Just going back and rereading some comments. I don’t believe I ever saw this one.

Youse sed:

You were very gracious to answer Winston’s silly arguments earnestly. What I found most annoying and sort of mind boggling is not the argument “for” …

Aktually, I wasn’t answering Winston. Such people are a lost cause. I was responding publicly to the rational readers.

always,
tony

You were very gracious to answer Winston’s silly arguments earnestly. What I found most annoying and sort of mind boggling is not the argument “for” an action or policy, but that it is “no worse” or “better” than some other action or idiotic policy.
My inclinations are to blow off someone with little prospects (as a waste of valuable time), you showed patience and directness. Your approach is far superior because we will have to EDUCATE more people if we are to pull out of this tail spin. What the Winstons of the world will never understand is we DON’T want to have to drop their dead-weight; we would like them to learn to take care of themselves. Not just to relieve our burden, but for the betterment of their lives. THEY would truly be HAPPIER being more independent and contributing. How can more “able” people be a bad thing?
Thanks again for the thoughtful and logical arguments. ~C

RE: needing a job at $40k to have $17k left over.

The average person makes about $35k/yr. The tax burden on such a salary is about 15%, or about $5k. That means that it takes the (income) tax of 3 people to support the one who is a parasite.

The average FAMILY income is about $50k. I suspect the average (income) tax is about 15% or about $7,500. That means that the parasite is taking the entire (income) tax of over two families.

The interesting thing about it is that, as you said, they think they are ENTITLED to it.

always,
tony

Yuse sed:

“And yes, the US is doomed. Those in power figured out a long time ago how to vote in more bread and shinier circuses for the non-producing masses.”

May I suggest the web site “TheTexasRing” and the post: “Political Football”

always,
tony

Habits are formed not from intentions, but from actions

My sister was fired from her job 5 years ago. She was denied unemployment, but she lived in rent subsidized housing so her rent was free. And the food stamps and medical for her kids (even though her ex had insurance-because she would have had to pay 50% of uncovered, the government decided to subsidize 100% of the bills).

She worked for a couple months at McDs and quit to have a government paid surgery.

FIVE years later she gets free rent ($725 a month), food stamps ($630 a month), $150 a month “utility subsidy” and an under the table baby sitting job PLUS a boyfriend who lives with her rent free and (was) working enough to pay for her luxuries.

The state is willing to pay for her education, she would just have to DO it. She won’t unless she is “paid.” Now she is complaining because she can’t get MORE in addition to the $17,000 a year she gets TAX free. Between daycare, taxes and expenses, I would have to have a job making over $40k a year to end up with $17k in my hand for food, health and roof.

Come to Detroit and see the girls with 5 babies, 5 baby’s daddies and living in the ghetto while wearing clothing I can’t afford to buy from garage sales.

As for the slavery guilt thing. Come on. My family came to America as indentured servants and worked our way up – with NO government hand outs. We don’t (nor have we) given a “leg up,” all we do is give handouts.

And yes, the US is doomed. Those in power figured out a long time ago how to vote in more bread and shinier circuses for the non-producing masses.

First of all, let me state that due to the time lag in posting comments, I responded to your first comment above before I read the second. Apparently your comment was queued when I responded. Hence, any reply in my first response which appears to be responsive to your second comment (e.g. relative wealth of welfare recipients or black folk on welfare) is purely coincidental.

To save space, I did not copy your comment here. I have tried to respond to your points in the order in which they occurred in your comment.

You claim that “the vast majority” of homeless have serious mental health or addiction problems. I challenge this. Can you point me to the study that determined this? You might try this link: http://www.nationalhomeless.or.....iction.pdf where it states,

“Although obtaining an accurate, recent count is difficult, the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (2003) estimates, 38% of homeless people were dependent on alcohol and 26% abused other drugs.” I suspect some overlap in those populations. MANY people function quite well with a “dependence upon alcohol”. In any case, hardly the “vast majority”.

However, I could just as well ask, “Why is it MY responsibility to feed and care for folks in such a situation? Am I responsible in some fashion for their addiction?” And also, “From where do you draw the moral responsibility to make ME pay for those people?” May I conjure up some cause and demand YOU pay for it?

I believe you have a mistaken view of America. I suggest you look at some of the research concerning economic mobility. The “upper crust” of America is constantly changing.

Consider the link: http://www.phenomenologycenter.....ocracy.htm where they found:

“A classic social survey in 1978 found that 23% of adult men who had been born in the bottom fifth of the population (as ranked by social and economic status) had made it into the top fifth.”

Of course, there was much movement within the five groups–some up, some down. Clearly, there is only so much room in the “top fifth”. If 23% made it in, then obviously 23% were “thrown out” and went “down”.

Winston, I don’t think you understand me. True, I may someday be up to my ass in salt water due to a natural disaster, but it won’t be because I did not heed warnings to leave the area. I suggest you look at the response to Katrina by Texas and Mississippi and compare that response to New Orleans. Also, while I may need assistance, I can tell you straight that I will be doing what I can to help myself, not demonstrating, chanting, and demanding someone else help me.

At one time I dated a woman who had a Down’s Syndrome daughter. The daughter was on SSI, Section 8, food stamps, and several other programs, including free transportation and medical care. I calculated that it was costing the taxpayers about $30,000/yr to support this person. That was 15 years ago. Many of the folks on welfare have their own car, own house, and live better than the “working poor”. (see my other response)

In terms of “corporate welfare”, I have come across this term many times. It appears to mean different things to different people. To one person, it meant the government buying a product from a business. If you mean subsidies, I could not agree with you more. If you mean something else, could you give me a definition of “corporate welfare” with some examples? I suspect I will agree with you more than you expect.

