Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Welfare Queens Galore


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Welfare Queens Galore Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 3:53:29 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
...but why do voters keep electing the politicians that continue to waste taxpayer dollars like this? imo ALL politicians need to be fired and thrown in jail for the damage they have caused.. politicians are the biggest welfare queens going imo..

Because, like many "democratic" election systems, the choice the people are given to vote for is no real choice at all.
For the most part, there is very little difference between the big parties that put themselves up for election.
For the US, there's the Dems and Repubs with the likes of the Tea Party trailing a poor 3rd place.
The UK is no different with the Conservative and Labour parties and the Lib Dems making a poor 3rd place; though we do appear to have the up-coming UKIP, but for how long??

People will argue the pro's and con's of whichever party they happen to support.
But IMHO, they are pretty much of a muchness.... ie, they all support big business that supports them, they all cohort with the mega-wealthy, and they all line their own pockets.
Most don't live in the "real" world that the majority of us have to put up with.
Most have massive expense accounts and tax dodges that we, the people, all pay for in one way or another that very few of us get the benefits of.

Have you ever seen a voting ballot that has a "None of the above" option on it??
I wonder if they did that one year, how many would put that rather than the insipid options we are given??

It's never a true democracy - it's a limited choice autocracy under a different name.

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 3:53:42 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline 		Sounds like your ass grew tastebuds.


_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 3:56:34 AM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie


quote:

ORIGINAL: subfever


quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

No, because RT news is light years beyond biased, stooopit and at best, ridiculous.


Do you consider our corporate-owned mainstream media the unbiased, champion of the masses?

But I digress. Lucy is keeping the thread on track by focusing on the message instead of the messenger.


There's a difference between a fart and a pile of shit.

Neither are pleasant to be around. Both stink.


Yes, but a pile of shit can be used as fertilizer and make things grow, while a fart is nothing but hot air.

(in reply to LookieNoNookie)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 4:26:39 AM   
DaddySatyr


Posts: 9381
Joined: 8/29/2011
From: Pittston, Pennsyltucky
Status: offline 		I have long been a believer that there are few things that a company (any size) should be allowed to deduct from their final tax liability.

Wages and taxes paid, obviously. - They're employing people and they are matching some of the taxes that the employees are paying.

If the company pays for medical care (or day care or whatever) so that the employee doesn't have to (I consider this to be part of the "compensation")

If the company does something for the community that is tangible - Back in New Jersey, there were three companies that needed a large amount of water as part of their cooling processes. They pitched in and built a lake which they maintain (and keep stocked with fish). That kind of thing should be tax deductible.

Other than those things, I think businesses should pay taxes at a fairly high rate. They use the local resources (labor being part of it), they provide jobs but also increase traffic flow (more cops and road repairs).

Certainly companies that make the kinds of profits that Microcrap makes don't need any tax breaks.

Politicians, especially the Pablum©-puking type, like to pay lip service to "everyone paying their fair share". It would be nice if we started with the entities that are making money, these days instead of the ones that are making choices between food and heating fuel.





< Message edited by DaddySatyr -- 2/27/2014 4:28:04 AM >

_____________________________

A Stone in My Shoe

Screen captures (and pissing on shadows) still RULE! Ya feel me?

"For that which I love, I will do horrible things"

(in reply to Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 4:33:43 AM   
Zonie63


Posts: 2826
Joined: 4/25/2011
From: The Old Pueblo
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444



quote:

ORIGINAL: subfever

From my perspective, the system is deeply flawed.

Of course, we can always argue that there are both good and bad in most things... even to a stretch. For example, was Hitler all bad? Or, was the Holocaust all bad? After all, there must have been at least some rotten-to-the-core, dirty, no good scumbags that were exterminated along with the good.

trying to compare Hitler to corp subsidies is like comparing apples to rotten eggs.. yes, its deeply flawed but why do voters keep electing the politicians that continue to waste taxpayer dollars like this? imo ALL politicians need to be fired and thrown in jail for the damage they have caused.. politicians are the biggest welfare queens going imo..


I would also mention a few words about bureaucrats and other unelected people who work in government. All these bloated pension plans take a HUGE bite out of local budgets. The politicians are only half the problem.

