RE: An Enabling Government

RE: An Enabling Government (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Mercnbeth -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 4:58:23 PM)
quote: To make it easy for you to gain and understanding I did the work of typing "hunger in America" for you so you might glean a little more knowledge on this topic than that NY Times article has obviously provided you... The "hunger in America" is noted. It hasn't changed my view because it points to self fulfilling results that support their expectation benefits of the program. However it's only one side of the equation. You neglect to address the other side of the issue. There is no denial on my part that parents have, in many cases, abdicated their parental responsibility and as a result their children go hungry. I also don't deny that other parents somehow manage to fall through all the safety nets, or refuse to use them, to get necessary funds to buy food for their children. There is no need to convince me, that both are common occurrences because I've involved myself first hand to try to help people, and charity organizations, work on those real problems. However, my first hand experience also exposed the fact that the bureaucracy and corporate interests involved at the government level is counter productive. Using my original example I've seen where giving a person a fishing pool and even a stocked trout lake, would hurt them more than help because it would eliminate all the government support. That's the bigger problem. Those in charge see their job as keeping their job, and that job requires more 'customers' wanting 'free fish'. If me, you, or anyone gives out too many poles and good fishing tips - they and the corporate benefactors would have to find another source of government funds. Is is your position that regardless of whom is the ultimate beneficiary the status quo is justified? I'm dismissive because anecdotal examples do not serve to represent the problem. Kids and/or whoever else make up the 'good results' of 'good intent' do not mitigate the reality that the ultimate benefactors are special interest groups, burocrates, corporations, and those representing them on the PAC payrolls in elected office.

Mercnbeth -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:00:45 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania quote: Consider the F-35 fighter jet; the Pentagon didn't want it, but a group of corporations and Senators conspired to force it upon the American people, simply to funnel money into private pockets. Billions were spent before the program was shut down. And it never ceases to amaze me that those who start these types of threads always want to FIRST cut those programs that help poor people and not those who are truly causing the deficit to go through the ceiling quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Which is why I pointed out that ending Corporate welfare would be my first recommended action. However the consequence would not only be F-35 fighter jets, and the cash flow welfare payments to Halliburton. It would be Mrs Bostik too. It never ceases to amaze me that close minded people assume first and read second....

rulemylife -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:25:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: ORIGINAL: rulemylife You are absolutely right Merc. Put those lazy brats to work and let them earn their meals. Repeal the child labor laws ad stop rewarding their failure. Great to see you come in as an advocate for corporate welfare rml. Or is it agenda based support? Always good to have kids be the pawns in your war against self accountability, parental responsibility, and consequences for decisions and actions. Who better to have as the warriors and poster child for defending an ultimately defenseless position. In this case, even the straw man you set up doesn't work. Kids. The process of having them is the last individual action/consequence. After birth care and feeding is the governments job. Who benefits? As has been shown, corporate farms and their distribution networks; along with a few million burocrates and PAC organizations. All living high and individually nowhere near the circumstance of the Mrs Bostick; but using her as the point person poster child to achieve their goal. As you now use children. My my, rml working for the advancement of government paid corporate welfare. Congratulations on getting your mind right, and achieving your indoctrination! You know, if you are going to maintain this support, maybe you identify with the wrong party. Are you now going to join the Republicans? After all, they have a long standing history as a group advocating the same support for government subsides, and corporate payouts as you are supporting here. No, you are trying to combine two entirely different issues to make an argument that they are one. I do applaud you though that you've only brought up two this time, not the seven or eight disparate issues you usually throw out and try to argue they are all connected. What it seems to me is what you really wanted to do was argue against food stamps and any form of social welfare, but you knew that would get quickly shot down so you contrived this far-fetched argument trying to relate food stamps to agricultural subsidies. That way when anyone complained that there are actually children that need these programs you could accuse them of supporting corporate interests, as you just did.

