SNAP (food stamps) should be restricted to rice, flour, rolled oats, and sugar

[Ray From Cleveland]

[QUO

I think it's very wrong. When you go to the movies, do they arrange their ticket prices by how much you make? How about a restaurant or gift shop?

If we all benefit by living in this great country, we should all contribute to it as well. Nearly half of the people who live here don't contribute a dime towards income taxes which is the tax that is spent for our social goodies, military, and just about any other federal spending outside of Social Security and Medicare--most of which is funded by payroll taxes.

To me progressive tax rates are despicable.

Nobody should get a free ride. The inner city ghetto asshole that has never worked a day in his sorry life benefits just as much from national defense as the a billionaire but yet the ghetto asshole doesn't have to pay anything to get the benefit.

The progressive income tax is oppressive and unfair because it taxes people unequally.

If these Moon Bats had to pay their fair share of the cost of government maybe they wouldn't be inclined to vote for big government Liberals when they got the bill, would they?

One of the things that these Moon Bats are really confused about is the corporate tax. Those dumbasses don't even know that they are the ones paying the tax whenever they buy something made by a corporation. The dumbshits think somebody else pays it.

Which is why they applaud it when the Democrats suggest to increase those taxes.

I have no problem helping people out, but only the ones who truly need it. Our social programs have become a vote buying mechanism for the left which is what I disapprove of. They don't hand out those goodies because people have no choice, they hand them out to buy votes.

If it doesn't cost you a dime, why not support somebody like Hillary with her free this and free that? Oh, we want to invest 500 billion dollars into clean air and water. Okay with me, as long as I'm not paying for it!

The problem with our election system is it allows people to vote money out of the pockets of others. That's why we all need a dog in this fight. I think a consumption tax would be fair. The more you buy, the more you pay. You want free college, than your consumption tax goes from 7 cents on the dollar to 9 cents. You want to double the food stamp role like Obama did, then your consumption tax goes from 9 cents on the dollar to 10 cents on the dollar.

If these issues meant actual money to people, they would think twice about lending their support for their spending.

Charity should be voluntary and not forced at the barrel of a gun by an oppressive government.

One of the reason we have so many idiots voting for big government Liberals is because those idiots don't have to pay the bill run up by the big government Liberals.

If they had to pay the bill then they wouldn't be so stupid.

Absolutely. Forced charity is not charity at all. Forced charity is theft. Theft is the action of forcefully taking property from somebody that doesn't wish to give it up.

I think Walter E Williams put it best. He asked that if he took money from his neighbors home, did he commit a crime? Would that change anything if he took that money from his neighbors home, and gave it to another neighbor down the street that needed medical care? Of course not, it's still a crime.........unless government does the exact same thing.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

[
So you think lebron james is as valuable to america as steve jobs was?

What do you mean by valuable?
People are willing to give him money for what he does the same as they gave Jobs money for what he did.

That's just a money transfer, you fool. Nothing has actually been produced when lebron plays basketball. Entertainment has no value or maybe i should say it has negative value since it encourages people to waste their time. THINK

 

[ShootSpeeders]

So what is a job of "social value?"

Engineer , businessmen, scientist. Or on a lesser level - plumber, farmer, auto repairman, electrician. Stuff like that. People that make things and grow things and fix things. That's what wealth is. People with technical skills. Athletes are useless.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Don't gimme any crap about how poor people need a balanced diet. As it is these snappers spend all this money on junk food. A diet of staples will be better for them. And MUCH cheaper for the taxpayers. Eating just those 4 staples, a person can live on a dollar a day.

Rice, flour, rolled oats and sugar are not food staples.
.

HUH?? You're gonna have to explain that. You think Cheetos are staples???

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

So what is a job of "social value?"

Engineer , businessmen, scientist. Or on a lesser level - plumber, farmer, auto repairman, electrician. Stuff like that. People that make things and grow things and fix things. That's what wealth is. People with technical skills. Athletes are useless.

