Income redistribution is bullshit

F

Flo_Rida_2016

Active member
It seems the major issue this election NS wise is over

income redistribution. Since im only really good at arguing through refutation,

I decided to compile some points proponents of income redistribution seem to

think are valid.

People who come from impoverished areas have a next to

impossible chance of getting out of their financial situation. More

specifically, lots of poor people who work hard, don’t get out of their

destitute environment.



I know most people are tired of hearing this story, but it

fully nullifies the above argument. My dad grew up in the cultural revolution

in China. This means he was yanked out of school around our middle school years

and sent to work on farms to industrialize China. Some of his friends were shot

and he made about $1 USD a day at the time. He played his cards right as did a

lot of his friends, and came to America with literally less than $100 USD. He

bussed tables in brooklyn and delivered chinese food. My dad faced constant

dangers being some goofy asian dude in the middle of brooklyn. He was robbed

many times, had his hard earned television and couch stolen, and his friend’s

car (their sole mode of transportation) was chop shooped. He eventually put

himself into queens college and worked hard enough to go to NYU graduate

school. After that, he even made time in between working multiple jobs and

studying to get his masters to get his citizenship. He eventually achieved

citizenship, and a Masters Degree in computer science (back when it was THE

[and naturally the most competitve] field to engange in). After about 10 years

after I was born, he makes significant 6 figures annualy.

My mom had the same exact story

pretty much. She came to Ft. Lauderdale, Florida and worked in Miami. She

attended community college before moving to NY where she met my dad. After many

jobs and lay offs, she now makes 6 figures for IBM too.

I believe that is far worse than

the worst situation any american can be born into. Neither of my parents were

able to see their parents much. My grandparents on my fathers side were

imprisoned for no reason for the cultural revolution, and my grandparents on my

mothers side were sent to a semiconductor and nuclear materials processing

plant. They later developed cancer and parkinsons and died. Sad story huh? In

the end they still surpass maybe 98% of all americans and they came from the

bottom bottom of the barrel. So dont give me your opportunities bullshit.

People who are sucessful today mainly come from inherited

money.

Ok its common knowledge that people who make above a

combined annual household income of $102,000 only make up 3-4% of the US. Yea,

only that little. Think about how hard it is to make $102,000 a year; how many

of the $100k-350k combined household income people do you actually think came from

inherited money?! People need to get rid of this crazy idea that everyone in

the world who is rich got help from their families. People who come from rich

families but are lazy do not stay rich. In today’s world where commodities such

as electronics, college tuition, automobiles, food, gas, utilities, rent,

mortgage, inheritence is not nearly enough. Those who have second generation

wealth will squander it if they are lazy and don’t work. There are very, very

few old money rich type folk in the us: they probably only constitute .01% of

the United States. On a side note, of all six figure earners in the US, there

is a greater percentage of immigrants and first generation Americans than there

is a percentage of them represented in the US. (US Cencus Bureau). This is not

a coincidence. Those with a good work ethic earn six-figure jobs.

I’m not going to lie. I live in a VERY posh and rich town.

Now according to your theories, people from towns like mine all end up being

successful and should be on the giving end of redistributed wealth right?

WRONG. There are plenty of kids here who come from great backgrounds but don’t

work hard and will never achieve the same level of life as those who live here.

Should I be giving 40% of my paycheck to them? I don’t think so.

Redistributed income helps mainly those who struggle.

Think about how competitive the six-figure job market has

become. So many kids these days are competing for college spots and with

affirmative action, those who might not be as deserving get there as well. The

job market is an extremely competitve one and those who fall through the cracks

end up in the sub 78,000 a year income (those who qualify for reduced taxation

under Democratic policy). NOT EVERYONE WHO RECEIVES DISTRIBUTED INCOME COMES

FROM POOR PLACES. What people don’t realize is the cut off point for reduced

taxation is $78,000! A very large portion of those people have gone to college

and still work a respectable job.

Redistributing wealth is a long term solution

Absolutely false. If we keep giving the poor our paychecks,

what extra motivation is there to get out of ghettos and the such? A good

number of people escape destitute environments so why can’t everyone do it? Its

not like people living in ghettos can’t differentiate between right and wrong.

