What should we do about the nation’s poor?

Bonnie Willis's picture

The political season heating up, and I have family and friends who have strong political convictions on both sides of the aisle.

Since they generally work hard, provide for their families, and attempt to live honest and godly lives, I have been thinking why are they on opposite sides of the political aisle.

This question has triggered some interesting conversations that seem to highlight a fundamental difference between the two opposing viewpoints and one I’d like to explore in this article: What should we do with the poor?

This question becomes all the more acute when you know friends who represent millions of Americans who have lost their jobs, gone through bankruptcy or foreclosures, or have had overwhelming medical bills that have either threatened or torn apart their families.

On one side of the aisle, I have friends who are moved with compassion wondering how is it that in a nation as rich as ours, families have to suffer like this. How is it that these hard-working individuals struggle day by day when others who seem far less “worthy” seem to live lives without a financial care in the world?

It all seems so unfair. Outrage fills their hearts, leading them to think, “Doesn’t our government have a responsibility to do something for these citizens?” I imagine it is thought-processes like these that led have led to the rise of many government aid programs like Medicaid, Medicare, Welfare, Food Stamps, etc. These programs were originally designed to help individuals and families have some basic necessities as they went through difficult times.

When I listen to my friends on the other side of the aisle, I hear similar concerns for the poor. However, their focus seems to be on the long-term effects government aid programs have on these families. Rather than being a temporary hand-up out of their financially challenging situation, these programs, all too often, seem to nurture an unproductive mindset and lifelong dependence on government aid. And tragically this mindset is often passed from generation to generation.

In answering the question of what to do with the poor, these friends seem to emphasize argue that extended family, friends, churches and local non-profits see the needs first-hand and can more effectively address the true needs of these families rather than a distant federal government.

Honestly, I can understand the appeal of both sides, and I recognize that both groups of friends desire to help the poor despite the many mischaracterizations of each side.

One side accuses the other of not caring about the poor because they tend to minimize the role of government over other avenues of support, and the thought becomes, “if the government isn’t here to help all people, especially those in need, then why do we have one.”

They also assert that it is unrealistic to think that those who are going through financially difficult times have a support system to help them, and even if they did, they would not turn to them because of the embarrassment they feel about their situations.

The other side makes the accusation that this group doesn’t care to place any check or limits on spending in these government aid programs. These programs, all too often, are not temporary supports, and seem to expand our definition of “basic needs” and “poor.” This group further asserts that as we spend this money on government aid we are only increasing the debt we are passing onto our children which has our citizens at over $16 trillion past broke.

Essentially, I too question the wisdom of having a federal government being ultimately responsible for providing the basic needs of the poor in our country.

However, my objection is not focused on how financially unsustainable it is. Rather, my objection comes from the danger I see in how it redefines the relationship between the government and her citizens.

Once a person, a family, a group of citizens becomes perpetually dependent on the provision of government, something eats away at their inner-man and their identity becomes altered. Their sense of dignity and self-sufficiency falters and aspirations for something better erodes.

When people depend on the government for their financial livelihood, those people are no longer truly free. And we ought never to sacrifice our freedom to make life choices to succeed or fail for the sake of being provided for.

The dangers of government dependency is so rooted in me because I grew watching my mother, as a single mom, resist going on public assistance to help her raise her three children. And sometimes we had to go without electricity, running water, and only had bread and jelly to eat.

And I do remember the day when we eventually did go on food stamps for nearly two years. And I watched my mother work even harder to get off of them. I did not understand why she was so determined to get off food stamps, but I do now.

To this day, I marvel at how my mother resisted accepting government assistance for so many years and when she did go on public assistance how she was able to exercise the restraint of not staying on it.

I am so grateful to her for her example because from her I learned two things. First, you never know the character and power that lies in a person based on whether they have a lot or a little. And second, it is far better to go without and retain one’s sense of identity and self-determination than to feel incapable and dependent.

So, “what should we do with the poor?” For me, the question isn’t theoretical, but it is real for people like my mother, my childhood friends, my own family who has had to struggle from time to time, and for some of my friends who continue to struggle to this day.

The answer I propose is three-fold.

Number one: Let the poor know over and over again that where they financially are does not determine who they are nor is it their position in life. Through hard work, they are still able to be successful and do great things no matter who they are or where they come.

Number two: I would encourage families, friends, and local agencies to come alongside these families without projecting pity, but to help in a way that allows them to maintain their dignity and self-respect.

Number three: I would encourage the federal government to resist the temptation of being the first point of contact and perpetual provider of all the needs of the poor.

The government should set policies that allow people the freedom of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness even if they are poor.

And with this freedom, we may experience challenges and struggles and things may not always seem fair, but how we handle that struggle helps define who we are as individuals and as a nation.

[Bonnie B. Willis is co-founder of The Willis Group, LLC, a Learning, Development, and Life Coaching company here in Fayette County and lives in Fayetteville along with her husband and their five children.]

suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
kinda says it all

1. You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealth out of prosperity.

2. What one person receives without working for, another person must work for without receiving.

3. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government doesn't first take from someone else.

4. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it.

5. When half the people get the idea they don't have to work because the other half is going to take care of them; and when the OTHER half get the idea it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get half of what they work for....that is the beginning of the end of any nation.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
Obama knows what to do...

Obama on new fed programs, including one to teach punctuality to the poor: 'We can't expect them to have all the skills they need to work. They may need help with basic skills, how to shop, how to show up for work on time, how to wear the right clothes, how to act appropriately in an office. We have to help them get there'...

Those poor dumb, well, poor people...

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
The only way to help the poor

The only way to help the poor is to increase the size of the middle class and remove the barriers for entry.

More jobs and better education is what’s needed to reduce the numbers of the poor.

This is the best plan I’ve seen for more jobs.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/jobs_act.pdf

This is the best plan I’ve seen for better education.

http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/education

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
So Gort,....

the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 wasn't enough? Under that act, $100 billion went for "edumacation" and $375 billion+ on work projects and training? And now these plans you propose are better???????

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Cyclist, it’s a better plan

Cyclist, it’s a better plan than just funneling the money directly to pinstriped banksters, international gambling tycoons, and Texas oil boilers like Mitt Romney, Paul Ryan, and Republicans in general plan to do.

At least some other people will get to use the money first.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
I understand Gort....

it's hard to defend the Stimulus Act and the actions of Obama and his little merry band of misfits. Sorry to have put you in that position. :-)

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
Cyclist, I don’t feel like I

Cyclist, I don’t feel like I have to defend the stimulus act. It accomplished what it was intended to do and we’re all better off for it.

When you step on the pedal on your bicycle do you pump it once and expect that to take you all the way to your destination?

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Well Gort....

There's a big problem with your analogy. Big fat me peddling down the road doesn't cost this nation 3/4 of a trillion dollars.

Your President had his chance and his plan has not provided the desired results. Now he has a "new" plan....and how convenient, just in time for the election.

I have an idea, give the middle class that money and we'll spend it on consumer goods. Heck, I might even buy you a bicycle.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - This

in your opinion is the way to increase the size of the middle class?

You actually think that passing an Act, we will increase the size of the middle class?

You're smarter than that Gort.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, you know I do. The

PTC_0, you know I do. The alternative is to wring my hands and worry about how the end of the world is coming.

What’s wrong with your entrepreneurial instincts? Are you afraid to invest in the people of the USA?

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - Every

day Gort, every day.

I am not wring my hands Gort, I have my life under control, do you? No, I suppose you are waiting for the government to step in to help out when things get bad. Talk about a false idol.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, false idols? Wow,

PTC_0, false idols? Wow, what’s that all about?

All I’m doing is answering a blog on ‘what to do about the nations poor.’

