So....how many posters do we have who have heard of this INCEL Movement?

[WinterBorn]

No it won't. The fraud will be committed. To think that just because someone makes $470 a week in benefits that they will not try for more is simply being naive or ignoring facts.

Yes, it will. Why would someone commit fraud if they could get a job, instead?

Because it's easier to commit fraud in most cases. Duh.

it isn't in this Case, duh.

they could merely apply for unemployment compensation or get a job.

Sure it is. Medicare is going bankrupt because of the amount of fraud being committed against it. That is easily researched.

I suggest you do some before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.

apples and oranges. capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that will be corrected for via socialism, that is all.

There is already a method of correcting for the natural rate of unemployment. You just don't like it because it requires that you need the money and you cannot collect it when your needs are being provided for by your mother.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it does. That Is employment at the will of either party. Why do You require a work ethic? Are you a priest or moral authority?

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

I know full well what I am talking about. Many years ago, when I was young, I was homeless for a brief period. I was also on a couple of gov't programs when I went to college (I had 3 kids and a sick wife).

I didn't live with my Mom. I needed the assistance. You just want it so you can do fun things.

Employment is at the will of either party, not Your subjective moral values.

That is the law. Enforce the law.

My morality has nothing to do with it. If you make a choice to quit your job, you don't continue to get paid. That is not equality under the law. You would be getting your freedom and what you want, but the employer would not.

It is called unemployment Compensation for a reason, story teller. Learn your terms better.

 

[emilynghiem]

And if they are simply unemployed through not fault of their own, they can get unemployment compensation. If they quit or are fired for willfully doing something they new was against the law or the company rules, they cannot draw unemployment compensation. They are responsible for their choices.

The State law is employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of that law which defines employment relationships within the police power of a State, is what is required.

Indeed it does. But equal protection under the law does not entitle you to continue to get paid after you voluntarily quit your job.

Yes, it does. That Is employment at the will of either party. Why do You require a work ethic? Are you a priest or moral authority?

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it will. Why would someone commit fraud if they could get a job, instead?

Because it's easier to commit fraud in most cases. Duh.

it isn't in this Case, duh.

they could merely apply for unemployment compensation or get a job.

Or both. With no means testing, it would be fairly easy.

you are employed or not. why bother if you are employed?

why don't you commit fraud now?

For the same reasons I don't commit other crimes. I am a law abiding citizen and have personal morals and standards.

so does everyone else. and they resort to fewer fallacies.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it will. Why would someone commit fraud if they could get a job, instead?

Because it's easier to commit fraud in most cases. Duh.

it isn't in this Case, duh.

they could merely apply for unemployment compensation or get a job.

Sure it is. Medicare is going bankrupt because of the amount of fraud being committed against it. That is easily researched.

I suggest you do some before you make an even bigger fool of yourself.

apples and oranges. capitalism has a natural rate of unemployment that will be corrected for via socialism, that is all.

There is already a method of correcting for the natural rate of unemployment. You just don't like it because it requires that you need the money and you cannot collect it when your needs are being provided for by your mother.

No, there isn't, story teller. You simply like to make up stories.

 

[danielpalos]

The State law is employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of that law which defines employment relationships within the police power of a State, is what is required.

Indeed it does. But equal protection under the law does not entitle you to continue to get paid after you voluntarily quit your job.

Yes, it does. That Is employment at the will of either party. Why do You require a work ethic? Are you a priest or moral authority?

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

it is about equality and equal protection of the law. we could be solving simple poverty via existing legal and physical infrastructure in a market friendly manner and on an at-will basis.

only the immoral right wing, has a problem with it.

 

[WinterBorn]

No it won't. The fraud will be committed. To think that just because someone makes $470 a week in benefits that they will not try for more is simply being naive or ignoring facts.

Yes, it will. Why would someone commit fraud if they could get a job, instead?

Because they can have a job and still commit fraud. They want more.

won't be much of a problem if they may face fines and potential jail time.

it will solve our homeless problem in a market friendly manner. this is an issue, especially in big cities where this will help out the most.

No, it will not solve the homeless problem. At first you were simply ignorant of the reasons why it won't. But now that it has been explained, you are simply lying.