They know whats wrong and choose to do it anyway, and because of that, they

don’t deserve 40% of my hard earned paycheck. Moreover, all redistribution and

systems like welfare does is appease laziness. Most people as they pass their

20’s start to give up. If they’re getting welfare and redistributed income, why

make more money? Is the extra work worth it enough for these people to be

making a bit more money? The work:money ratio is dialed way further down for

people with less money now. For every $1 a person who receives redistributed

income or tax breaks gets, its is done through a disproportionately less amount

of work than every $1 a richer person gets.

The lunch bucket crew inherently deserves money from the

rich.



Where the fuck did anyone get this idea in the first place?

How can you over tax people making a combined household income of 102k a year

when they have invested so much? Think about it, in the first few years, a

person making 102k isn’t really making 102k a year. Assuming this person went

to college, he invested an extra 4-12 years in education as well as about $50k

a year for said education. In the first maybe 8 years, a person making $102k+ a

year is still trying to break even on his investment of higher education. If

anything, the lunch bucket crew should give us money for being lazy and not at

least attempting to attend some sort of schooling.

Moreover, I have volunteered many, many hours at my

local Salvation Army. I can tell you for certain this experience has taught me

one thing: the vast majority of homeless people are extremely lazy. I can

understand if a person is injured or disabled and becomes homeless but there

are so many capable, young people flocking into the Salvation Army everyday so

I can serve them soup and chicken. Its absolute bull. In the back theres a

group of 20 year olds decked out in Sean Jean, Timbs, New Eras, and texting on

their friggin Tmobile Sidekicks. Aboslutely ridiculous. Can you believe you are

being asked to give 40% of your paycheck to these people? I know these

people don’t represent the majority but the fact that there are a lot of these

people receiving 40% of my paycheck just doesn’t sit well with me.
 
defintaley hear that brotha. people shouldn't be given other peoples money for doing nothing, or making under a certain amount. now my family have never been rich, not even close, myself and my two brothers all have to work for what we want, and in thinking about what we have to do for ourselves, i definately dont want my money going to someone else,.. although, i do hold sympathy for people with disabilities or medical issues, who cant make enough money for themselves, and people definitatly need to help these people.
sounds slightly like communism to me, the way you put it lol..

CANADA!!
 
The thing is, a lot of social programs actually do help people in need and improve the general quality of life in the U.S. The main one people always bitch about is welfare, but taxes are used for a lot of other things. Public education (i.e., investing in human capital), all the services the government performs for us. Not to mention that it was the republicans who got us into a war costing us quite a few tax dollars. Now, I understand that you would argue that most fiscal conservatives don't stand for that, but in this day and age, Republicans (like McCain), though fiscally conservative, would keep us in Iraq. Now, me personally, I'd rather have a social welfare state where my tax dollars are actually going toward something meaningful rather than fighting a meaningless war. In principal, I don't disagree with many of you points, I just think you're focusing on the ones that matter very little at this point in time.

Just my $0.02
 
health and human services costs 56% of our federal budget in 2007. Social security was 20.2%, 12.7% was welfare, 13.6% was Medicare, and 9.5% was Medicaid. Comparatively, education costs 3.1%, and defense costs 19%. All the transportation that is subsidized by the US only costs 2.6%. Welfare takes a preeettttyyy big chunk.
 
See here's the problem with all that. Although your parents worked very hard, not everyone is like that. The reality is there is a large, unmotivated group of impoverished people in America.

If I went through what your dad went through, I would have said "fuck it" and turned to drug dealing or robbing people pretty quickly. As a college student I do very little work in comparison. I get to live in a nice apartment paid for by my parents, and my biggest concern outside of school is generally "which party will I go to this weekend?"

Not all people are motivated, and obviously there are a substantial amount of people in America that feel like there isn't very much opportunity to move upward.

And then there's you. If you're so rich, then why do you care about a little bit of your money going to people who might not deserve it? You obviously live comfortably enough, so what's it to you? And also, you have no fucking clue what the lower class is like. You just don't. You cannot refute that statement. I am from a lower income family than you, but I also don't really have any idea what it's like to be living below the poverty line. I've read a lot of books and articles on sociology, I've done volunteer work helping poor people, my mom worked for headstart (before republicans cut its funding) but the bottom line is, I don't really know. I'm a white kid from an upper-middle-class family.

One more thing: how much do your parents make a year? If it's less than a million, then congratulations, you are another American who falsely identifies with the super-rich. If it's more than a million, my apologies, but to you I say: "Don't you have enough money?" My theory is this is a fundamental difference in our opinions: I believe excessive greed to be a sin, and I guess you don't.