Don’t try to turn it into something dirty!

8 - )

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
LOL - Gort

OK, I won't.

However, that's what I thought all statists do, worship the state.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, why do you believe

PTC_0, why do you believe that I would even know the religious practices of a “statist’?

You’re trying to get Gorts goat a little bit, eh? 8 -)

What do you want to do about the nations poor?

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - I

personally would like to help the poor, I just don't want to use the government to do it for me. It's not the role of government to act as a tool to help the poor. If we want to help the poor then let's do it individually. It's called freedom to do what you want with your money Gort. I don't want the government to hold a gun to my head and say "help the poor, my way".

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Maybe tomorrow we'll get

a clearer picture of the difference between these two:

http://youtu.be/IWDJEc92d38

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - How

does the rest of the world view our leader?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=erYpXzE9Pxs&feature=player_embedded

Been traveling a lot lately, I don't feel a lot of love out there.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, you expect to see

PTC_0, you expect to see love? This was our thank you for all our blood and treasure in Iraq.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLA_SKo2sTM&NR=1&feature=fvwp

The US spends more on national defense than any other county in the world. A portion of the money goes into insuring the freedom and safety of the country’s represented in your video link.

So what if Obama over uses a boxing metaphor at media events?

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - No

a script, without anything heartfelt in it. The world gets it Gort, even if you don't.

You know Gort, it's like Ben Franklin said, countries don't have friends, they only have interests.

Gort
Gort's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/28/2009
PTC_0, I only speak for

PTC_0, I only speak for myself. I never claimed to speak on behalf of the world.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Gort - Go

watch the video again pal, it's like that where I go in the world and it seems to be pretty universal based on my experience.

They are laughing at us Gort and Mr. Obama. As we lose financial strength, we lose respect in the world.

suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
my thoughts

Bonnie, you brought up something that needs to be addressed. I've been trying to help a relative with about 50 rental houses. What I've come face to face with some of her HUD renters and it has been mind blowing. The system needs to be revamped badly.

I think it was designed to help people get a leg up. With some that is the case, with the majority of what I've seen, it is total abuse.

Many have no intention of getting off. Those that really need it and might use it for the purpose it was intended, are sitting on a stagnant waiting list. I don't feel adding more money to this is the answer, rather some stiff, and enforced guide lines that are simple and should be followed.

Unless you are retarded or disabled, THERE SHOULD BE NO LIFERS ON THE PROGRAM. So many I've seen wouldn't think of getting off, nor would they think of work either.

1. There should be a time limit on how long you stay on the program. If someone has been on the progam for say 4 years and hasn't gotten a job, more than likely the fault lies with them. What people don't realize is that you can't help everyone. Give someone a chance and if they blow it, go to the next one. It isn't our problem anymore, the problem then rest totaly on the shoulders of the one that won't work. You would see a big change if they were held accountable.

2. "It is for the children", get off that one right now. I've seen women who breed just to get a bigger house. They use their children. If you keep breading and not getting a job, you have to come off the program. (I'm sure the civil liberties guys will flip on that one!) But by supporting these people, we are hurting ourselves and these kids because they become the next generation of entitlement. You would see some real birth control if they lost their entitlements for having more and more kids.

3. Accept straight up that you are not going to help everyone. All anyone IS entitled to is a CHANCE. Give them that and move on. Some people are in the gutter because that is where they belong. Don't help them breed. Let them go the way of the dodo bird. That is how nature does it.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
The Ozarks, the Urban Ghettos,

Don't help them breed - let them go the way of the dodo bird? Wow! America in action!! Giving everyone a chance is right on. Ignoring 47% of a perceived citizenry that doesn't agree with ones policy is ignorant. We already have had 'ignorant' - let's try cooperation and common sense for at least four more years. If we ever get a Congress that knows how to legislate for the American people - we'll be on our way.

The operative word - legislate!!

Your other points are those that have been expressed before - end generational welfare; adhere to strict guidelines; (there is no excuse for HUD housing to be in disrepair or dirty!!) The word 'breed' is used in husbandry.
I was taught not to use that word when referring to human beings. (That word was often used when referring to 'white trash'.) I often wonder why 'others' were not taught the same respect for all humans.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM- again you tout "cooperation"....

But what you really mean is do nothing. If one political party wants to expand welfare and government spending and the other does not, there really isint an in-between, is there. Either you cut the budget or you dont. Either reduce the deficit or dont. Obama claimed he could spend more and reduce the deficit, but it didnt work out like that, did it? Math always wins in the end and im sorry, but 2+2=4, not -3 like he said it would. Cooperation for liberals is just code for "let me keep doing whatever we want." Whenever conservatives point out that a liberal is being rediculous, we are accused of "not-cooperatiing." Many people on this thread have offered suggestions to fix the problems, myself included, But you have not offered any of your own. You have protested loudly that the problems are real and need to be fixed, and you have weighed in on weather you thing these solutions are good or not, or racist or not, but you never offer any solutions of your own. Why is that? It is not fair to say that just because we want to reform entitlement programs we are being ignorant. Its also not fair to say that just becasue we feel their is too much coddling and waste/abuse in the system we are being ignorant. I dont think you even believe that yourself (but that didnt stop you from saying it!), you just say these things to stir the pot. No one said "dont help them breed." What was said is that there should not be finacial incentives for doing so, and therefore financial incintives to stay on welfare. People respond to you becasue you deliberately misquote them, then argue against the misquote, just to get peoples dander up. But if you want to be taken seriously, I would suggest you do more than simply agree there is a problem and deride others suggestions. Try offering one of your own.

suggarfoot
suggarfoot's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/10/2007
Thank you Renault

"It is not fair to say that just because we want to reform entitlement programs we are being ignorant. Its also not fair to say that just becasue we feel their is too much coddling and waste/abuse in the system we are being ignorant."

The way the system is set up now, their is no incentive to get off, rather, there is an incentive to have more children and stay on. To get on HUD you simply have to prove your income at a certain level. You don't have to prove you are trying to get a job or remedy the problem yourself. There is a 3 yr waiting list. Some of these people on the waiting list might take the oppertunity to help themselves get a leg up, but they don't get the chance because the lifers won't move on. They are going to sit there till they draw every nickle they can out of the system. These are the people I object to.

I make no appologies for saying the lifers should become extinct. If you try to save people from drowning and you have one that will take the life raft and try to get to saftey that is good. If you have another that won't take it but clings to you and in the process is drowning you both, you get them off you and try to save yourself. This country and working class can no longer shoulder them. The very rich are balking at paying their %, the entitled balk, and that leaves the working class which is dissapearing. If something doesn't give, the working middle class will become the extinct dodo bird. Then who is going to take care of anyone?

It isn't fair, nor productive for one group to take care of another from the womb to the tomb. The system needs to be revamped.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Compromise/Cooperation does not = do nothing
Quote:

No one said "dont help them breed."

Really?

From Suggarfoot

Quote:

Don't help them breed. Let them go the way of the dodo bird. That is how nature does it.

So much for your thoughtful comprehension/response skill.