As for the voters, I've often wondered why they keep voting as they do. Even if they vote out one guy, they'll invariably replace him with someone else who does the same thing. Nothing ever changes, no matter what the voters do.

I think there's some irony in bringing up Hitler in this topic (Godwin's Law), but if there's any lessons to be learned here, it's that lazy, corrupt, do-nothing politicians, bureaucrats, and even corporate welfare queens need to act more responsibly and not let things fester to the point where the people are so desperate that they might elect an extremist to public office.

(in reply to tj444)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 8:07:55 AM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1


quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444
...but why do voters keep electing the politicians that continue to waste taxpayer dollars like this? imo ALL politicians need to be fired and thrown in jail for the damage they have caused.. politicians are the biggest welfare queens going imo..

Because, like many "democratic" election systems, the choice the people are given to vote for is no real choice at all.
For the most part, there is very little difference between the big parties that put themselves up for election.
For the US, there's the Dems and Repubs with the likes of the Tea Party trailing a poor 3rd place.
The UK is no different with the Conservative and Labour parties and the Lib Dems making a poor 3rd place; though we do appear to have the up-coming UKIP, but for how long??

People will argue the pro's and con's of whichever party they happen to support.
But IMHO, they are pretty much of a muchness.... ie, they all support big business that supports them, they all cohort with the mega-wealthy, and they all line their own pockets.
Most don't live in the "real" world that the majority of us have to put up with.
Most have massive expense accounts and tax dodges that we, the people, all pay for in one way or another that very few of us get the benefits of.

Have you ever seen a voting ballot that has a "None of the above" option on it??
I wonder if they did that one year, how many would put that rather than the insipid options we are given??

It's never a true democracy - it's a limited choice autocracy under a different name.

I think if the voting ballot did have a "none of the above" option on it, from what I have seen of voters opinions is that most are so blinded & entrenched in their "good" party vs the other ("bad/evil") party that they would never choose that option.. Even on these forums, most posters are supportive of "their" party no matter its bad actions.. nothing in the US will change unless there is a true revolution but that kinda militancy/rebellion has been beaten out of them by decades of conditioning to do everything as the govt decrees.. starting from birth where you are required to get a SSN as soon as you are born..

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 8:58:41 AM   
tj444


Posts: 7574
Joined: 3/7/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Zonie63

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: subfever

From my perspective, the system is deeply flawed.

Of course, we can always argue that there are both good and bad in most things... even to a stretch. For example, was Hitler all bad? Or, was the Holocaust all bad? After all, there must have been at least some rotten-to-the-core, dirty, no good scumbags that were exterminated along with the good.

trying to compare Hitler to corp subsidies is like comparing apples to rotten eggs.. yes, its deeply flawed but why do voters keep electing the politicians that continue to waste taxpayer dollars like this? imo ALL politicians need to be fired and thrown in jail for the damage they have caused.. politicians are the biggest welfare queens going imo..


I would also mention a few words about bureaucrats and other unelected people who work in government. All these bloated pension plans take a HUGE bite out of local budgets. The politicians are only half the problem.

As for the voters, I've often wondered why they keep voting as they do. Even if they vote out one guy, they'll invariably replace him with someone else who does the same thing. Nothing ever changes, no matter what the voters do.

I think there's some irony in bringing up Hitler in this topic (Godwin's Law), but if there's any lessons to be learned here, it's that lazy, corrupt, do-nothing politicians, bureaucrats, and even corporate welfare queens need to act more responsibly and not let things fester to the point where the people are so desperate that they might elect an extremist to public office.

Politicians make all sorts of promises (usually vague in how those promises will become reality) at election time and then frequently turn around and do the opposite of what they said they would do.. they don't need to be or appear to be an extremist to get elected.. by the time you see their true intentions you cant get rid of them.. I don't think Hitler appeared as an extremist, that came out after he was in power and had the ability to control the military, create laws, etc.. Imo, Bush II was the closest to a US Hitler, he used a lie to go into Iraq and as a result thousands of soldiers & innocent people & children were killed.. and he brought in the Patriot Act which allows the govt to throw people in jail & detained "indefinitely", without charges, without a lawyer, etc.. you have TSA asking to see your papers even away from the border.. you have the govt spying on citizens & corporations, etc.. Why was Bush II not seen as an extremist and dangerous? Sometimes people just don't want to see what's in front of them.. When the Patriot Act was first enacted, Americans fell in line behind him cuz you were "either with us or against us"..