Yes, it will. All they need is an income under capitalism.

1) Where does the unemployment office mail the check?
2) How does a homeless person get a state ID? No address means no ID. Which means a check is of no use.
3) Where do they put the money they get? Cash in their pocket? No bank will open an account without an address.
4) How will those with substance abuse and mental problems get help before they are handed $2,000.00 a month? Otherwise you are doing more harm than good.

 

[westwall]

Indeed it does. But equal protection under the law does not entitle you to continue to get paid after you voluntarily quit your job.

Yes, it does. That Is employment at the will of either party. Why do You require a work ethic? Are you a priest or moral authority?

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

it is about equality and equal protection of the law. we could be solving simple poverty via existing legal and physical infrastructure in a market friendly manner and on an at-will basis.

only the immoral right wing, has a problem with it.

And yet you feel it is moral to steal money from those who actually earn it, and give it to people who CHOOSE to not work.

Methinks you are projecting again.

 

[WinterBorn]

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

I know full well what I am talking about. Many years ago, when I was young, I was homeless for a brief period. I was also on a couple of gov't programs when I went to college (I had 3 kids and a sick wife).

I didn't live with my Mom. I needed the assistance. You just want it so you can do fun things.

Employment is at the will of either party, not Your subjective moral values.

That is the law. Enforce the law.

My morality has nothing to do with it. If you make a choice to quit your job, you don't continue to get paid. That is not equality under the law. You would be getting your freedom and what you want, but the employer would not.

It is called unemployment Compensation for a reason, story teller. Learn your terms better.

Call what you want what it really is, a Free Ride.

 

[Oddball]

The State law is employment at the will of either party. Equal protection of that law which defines employment relationships within the police power of a State, is what is required.

Indeed it does. But equal protection under the law does not entitle you to continue to get paid after you voluntarily quit your job.

Yes, it does. That Is employment at the will of either party. Why do You require a work ethic? Are you a priest or moral authority?

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

Waste of time and keystrokes.

He actually revels in his economic illiteracy.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it will. Why would someone commit fraud if they could get a job, instead?

Because they can have a job and still commit fraud. They want more.

won't be much of a problem if they may face fines and potential jail time.

it will solve our homeless problem in a market friendly manner. this is an issue, especially in big cities where this will help out the most.

No, it will not solve the homeless problem. At first you were simply ignorant of the reasons why it won't. But now that it has been explained, you are simply lying.

Yes, it will. All they need is an income under capitalism.

1) Where does the unemployment office mail the check?
2) How does a homeless person get a state ID? No address means no ID. Which means a check is of no use.
3) Where do they put the money they get? Cash in their pocket? No bank will open an account without an address.
4) How will those with substance abuse and mental problems get help before they are handed $2,000.00 a month? Otherwise you are doing more harm than good.

There are already places you can get mail. And, with recourse to an income, markets will be better able to supply any demand.

 

[danielpalos]

Yes, it does. That Is employment at the will of either party. Why do You require a work ethic? Are you a priest or moral authority?

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

it is about equality and equal protection of the law. we could be solving simple poverty via existing legal and physical infrastructure in a market friendly manner and on an at-will basis.

only the immoral right wing, has a problem with it.

And yet you feel it is moral to steal money from those who actually earn it, and give it to people who CHOOSE to not work.

Methinks you are projecting again.

it isn't stealing. it is providing for the general welfare.

next.

 

[danielpalos]

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

I know full well what I am talking about. Many years ago, when I was young, I was homeless for a brief period. I was also on a couple of gov't programs when I went to college (I had 3 kids and a sick wife).

I didn't live with my Mom. I needed the assistance. You just want it so you can do fun things.

Employment is at the will of either party, not Your subjective moral values.

That is the law. Enforce the law.

My morality has nothing to do with it. If you make a choice to quit your job, you don't continue to get paid. That is not equality under the law. You would be getting your freedom and what you want, but the employer would not.

It is called unemployment Compensation for a reason, story teller. Learn your terms better.

Call what you want what it really is, a Free Ride.

solving for simple poverty bothers the right wing, but not inequality on purpose for the Rich. i got it.