juliaoceania -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:31:01 PM)
quote: However, my first hand experience also exposed the fact that the bureaucracy and corporate interests involved at the government level is counter productive. Using my original example I've seen where giving a person a fishing pool and even a stocked trout lake, would hurt them more than help because it would eliminate all the government support. That's the bigger problem. Those in charge see their job as keeping their job, and that job requires more 'customers' wanting 'free fish'. If me, you, or anyone gives out too many poles and good fishing tips - they and the corporate benefactors would have to find another source of government funds. So no matter how many people have fed their little ones with temporary help from the food stamp program because all of the fish in a pond had been exhausted (such as it is now) your inclination is still to say that people do not know how to fish.... One can have deep and extensive knowledge about how to fish, yet if there are no fucking fish to catch, well they are going to go hungry.... And your inclination to tell people to move because there are no fish in their pond... so a young single mother is supposed to uproot herself and her children to move every time her job at Wendy's or Walmart lays off people, especially those who have to miss work because of child/parent teacher conferences or a sick child... so that mother is supposed to move with no savings to find work elsewhere? Possibly where she has no reliable network of friends and family? You know, about one in four kids is being reared in a single parent home at any given time, yeah, I am sure their parent can put in extra time at their minimum wage job that does not quite feed everyone and house everyone in the home, but you know, I am just not a punitive person... I would rather pay a little higher of a tax and see that mother come home after 8 hours rather than not be home... I am just a big softy like that. You type like someone who has never in your life been a single mother, oh yeah, you haven't... these women are some of the hardest working amongst us. Fact of the matter is, if kids do not eat as much when they are learning, well they do not learn as well and can have lifetime learning deficits as a result... robbed of the benefits of an education for the rest of their lives by childhood malnutrition... not to mention more likely to fill our prisons as adults. Now that is the facts for you... it is better to spend a little today than to spend a whole hell of a lot tomorrow. Like I said, you have no proof that the food stamp program hasn't helped a lot of kids eat good meals before they went off to school and learned how to read and write, and for that fact, the food stamp program IS worth it... PS... looking for the corporate welfare threads about the military industrial complex and all that freaking graft you are ignoring... ooops... got tired of waiting, so I am going to go start my own... Edited to add, you may bring up the other corporate welfare programs... but you started a thread about this program

AnimusRex -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:34:51 PM)
I have been considering your earlier responses, Merc, and from what I can see your proposal boils down to "lets end all forms of welfare, corproate and otherwise." To which I say, "Yay". Well, except- what happens to Mrs Bostik? We just say Bootstraps, Bitch" and turn our backs on her? Your original post talked about teaching people to fish. How would we help Mrs. Bostik to become self-sufficient? During the Depression, the New Deal DID do exactly that; the alphabet soup of programs like CCC and WPA hired men by the thousands, giving them work and an opportunity to learn new trades. Almost all of those men went on to private sector jobs afterward. Many of the men who built the interstate highway system in the 1950's, who constructed the millions of suburban houses after the war, who worked on the factories and assembly lines of postwar America learned their trade in the government programs during the Depression. So if you are talking about something like that, a jobs training program or temporary work program that Mrs. Bostik could be placed in, and earn a living while learning a trade, then I am all in favor of it. If by "teaching her to fish" you mean tossing her out of the boat, well....not so much.

AnimusRex -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:37:15 PM)
Oh, c'mon Julia! Moving to find work, to feed her children certainly worked for this shiftless welfare queen! [image]local://upfiles/280232/0C5C1208CF38403D86EFA11C4874D63C.jpg[/image]

juliaoceania -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:40:50 PM)
quote: Oh, c'mon Julia! Moving to find work, to feed her children certainly worked for this shiftless welfare queen! That tramp! If she didn't keep having kids she wouldn't need our help... And I don't wanna hear about how the pill wasn't invented yet, either! I bet that that tent she is living in was given a subsidy, too! All joking aside, that lady is only 32 years old in that photo... talk about a hard life.. being poor is a life shortening thing...

thornhappy -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:48:15 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: AnimusRex Consider the F-35 fighter jet; the Pentagon didn't want it, but a group of corporations and Senators conspired to force it upon the American people, simply to funnel money into private pockets. Billions were spent before the program was shut down. Not sure what program you're talking about here - the F-35 is still there; F-22s were canceled after 187 were built. Extra C-17s are constantly pushed on the Pentagon.