The Tea Party - which won seats in 2010 - have been the cause of this Congress having the lowest rating in history.
Leaders can compromise without giving up principle. To assist - does not mean 'coddle'. I do not misquote - but share what I understand is being said. You don't want to understand any other point of view but your own. You don't want to acknowledge any solutions - other than your own. Cooperation is not a bad thing - but it appears that those who have taken over the Republican Party have felt that they have the power to have their ideas implemented with no attempt to cooperate with others. When you are challenged with another point of view - you swear that you are not 'racist', 'elitist', etc., etc., etc. You have your own 'take' on the history of these United States - and how different citizens may have been affected by certain laws, regulations, etc. I thank you for sharing your understanding and your ideas. There are citizens who agree or disagree with all of your ideas. You and I have a different view of 'cooperation' during the past 3 years. As I said before, neither one of us seem to represent the majority of the American people. This will be an interesting election. As of late, the Republican candidate seems to be changing his 'stand' again. Hopefully, he will be direct on Wednesday night. You are the one who 'derided' the suggestions made in an outstanding essay shared in this discussion. You and yours are so adept at telling the American people what they CAN'T do. Your candidate has changed his solutions so often, that we are anxiously awaiting his clarification on his stand. The President has his record of what he has accomplished after inheriting 8 years of completely ignoring any semblance of a budget for this country; two wars that have lasted longer than any war that the US was involved in; the capture of the man who coordinated the killing of 3000 humans in New York; survived one of the most vicious attacks on a sitting president since Clinton. (Nixon and Carter took a beating - but nothing IMO like what was dealt Obama); kept the country from falling into a depression - even though we lost our credit rating because of an incompetent Congress.

Your comprehension? Sorry if you can't comprehend my suggestions. I will continue to share my opinions. . as I'm sure you will continue to share yours.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM- for once, you are right!

but youre wrong on everything else! you were right, sugarfoot did say that. But once again, you prove my point. You pass judgement on others suggestions, you offer opinions on others thoughts, but you dont provide any suggestions of your own. My critique of Ms. Willis essay was limited only to the fact that her three suggestions could not feasibly be put into place. There was no "denial" (as you put it) of her suggestions. Its just that they were emotional responses rather than legislatable ideas. If you disagree, which clearly you do, dont just tell me im wrong. tell me how her three suggestions could be enacted without costing the taxpayers more money. Becasue if you cant do it without costing MORE money, then whats the point? DM- cooperation is the ideal, i agree, but its naieve to think that there is a middle ground for every issue. There arent always. You either increase spending or you dont. You either increase taxes, or you dont. You can blame the tea party for being obstructionist if you want, but those were the issues they were elected on. How do you compromise on those issues? How do you kinda increase the deficit? how do you sorta increase taxes?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Renault

You have all of the answers.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM- Being snide is the best you can do?

so you can dish it out but you cant take it when someone points out that you never offer suggestions of your own? You have written tens of thaousands of words on this thread alone, but all of it to comment on others suggestions as to how to reform entitlement programs. Never to offer and idea of yours. You make not like the ideas I put forward, but at least I was brave enough to put them out there for others to consider. My father taught me to never complain about something unless I had an idea to make it better.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Renault -posted yesterday

A. An assistance program that is well defined and temporary.
B. An oversight program that checks for fraud and corruption ( both of users and implementers)

This program would provide assistance to those citizens and/or legal residents to provide food, shelter, and assistance to acquire skills for becoming a contributing citizen to society. (pretty much what the words of our current Welfare to Work Program offer)

And your ideas?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Be accurate Renault

You don't agree with my suggestions , which I posted twice. Don't accuse me of not making any.

mudcat
mudcat's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
You think she's snide now? Wait until Nov. 7

When her messiah gets voted out and real entitlement reform begins, they'll have to invent an entirely new word for her attitude then.

Imagine the carnage among the Obama voters - "Oh no, I have to pay for my own cell phone" or "Who's gonna pay for all these babies" or "Oh no, I have to make my own car payments now/"

JeffC
JeffC's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/21/2006
Snide mudcat?

Romney has to pick it up tonight or he's toast. It's looking like Obama wins with a hundred electoral votes.

Robert W. Morgan
Robert W. Morgan's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Obama wins! Obama wins! el Jeffe. No one has actually voted

Not yet, except maybe some absentees or military ballots which will show up next April. Yes, I know, Jimmy Hoffa voted for Presbo and has pledged $1 to the Presidential election fund. But aside from that, Jeff -NO ONE HAS ACTUALLY VOTED. You want polls, fine. 3-8% margin of error. Useless crap Jeffe - all of them. Unless they were used to suppress the vote of the right-leaning undecided.

When the unwashed Occupier crowd sleeps late on election day and the real married women (not the welfare brood mares on the government dole), but the real Housewives of America reject this idiotic "Vote as if your female body parts depended upon it" campaign - Presbo is going down by at least 100 electoral votes.

What do you think happens if he takes Ohio, Wisconsin, Pennsylvania and Florida?

This country has plenty of stupid people, but most didn't get their free phone yet and they will stay home Nov 6. Some of the moderately stupid still understand that having a job is better than counting down to the 99th week of unemployment benefits. Those that are on unemployment legitimately and actually looking for a job will find one very quickly after Romney opens up the fracking and drilling and of course lowers taxes on the business owners who are just waiting for something good to happen before they invest in their future.

Or, I could be wrong and Obama and his followers win and take over the country. Sad day, that.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
Mudcat - i just learned that

two of the succsesses that Obama claims are actualy wins for Bush. The check to "save" the automotive industry was actually signed by Bush in Dec. of 2008, amonth before Obama took office. Obama reworked the deal to favor the unions and now he takes credit, but the money initially came from Bush. And the Bin Laden thing. Didnt Obama promise to close Gitmo? Didnt we find Bin Laden becasue of the war and the policies Bush enacted. They finally caught up with him on Obama's watch, but he couldnt have done it without Bush. I wonder what DM would think of those pieces of information. She might find it as 'interesting" as you or I.

mudcat
mudcat's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/26/2005
Actually Obama asked Bush to sign the car thing

just so something bad didn't happen in the 6 weeks leading up to Obama's immaculation. Obama portrayed it as an extreme emergency. Not sure that "success" is the right term to use for this ting, but Obama does own it. Bush signed it just to be polite and Obama pays him back by trashing him for 3+ years.

Several of the Navy Seals have made it pretty clear who was responsible for Bin Laden and it was not Obama and it certainly wasn't Valerie Jarrett who is totally responsible for the 2-day delay in that operation. She's a real piece of work - politically. Karl Rove without his smarts.

Closing Gitmo was delayed not only because it makes no sense, but also because Obama and his charming attorney general can't find an existing facility that wants to take the terrorist scum that currently occupies Gitmo. So, Obama has a problem. How's he going to solve it? Why he is buying an unused prison in - guess which state? That's right - Illinois. $1.65 million and guess what will happen in his second term? That's right, once they get on US soil, they will become political prisoners with all kinds of rights and lawyers and open trials. Great move, Mr. President.

The Wedge
The Wedge's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/09/2008
DM, where are your answers?

It is easy to dismiss someone with a glib posting, but in no way have you advanced any concrete ideas of your own. Is it so wrong to ask for what ideas you would support? Ideas that are able to be legislated? Ideas that will make everybody more prosperous, versus taking from one to give to another?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Government or redistribution of priorities?

Citizens are spending millions voluntarily on an election (millions!) in this country. There are no tax breaks for these contributions. I'm told an inordinate amount is coming from 'small' donations. Government is not paying for this. Is an election ad and a political party more important than assisting those citizens who need help? Since it is not 'government' money, maybe a citizen watchdog committee could oversee the funds to protect against fraudulent use. Just saying.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Davids mom

"Is an election ad and a political party more important than assisting those citizens who need help?"

The hard and cold cruel fact is that this nation or any other can afford to help everyone in need. Not even your socialist bubby Hugo Chavez can pull that one off.

BTW, the clock is ticking towards the fiscal cliff. Those of us that pay federal taxes - yes, that would be the 53% of us - will see anywhere from a $2,000 to $6,000 tax increase. That means that $500 billion will no longer circulate to purchase goods such as......well such as cars from General Motors. Oh, and there will be no public money left to keep them afloat.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Cyclist
Quote:

can afford to help everyone in need.