The parable was written from a philosophical view. Whether the welfare folks get more undeserved income from the government than the corporations or vice versa is irrelevant. I think if you look at ALL the various welfare programs, you will find that the aggregate total is far more than that going to business. It must be true because over half the budget is targeted to social welfare programs. I reject the notion that the relative amount is pertinent and claim the parable applies to corporations as well. I was NOT for the GM bailout–or the other ones.

I’m not at all sure I agree that there is no God. However, for the sake of argument, let me stipulate it. If there is no God, from where do you draw the moral basis for taking care of these folks? To what authority do you appeal to take my money and give it to them?

I am unable to respond to your next paragraphs concerning my “defenders”. To tell you the truth, I couldn’t understand your writing. I don’t believe it is proper to justify inappropriate behavior by pointing to worse behavior. In passing, let me simply state that when someone commits a “white collar” crime, nobody is physically injured.

In terms of your last paragraphs and your statement:

“If this is the state of public discourse, the U.S. is freaking doomed”

I must agree with you.

If you wish to insult me more thoroughly than you already have I can offer you two choices: leave me a message on http://www.thetexasring.com, or write to me directly at ranchLT4@gmail.com.

Sweet, superior smile…I really cannot advise either option, my dear man, since in any contest short of arm wrestling or the 500-yard dash, and in particular when it comes to battles of wits, philosophy, and words, I am quite prepared to rip your head off verbally and logically and I will enjoy doing it. One of my basic rules is, “If you don’t want it, don’t ask for it.” You asked for it. I can ignore dimwits who have no more sense than to suppose that socialism works, but when it comes to denigrating me AND two of my friends I am willing to break a basic rule, which is, “If you can’t say something nice, don’t say anything.” You have forfeited any right to such consideration.

Winston…if you’ve got the guts, I’ve thrown the gauntlet down. Pick it up if you dare. You people have been robbing me and calling me names all my life and I am tired of it. I’ve had my share of very bad times and in every instance I solved the problem with intelligence, hard work, doing without things I wanted to pay for others that were important, and acting like a rational individual who did not need anyone else. I went and got a job when I needed one. I want nothing from your repressive, dictatorial Nanny State other than that it leave me alone.

If you really have the courage of your bizarre convictions, Winston, tell me what you did (if you are retired) or do to support yourself, where you live, and why, and all about what you do to make the world around you a better place other than wanting to rob me for your sloppy, mawkish, puerile, sentimental notions.

Linda Brady Traynham

You misread my statement.

It’s when you have been feeding the animals and you QUIT feeding them they get hostile and aggressive.

We should not have started feeding the gubbermint. Hopefully it’s not too late to stop.

always,
tony

Glad you liked the story.

First of all, a modicum of research will show that the percentages of AFDC recipients by race are: White 38.8%, Black 37.2%, Hispanic 17.8%, Asian 2.8%, Other 3.4%. As you can see, the majority of welfare recipients are not black. If you wish to use “slavery” as an excuse, please tell me how that relates to Whites and Hispanics being on welfare.

Yes, captive animals have to be fed–captive people (in prisons or asylums) also have to be fed. I guess that’s my point–we’ve domesticated the welfare recipients to where they cannot look after themselves. Please note that in the body of the parable I mention that animals that are hurt or injured are cared for, but “cut loose” as soon as possible. How does that invalidate my analogy?

Certainly, some people are unable to fully look after themselves. Some belong in asylums; others need a helping hand for awhile. The problem is, “Who makes the determination?” When our prex said to Joe the Plumber that he wanted to “Spread the wealth”, Joe’s “correct” answer was, “May I help? Let’s start with YOURS. “

When you have a vast welfare system which has eaten trillions of dollars with no progress in 50 years, one must wonder at the effectiveness of the program. When generations of a family are on welfare, perhaps it’s time to take a look at the program in terms of results.

In terms of “grabbing a brain”, that’s a good idea. I don’t know if you were around for the beginning of the “War on Poverty”, but it was quite an emotionally charged time. None of the originators apparently had time to “grab a brain” and think about it. You know, any sophomore in Psychology could have told Lyndon Johnson what would happen if you tell some 15 year old gal:

Spread your legs; it’s fun. If you have a kid, we’ll emancipate you, set you up in your own apartment, and support you. You can party all you want and sit around all day and watch T.V. You will not have to go to school, and no adult will tell you what to do. If you don’t have enough money, spread your legs again and we’ll give you more.

Sadly, some of us DID try to tell them what would happen. They didn’t listen. They are not listening now. Not only did they destroy the family, promote poverty, and destroy the cities, but they bankrupted Social Security. And you wish to continue this because “some” need help? If there is any callousness involved, it is on the part of the perpetrators and perpetuators of such a system. The county welfare system along with churches and other organizations worked quite well before the fed usurped the function.

Of the folks deemed “poverty stricken” in this country, 31% owned their own homes and 48% owned a car. Their average net worth was $30,000. Non-cash benefits such as rent subsidies, free medical care, and food stamps are not counted in determining “poverty”. Only in America could such people be termed “poverty stricken”.