juliaoceania -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:52:14 PM)
quote: but you knew that would get quickly shot down so you contrived this far-fetched argument trying to relate food stamps to agricultural subsidies. That way when anyone complained that there are actually children that need these programs you could accuse them of supporting corporate interests, as you just did. I am going to be fair, food stamps have always been a farm subsidy.. since the inception of the food stamp program they have been so... He is not wrong in pointing this out, but he is wrong in stating that it is only corporate farms that profit, that is untrue. During the Great Depression the marriage of solving America's hunger and supporting farms (many which were destroyed by the Dust Bowl) was conceived... help the poor and farmers at the same time... Now we do have corporate farms, we also have other types of farms too. What Merc fails to note is that Farmer's Markets all over the country have now begun to accept food stamps as the rules governing who can accept them have been changed as to supply inner cities with fresh food. This was done in Fresno by the lady that I mentioned earlier that I interviewed. Her organization, which is religious btw, pushed to have food stamps accepted directly by farmers... and that push worked. So while corporations have benefited from the food stamp program, so have local farmers in the last few years... just sayin

AnimusRex -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 5:56:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thornhappy Not sure what program you're talking about here - the F-35 is still there; F-22s were canceled after 187 were built. Extra C-17s are constantly pushed on the Pentagon. D'oh! I did confuse the two fighter jet programs.

thornhappy -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 6:05:38 PM)
Ah well, both have wings, both have tails... [:D]

AnimusRex -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 6:18:36 PM)
And both have yet to ever be used against their intended targets.

domiguy -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 7:06:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Hell - that justifies the trillions in corporate welfare payments. So what if owners of farming corporations and national grocery chains can dine on "sumptuous meals of pheasant & wine" as ArnimusRex points out. We have got to keep these street orphans fed! Maybe we should make an honest attempt to educate them. How much money would that save in the long run? I wonder if roles were reversed and if Ms Bostok had the opportunities afforded Merc and Merc was forced to grow up in the shoes of Ms Bostok....We would probably be talking about Merc and his love of delicious ox tails and how he is living it up so large on his 15k.

juliaoceania -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/12/2010 11:18:28 PM)
quote: Maybe we should make an honest attempt to educate them. Education is a good investment into the future, and only shortsighted people do not understand that the people that you do not educate today will be burdening you tomorrow. quote: I wonder if roles were reversed and if Ms Bostok had the opportunities afforded Merc and Merc was forced to grow up in the shoes of Ms Bostok....We would probably be talking about Merc and his love of delicious ox tails and how he is living it up so large on his 15k. To be fair, as Merc might argue, he would have come up with a way to buy his own oxtail and generate more revenue... perhaps he would have made a better ox trap or something... But what Merc does not seem to understand is that not all people were born to make a better ox trap, and just because they weren't doesn't mean they are not as valuable as the next person... For crying out loud, a person puts in 40 hours a week at a job, that person should have a roof over their head, food, medical care, and a vacation once a year... minimum. If they can't find a 40 hour a week job, then lets educate em or employ em... Most of us want more in life than subsistence, and are willing to work for more than that, but at the very least people should have that.. if an economy and a government do not exist to serve the people that live within them, then there is something wrong with that economy and that government. It is ludicrous to me to argue that people are just more than happy to get a free lunch and work their ass off to jump through government assistance loops, so much so that they have no desire to do anything else in this life. Maybe they don't see a way to do better because they didn't get an education. Maybe they aren't given chances at a living because of the way they are street socialized, etc. Maybe they made a few mistakes and have a few children that they should have waited to have. Maybe maybe maybe... the point is that most of us if we knew we could at least feed, clothe, and house ourselves would be willing to go to a job. It really isn't that much to ask for.. just to subsist.... And all those toys like nice cars, houses, yachts, etc, those are the things you strive for! In this country a family used to be able to live off of one blue collar income, now we need two, and even two isn't enough for more than a couple... that is freaking crazy!