I don't know how you can conclude that. After all, those athletes put a lot of people to work. It think generating money is a huge social value. Mind you, the last thing I could ever care about is sports. But I recognize their value.......at least in our community.

 

[Flash]

[
So you think lebron james is as valuable to america as steve jobs was?

What do you mean by valuable?
People are willing to give him money for what he does the same as they gave Jobs money for what he did.

That's just a money transfer, you fool. Nothing has actually been produced when lebron plays basketball. Entertainment has no value or maybe i should say it has negative value since it encourages people to waste their time. THINK

Entertainment has value you idiot. If it didn't then nobody would buy it, would they?

 

[BrokeLoser]

Don't gimme any crap about how poor people need a balanced diet. As it is these snappers spend all this money on junk food. A diet of staples will be better for them. And MUCH cheaper for the taxpayers. Eating just those 4 staples, a person can live on a dollar a day.

My idea of welfare reform:
Any able body person over 18 collects a maximum of one year public assistance. If one can't figure it out by then we give a free sleeping bag, fishing pole, tent and a ride to a forrest.

Why not leave the poor the fuck alone?

And while you're at it let them smoke pot so they can go to sleep feeling a little better.

Wouldn't it be so much easier if "the poor" just pulled their head out of their ass, got educated and went to work?
Oh wait, let me guess...there's no jobs for the poor because you wanted to keep a steady flow of illegals rolling in and now we have more people than jobs...Hmmm? Guess "the poor" will just stay on the tit for eternity...Damnit!

 

[initforme]

The op post is pure american stupidity. Once its gone its gone but buy yourself a beer to get away from this god awful mess for a few minutes. God awful mess. Being poor anywhere even in this mess means poverty. Only crybabies believe they are tougher.

 

[Cecilie1200]

Entertainment is a value that people are willing to pay for. Whether it be sports or singing or acting or whatever.
For instance, I wouldn't pay one red cent to see a stupid soccer player run up and down a field playing that boring game but many people do enjoy it and are willing to pay the cost.
It is not for me to judge the social value of a job. The market will do that fine.
Social value of income does not factor in to the income tax equations. Income is income and the majority of the taxes in this country are paid for by the people with high incomes.

So you think lebron james is as valuable to america as steve jobs was?

He's a law-abiding, gainfully employed citizen who generates income for others by his labor, so yes. Funny thing is, I think ANYONE who meets that description is just as valuable as anyone else. That's what "equal before the law" and "sanctity of human life" both mean, in their own contexts.

I don't think it's my job, or anyone else's, to try to sit in judgement on whose lawful employment is more "valuable" or meaningful. That would make me a liberal.

 

[Cecilie1200]

LeBron is a very generous man who's donated tens of millions of dollars to charity. It's probably not on national news as much, but here in Cleveland the media makes it very well known. I don't follow sports or entertainment very much, but I would go on the limb to say LeBron gives the most to charity when it comes to sports figures. Of course he makes the most, but that's besides the point.

Most charities are rackets like the Clinton Foundation. Where have you been.?

And the fact remains that lebron has a job of no social value. THINK

If "THINK" means spewing leftist bullshit slogans like you've started doing, then I'll pass.

 

[Cecilie1200]

[
So you think lebron james is as valuable to america as steve jobs was?

What do you mean by valuable?
People are willing to give him money for what he does the same as they gave Jobs money for what he did.

That's just a money transfer, you fool. Nothing has actually been produced when lebron plays basketball. Entertainment has no value or maybe i should say it has negative value since it encourages people to waste their time. THINK

Wrong. He produces entertainment, something that people obviously want and need, or sports and entertainment industries wouldn't make so much. It's no less a productive job simply because what it produces is not tangible and material.

 

[Cecilie1200]

So what is a job of "social value?"

Engineer , businessmen, scientist. Or on a lesser level - plumber, farmer, auto repairman, electrician. Stuff like that. People that make things and grow things and fix things. That's what wealth is. People with technical skills. Athletes are useless.

So basically, "social value" is anything that you, personally, think is important.