Like I said to you in an earlier thread, take this shit somewhere else. If this annoys you so much, go do some campaigning. Canvasing and phonebanking is pretty dull stuff but its a little more productive than ranting on a skiing website.
 
Could you please link me to where you got these numbers? Because ive been looking for them, but all of the numbers shown by the federal government dot really match up with any of this. Especially the costs of social security, (which come from a separate fund than the general fund, and thus shouldn't even be included) and the defense budget (which does not include the war costs of Afghanistan and Iraq.) Im just saying that the numbers I'm looking at don't match up with what your saying they should be, and im wondering if you have access to some numbers that i don't. If you can show me where these numbers are coming from, then by all means, show me and ill look over them and im sure ill agree with you on this. If you cant, then you should just shut the fuck up.
 
you are a fucking dumbass with no numerical research. For the record, i know what the lower class is like. Before moving here, i grew up in Peabody MA and Quincy MA in shared housing. My friends were mostly black and we did absolutely shit. We used to be dirt poor. And for a year, i spent everyday in a salvation army. I go to china every other year. i think i know what poor people are like. Im also not white.

I also specifically said my parents make a combined 300k a year. But that was my point... we aren't a member of the super rich so why should our taxes be bumped up to 39.5%!? Moreover i think youd be surprised as to how little people in the us actually make. People in the US who make a combined household income of 102k a year make up the top 4% of the US. 300k a year is believe it or not within the top 2% of the US.

On a side note, of all Asian immigrants who arrived in 1996, 17.8% of them make between $100k and 150k now. Also, 29.5% of them make above $100k a year. That easily disproves any "poor people can't get out of their situation" arguments.
 
well thats not what Obama or Hillary are talking about. They are cutting it off at such: Below78k- subtract income tax from 33% to 29-26%, 78k-102k= no change, 102k+ goes to 39.5%. how is that fucking fair in anyway?

Also if you heavily tax the super rich of the US and they all decide to leave the country then what happens?

Also if people would lower the minimum wage a little bit, i think everyone would like it better. There would be significantly less unemployment.
 
there is a major difference between comfortable and receiving free income and benefits. If you didn't work your way to the top, then you gotta pay for it at your own expense. People who worked harder than you shouldn't have to be forced to give their money to you.
 
how am i "Scraping for an argument"?! Thats a major issue if the super rich in the US decide the US is getting too socialist and they all decide to live in like cayman islands?! A lot of of the super rich already do that to avoid taxation.

Lower the minimum wage?

Have you ever tried to live on $0?!

I think its reasonable to have economic safety nets in our society, but not by the government. There can be charities that help the truly, truly poor. And pretty much everyone can get into great schools and become CEOs. I think you greatly under estimate the amount of work it takes to become a CEO.

"just get into great schools"!? How did getting into great schools become so easy you can use the word just?! I think the extra amount of work a poor kid has to do to get into a great school compared to a rich kid is negligible compared to the overall amount of work it takes to get into a top 10 school...

And just cuz you go to a great school (lets say a combined 500,000 a year) doesnt mean you get to be a CEO... you still have to work hard... And all that work and investment should not be stolen from you to give to poor people.
 
I really wish there was a good solution to their problems. Its not my fault that someone came from a poor family and has to struggle to really "make it." There is nothing stopping them from going to a community college and getting some associates degree that will get them a 25k a year job and then working their way up or going back to school for a bachelors. People just don't want to do it because they're priorities are different. I don't want to pay for them because they're lazy.

Now what about the people that aren't lazy and really do deserve some extra help? How do we know who they are and how do we stop people from exploiting it? You can't. As long as there's free stuff people who don't deserve it will try to get it. I think a fend for yourself policy with few taxes will help out better in the long run because people will stop expecting freebies and actually learn that they are responsible for themselves. The only problem is that you would be shitting on the people that need help NOW and I really don't know how to solve the problem.
 
There is no social security fund, that is a huge misconception. Social security is just part of the general fund.
 
No you're dead wrong. there is a social secuirty fund its called the SSA fund and ran about 628 billion dollars in the fiscal year of 2007.
 