NorthernGent -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/13/2010 4:37:38 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth quote: Are we supposed to let children suffer? I never realized that the US had so many children wandering around the streets alone without parents or anyone there to feed them. You're right that's only going to only get worse if we end or try to change the status quo. After all, people have children, but it's the government's job to feed them. The fact that to do so requires a massive corporate welfare scheme is immaterial. Hell - that justifies the trillions in corporate welfare payments. So what if owners of farming corporations and national grocery chains can dine on "sumptuous meals of pheasant & wine" as ArnimusRex points out. We have got to keep these street orphans fed! You're an idealist in your own right Merc. In an ideal world people would be self-sufficient without need for outside agencies to provide welfare. Well - seeing as in an earlier post you mentioned 'the realities of human nature' - then how do you propose to transcend these realities? considering the evidence suggests that there will always be people who need welfare for one reason or another and there will always be a small minority who abuse the system and find a way round it no matter the policies. There is a cost to society - of course there is - but then there's the opportunity cost of leaving people to fend for themselves who may or might not turn to crime and will quite possibly be cut off from contributing toward society in the medium to long term. I think it's a better option to provide welfare and accept that a small proportion will abuse the system (of course they will - in the same manner as any system/idea). Having said this you're right on one thing - the welfare has to be an incentive toward work rather than disincentivising people - but no matter your policy a minority will always find a way around it to abuse the system because as you quite rightly mentioned 'the realities of human nature' and this ain't an ideal world full of virtuous human beings who simply need the right motivational tools in order to step into line.

Real0ne -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/13/2010 7:03:50 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: juliaoceania I am going to be fair, food stamps have always been a farm subsidy.. since the inception of the food stamp program they have been so... He is not wrong in pointing this out, but he is wrong in stating that it is only corporate farms that profit, that is untrue. During the Great Depression the marriage of solving America's hunger and supporting farms (many which were destroyed by the Dust Bowl) was conceived... help the poor and farmers at the same time... Now we do have corporate farms, we also have other types of farms too. What Merc fails to note is that Farmer's Markets all over the country have now begun to accept food stamps as the rules governing who can accept them have been changed as to supply inner cities with fresh food. This was done in Fresno by the lady that I mentioned earlier that I interviewed. Her organization, which is religious btw, pushed to have food stamps accepted directly by farmers... and that push worked. So while corporations have benefited from the food stamp program, so have local farmers in the last few years... just sayin well people fwiw are listed in the dept of ag as human livestock, and in the depart of trans as a vessel in commerce. a corporate sole which is evidenced when you look at your drivers license, credit card, property deed and anytime you go to court you name will be all capital letters which is not a typo because the USGPO standards specifically state that a suit must be brought in proper name. Your mom the informant made you a member of said corporation os the united states whose debts you may not question per 14th amend. So for those of you in this discussion its follows that its only a matter of deciding which corporation gets funded where and when.