The gloom and doom crowd lost out in the 30's and that is exactly what is happening now. No matter who wins this election - the doom and gloom crowd will be the losers. This country is not failing just because someone put a numerical value on the success of democracy. Hope and change do not come about easily or on the promises of one man or one party. We have seen what non-cooperation does - hinders progress - and the American people are tired of it. The PEOPLE of any community can come together to assist those in need - a community can be a village or a country. Americans have been known throughout the world as assisting those in need - even their former enemies. To compare the United States with the country of Hugo Chavez doesn't even make sense. There is money in this country to provide assistance to those in need. If the 'government' has failed in the implementation of this activity of helping their poor - but PRIVATE CITIZENS can assist in political campaigns - so can campaigns assist the poor by implementing a program outside of 'government'. We are a Christian based nation according to many - then what is the problem of following the directions of the Christ - and Do Unto Others as You Want Done Unto You? This valuable guide is not just found in the Christian religion - (The Golden Rule) - but in all the major religions throughout the world. Too many topics for one to comprehend? Blame that on the fourth grade reading level that is fed to us through the American media. You and PTCO can handle multiple subject comments - you both completed the fourth grade.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Davids mom - Giving

Yup I do, and I would suspect most others do.

The thing to remember is that if we go over that fiscal cliff, the 53% will, on average, pay an additional $300 month extra for federal taxes. That's less money to pay for food, clothing, gasoline, housing, and yes, giving. Oh, and lets not forget our monetary policy will devalue the dollar.

And the reason why? Well you remember that 2009 stimulus....you know, the one that we spent our money on stupid projects like teaching South African men how to wash their gentiles. Well, we have to pay for that and the other equally stupid useless projects.

Oh and Hugo Chavez, it is what it is.

BTW, posting at 0228??? Are you by any chance out visiting in Valencia? If so, enjoy that those nice warm Santa Ana winds.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Cyclist

Valencia? Nope. Last time I was that way was March of this year. Working on a project - and turn to this for a moment of relaxation . Cyclist - by your citing the 53% - are you among those who feel the '47%' don't pay income taxes?

The genitals and the bridge - and unfortunately, there are others throughout history - no matter who was in the White House or in Congress. Maybe with the greater transparency that technology brings - we'll be able to better question this 'pork barrel' stuff.

Cyclist
Cyclist's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/15/2007
Davids mom

Working on a project at that hour???

I remember when I caught "sniffles" posting at about the same hour while I was in Israel. He mentioned something to the effect that that someone form the liberal side has to be on the lookout for those "Repub" rascals.

About the percentage, I honestly don't know what is the correct percentage as it could be more or less. But that number has been batted around.

Anyways it's off to bed. Got to rise early in the morning and hit the gym to scare off those evil fat cells.

BTW, coffee thingy soon.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM
Davids mom wrote:

The gloom and doom crowd lost out in the 30's and that is exactly what is happening now. No matter who wins this election - the doom and gloom crowd will be the losers. This country is not failing just because someone put a numerical value on the success of democracy.

DM on this you are wrong. Our fiscal policies and our financial future can not and will not be sustainable. We cannot continue to spend money we simply do not have. That leads to a bankrupt Nation and Anarchy. The Dollar is being devalued by the Fed and nothing this Administration is doing is stopping it. In fact they are helping the destruction along. A very belligerent poster once told me here I was out of my mind and did not know what I was talking about when I said China was going to stop buying our debt.. Guess what they have and we are now buying our own debt. The Fed holds 65% of our debt now.

See Weimar Republic and Zimbabwe to see where this leads...

Davids mom wrote:

Hope and change do not come about easily or on the promises of one man or one party.

Now whose fault is that. We were sold by your party that if Obama was elected.. The Earth would begin to heal..The Seas would recede and the Economy would be completely fixed in 3 years.

Has any of that happened?

Davids mom wrote:

We have seen what non-cooperation does - hinders progress - and the American people are tired of it.

Progress.. whose progress DM..? If we were headed for a cliff would you want to continue your progress towards it or maybe stop and look for another route? You see DM Progress can mean different things to different people. Your Progress towards a Socialist Utopia does not fit my idea of progress so should I cooperate with you or work against you?

Davids mom wrote:

The PEOPLE of any community can come together to assist those in need - a community can be a village or a country.

Charity has always been an American ideal.. We don't need Government to force it on us. Charity or the act of being charitable depends on the heart. Not Government. Government can only take from someone to give to someone else.. That's not charity that's theft.

Davids mom wrote:

Americans have been known throughout the world as assisting those in need - even their former enemies. To compare the United States with the country of Hugo Chavez doesn't even make sense. There is money in this country to provide assistance to those in need.

That used to be true.. However due to Politicians need to spend our hard earned money and their need to buy your vote we are reaching a point of saturation. We have 51-53% of Americans footing the bill for 100% of Government. Tell me DM how is that Sustainable?
Valenzuela particularly the Chavez Government controls all wealth by controlling business then re-distributes that wealth to buy the votes needed to win an election. Look how Chevez lives and look how the "people" live. Socialism is for the people not the Socialist.

Davids mom wrote:

If the 'government' has failed in the implementation of this activity of helping their poor - but PRIVATE CITIZENS can assist in political campaigns - so can campaigns assist the poor by implementing a program outside of 'government'. We are a Christian based nation according to many - then what is the problem of following the directions of the Christ - and Do Unto Others as You Want Done Unto You?

Would Jesus ask you to kneel and give at the point of a Roman spear?

No... Jesus taught us Charity comes from the heart not by force. Government has no role here and Constitutionally speaking not even a legal one.

Government cannot "give" charity that it first had to take, by threat of force, from someone else.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL Go to church - ask your pastor

I have my own understanding of what Jesus would do. I don't impose that on anyone else. I do feel free that I can share it in my comments. DID YOU COMPREHEND WHAT I WAS SAYING?
I said:

Quote:

If the 'government' has failed in the implementation of this activity of helping their poor - but PRIVATE CITIZENS can assist in political campaigns - so can campaigns assist the poor by implementing a program outside of 'government'.

You said:

Quote:

Charity has always been an American ideal.. We don't need Government to force it on us. Charity or the act of being charitable depends on the heart. Not Government.

Sustainability: Nothing/no budget can operate without revenue. We have had a 'budget' that spent with no knowledge of where the revenue was coming from to cover the expenses. Balance means to most economists - a balance between revenue and spending...,.not cut or no taxes and cut all spending.

Progress: The charts will show where we were and where we're going. Is the deficit more? Yep. Has the unemployment slowed down? Well , some of us are still waiting for the 'job providers' to do their 'JOB!- we'll listen to the candidates - not those who try to interpret what Fox News or CNN says - and make up our minds on November 6. I obviously do not agree with you and your interpretation. I am not the only one - and it is a close election - so neither one of us is part of a large majority of Americans.

When was the last time you were in Zimbabwe? There is no comparison between the governments of Cuba or Zimbabwe and the government of the US. I've been to both countries. The US does operate within The Constitution - WITH A HEART! W's father tried to introduce the 'lights' of volunteerism. The changing Republican Party did not support that. Yes, different subjects addressed in this response - but the same theme runs through all. I'm sure you get my point - and I acknowledge that you don't agree with it. CUT TAXES; CUT SPENDING; INTRODUCE AN AUSTERITY PROGRAM (since there is not enough revenue for anything else) and let other countries take over the leadership in technology, manufacturing, education, military strength, etc. etc., etc. Grizz agrees with you. You're in good company.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM tell me how it will be done
Davids mom wrote:

Sustainability: Nothing/no budget can operate without revenue. We have had a 'budget' that spent with no knowledge of where the revenue was coming from to cover the expenses. Balance means to most economists - a balance between revenue and spending...,.not cut or no taxes and cut all spending.