 

[danielpalos]

Indeed it does. But equal protection under the law does not entitle you to continue to get paid after you voluntarily quit your job.

Yes, it does. That Is employment at the will of either party. Why do You require a work ethic? Are you a priest or moral authority?

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

Waste of time and keystrokes.

He actually revels in his economic illiteracy.

lol. even wo-men can gossip.

 

[westwall]

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

it is about equality and equal protection of the law. we could be solving simple poverty via existing legal and physical infrastructure in a market friendly manner and on an at-will basis.

only the immoral right wing, has a problem with it.

And yet you feel it is moral to steal money from those who actually earn it, and give it to people who CHOOSE to not work.

Methinks you are projecting again.

it isn't stealing. it is providing for the general welfare.

next.

Oh? If I decide to not give it up what happens?

 

[westwall]

I know full well what I am talking about. Many years ago, when I was young, I was homeless for a brief period. I was also on a couple of gov't programs when I went to college (I had 3 kids and a sick wife).

I didn't live with my Mom. I needed the assistance. You just want it so you can do fun things.

Employment is at the will of either party, not Your subjective moral values.

That is the law. Enforce the law.

My morality has nothing to do with it. If you make a choice to quit your job, you don't continue to get paid. That is not equality under the law. You would be getting your freedom and what you want, but the employer would not.

It is called unemployment Compensation for a reason, story teller. Learn your terms better.

Call what you want what it really is, a Free Ride.

solving for simple poverty bothers the right wing, but not inequality on purpose for the Rich. i got it.

Wrong, welfare is for people who need help to get over a bump in the road. What you advocate for is feeding the mob free stuff to placate them.

This is the USA a free country, and if you choose to not work, you are free to starve.

 

[emilynghiem]

Indeed it does. But equal protection under the law does not entitle you to continue to get paid after you voluntarily quit your job.

Yes, it does. That Is employment at the will of either party. Why do You require a work ethic? Are you a priest or moral authority?

No it does not.

I don't require a work ethic. But if you want money you need one.

I do, however, require that you live with the consequences of your own choices.

For many people taxes cause a hardship. But you want to raise them.

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

it is about equality and equal protection of the law. we could be solving simple poverty via existing legal and physical infrastructure in a market friendly manner and on an at-will basis.

only the immoral right wing, has a problem with it.

No I think you misunderstand where the "rightwing" has a problem with the "leftwing" approach danielpalos

1. To you, solving poverty issues through govt is a reflection of the people doing that.
So you see it as democratic protection and participation.

To the rightwing, going through "federal govt" means giving UP power of the people to Congress
which is REMOVED from the people and forces us to jump through hoops hoping to get what we want.
That still inserts Parties and Politicians as the MIDDLEMAN that too easily abuses this power
and SELLS OUT and exploits the people that are supposed to be represented.

What you want is something more DIRECT and GUARANTEED to represent the people.
Govt is not it, because it is set up to be representative, and too much gets lost in the process.

You forget danielpalos, if you keep trying to go through FEDERAL GOVT - that is REQUIRED
to represent ALL THE OTHER TAXPAYERS not just you and what you believe. So you end up
fighting these political and ideological battles because all people have equal freedom of BELIEFS.

You can't just get govt to dictate things YOUR WAY.

If you want direct representation and protection of your beliefs, you have to govern yourself
through your own programs. You'd be better off setting up the benefits program through your
own party, voting in what you want and representatives who believe the same things, and
fund it yourself while deducting those expenses from your federal taxes so you invest directly
and get what you want by building it yourself. That's faster than trying to establish it
through a govt that has to represent 400 million people across 50 states with diverse beliefs
that don't agree on the same terms.

2. What the RIGHTWING has a problem with is depending on govt for handouts as a bandaid,
without making the necessary changes to STOP the poverty and problems. So this ends up
either feeding into a blackhole, like pouring money into keeping a car going without fixing
the problems that keep costing more and more to repair, or it ends up REWARDING RECKLESS
BEHAVIOR. Like paying people to having more babies, to fight for custody so they can get
the monthly support from the other partner, etc.

The RIGHTWING especially Christians who successfully counsel people recovering from
drugs, homelessness, personal abuse, mental or criminal illness BELIEVE in solving the
SPIRITUAL causes of problems so the people can prosper independently by restoring their ability to function
and become leaders instead of victims.