Mercnbeth -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/13/2010 7:24:54 AM)
quote: Edited to add, you may bring up the other corporate welfare programs... but you started a thread about this program No the NY Times article pointed it out. I'm glad it's exposed the hypocrisy that it has. It points out how the battles between individuals having legitimate human concerns, can be manipulated. It's easy to state you are against any form of corporate welfare; expect when that welfare benefits you directly or touches you emotionally as it does regarding feeding the children. If the spacial interests marketed the benefits to the farms and distribution networks - who would support it. Sell it based on a hard working mother wanting a little be extra, or get a professional photographer to take a picture of a tired woman and her kids - and people are moved. Next time you see pictures of chicken production farms, or a PETA add about the abuses going on a slaughter houses, keep in mind the welfare scheme is a major contributory factor for its existence. The end product may be a bit more food and assistance to families at a meager level; however at the start of the pipeline are special interest payouts, corporate welfare, delivering groceries serving to provide oxtail, chicken wings, and anything else slaughtered for delivery, intimately generating government welfare payments to corporations. Local farm markets taking welfare funds is a nice, non-factor facade. quote: Well - seeing as in an earlier post you mentioned 'the realities of human nature' - then how do you propose to transcend these realities NG, Good point, my point is that why enable the weaknesses while not encouraging the individuals strength. I'm tired of seeing these people exploited; kept in their situations for generations to facilitate that the program, and corporate welfare payments, go on. Consider the direct marketing campaign talked about in the NY Times article. I ask you NG, who ultimately benefits the most? Who has to go though the process and the hurdles? Who waits at the end of the process to collect the big money? I've come to realize that the amazing marketing ability of the special interest groups makes it nearly impossible to ridiculed the programs. The most adamant anti-corporate welfare individuals and groups see no problem with this. Trotting out the kids, the abuses woman, as posters for the righteousness of the programs and their positions. quote: virtuous human beings who simply need the right motivational tools in order to step into line. I'll keep virtues out of it. Your right, motivation is the key. Greed and the motivation for profits created the scheme. I think the motivation starts by educating people to appreciate the deck is stacked against them as soon as they begin to participate. They have to be motivated not to; which is very difficult considering the counter intuitive advertising campaigns working so well with the exploited and the good intending. Frankly, NG I don't know if it's possible to tap into whatever part of human nature strives for self sufficiency over government reliance. There has been too much acceptance of expectation that government is a provider. The word entitlement used to be something that parents yelled at their kids when they asked for something; "You're not entitled to anything!" Now that's been turned around. Now kids are sent to school with parents telling them they are entitled; to lunch, pencils, and everything else - including good grades and graduating without effort. Is there virtue in that? Coming through that system it's a wonder any graduate considers self reliance and accountability. More likely they think anyone who does a fool for not 'taking advantage' of all the 'free' government hand outs. You pose a good question - how do you motivate personal self sufficiency? I don't represent to know an answer; however I'd say you don't do so by giving things to people, enabling them not to have to be, or strive for self sufficiency.

juliaoceania -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/13/2010 7:34:06 AM)
quote: I'm glad it's exposed the hypocrisy that it has. It points out how the battles between individuals having legitimate human concerns, can be manipulated. It's easy to state you are against any form of corporate welfare; expect when that welfare benefits you directly or touches you emotionally as it does regarding feeding the children. First... quote me as saying I am against any subsidies for any company... I have never said that once. I have noted that there is a willingness on the part of conservatives to tolerate corporate welfare, but screw individuals.... I understand something that perhaps you do not... building of roads is corporate welfare. Education is corporate welfare. We do a lot of things in this country that help corporations that the rest of us benefit from... just the facts.

Real0ne -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/13/2010 7:47:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth You pose a good question - how do you motivate personal self sufficiency? remove us from the feudal system, (not that I expect more than a very small handful here can relate to this in perspective), and create a system, (as was originally intended in the US), where you do not need to be a rocket scientist to acquire real wealth.

NorthernGent -> RE: An Enabling Government (2/14/2010 1:03:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth Frankly, NG I don't know if it's possible to tap into whatever part of human nature strives for self sufficiency over government reliance. There has been too much acceptance of expectation that government is a provider. The word entitlement used to be something that parents yelled at their kids when they asked for something; "You're not entitled to anything!" Now that's been turned around. Now kids are sent to school with parents telling them they are entitled; to lunch, pencils, and everything else - including good grades and graduating without effort. Is there virtue in that? Coming through that system it's a wonder any graduate considers self reliance and accountability. More likely they think anyone who does a fool for not 'taking advantage' of all the 'free' government hand outs. My understanding is it's gone the other way here. When I went to school (til the age of 16) I spent a fair amount of my time arsing around and certainly not making the most of the education opportunities available to me. Today - the competitive environment means schoolchildren are in a more rigourous testing and performance measurement environment. Come on Merc - getting a lunch or a pencil isn't the start of a slippery slope toward ruin. It makes sense to provide the tools for a child to excel while over the course of a child's education instilling the mindset that will help the child to make a success of adult life - which demands good teachers and investment. quote: ORIGINAL: Mercnbeth how do you motivate personal self sufficiency? It's a mindset - though you'll never be able to reach everyone. Investment/good teachers/sound planning on the part of those who set the curriculum will help.

Page: << < prev 1 2 [3] 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875