DM how do I say this without my head exploding... WE DON'T HAVE THE MONEY TO KEEP SPENDING ON ENTITLEMENTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE!!!!

Dm what part of a $16 Trillion dollar debt don't you get? How can we continue to spend $1.5 TRILLION dollars per year over budget and you think we can just tax more and cut a little and wha-la balance comes?

Again DM I will make this point one more time for you.. According to the IRS tables there are 2.7 million adults with a net worth above $1.5 million. If the government were to seize all the wealth above the $1.5 million threshold, Washington would realize a one-time windfall of $4.0 Trillion. That's 3 years at current spending DM...

Even if you went down to the $200,000 level the 6.9 million filers would only gain the Government $221.0 Billion... Not even close to "balance" DM.

No amount of "TAXES" is going to fix this and no small cuts will either.

The only way out of this is MASSIVE cuts, wholesale shutdown of Government agencies and tax increases on EVERYONE including those that don't currently have a tax burden.

But what the heck DM it's not going to happen. The Government is going to continue spend money we don't have to buy votes, buy supposed good will in the World and line their own pockets.
No matter who gets in nothing will change...at least not voluntarily.

Events will change it for us.. Many European Countries are going under DM..China is following us down the Rabbit hole and have their own problems and we just keep on "printing" money to prop up a failed economy.

Once the Fed stops... so will we.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
What will be cut?

Tonight the candidates will tell us what programs will be cut and what sacrifices we have to make. ( Or will promise us 12 million jobs and only those making over a certain amount will not have to chip in.)

Quallacherokee
Quallacherokee's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/27/2011
What will be cut? Nothing, but I do have a weird idea

What if we could convince Washington DC to cut every single agency, Department of, and Bureaucracy that Congress has NO Constitutional authority to create or fund? One can find the List of Powers Congress has written down strangely enough in the US Constitution, Article 1 Section 8, What's really strange is if Congress wasn't given a Power, it was assumed they wouldn't wield that power, (I guess the authors of the Constitution thought the people would be responsible OF their government)

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
SL - DM

doesn't care, just like all other socialists. The idea is to bring the country down SL. That way they can fulfill their "vision" of what life should be like. Unfortunately, we will live just like it's 1984.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
PTCO-On DM and "others"

I know.. I know.. I am beating the old proverbial dead horse...but I guess I am like the a modern day Revere I keep yelling the Economy is falling and they keep saying everything is just fine.

Sometimes I forget they actually want it to fail so they can "re-structure" it to be fair to be a Social Democracy.

Somehow these guys like Dm, Gort Lion and others think they can do Socialism better then the those that created it and then watched it fail. I forget that they think it's fair to "level" the playing field that the pie is always static and if someone has a bigger slice then it takes away from somebodies elses slice. I also tend to forget that reasoned arguments, logic and facts will actually make a difference. They will not with these believers...

NUK_1
NUK_1's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/17/2007
DM: It's cut now or suffer far worse later
Davids mom wrote:

CUT TAXES; CUT SPENDING; INTRODUCE AN AUSTERITY PROGRAM (since there is not enough revenue for anything else) and let other countries take over the leadership in technology, manufacturing, education, military strength, etc. etc., etc. Grizz agrees with you. You're in good company.

Plenty of people agree with the above actually, including Germany first and foremost, who was a leader in forcing the above on Greece, as were the Dutch and other countries sick of other countries being deadbeats and refusing to buy any more of their debt. You know why? Because no one would buy any more debt that Greece was trying to issue. They were totally BROKE. The only way they could get any more money from debt-financing was to agree to the terms dictated by other countries who might buy their debt and if they subsequently showed at least some semblance of getting the idiotic spending under control.

The same is happening in Portugal, Ireland and Spain right now. They are at the breaking point where no one wants their debt any more because they are INSOLVENT and as financial analysts would say "have terrible underlying fundamentals." They are failing now and there is no hope to succeed in the future unless drastic changes are made right away.

The US is sitting on a 16 trillion deficit that Obama is happily adding 1.5 trillion to each year despite all of his bluster and lies before being elected. It's bad enough now that the Fed is in the monetizing debt business(the same concept that about bankrupted all major banks and insurers and was widely hated by every Dem/Lib/Progressive that didn't cash in personally but seemingly OK for the Fed)by buying their own debt that they printed to get more dollars in circulation. And this is supposed to end well how? We print enough money and pump it into the "economy" and the economy roars and everything rights itself and no more 16 trillion deficit? LOL!!!!

Let's go ahead and raise taxes by eliminating ALL BUSH TAX CUTS. Every damn one of them! Let the 47% suck it up for a while too. Now, we just got an extra 130-150 billion annually in revenue. Again, what do we about the other 1.3 trillion in deficit spending annually we're doing and about to greatly add to with Obamacare?

The legacy this generation of PUKES is leaving behind for all that follow afterwards is an abomination. It's like telling your offspring the minute they are born that they have this crazy debt to pay off that will impact their lives very negatively throughout, but sorry, we got to keep on spending the money now and increase your burden because we're too scared to make any sacrifices whatsoever.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
NUK_1 - They

do say that suicide is a selfish act, you only leave behind victims.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
U.S. Economy Looks Like Weimar on the Brink

You should really read this Dm...

http://washingtonindependent.com/2345/us-economy-looks-like-weimar-on-th...

We are more like them then you want to believe...

There is no sustainable path DM.. Not spending like we are with so few paying for it.

btw-I don't need to ask my pastor DM Show me where in the Bible Jesus wanted the Roman Government to take over Charity?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
SL -
Quote:

btw-I don't need to ask my pastor DM Show me where in the Bible Jesus wanted the Roman Government to take over Charity?

The commands of Jesus were very clear. You can read them yourself in the New Testament. The word for 'charity' in the Bible often means 'love'. Mistakes have been made, and can be used as a learning experience. EVERYONE should be willing to take part in the correcting of the mistakes so that our country can continue to grow. So few paying for it - as you say - is not the road to correction, You also believe that the so-called 47% don't pay income tax? Interesting.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
DM the 47 percenters

47-49% don't have a Federal Income Tax burden.. That is called a fact DM.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxtopics/federal-taxes-households.cfm

I know..I know the Huffington Post didn't say it so......

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
A fact? SL

That all who don't have a Fed income tax burden are voting for Obama. _ therefore Romney doesn't need to worry about them. That was news for some of Romney's supporters. Check who comprises the 47%. Interesting.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - Don't forget

the Old Testament!

Commandment 8

You can't do this without force or cunning.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
The 8th Commandment

In the Judaic/Christian cultures, the sabbath is kept holy in many different ways. Here in the south and in other sections of our country, there has been legislation regarding this issue. Many church denominations have 'rules'. Many believers keep the sabbath in their heart. . free from force or cunning.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - better

Study the Ten Commandments, you missed the point.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

Please enlighten me!

grizz
grizz's picture
Offline
Joined: 01/02/2011
Great points Lindsey

The problem with the bedwetting liberals is that they always are touting some sort of government 'program' (taxpayer dollars) to fix things. Throw money at the problem - that should fix it.

The truth is that the greatest deterrent to poverty is a stable family life. A mother and father to nuture you into adulthood and prepare you for life on your own.

The bedwetters, on the other hand, promote sex outside of marriage, condoms and abortions on demand at the taxpayers expense. Just look at the demographic that has a 70% or higher out-of-wedlock birth rate and look at the poverty rate of that demographic. See a correlation?