GOVERNMENT CANNOT TEACH THAT PROCESS.

It is individually unique and takes a different timeframe for each person.

That's why Conservatives especially Christians believe in helping people through SPIRITUAL
counseling AS PART OF THE CHARITABLE SUPPORT. they don't believe in just giving the
financial help without making sure the person is getting out of the abusive patterns or crisis.

Again that's like paying more and more to keep the car running, but without fixing the problems.
The CONSERVATIVES want to fix the car instead of keep wasting money on the symptoms.

 

[WinterBorn]

Daniel, none of your reasons are valid. Your claims of altruistic reasons are just you lying to try to cover for your own greed and laziness.

You want the tax payers to give you money while you live with your Mom. That will not happen.

You may as well get a job. You can develop your online business while you earn.

But I will tell you, I know quite a few people who started their own businesses, both online and offline. They worked harder than most people with a regular job. I don't think you will do that. You are looking for someone else to take care of you.

 

[danielpalos]

lol. Poverty is worse. You simply don't know what you are talking about, story teller.

Dear danielpalos
1. Depending on what state you live in, WinterBorn is right.
In Texas, you are eligible for unemployment benefits if your employment ended because of company policies
and NOT because of any behavior or choice on YOUR side (ie cannot be
for resignation and cannot be if you got fired because of your conduct or actions),

2. As for "poverty being worse", that also depends what you are talking about.
You remind me of what Mother Teresa said, comparing the economic poverty in India
to the spiritual poverty in America, which she said was WORSE. You can be rich and
miserable, get depressed and live in addiction or die by suicide; and that's WORSE that
being poor but being mentally and spiritually grounded where you know how to deal with hardship.

danielpalos
I've said this before, and both OBAMA and BEN CARSON also endorse it as the solution:
that Microlending and business/financial training to UPLIFT people to break out of the
poverty and victim mentality is a BETTER replacement for govt or charity welfare handouts that
don't help people become independent.

Social Justice advocates such as the Welfare Warriors have fought to END the
backwards system that keeps rewarding people for staying poor and dependent on govt,
and PUNISHES them for acquiring cars or saving money to get out of poverty
by taking away their benefits if they start to stabilize. We need a system that
REWARDS people for INVESTING in developing their educations and careers
on a SUSTAINABLE basis, not just either handouts, grants or loans without a plan.

The GRAMEEN FOUNDATION that won a Nobel Prize for stabilizing poor regions
by investing in community business ownership and development is the more
sustainable cost effective solution. www.grameenfoundation.org

It addresses POVERTY and helping people out of it, but DOESN'T rely on
politics, exploiting poverty, fear or class for VOTES, or on govt controlling benefits.

danielpalos if you are really against POVERTY you'd look into Microlending
and how that has transformed people's lives, communities, and approach to changing society.

it is about equality and equal protection of the law. we could be solving simple poverty via existing legal and physical infrastructure in a market friendly manner and on an at-will basis.

only the immoral right wing, has a problem with it.

And yet you feel it is moral to steal money from those who actually earn it, and give it to people who CHOOSE to not work.

Methinks you are projecting again.

it isn't stealing. it is providing for the general welfare.

next.

Oh? If I decide to not give it up what happens?

give what up? it would be a general tax, you won't even feel it.

And, business will love you for it since it is no longer, Their problem.

 

[danielpalos]

Employment is at the will of either party, not Your subjective moral values.

That is the law. Enforce the law.

My morality has nothing to do with it. If you make a choice to quit your job, you don't continue to get paid. That is not equality under the law. You would be getting your freedom and what you want, but the employer would not.

It is called unemployment Compensation for a reason, story teller. Learn your terms better.

Call what you want what it really is, a Free Ride.

solving for simple poverty bothers the right wing, but not inequality on purpose for the Rich. i got it.

Wrong, welfare is for people who need help to get over a bump in the road. What you advocate for is feeding the mob free stuff to placate them.

This is the USA a free country, and if you choose to not work, you are free to starve.

Men have arguments. Solving for capitalism's natural rate of unemployment is what we are discussing.