I'm not on either side right now, but what do you mean by "the people at the bottome of this socioeconomic system are down there partially because of the actions of those at the top"? How are the people at the top responsible? I assume you mean on the business side of things not the government side.
 
on a serious note tho judood, theres always gonna be poverty and poor people. The man(or woman...NOT, jk) anyway the man who can end world poverty will become the richest man in the world, its like knowing the meaning of life. Seriously tho, i think poor people play their own role in the symbiotic cycle of our society. No one in your upper 4% bracket is going to want to clean the toilets or work at mcdonalds for a living. Just like all the republicans who bitch about kicking out all the illegal mexicans. They play an important role in our economy, you could hark them back to the role slaves played in the 19th century. They are willing to do jobs for cheap that no self respecting trailer trash white person will do, and they will do it for less money. This is a good segway into my next point, all minorities who come from foreign countries, especially 1st generation are inclined to work much harder. Even though this is blatant stereotyping you know it is true. In addition, you are asian, and it is a well known fact that asians are the hardest workers academically. My dad is indian so i have firsthand experience, with how their culture works as opposed to american culture. Again blatant stereotyping but so true. In principal, i agree with what you are saying, but this is the essence of life. Life isnt fair and there is no miracle system that can solve all of societies problems. Obviously there could be a few changes made to the policies, but that is beside the point. There will always be the bottom feeders, the people who dont deserve it, its just life man. I know, i know, now with those extra taxes that they took to feed some poor people your parents cant get you that mercedes suv youve always wanted, and shoot now you cant make it rain on hoes with that extra money that went to some gosh darn lazy black person. But hey thats life.
 
The ability to attain status based on your abilities is my American Dream too and my feeling is that as long as you make good choices I think that still holds true. But making good choices is the one caveat which most people ignore. Good things usually don't come to people who repeatedly fuck up no matter how smart they are. People forgive, but only to a certain extent. As much as I feel for the single mother with two kids who is struggling and I wish there was a way she could better her position, you have to ask, how did she end up a single mother with two kids? As bad as it sounds, there are ways around those things that hold you back.  I know people are going to call me a terrible person for calling children an impediment to a better life, but if you aren't in the correct financial position to be adequately providing for children then you either shouldn't have them or you should put them up for adoption. It isn't fair to the kids and it isn't fair to you.  So I am all about equality here too but there is a point where you have to step back and ask how many chances a person should get to make the right decision.
 
Man are you in college, if so I would consider changing schools because your current school is doing a horrible job educating you. A lot of wealth redistribution is the result of government fiscal policy, take the current rebate checks that a lot of people are receiving, there is a cutoff for receiving them around 100,000$ . This cutoff is because for people who make that amount of money receiving that 600$ check isn't going to change their spending habits (the government is trying to get people to spend more to bring eliminate the recessionary gap in our economy). On the other hand a single mother who makes 10,000$ a year is going to go out and spend that 600$ on groceries for a couple of weeks, or maybe buy a new t.v. I agree with you that it is wrong for the government to forcibly take money from the rich to give to the poor. But at the same time would you be willing to give generously (20% of your paycheck) to charity if the government ended income redistribution?

I just wrote a paper on fiscal policy for my econ class so if the rebate check example doesn't make sense I have a lot of others.

 
Not everything in this world is numerical, you need to understand how it feels to be in the lower class in order to truly understand what they go through. Honestly. To me, conservatives don't seem to really care about the lower class who are suffering, and just struggling to feed themselves at least once a day. Try working really really physically hard one day, and then eating only one meal. Try that once and see how it feels. People go through that every day in our country and I personally think that's way fucked up.
 
Wow this thread is actually for the most part full of decently thought out responses, regardless of their viewpoint. However i am going to agree with the more "liberal" side of things.

Will people "ride the system" on welfare? probably, but the number of people willing to live that shitty of a life just so they dont have to work is very slim. Were better off supporting those who truly need it, then getting rid of it to fuck over the couple of lazy folks.

Also i would like to see the additional taxation spent on more then welfare. I would like to see a greatly improved public education system, rather than the absurdity that is the no child left behind act. I would love to see socialized medicine, rather than the idiotic complete privatization of it that mccain has suggested.

Now to the rich peoples side. How many stories have you heard about the poor rich guy who has to go on welfare because the US government has taxed him to oblivion.. thats right.. none. I, like drew, am currently posting from a new macbook, in a 4-500k dollar house, with three cars for the family, we go on multiple vacations a year. If we were to have to pay more taxes i wouldn't complain.

Also ju, your theory that all the rich people are just gonna leave the country........ really? thats just ridiculous. like honestly, absurd.

Im sure there were other issues in this thread i didnt address but thats a start.
 
haha funny, but its more like rich white kids complaining that they are too poor to pay taxes.
 