There is no program for raising children greater than having a loving mother AND father in the house. I was at a recent event where one of the speakers stated that there needed to be more government programs out there to get children interested in playing sports. This buffoon didn't have a clue. There IS a program to get chilren more interested in playing sports - It's called being a parent.

We don't need more endless, wasteful government programs. This country needs more personal responsibility. Enough with the wasteful spending on the cretins for their Obamo-phones.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Grizz -I agree. Answers for Wedge

A gentleman was on the news this morning - raised in the projects, often homeless as a child - but he and his seven siblings had two wonderful parents who taught the value of hard work and personal responsibility. They had the help of government programs and a good public school education (teachers who cared). I agree, nothing replaces good home training from a loving, caring parent figure. If that parent figure needs assistance in providing food and shelter, thank heavens we live in a country that provides a step up. The step up for this gentleman did not become a generational life style, but temporary help. What constitutes a 'good' welfare program?
A. An assistance program that is well defined and temporary.
B. An oversight program that checks for fraud and corruption ( both of users and implementers)

This program would provide assistance to those citizens and/or legal residents to provide food, shelter, and assistance to acquire skills for becoming a contributing citizen to society. (pretty much what the words of our current Welfare to Work Program offer)

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Cyclist - That's

easy, if you want more money floating around you just go print it!

Unfortunately, I think it's all too late based on the projected numbers. The country is in a decaying orbit and the people are not going to give it a boost. On the contrary they are going to continue to demand more an more until the house of cards collapse.

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Thanks Uncle Joe!!!!!

Seems as though our esteemed plagiarizing VP, Uncle Joe Biden, is at it again. He said this today in Charlotte:

"This is deadly earnest," Biden said. "How they can justify -- how they can justify raising taxes on the middle class that's been buried the last four years. How in the lord's name can they justify raising their taxes with these tax cuts?"

Maybe he has had a change of heart and is telling it like it is these days. Even he can't deny the damage they have done to the middle class and continue to do.

S. Lindsey
S. Lindsey's picture
Offline
Joined: 12/31/2008
I thought Biden was campaigning for Romney....

... still think he might have been. Maybe he knows they really don't want to be blamed for the mess that will need to be cleaned up after this administration.

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Maybe a bit of a Freudian slip????

Even Uncle Joe is tired of Barry and his whoppers. He just wants to steal a few speeches and hit the speakers circuit with Slick Willie. Easy money!!!

Git Real
Git Real's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/17/2006
Uncle Joe, Slick Willie and Easy Money!!!

Good one MOC. I can see them all now yucking it up slammin' brewskies at the Y-Not with a former PTC Mayor..... Singing money for nuthin' and your chicks for free......"

Eeeeeeasy Money...... ;)

meanoldconservatives
meanoldconservatives's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/09/2008
Hey Git

Love the song!!! And, how appropriate is the band's name to our current situation? Dire Straits....

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Print Me Some Money Too!

Not like a decaying orbit, more like the toilet swirl!

Print until there are no trees left!

Buy tangible assets, land, food, water, gold/silver, and of course the 2 most precious metals brass and lead. -GP

Quallacherokee
Quallacherokee's picture
Offline
Joined: 04/27/2011
Amen Amen Amen

Did I mention AMEN !
One other asset I personally recommend, learn the EXACT quantities of charcoal, salt peter, and sulfur needed with the above mentioned precious metals

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Deleted by poster

.!

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
We must find the right answer!!!

This is a very good article. Until you reach the 3 prong answer. There is no substance there. Nothing that we can latch on to and say yes this is what needs to happen. So what is the answer? I realize that there are some deserving and needy people that are in a situation not of their doing. Still there are others that abuse the system. We must find an answer but, coming up with the wrong one could be the end of this country as we know it.

We have to find a way to make the country more solvent first. We can’t just keep giving when we have to borrow to survive as it is. If you’ve flown you’ll remember the instructions of the flight attendant to, in the event of a loss of cabin pressure, put your oxygen mask on BEFORE putting the mask on your child. The logic being that you must first be of sound mind to help anyone else. It’s time for this country to think like that. If we don’t rein in entitlement programs as well as other wasteful spending we’ll all be poor and looking for hand outs with no one there to provide them.

Historically entitlements have been the end of a democracy. Alexander Fraser Tytler spelled it out for us when he said:

Quote:

A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship.

The average life span of a democracy is around 200 years. This one is 236.

Georgia Patriot
Georgia Patriot's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/17/2010
Well Said G35

Unfortunately the majority of the sheeple are too short sighted to understand they are marching through the chutes that lead to the slaughter house! -GP

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
G35 - Too

late, it's in the numbers and there are just too many people, citizens, voters that believe that government is the answer.

G35 Dude
G35 Dude's picture
Offline
Joined: 02/15/2006
PTCO

It's human nature to let others take care of you if you can get away with it. Most will take the path of least resistance if given a choice.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
G35 Dude

So true, it is what makes us human. It is only honor and virtue that keeps the entire thing from folding but those two qualities are fading fast.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Do you know the 545 humans that control our country?

This is about as clear and easy to understand as it can be. The article below is completely neutral,
neither anti-republican or democrat. Charlie Reese, a retired reporter for the Orlando Sentinel,
has hit the nail directly on the head, defining clearly who it is that in the final analysis
must assume responsibility for the judgments made that impact each one of us every day.
It's a long but good read. Worth the time. Worth remembering!

545 vs. 300,000,000 People
-By Charlie Reese

Politicians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, WHY do we have deficits?

Have you ever wondered, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, WHY do we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget.. The President does.

You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does.

You and I don't write the tax code, Congress does.

You and I don't set fiscal policy, Congress does.

You and I don't control monetary policy, the Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one President, and nine Supreme Court justices equates to 545 human beings out of the 300 million are directly, legally, morally, and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered, but private, central bank.

I excluded all the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman, or a President to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it. No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislator's responsibility to determine how he votes.

Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of a Speaker, who stood up and criticized the President for creating deficits. The President can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it.

The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating and approving appropriations and taxes. Who is the speaker of the House? John Boehner. He is the leader of the majority party. He and fellow House members, not the President, can approve any budget they want. If the President vetoes it, they can pass it over his veto if they agree to.

It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 300 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts -- of incompetence and irresponsibility. I can't think of a single domestic problem that is not traceable directly to those 545 people. When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise the power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair.

If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red.

If the Army & Marines are in Iraq and Afghanistan it's because they want them in Iraq and Afghanistan ...

If they do not receive social security but are on an elite retirement plan not available to the people, it's because they want it that way.

There are no insoluble government problems.

Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish;
to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators,
to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take this power.
Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exists disembodied mystical forces like
"the economy", "inflation", or "politics" that prevent them from
doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people, and they alone, are responsible.

They, and they alone, have the power.

They, and they alone, should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses.

Provided the voters have the gumption to manage their own employees...

We should vote all of them out of office and clean up their mess!

Charlie Reese is a former columnist of the Orlando Sentinel Newspaper.

What you do with this article now that you have read it... is up to you.
This might be funny if it weren't so true.
Be sure to read all the way to the end:

Tax his land,
Tax his bed,
Tax the table,
At which he's fed.

Tax his tractor,
Tax his mule,
Teach him taxes
Are the rule.

Tax his work,
Tax his pay,
He works for
peanuts anyway!

Tax his cow,
Tax his goat,
Tax his pants,
Tax his coat.

Tax his ties,
Tax his shirt,
Tax his work,
Tax his dirt.

Tax his tobacco,
Tax his drink,
Tax him if he
Tries to think.

Tax his cigars,
Tax his beers,
If he cries
Tax his tears.

Tax his car,
Tax his gas,
Find other ways
To tax his ass.