I am not the first to compare Bush to Hitler..
http://www.dissidentvoice.org/Articles3/Jayne_Hitler-Bush.htm

_____________________________

As Anderson Cooper said “If he (Trump) took a dump on his desk, you would defend it”

(in reply to Zonie63)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 10:26:16 AM   
subfever


Posts: 2895
Joined: 5/22/2004
Status: offline
quote:


Did you just compare programs that help feed people to mass genocide? Buddy from your post your the one who seems deeply flawed.


Sigh... do I need to explain "even to a stretch" to you? ...

(in reply to Alice0in0Wonder)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 11:45:01 AM   
papassion


Posts: 487
Joined: 3/28/2012
Status: offline


quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Wal-Mart isn't even mentioned.   We spend a lot on heat subsidy, food stamps and other government services to feed, clothe and keep their employees.


And lets never talk about the other externalities we suffer to provide these poor fuckin corporations like the SuperFund.







 


Wouldn't it cost us MORE if Walmart employees were not working and collecting full welfare?

And If Walmart suddenly "saw the light" and distributed their "excess" profits to workers, but had to raise prices a lot to do this, do you think the public would continue to shop there?

The " enlightended" are generous until it comes out of THEIR pocket.

(in reply to mnottertail)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 11:51:54 AM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline 		how much do you expect prices to go up???
where are you getting your "numbers" or guesses?

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to papassion)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 12:11:11 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion
And If Walmart suddenly "saw the light" and distributed their "excess" profits to workers, but had to raise prices a lot to do this, do you think the public would continue to shop there?

The " enlightended" are generous until it comes out of THEIR pocket.

Walmart and the like wouldn't need to raise any prices by a single red cent.
Sure, profits not quite so high, but the bottom line is they don't need to raise any prices.

(in reply to papassion)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 12:26:33 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion
And If Walmart suddenly "saw the light" and distributed their "excess" profits to workers, but had to raise prices a lot to do this, do you think the public would continue to shop there?
The " enlightended" are generous until it comes out of THEIR pocket.

Walmart and the like wouldn't need to raise any prices by a single red cent.
Sure, profits not quite so high, but the bottom line is they don't need to raise any prices.


Your argument is that WalMart's profits are too high, then. Where would Government draw the authority to dictate profit maximums? If Government was allowed to do that, how would they do that, by margin (%) or by dollars? Does Big Oil have too high a profit because they rake in hundreds of billions of dollars in profits? Or, is Big Oil's <10% profit margin acceptable? Would Apple be okay with their 20%+ profit margin because it's not over some billions of dollars level?

You do not get to decide what profit level any company needs unless it's your company.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 12:29:06 PM   
DomKen


Posts: 19457
Joined: 7/4/2004
From: Chicago, IL
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion




quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Wal-Mart isn't even mentioned.   We spend a lot on heat subsidy, food stamps and other government services to feed, clothe and keep their employees.


And lets never talk about the other externalities we suffer to provide these poor fuckin corporations like the SuperFund.










Wouldn't it cost us MORE if Walmart employees were not working and collecting full welfare?

And If Walmart suddenly "saw the light" and distributed their "excess" profits to workers, but had to raise prices a lot to do this, do you think the public would continue to shop there?

The " enlightended" are generous until it comes out of THEIR pocket.

Wal-Mart could raise their wages substantially and not affect prices at all.

(in reply to papassion)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 12:31:36 PM   
bachus


Posts: 31
Joined: 1/27/2014
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: papassion




quote:

ORIGINAL: mnottertail

Wal-Mart isn't even mentioned.   We spend a lot on heat subsidy, food stamps and other government services to feed, clothe and keep their employees.


And lets never talk about the other externalities we suffer to provide these poor fuckin corporations like the SuperFund.







 


Wouldn't it cost us MORE if Walmart employees were not working and collecting full welfare?