You're entire basis of your arguments, is that you want to keep your income. Just where are these charities going to get their funding? Surely not from you. Or anyone else who supports your ideals. And lets face it, the only reason why the rich donate to charities anyways, is for the tax write-off.

You are comparing apples to oranges here. Every person in our society does not have the same chance in achieving greatness. Think of the quality of education children who attend private academies receive over the kids stuck in an inner-city public school? What top notch teacher would want to go to a place and teach in an environment surrounded by violence, crime, drug use, and poverty? When they could easily make more money teaching children of high income families who don't mind paying $15,000 a year out of pocket for their child to go to school.

But those inner city kids have the same chance of getting into college right? Or how about an ivy league school?

I am all for structured taxation based on income. While welfare does need to be paid out. The majority of the tax revenue, should go to community outreach programs. Such as more police to clean up drugs and violence off the streets. Sports and other recreation, especially for young african american boys. So they can get some older responsible male figure in their life. And increased school funding so schools in poorer areas can afford to bring in better teachers.
 
Another point i would like to make is that of all these "poor rich people paying horrible taxes", very few actually pay them on all of their income. Its invested or hidden away, or a small portion of it it donated to charity, so that they can get the tax benefits.
 
to the excessive greed and sin point:

if you have taken a highschool economics course you should know that capitalism roots itself on greed. i dont really see how sin fits into this picture. i understand your point about how hard it is to live in poverty, but the ismple truth is that our entire society is based on the struggle between the rich and the poor. as a college student, you probably should have learned this.

of course, the rich want to stay rich, and keep the poor in poverty. therefore, the rich will continue to send their kids to schools which feed them into the upper class. and among these people,t he smartest become richer and the others fall into the middle class. the poor are stuck where they are. howevever, this is human nature. it is how we are programmed. i see no reason to think that it is wrong to keep your advantage.

likewise, the poor certaintly have an opportunity to become rich. keep in mind that when our ancestors came to this country, they were all poor. we are all the decendants of hard workers who made it out of poverty. the poor have this opportunity also. sure, a good future might not be handed to them, but if they really want it, they can achieve it. after all, we are valued based upon our value to working america.

i believe that the poor remain so becuase it is easy to procrastinate and complain. we are brought up by hard working parents (for the most part) who pass these traits along to us. the poor typically aren't. that is not to say that anyone who is a motivated hard worker does not have every shot at raising his or her status in society.

the issue of redistributing wealth stems out of the problem with crime. the truth is that crime is the #1 co=ntributer to human misery in this countryl. some politicians feel that because so many americans are so rich, it is more important to address other issues facing our society, and stimulating the poor is key in solving the crime problem (at least from a liberal standpoint).
 
I believe people should be taxed based on income. A person who makes a million a year should pay more than someone who is making 1,000 a year. Our country has reached a level where people shouldn't starve to death on the streets. However, no one deserves any more than the bare minimal. Beyond that its free. If you get lucky, good for you. If you get unlucky, you deserve the bare minimal. If you work hard, you deserve what you get. If you don't work, you deserve the bare minimal.
 
I know right? You would think it would be all the lazy poor people getting the benifits the rich paid for complaining right? Wait, no.
 
i totally agree. one person has no right to take away from another. if one person wants to help the poor. let em do it. bu the government has no place in that
 
your father's an individual case and I think you're neglecting the point.

say a kid is born into a really poor, sucky home where his dad's an alcoholic and beats him and his family. he goes to a sucky school and is his friends are more or less in the same situation. yes this kid could work hard and go to some great college and get a "great" (high paying) job...but chances are his school work isn't going to be a priority to him, or something he can even focus on. chances are he'll work at a low-paying, physical labor job from a relatively early point in his life and end up in a similar situation as his father. He'll be relatively poor, have kids and the cycle continues. a few kids will escape, but they are the exception...DO THE REST DESERVE TO LIVE IN HELL? Nope. Regardless of why they're poor nobody deserves to worry about basic necessities such as food etc.