Tax all he has
Then let him know
That you won't be done
Till he has no dough.

When he screams and hollers;
Then tax him some more,
Tax him till
He's good and sore.

Then tax his coffin,
Tax his grave,
Tax the sod in
Which he's laid...

Put these words
Upon his tomb,
'Taxes drove me
to my doom...'

When he's gone,
Do not relax,
Its time to apply
The inheritance tax.

Accounts Receivable Tax
Building Permit Tax
CDL license Tax
Cigarette Tax
Corporate Income Tax
Dog License Tax
Excise Taxes
Federal Income Tax
Federal Unemployment Tax (FUTA)
Fishing License Tax
Food License Tax
Fuel Permit Tax
Gasoline Tax (currently 44.75 cents per gallon)
Gross Receipts Tax
Hunting License Tax
Inheritance Tax
Inventory Tax
IRS Interest Charges IRS Penalties (tax on top of tax)
Liquor Tax
Luxury Taxes
Marriage License Tax
Medicare Tax
Personal Property Tax
Property Tax
Real Estate Tax
Service Charge Tax
Social Security Tax
Road Usage Tax
Recreational Vehicle Tax
Sales Tax
School Tax
State Income Tax
State Unemployment Tax (SUTA)
Telephone Federal Excise Tax
Telephone Federal Universal Service Fee Tax
Telephone Federal, State and Local Surcharge Taxes
Telephone Minimum Usage Surcharge Tax
Telephone Recurring and Nonrecurring Charges Tax
Telephone State and Local Tax
Telephone Usage Charge Tax
Utility Taxes
Vehicle License Registration Tax
Vehicle Sales Tax
Watercraft Registration Tax
Well Permit Tax
Workers Compensation Tax

STILL THINK THIS IS FUNNY?
Not one of these taxes existed 100 years ago, & our nation was the most prosperous in the world.
We had absolutely no national debt, had the largest middle class in the world, and Mom stayed home to raise the kids.

What in the heck happened? Can you spell 'politicians'?

I hope this goes around THE USA at least 545 times!!! YOU can help it get there!!!

GO AHEAD. . . BE AN AMERICAN!!!

Git Real
Git Real's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/17/2006
Another Good One...

If someone asks you what the main difference is between most of the Obama supporters and Romney supporters, might you just tell them

Romney supporters sign their checks on the front...

Obama supporters sign their checks on the back......

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
Ms. Willis - your solutions are heartfelt, but......

are not concrete enough to actually acomplish anything. I think you did a fine job of illustrating the problem from both sides, but your three-fold answer is touchy feely nonsense. #1) Stigma does exist with people recieving aid from the gov't. But making sure that people dont't feel bad about being on foodstamps is not going to get them OFF of food stamps. Your own mother avoided it like the plague until there was no other choice, and even then got off as ast as she could, probably in part due TO the stigma. If everyone had your mom's work ethinc, we would not be having this discussion. But we are, because most people dont have her work ethic, and since they are adults, telling them that working hard will be good for them wont do anything. They already missed that lesson. #2) I like. Family, church and charity should always be turned to first in times of trouble before the gov't. They are much more likely to help you figure out where you went wrong and help you fix it. Welfare of any type just throws money at the problem without trying to determine why it happened in the first place. #3) is absolutely rediculous pie-in-the-sky fantasy. Especially since (from my perspective) half of our federal gov't keeps themselves in power by peddling the victimhood mentality and promising to take care of them (the helpless, hapless victims) cradle to grave. Our current president has added more people to the welfare roles in 3.5 years than any other in history. Its not the federal gov't that is the problem, its the elected politicians who are there. Which brings me to my two solutions. A) If you are recieving any kind of federal welfare type benefit, you temporarily lose your right to vote in federal elections. There is an inherent conflict of interest when people who are recieving public benefits have the power to vote themselves more benefits at the continually increasing cost of others who are not recieving those benefits. Additionally, this will stop those certain politicians who make a career out of promoting victimhood and seek to enrich themselves off the work of others by abusing thier governmental powers to take money from one group and give it to another. This is not disenfranchisement, since being on public benefits is voluntary. This is not racist, since their are far more white people recieving benefits that minorities. You get off the benefits for 1 year prior to the election, you can vote again. You stay on the benefits, you cant vote. Simple as that. My second solution deals with the generational poor issue. In my opinion, parents who are on benefits for extended periods of time (several years) by definition cannot take care of children. Those children should be taken away. All they are learning in that environment is to emulate their parents. you said it yourself, "unproductive mindset and lifelong dependence on government aid gets passed on from generation to generation." Simultaneously, there needs to be an effort at the highest levels to make it seem like it is the patriotic duty of every thriving american family to take in these children and foster them. They need to see what is piossible by working hard, being responsible and staying out of trouble. They need to be shown, by successful families, even if temporarily, that there is a better way to be. When their birth families, get off public benefits and are stable, the children can go back. This, i think, is the only sure fire way to combat generational poverty in this country. I would be first in line to take in one of these children. I think others would too. if the government can make it sound patriotic to buy war bonds and recycle aluminum, surely they can make the case to foster needy american children.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
renault

Good points. Look into the implementation of the 'welfare to work' program. Using a persons 'right to vote' is a tough issue to introduce so soon after a part of the American citizenry just received this 'right' in every state of our great country. What I have seen as productive until recently was the cutting off of benefits after a certain time period. In today's job market - with so many individuals genuinely looking for work - the benefits were extended as a much needed safety net. Generational poverty is a problem that many are working on to combat. There are not many 'others' to join you in the act of taking in children in need - check DFAC. We have far too many 'older' children in foster care.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM- not sure what you mean

about everyone just recently recieving the right to vote in our country. Besides, as I pointed out, going on public assistnce is voluntary. If voting is more important to them, they dont have to apply for public benefits. if they do, that is their choice. No one is losing the right to vote, you are waiving those rights temporarily in exchange for benefits.
I agree that not enough people foster children. That part of my plan wouldnt work unless there was aserious effort to make is seem like it was every American families duty to do so. If the government spent half as much time and effort in convincing people to foster kids as they do trying to get us to abandon coal and oil in favor of solar and electric, this wouldnt be a problem. Even if there was a surge in the amount of money the govt spends on giving money to foster familes to help care for the kids, in the long run it would pay off as the welfare roles got less and less.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
This is what I mean renault
Quote:

about everyone just recently recieving the right to vote in our country. Besides, as I pointed out, going on public assistnce is voluntary.

As an educated, gainfully employed, adult of 21 years of age, I could not vote in many states in the US until the mid-sixties - and then it was not without great difficulty and sometimes danger, Some in our country take the 'right to vote' as a given. and others a hard fought for 'right' - and to take that right away because someone is educated, gainfully employed and responsible simply because he has a government job is difficult for me to 'swallow'. I understand the thinking behind it - but don't agree with it and feel it would meet with great resistance in our country. Many of the concerns that you voice have been discussed with those who worked on the 'welfare to work' program. These are valid concerns - and they don't have a 'one solution fits all' answer. I thoroughly agree with the responsibility of 'home', 'parents' and 'church' doing their job to teach the morality of work and responsibility. There are communities that are working on this - but as you have acknowledged, welfare recipients of all 'races' have established a multi-generational participation in this program - and too many have accepted 'welfare' as a way of life. On the other hand - there are those who have made a business of serving welfare recipients . These are 'businesses', some legal, some illegal, that are profiting from those on welfare. There is a great need for ending the fraudulent practices involved in the welfare system. I must mention that there are those who were recipients of welfare at one time or another - and have made/are making great contributions to our country. As I said before - no simple answers - but the discussion must take place in seeking solutions - and steps taken to correct some of the problems with our welfare system.

