This should shut up Trump. And basically every other republican....
This has to be the best thing ever:
John McCain was born in a Naval Air Station along the Panama Canal, a U.S. territory, not a state of the Union. He would have to become naturalized once he emigrated to the U.S. and would not have been eligible for presidency.
That is from a different, more unreliable site, but I still think it is hilarious, if true.
The president's job is to sacrifice for the American public if he can't do that he cannot be president. If he's focus is on his own interests we're screwed.
So he should take vacations using tax payers money while telling all of us to be frugal?
My sister applied for it when she had her baby and they told her to quit her job and then she would have a better chance at getting it. How does that make sense?
It doesn't and it represents a significant flaw in our welfare policies; I support welfare but our current system (like the majority of Government agencies and programs) could be overhauled to be more effective and, potentially, cheaper.
Don't assume you know me because of what I argue for.
My apologies, all the same you have to admit that generally conservatives tend to be middle and upper class while liberals are usually lower or middle class.
Also that doesn't preclude society from influencing you nor does it mean you're facts are correct.
Again I'm sorry and no offence was meant.
My point was not for you to back up all of your arguments. I was just saying that I did not question you with a lack of sources so why do you question me?
They were provided when you asked for them; I have researched these topics before and know my facts I just didn't feel like posting statistics unless they were needed.
It doesn't and it represents a significant flaw in our welfare policies; I support welfare but our current system (like the majority of Government agencies and programs) could be overhauled to be more effective and, potentially, cheaper
Agreed. I never said it should be done away with. Some people definitely need it but it is very much abused in it's current state. This is just the reasoning for why I am saying that I am not a fan of socialism.
conservatives tend to be middle and upper class while liberals are usually lower or middle class
Agreed but please still don't assume.
They were provided when you asked for them; I have researched these topics before and know my facts I just didn't feel like posting statistics unless they were needed
Understood. And they weren't needed. I just did that to prove a point. I never assumed you were completely in the wrong because you did not provide sources.
I'm sorry but I have no sources to back up my facts because they are based off of life experience. On busses from Chicago, I have heard people talking about the welfare check they were going to pick up and go back home (to Chicago). I am sure if I really wanted to I could search and find Minnesota welfare laws but I am busy. I have worked with handicapped people in all of my jobs and have seen them working in many other places. As for lazy people...I just know them too. If you don't believe me that is ok.
Finally, I didn't mean to single out Obama. Almost all politicians do that.
Agreed. I never said it should be done away with. Some people definitely need it but it is very much abused in it's current state. This is just the reasoning for why I am saying that I am not a fan of socialism.
Of course, in theory I'm almost a communist but in actual practice I tend to find myself very close to socialism but with a few reservations. I believe that economies should be somewhat merit based and I believe that the market should, to an extent, denote what jobs have the most merit; however, I believe that all men are entitled to enough money to satisfy all of their needs to a humane level. I also believe that some business are best left as part of the private sector and should be controlled as such but for basic resources (food, raw materials, factories, etc.) a democratic form of socialism should be enacted. I'm off topic though, this is for another thread when I have much more free time.
Agreed but please still don't assume.
Fair enough.
I'm sorry but I have no sources to back up my facts because they are based off of life experience.
Which is a good argument, I often find myself arguing with the same information, but it isn't enough. I suppose I'm less concerned here with what people do with their welfare and more concerned with how people on welfare are viewed.
I have worked with handicapped people in all of my jobs and have seen them working in many other places. As for lazy people...I just know them too. If you don't believe me that is ok.
I agree that the handicapped should be given many more benefits but I'm unsure if they really deserve it more, not that they would deserve it less.
As for lazy people I know a few myself but that doesn't mean that they represent a holistic picture of those on welfare.
Stems from our obsession with the "rotestant ethic"; basically to be a "moral" the American public believes you must work and be frugal with your money, otherwise you're immoral. Combine that with the government's propaganda during WWII and the Cold War that decried Communism as Anti-American and Anti-Christian and you have a very confused and backwards nation.
The history student does not need a lesson in history, though it's appreciated all the same.
Okay, I want to try something, I have a bad feeling about it, but it's worth a chance.
Americans I want to know why you believe socialism is a poor economic model. Don't give sources, just your personal opinion. I'd give my opinion, but, I'm Canadian.
Communism is nice in theory but as you eluded to, people need an incentive.
