700 Billion Buy out plan defeated.....

[The Ween]

Essential reading for anyone interested in moving beyond the "post-fact" conservative propaganda machine:

https://www.mcclatchydc.com/251/story/53802.html

Interesting read. Thanks.

 

[devilof76]

https://forum.objectivismonline.net/index.php?showtopic=14054

 

[ProgMatinee]

I wonder how many people on wellfare have cell phones or cable? Just wondering.

 

[barbelith]

objectivismonline

HA HA HA HA HA!


Cheers!

 

[devilof76]

How about you troll someone else's forum with your crap?

 

[devilof76]

I wonder how many people on wellfare have cell phones or cable? Just wondering.

https://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm

 

[ProgMatinee]

https://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/bg1713.cfm

Good article, thanks! The idea that wealth needs to be shared when 26% of "poor" people have a cell phone or 62% have cable/satellite is pretty silly, IMO.

 

[barbelith]

The idea that wealth needs to be shared when 26% of "poor" people have a cell phone or 62% have cable/satellite is pretty silly, IMO.

Actually it's often cheaper to have a cell phone than a fixed line, and cable is an inexpensive form of entertainment for families that can't afford to go out or buy expensive toys.

 

[ProgMatinee]

Uh...but "entertainment" isn't something that should be subsidized by tax payers. Broadcast TV is free (assuming you have a tv). For those without a TV, a library card is free, go borrow a book. Used board games can be found for 25 cents at garage sales.

Furthermore cell phones are not cheaper than a fixed line. Fixed lines, without the bells and whistles (which again aren't necessities, shouldn't be subsidized) are like $10 a month.

I think the current socialists out there believe that because a lot of people have a luxury, that everybody deserves it even if they haven't earned it. Is there a reason for anyone to earn something if you're just willing to give it to people for free?

 

[devilof76]

I'm sure they aren't using their subsidies to pay for the luxury stuff. They use that for necessities, and then use their 16 hour paychecks for the luxuries.

Also, I've never seen people buying lobster with food stamps. Nope. Never.

 

[barbelith]

Uh...but "entertainment" isn't something that should be subsidized by tax payers.

I'm not sure we're paying the cable company.

Furthermore cell phones are not cheaper than a fixed line.

It really depends on the circumstances (whether your fixed company charges for long distance, whether you're using a prepaid handset for a few minutes per month etc). The flight to mobiles from fixed is occurring at the high and low ends of the market rather than the middle for precisely this reason.

 

[ProgMatinee]

I'm not sure we're paying the cable company.



It really depends on the circumstances (whether your fixed company charges for long distance, whether you're using a prepaid handset for a few minutes per month etc). The flight to mobiles from fixed is occurring at the high and low ends of the market rather than the middle for precisely this reason.

Long distance is a luxury too. As is being able to chat while walking around outside or driving to work or riding the bus. These aren't necessities.

devilof76 has it exactly right, the subsidies are paying for necessities and wages pay for luxury, but wages should be used 1st for necessities and subsidies should only make up the difference in cost between WAGES and NECESSITIES.

Every dollar that a welfare person spends on a luxury item should equal one less dollar they receive from welfare.

 

[barbelith]

Long distance is a luxury too. As is being able to chat while walking around outside or driving to work or riding the bus. These aren't necessities.

Some jobs require mobility. And at any rate if you're using a prepaid handset and rationing time so that it's less expensive than a fixed connection - does it matter if you have the "luxury" of using that time on the bus or to let your kids talk to their grandmother in another state?

 

[devilof76]

devilof76 has it exactly right, the subsidies are paying for necessities and wages pay for luxury, but wages should be used 1st for necessities and subsidies should only make up the difference in cost between WAGES and NECESSITIES.

I was thinking more along the lines of people actually working full time to pay for both, but that's crazy talk. I forget that people are frequently struck down out of the clear blue--never by any fault of their own--with pregnancies, home foreclosures, firings, lack of diploma, drub problems, apathy, boredom, contempt for authority figures, temptation via the knowledge of how to cheat the system, etc.

 

[ProgMatinee]

Some jobs require mobility. And at any rate if you're using a prepaid handset and rationing time so that it's less expensive than a fixed connection - does it matter if you have the "luxury" of using that time on the bus or to let your kids talk to their grandmother in another state?

If a job requires it, its a job related expenditure that the employee either covers himself or has the employer pay. Why am I supposed to pay it for Joe Schmo?

A laptop would make me a better employee, care to buy it for me, whats it matter if I also use it to play games on my offtime?

 

[devilof76]

What does it matter even if you don't? Why is it anyone's responsibility to provide for the welfare of another person?

 

[ProgMatinee]

What does it matter even if you don't? Why is it anyone's responsibility to provide for the welfare of another person?

Exactly. As a Chrisitian and/or as a "nice" person, I want to help people that seriously can't help themselves, whether they've been diagnosed with a disease or have had a serious accident or something.

But apathy and laziness, poor decisions, lack of desirable skills, these aren't things I feel compelled to help.

Which people make up most of welfare? Which people do the democrats cater to the most with promises to help, but just broaden the reasons to loaf and make mistakes. Democrats absolutely love holding the people they claim to be helping down by keeping them sustained under welfare. If a welfare person made something of themselves, they'd lose that vote. Democrats have a god complex and they make really crappy gods.

 

[The Chaver]

Exactly. As a Chrisitian and/or as a "nice" person, I want to help people that seriously can't help themselves, whether they've been diagnosed with a disease or have had a serious accident or something.

But apathy and laziness, poor decisions, lack of desirable skills, these aren't things I feel compelled to help.

Which people make up most of welfare? Which people do the democrats cater to the most with promises to help, but just broaden the reasons to loaf and make mistakes. Democrats absolutely love holding the people they claim to be helping down by keeping them sustained under welfare. If a welfare person made something of themselves, they'd lose that vote. Democrats have a god complex and they make really crappy gods.

Our government as a whole has the god complex,not the democrats.And yes it makes for a very,very,very crapy "God". Enough said..

 

[barbelith]

I forget that people are frequently struck down out of the clear blue--never by any fault of their own--with pregnancies, home foreclosures, firings, lack of diploma, drub problems, apathy, boredom, contempt for authority figures, temptation via the knowledge of how to cheat the system, etc.

If the census showed people stayed on welfare their whole lives then you'd probably have a point. But the vast majority of welfare recipients receive benefits as a temporary stopgap, so you don't. In short, most of the people on welfare actually are using it as a crutch to climb up from shots out of the clear blue.

If a job requires it, its a job related expenditure that the employee either covers himself or has the employer pay.

It's just possible you haven't conceived of every possible valid reason for having a mobile phone.

Why am I supposed to pay it for Joe Schmo?

I don't understand why you think you're paying for it. I'm pretty sure the government isn't writing checks to the phone company.

Why is it anyone's responsibility to provide for the welfare of another person?

Aside from the ******* principle, we have collectively chosen to embrace a safety net. It's security if nothing else. Think big picture. If you want line item veto on taxes then I'm right behind you, crossing out my contributions to WMD and the like. But we live in a representative democracy, so it goes the way it goes. You're free to leave if you don't like it.

 

[devilof76]

You're free to leave if you don't like it.

Which is what a great many American companies have done. How many american jobs have gone overseas?

Excellent point you have there. *******.