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM- the 15th amendment

was passed in 1870, but I'm sure you know that. I suppose youre talking about Jim Crow laws, but again i think youre missing the point. No one is taking anybodys right to vote away in my plan. Thats because being on public assistance is completely voluntary. Also, you are talking specifically about black's who "recently" got the right to vote and would not want it taken away. I anticipated this argument, that my idea would just be a form of closet racisim aimed at denying minorities the right to vote. Thats why I intentionally mentioned that there are in fact more white people recieving public benefits than minorities. Ms. Willis's heart is in the right place, but none of her ideas in the three fold plan she put forth are actionable. It sounds nice, but you cant actually do any of it. I'm actually trying to propse things that could be implemented. Someone has to. And I disagree with your last statement, that there are no simple answers. There are. We just need to have the political will to implement them. Its only when you try to worry about not hurting peoples feelings and make sure everyone one likes the idea and agrees to it that things get hard. The time for hard choices is now, because its been put off for too long already

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
Renault

All of Ms. Willis' suggestions are actionable IMO. Voluntary welfare? Ask the guy, gal who lost their jobs three years ago and have kids to feed, lost their home, and THERE ARE NO JOBS. Did they volunteer to go on welfare? How will you react when someone suggests that you no longer have the right to vote, carry a gun, marry the person of your choice? Political correctness or assumption of 'rights' and privilege. It doesn't matter the color of a persons skin color in 2012 - a privileged class based on anything other than hard work should not be present in these United States. Your attempt to make light of the overturn of Jim Crow is very telling. There have always been more poor white people in our country - but they (whites) could always vote. 1870 - 1964 (94 years) Progress!!

renault314
renault314's picture
Offline
Joined: 07/03/2007
DM - what in the world are you talking about now?

This last little string of conversation between us was a direct response to your statement earlier "Using a persons 'right to vote' is a tough issue to introduce so soon after a part of the American citizenry just received this 'right' in every state of our great country." I wasnt making light of Jim Crow laws. Where did you get that and in what way is it "telling?" I only mentioned it to confirm that that is what you in fact were refering to, since you didnt mention it specifically. If you agree thatthere have always been more poor whites in america and that skin color doesnt matter in 2012, why did you even bring it up in the first place? You are so used to inject race into every single argument you make I dont think you even realize how reflexive it is for you. No one else was talking about race. Just you. How "telling" is that? And I'm sorry but no, Ms. Willis solutions are NOT actionable. Take her first suggestion for example. Make sure people dont feel bad that they are on welfare? How exactly would you legislate that? How exactly would that solve the problem of getting people off welfare? Exactly. Not actionable. It sounds nice, but doesnt do anything. her third suggestion, make sure gov't isint the first stop for help, well, that is exactly my point isint it. You cant make it illegal for politicians to promise more entitlement benefits, so that suggestion isint actionable either. half of politicians get their jobs by promnising more welfare, they arent going to stop 'cause Ms. Willis says please. They promise more, becasue it BUYS (yes i use that word deliberately) votes. To stop it, you have to take the reason for their expansion of welfare away, i.e., the votes it buys. Lastly, no, DM, I dont believe that the people who lost their jobs and have no short term alternatives WANT to go on welfare (the key word being short). But having the power to vote themselves more money out of yours and my wallet isint going to incentivize them to off of it as fast as possible. The opposite is true. Since you agree that generational dependance on welfare is real, this fact must be obvious to you.

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
The right to vote - Renault

Was at the core of the Civil Rights movement! To discuss limiting that right in any form or fashion brings up the topic of 'race' to those Americans who had to wait for 94 years before they benefitted from the 15th amendment. Race and right to vote go hand in hand in this country - unless you're free, white and 21

See my comment on priorities.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
Renault - Interesting

Idea about voting rights, but shouldn't that extend to everyone that receives income from the government?

Isn't this how government workers, contractors, etc. gain power? Isn't a conflict of interest for workers of an arms factory that supplies our government a force for more war spending? How about public teacher's unions? Don't you think they wield significant financial power in government? Don't you think that is a conflict of interest? Why should we single out welfare moms and not include these as well? The list goes on and on.

Thoughts?

Davids mom
Davids mom's picture
Offline
Joined: 10/30/2005
PTCO

I know you feel that I am 'dull' - but one question. Why should those who serve the country not have a say in the governing of this country? Why should those who receive the service from the 'servants' have the power/privilege of having the exclusive say in governing? Does not being a 'servant' give one the right to exert 'power' or 'leverage'? Isn't that what our founding fathers left behind? The sad reality is that too many of our citizens do not use this 'right' and so a 'few' individuals/corporations have the power instead of ALL citizens.

PTC Observer
PTC Observer's picture
Online
Joined: 04/23/2007
DM - OK!

That's one subject DM, great let's discuss it.

I'll answer your first question last if you don't mind.

I am interested in addressing this statement:

"The sad reality is that too many of our citizens do not use this 'right' and so a 'few' individuals/corporations have the power instead of ALL citizens."

Now why do you suppose that is DM? Well here's what I think. The reason that just a few individuals and corporations have the power is because they pay for it. The reason they can pay for it is because the government is corrupt. The reason the government is corrupt is because the politicians can use tax money and debt to finance their re-election. The reason the politicians can use tax money is because we let them. No! We demand it. We demand it each time we want the government to solve social ills by creating programs to "serve our interests".

The fact is DM is that the corruption we see in government is a reflection of the people and more than that it is a refection of those that demand more and more from the government. This is why we should return to a representative republic.

Now to your question concerning the military and their "right" to vote. Well I have stated in an earlier post that certainly those that are drafted should have the right to vote. As a matter of fact, the military when it was a very small percentage of the population chose not to vote. It wasn't until the Civil War that the percentages started getting so large that voting became and issue. This is when the concept of absentee voting for soldier started. Naturally, the Democrats fought against this movement and they still are not too happy about military voting today. The primary reason is that it is suspected that the soldiers in the Civil War would vote Republican. Sounds like today doesn't it? Anyway, I object to the military voting based on the idea that politics need to be separated from our Army. It is foolish to think that they would not at some point collude with politicians to take power. This you may have noted in your study of history has happened many, many times and there is no reason to believe that it couldn't happen in our country as well. This is not a negative reflection on those that serve our country as I have in the past, it is a reflection on the nature of mankind.

So, when people opt to join the Army in PTCO's world they would know up front that they were giving up their "right" to vote before entering. Just like any other government worker. If they were forced to join the military, then they would keep it.

Thoughts? Remember one subject at a time DM.

kcchiefandy
kcchiefandy's picture
Offline
Joined: 09/18/2009
On the other hand, PTCO...

...we could be like Heinlein's 'Starship Troopers' and you don't get citizenship, or the 'right' to vote UNLESS you've served your country in the military (I'd even allow for service in a national service org.).

You mistakenly believe that when you join the US military you automatically are changed to something different than when you came in, or, your views are somehow more validated. I would argue, from personal experience, that you are very much incorrect. Current reports from many quarters, and again from my view 'on the ground', would agree w/ this 2010 survey:

A new Military Times survey finds that fewer American troops identify as Republicans.
According to the survey of 1,800 troops released on Monday, the number of active service members self-identifying as Republican has fallen by one-third since 2004, with 9 percent of that drop-off occurring in the last year.

Although I understand your point, putting military members on par with convicted felons seems a bit extreme. Maybe, as I first suggested, your citizenship should be earned before you get the 'right' to vote, like the the 2 'government workers' that were killed yesterday in A-Stan; yeah, their duties are just the same as those of my postman...were they good enough to vote?

Recent Comments