Who died and made you Supreme Arbiter of Meaning?

 

[Flash]

[Q


So basically, "social value" is anything that you, personally, think is important.

Who died and made you Supreme Arbiter of Meaning?

These Moon Bats are confused about a great many things.

I don't think the Moon Bat understands that the NBA is a big business employing thousands of direct jobs and tens of thousands indirectly through merchandising, advertisement, media etc.. It also pays millions in taxes in addition to providing entertainment to the millions of fan.

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Entertainment has value you idiot. If it didn't then nobody would buy it, would they?

Hey einstein. People buy cigarettes too. Where is the value in that? Cigs have NEGATIVE VALUE. They cost america a fortune. THINK,

 

[ShootSpeeders]

Engineer , businessmen, scientist. Or on a lesser level - plumber, farmer, auto repairman, electrician. Stuff like that. People that make things and grow things and fix things. That's what wealth is. People with technical skills. Athletes are useless.

I don't know how you can conclude that. After all, those athletes put a lot of people to work.

But it's all make-work. Like having people dig holes in the morning and fill in the holes in the afternoon. Athletics doesn't produce wealth. Some people enjoy watching sports but then some people like using drugs too. THINK

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Engineer , businessmen, scientist. Or on a lesser level - plumber, farmer, auto repairman, electrician. Stuff like that. People that make things and grow things and fix things. That's what wealth is. People with technical skills. Athletes are useless.

I don't know how you can conclude that. After all, those athletes put a lot of people to work.

But it's all make-work. Like having people dig holes in the morning and fill in the holes in the afternoon. Athletics doesn't produce wealth. Some people enjoy watching sports but then some people like using drugs too. THINK

So you get a bunch of athletes in an arena. The parking people have to park cars, the vendors have to service people with refreshments, the truck drivers have to bring those refreshments and food to the stadium, the camera people have to monitor all activities, then there are the producers, the electricians, the field maintenance people, the clean up crew, the maintenance crew, and the city holding the event makes a ton of cash.

Everybody is happy unlike somebody who had a hole dug only to throw the dirt into another. The private sector produces products or services. Entertainment is a service. You don't produce anything by cleaning carpets or painting walls, but the service you provide promotes the exchange of money and helps create jobs for other people associated with the service.

 

[Flash]

Entertainment has value you idiot. If it didn't then nobody would buy it, would they?

Hey einstein. People buy cigarettes too. Where is the value in that? Cigs have NEGATIVE VALUE. They cost america a fortune. THINK,

So you think professional sports is a negative?

I always knew you Moon Bats were beaucoup dinky dau but this takes the cake.

 

[Slyhunter]

You do know people need fruits and vegetables right?

junk food is cheaper than fruit and veggies.

It definitely is cheaper, which is why they buy it. Their actual benefits one month at a time is shit.

No, they are very generous with the food stamps. But what happens is that people get together and pool their SNAP's cards together. Whatever they don't use they sell for cash.

my sister family of 5 gets 300 a month. They eat a lot of pasta. Our doctors tells us to eat less pasta and more fruit and veggies but she can't afford it with her food stamps. She has no income but they kicked her off food stamps when her youngest turned 18. She has liver psorosis, and a multitude of other problems like leaking whenever she has a period but they won't give her disability because they say she can do a sit down job. So I pay all the bills which isn't fair on me. If I wasn't here she'd be on the street with her two kids and our mother.

Ideally, she should be able to collect unemployment compensation, simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis. With that income, she could take better care of herself until she finds a job.

You can't collect unemployment if you haven't been employed the past 6 months.

 

[danielpalos]

yes, it does, specifically mean just that. why do you believe it doesn't?

have you looked into the difference between private laws and public laws.

Private and public laws. WTF are private laws? I never heard of that in my life.

Let's say you had a friend over for a visit. While you're sitting outside on the patio, your elderly neighbor comes home from grocery shopping. As she struggles to get up the stairs with her groceries, you run over to help her out. You just provided for the general welfare of your neighbor.