Additionally, don't think wealth leads to happiness. If you're busting your ass for some crazy job and stressing out you may not be as happy as you think when you actually have a chance to spend that six-figure salary. Beyond a salary that provides us with the necessities additional money doesn't make us happier, our human relationships, and our approach to everyday opportunities does. some hobbies also do and some are more expensive than others.
 
lol, how are all poor people fucked? Get some ambition and get a job. It seems more greedy for people to feel entitled to money someone else worked hard for.
 
then how would you explain bill gates, warren buffet, and any other wealthy person who donates their fortune to a good cause.

i dont know what kind of people you hang around with, but allot of rich people, donate money to charity.

if this was a joke? then you can disregard this post...
 
you go work all day long... and i mean hard work, not sitting at a desk, then give 20% of it to some guy that you dont know. htat means if you make 1,000 dollars taday, say good bye to $200.

and btw if taxes didnt exist they would prolly have enough money to pay for their own health care, based on the amount of money they themselves had to give to the government. whitch might i add is insanly corrupt. as all government are.

Plus then the drive to work goes away cus you will just get your wellfare check anyway.
 
so clearly the tiny portion of people donating to charity is supposed to fund all the unemployed. and to the other guy who said they should get a job. when you lose your job a new one doesnt just appear in front of you, it takes time to find it. welfare is supposed to help people out in that time.
 
Chances are school work isn't a priority for him? Too bad, chances are real work isn't a priority for him either. Why wouldn't they deserve to live in hell if they don't want to work their way out? Maybe when Jimmy McShitjob goes home from his lousy job he can ponder why his life sucks so bad. If he's not a complete retard he'll figure it out and at the very least push his kids toward a succesful life. If not, fuck him, the world needs ditch diggers. You can sustain yourself past the basic necessities on minimum wage. Sure people need government assistance if they suddenly lose their jobs or get hurt, but no one should be on welfare or unemployment for more than a couple months. If you're living off governemt sponsored programs there isn't going to be much motivation to work hard and improve you situation, if you had the ambition you would already be living comfortably.

 
If we lowered the minimum wage any lower than it is already, people would say fuck it, its not even worth having a job if you take home 30 dollars at the end of the day for 8 hours of work. It's bullshit to live like that anyway, to cut the minimum wage is a terrible idea.
 
at least pretend to back up your case with a fake statistic.

i'd pander that a more than a "tiny portion" of people WHO ACTUALLY PAY INCOME TAXES do donate to charity. whether they do for the tax right-off or from actual compassion is a different debate.
 
you're so fucking arrogant. let me pose another, more blunt hypothetical situation for you. if you happen to be walking by a small pond and see a kid drowning in it would you save him? sure he was probably being foolish, but chances are his parents didn't give a shit to pay attention and in addition to this he never learned to swin like you. so now would you say fuck him? chances are you'll ruin your clothes and shoes etc. while saving him, but I'd like to think you have some compassion and would be willing to make this sacrifice. these people are drowning; slipping through the cracks our of means of advancement.

they wouldn't deserve to live in hell because we're all fucking people and to say anything else is retarded? where would we suggest we drawn the imaginary line of people who are hard working and get to enjoy live then? right below where you are? how can you not recognize that people are largely are product of their circumstances. other than england, america has the lowest upward mobility of any industrial nation.

Isabel Sawhill et John E. Morton, Economic mobility : Is the American Dream Alive and Well?, The Pew Charitable Trusts, 2007

Tom Hertz, Understanding Mobility in America, Center for American Progress
 
That is a COMPLETELY different situation. Johnny McShitjob isn't dying, he's just not playing xbox on a big screen tv. You can certainly live off minimum wage. It might be a pretty boring life but you can definitely survive. Its also not terribly difficult to get a job that pays better than minimum wage either, even without a college education.

Johnny only deserves my tax money if he's going to use it to make his life better. If he can take his welfare check, use it for school or some sort of job training and then get a good job so he can support a family, live in a nicer place and then use his newfound money to pay other people's welfare then thats great. I'm not going to pay for him if he's going to use it to buy a big tv and an xbox. I'm not his dad and I'm not going to buy him presents.
 
Ok, I take that back. That was harsh, judgmental, and purely conjecture.

Just realize that not everyone is like your parents, ok? I am not saying its favorable that some people get money for nothing (and by the way welfare was largely eliminated under clinton, so this entire argument isn't very relevant).

What I am saying is that there is a large group in America that when are given the ultimatum sink or swim, they sink. And we can't have too many people starving to death in our country, it looks bad.

But anyways welfare is nothing these days, you can get it for a couple weeks but you have to be looking for a job. Most of this "income redistribution" you are talking about (which is a very misleading term) is in the form of social security disability payments, and to veterans. There aren't too many healthy poor folk living the high life off Uncle Sam.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top