 80% of the poor who aren’t good citizens because they don’t vote need to show up and vote every two years. If they did then ceos wouldn’t make $30 million while paying $15 hr. The poor would be able to raise a family on one 40 hr a week job.

The rich vote and have convinced the poor voting doesn’t matter so I’m done advocating for the poor. Don’t vote don’t matter. Bad citizens.

Which rich people convince the poor voting doesn't matter? Any names?

And how would the poor voting change what a company pays their CEO or employees? Do you want government to run businesses too???

Government is the ultimate referee.

Not only can government advocate better for the poor and middle class in business they can also tax companies to strengthen social security

So how does taxing companies help the poor? You can tax companies at 50%, and not one poor person will see a dime.

You may make government richer, but they are the only ones.

If you want to help the poor, write to your politicians and tell them to start promoting two-parent families. That's the root of the poor's problem.

Ultimately that’s why I agree

 

[danielpalos]

The right wing had no problem financing tax cuts.

Yeah, when I say fiscally conservative, I mean generally opposed to wealth redistribution. Tax cuts are directly in line with this motive.

Granted, this only refers to the portion of the right wing spectrum where you'd find most American conservatives. I get that fascists are generally socialists.

I think the right wing is simply clueless and Causeless; and have nothing but socialism on a national basis.

Financing tax cuts is simple income redistribution.

Eh, I fail to see how letting someone keep the wealth they create is redistribution of anything.

Though, I do wonder sometimes if the left and the right are just talking past each other on this point. Perhaps you mean something different by redistribution.

When right wingers say they're opposed to redistribution of wealth, what they mean is that they are opposed to the government taking wealth created by one entity and awarding it to another. Thus, tax cuts don't qualify. Tax cuts are the government refraining from taking that wealth altogether, which necessarily eliminates the possibility of that wealth being redistributed.

Nobody takes the right wing seriously about economics. The tax cuts were financed and added to the debt; there were no cuts in spending except for token amounts from the poor; after the rich got richer faster.

Translation from useful idiotspeak:

"Leftwingers deny the reality of economics and pretend high taxes and socialism improve the economy. It's a lie. We all know it's a lie. But we will continue to squawk the lie because, as useful idiots, that is our only purpose in life."

The right wing prefers the cluelessness and Causelessness, of the Ignorance of Bliss.

www.thefiscaltimes.com/2015/12/23/Trump-s-Tax-Cuts-Would-Add-245-Trillion-Debt