But in different scenario, you hurt your back the day before and could't help your neighbor, so you ask your friend sitting with you if he would, and he does. You just promoted the general welfare of your neighbor.

In the third instance, your back is hurt, and your friend just had surgery two days ago and isn't allowed to lift anything. So you quickly run to the street and notice a teen playing with some friends, and you ask him to help your neighbor with her groceries and you'll pay him ten bucks. You just funded the general welfare of your neighbor.

In our Constitution, it mentions promoting the general welfare, and providing the general welfare. But nowhere is it written to fund the general welfare of the public.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, that grants Congress the right of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, annals of Congress, 1794

Only the right wing, claims that. Providing for the general welfare means doing what it takes to fund it.

No, it does not. As Madison pointed out, our federal government is not an agency of benevolence. He should know, he wrote the Constitution.

Here, learn something about what was meant in the writings:

But what does the term General Welfare actually mean? The term general welfare is often connected with the ancient philosophy of classic republicanism. This philosophy encapsulates many things, but for our discussion today it refers to promoting the common good or putting the interests of everyone over the interests of a select group or a few people.

Original Intent: The General Welfare

yes, it does; it means, to raise money for the general welfare, not the general warfare.

Obviously you didn't even click on the link yet alone read it. As Madison put it, the general welfare clause was limited only to that enumerated within the Constitution. And there is nothing in the Constitution that mentions housing, food, medical care, air conditioners, basketball courts, none of those things. It's within the Powers of Congress where what the federal government is to provide the people.

I already read the Federalist Papers. I don't need to appeal to ignorance of the federal doctrine, or the law.

Promoting the general welfare does not mean, promoting the general badfare, or the general warfare or the common offense.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Private and public laws. WTF are private laws? I never heard of that in my life.

Let's say you had a friend over for a visit. While you're sitting outside on the patio, your elderly neighbor comes home from grocery shopping. As she struggles to get up the stairs with her groceries, you run over to help her out. You just provided for the general welfare of your neighbor.

But in different scenario, you hurt your back the day before and could't help your neighbor, so you ask your friend sitting with you if he would, and he does. You just promoted the general welfare of your neighbor.

In the third instance, your back is hurt, and your friend just had surgery two days ago and isn't allowed to lift anything. So you quickly run to the street and notice a teen playing with some friends, and you ask him to help your neighbor with her groceries and you'll pay him ten bucks. You just funded the general welfare of your neighbor.

In our Constitution, it mentions promoting the general welfare, and providing the general welfare. But nowhere is it written to fund the general welfare of the public.

"I cannot undertake to lay my finger on that article of the Constitution, that grants Congress the right of expending on articles of benevolence, the money of their constituents."
James Madison, annals of Congress, 1794

Only the right wing, claims that. Providing for the general welfare means doing what it takes to fund it.

No, it does not. As Madison pointed out, our federal government is not an agency of benevolence. He should know, he wrote the Constitution.

Here, learn something about what was meant in the writings:

But what does the term General Welfare actually mean? The term general welfare is often connected with the ancient philosophy of classic republicanism. This philosophy encapsulates many things, but for our discussion today it refers to promoting the common good or putting the interests of everyone over the interests of a select group or a few people.

Original Intent: The General Welfare

yes, it does; it means, to raise money for the general welfare, not the general warfare.

Obviously you didn't even click on the link yet alone read it. As Madison put it, the general welfare clause was limited only to that enumerated within the Constitution. And there is nothing in the Constitution that mentions housing, food, medical care, air conditioners, basketball courts, none of those things. It's within the Powers of Congress where what the federal government is to provide the people.

I already read the Federalist Papers. I don't need to appeal to ignorance of the federal doctrine, or the law.

Promoting the general welfare does not mean, promoting the general badfare, or the general warfare or the common offense.

In other words, you want to put the palms of your hands over your ears and sing aloud. That's fine, but don't pretend the founders of this country meant welfare the way you do. Nobody would start a country with the dream of loafers sitting around while others work to support them.