And If Walmart suddenly "saw the light" and distributed their "excess" profits to workers, but had to raise prices a lot to do this, do you think the public would continue to shop there?

The " enlightended" are generous until it comes out of THEIR pocket.


The thing about companies like Wallmart is what they are doing to their competition, and I am not talking here about the other large discount department stores and warehouse stores. If you want an competitive market economy it needs to be fair and honest to everyone. What about the small shop owner who simply can not compete, because he is not getting all of those subsidy and benefits. Those are the employers who actually give their employees a decent salary, those employees do not need food stamps. It is those jobs and income's Wallmart is destroying.
I am all favor of good honest capitalism, open markets and competition. it creates healthy environments where hard working honest people can thrive. When you start cheating the system by not having to give your staff decent salaries, by not having to pay the same amount of taxation as you competition, by being subsidized by your government, which is really hard to accept because that is money that partly comes from the same shop owner who is being sodomized by large discount department stores and warehouse stores..
I would say at least give make large discount department stores and warehouse stores pay the same salaries and take away their tax exemptions and subsidies. Yes that would increase the price but it would also help enormously with Income Inequality take a look at these statistic. It gives an interesting view http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3629

(in reply to papassion)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 12:33:09 PM   
anniezz338


Posts: 1183
Joined: 8/17/2010
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

how much do you expect prices to go up???
where are you getting your "numbers" or guesses?


I just paid $4 for my mini bottle 8 pack of coke that was $3.75 two days ago. grrrr

_____________________________

I had become insane, with horrific lapses of sanity. Edgar Allen Poe

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 12:48:18 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Your argument is that WalMart's profits are too high, then.

You do not get to decide what profit level any company needs unless it's your company.

If you have a profit large enough to cover other incidental costs, you don't need to raise prices.
Desirable, yes. Need? No.

If you make a profit, even just one single cent - it is profit.
Now if the question were about maintaining the current profit margins, that would be different.
The posit was that Walmart would need to raise prices to meet said requirements.
My contention is, it isn't a need per se.

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 1:05:03 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: anniezz338


quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

how much do you expect prices to go up???
where are you getting your "numbers" or guesses?


I just paid $4 for my mini bottle 8 pack of coke that was $3.75 two days ago. grrrr

mine did too:) but it wasnt due to walmart payin a decent wage to their workers:) or getting less corporate welfare



as an aside...I just had a page show up with DS's avatar under your name....that took me aback


look LOL, when I refreshed it went back to normal





Attachment (1)

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to anniezz338)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 2:35:51 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1
quote:

ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri
Your argument is that WalMart's profits are too high, then.
You do not get to decide what profit level any company needs unless it's your company.

If you have a profit large enough to cover other incidental costs, you don't need to raise prices.
Desirable, yes. Need? No.
If you make a profit, even just one single cent - it is profit.
Now if the question were about maintaining the current profit margins, that would be different.
The posit was that Walmart would need to raise prices to meet said requirements.
My contention is, it isn't a need per se.


Right, because no one needs a certain amount of profit to maintain solvency and viability. As long as they get one penny of profit, they are doing fine.

Perhaps the board decided that to maintain their current store portfolio and to continue to amass money for further growth, they need X% profit. If they are there, then they certainly would need to raise prices.

You have zero authority to make that determination, unless you are part of the business planning for WalMart. I'm going to gather you are not, so, you have no authority to make a statement of WalMart's needs.


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 2:38:08 PM   
DesideriScuri


Posts: 12225
Joined: 1/18/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
as an aside...I just had a page show up with DS's avatar under your name....that took me aback
look LOL, when I refreshed it went back to normal


I feel bad for anniezz. That's a level of abuse that I can't even imagine the deepest masochist could shoulder...


_____________________________

What I support:

  • A Conservative interpretation of the US Constitution
  • Personal Responsibility
  • Help for the truly needy
  • Limited Government
  • Consumption Tax (non-profit charities and food exempt)

(in reply to Lucylastic)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: Welfare Queens Galore - 2/27/2014 2:43:24 PM   
Lucylastic


Posts: 40310
Status: offline 		Oh its not THAT bad.....
Fishing for compliments??? *wink*

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to DesideriScuri)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Welfare Queens Galore Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109