[/quote]Which is a good argument, I often find myself arguing with the same information, but it isn't enough
I agree but part of it was common knowledge (Some handicapped people work and some lazy people don't work)
[quote]I agree that the handicapped should be given many more benefits but I'm unsure if they really deserve it more, not that they would deserve it less. As for lazy people I know a few myself but that doesn't mean that they represent a holistic picture of those on welfare
I don't even necessarily think that they need more benefits. I also know that it does not represent a holistic picture. What I don't like is that our current system allows for this to happen. I have heard perfectly capable people (again personal experience but you have said that you do know lazy people) give one excuse or another and then I see someone who is handicapped giving their all. It disgusts me that this is allowed to happen. I know there is no easy way to fix it but I don't like it.
I was just saying answering to someone's claim of American paranoia and provided some possible reasoning for it.
The history student does not need a lesson in history, though it's appreciated all the same.
'Twas for the others.
What I don't like is that our current system allows for this to happen. I have heard perfectly capable people (again personal experience but you have said that you do know lazy people) give one excuse or another and then I see someone who is handicapped giving their all. It disgusts me that this is allowed to happen. I know there is no easy way to fix it but I don't like it.
Nor do I, unfortunately the two best options seem to be either cutting almost all welfare spending or spending more money to determine who needs it. Then again we could push civil works or universal schooling programs (note here that I'm referring to community and vocational schools our college system is the best in the world because we do not pay for all schooling).
I was just saying answering to someone's claim of American paranoia and provided some possible reasoning for it.
Towards socialism? Most of it is born from ignorance, some people have legitimate reserves but I believe past societal influences account for the majority of American paranoia.
note here that I'm referring to community and vocational schools our college system is the best in the world because we do not pay for all schooling
I do not follow this. Because it is free it is good? Please explain.
Towards socialism? Most of it is born from ignorance, some people have legitimate reserves but I believe past societal influences account for the majority of American paranoia.
Agreed but I was giving another possibility. I'm sure history of communism has not helped my perception of anything socialist (I'm not saying they are the same thing).
Communism is nice in theory but as you eluded to, people need an incentive
Ignorance detected. Socialism IS NOT communism.
(note here that I'm referring to community and vocational schools our college system is the best in the world because we do not pay for all schooling).
I could talk about the side effects of that, but unless you're well off, or an athlete you'll soon find out.
I'm sure history of communism has not helped my perception of anything socialist (I'm not saying they are the same thing).
What America often refers to as "communism" is often totalitarian or fascist. For the record, the Soviet Union was never communist, regardless of what claims they made.
He said "in theory I am almost a communist". I was not replying to you. You posted while I was writing that.
I could talk about the side effects of that, but unless you're well off, or an athlete you'll soon find out.
I have graduated with my bachelor's and am currently still in school and have all kinds of loans...I understand that part. I just don't think it can be said that something is the best simply because it is free (even though it is not because you still pay for it through taxes).
[quote]What America often refers to as "communism" is often totalitarian or fascist. For the record, the Soviet Union was never communist, regardless of what claims they made.[quote]
I do not follow this. Because it is free it is good? Please explain.
I could talk about the side effects of that, but unless you're well off, or an athlete you'll soon find out.
Heh, I never was good at getting a thought squeezed into parenthesis.
Darnell, I was saying our education system was good because it was forced to be competitive in both pricing and prestige due to students not getting a full scholarship from the government.
Wolf, I understand that government provided scholarships can provide massive benefits and I believe that the amount given should be increased. However, unless the need is great enough or the student intelligent enough I do not think the government should give full rides to top tier schools. I believe the scholarships should be awarded on a case by case basis; except in the case of community colleges, for the sake of debate we'll say any sub $10,000 college.
This both provides more education to more individuals and maintains competition.
I'm sure history of communism has not helped my perception of anything socialist (I'm not saying they are the same thing).
What America often refers to as "communism" is often totalitarian or fascist. For the record, the Soviet Union was never communist, regardless of what claims they made.
American public schooling does not require that students study economic systems and because of that it usually doesn't happen. For most uneducated individuals communism is the Leninist one party communism prevalent in the USSR and China. It's hard to excuse their ignorance but it isn't necessarily their fault.
Actually, not really. No economic system has ever been representative of its ideal type. America is not free market, Denmark is not socialist, and China is not communist. Moreover Marxist and Leninist communism have a very key difference, in Marxist communism the government is ruled equally by all individuals in democratic fashion. In Leninist communism one party holds total power and masquerades as communist.
I'm sure history of communism has not helped my perception of anything socialist (I'm not saying they are the same thing).
And I later responded with this...I know they aren't the same thing. I know I did not quote correctly but please read the whole post before you make remarks like that.
Actually, not really. No economic system has ever been representative of its ideal type. America is not free market, Denmark is not socialist, and China is not communist. Moreover Marxist and Leninist communism have a very key difference, in Marxist communism the government is ruled equally by all individuals in democratic fashion. In Leninist communism one party holds total power and masquerades as communist.
