Quiz... Capitalist or Socialist?

[woodsy]

I have a novel idea. Instead of tearing each other down or arguing about whether using Section 8 in response to TANF is comparing apples to oranges or whether $13k per year is far too much money for one person's salary or whether the one black guy you know fairly represents all black people everywhere (hello anecdotal evidence), why don't we actually try to do something positive and additive?

We all seem to agree some form of welfare is a valid application of government power and we all seem to agree on time caps. We also all seem to be experts in the field, so maybe we can come together and hash out a feasible welfare plan that addresses everyone's concerns.

Anyone want to take a shot at it?



Presumably the same point as your own 500 posts of nothing but mindless right wing drivel - conversation and the exchange of ideas. I'm sure there's a forum somewhere for people who prefer to exist in an echo chamber; have you tried enrolling there?

The only person living in a echo chamber is you, 'cause no one is listening to you...haven't you figured that out yet? As for this forum, here's a stat I doubt even you could pervert or deny [though I'm sure you'll try...as usual]. I've been here alot longer than you and I'm not going anywhere, so if you don't like it here, feel free to leave anytime. I doubt anyone is going to shed any tears when you're gone. Though I suspect there will be some cheering going on

You know it just came to me...you sound just like someone who is no longer with us....does the name tylerd ring a bell?

 

[barbelith]

The only person living in a echo chamber is you, 'cause no one is listening to you...haven't you figured that out yet?

I'm sure I'm not the only person laughing at the irony of this post.

I've been here alot longer than you and I'm not going anywhere, so if you don't like it here, feel free to leave anytime.

I like it here just fine. Just pointing out the silliness of your effort to turn this place into an echo chamber where the only people allowed to contribute are those who share your extreme right politics.

You know it just came to me...you sound just like someone who is no longer with us....does the name tylerd ring a bell?

No. I imagine this is one of those tedious "there can't possibly be more than one person who doesn't look at the world like I do, so this must be someone else I've already disagreed with under a different name" sort of implications?

Meanwhile, I see you're much more interested in continuing with the politics of destruction instead of crafting a positive discussion, so if you don't mind I'll let you get on with whatever you're trying to achieve and once more invite Anzik and Wofford29 to have a chat about our common ground and potential solutions to the welfare issue. Unless of course they too are more interested in scoring points than having a substantive discussion.

 

[wofford29]

I'll let you get on with whatever you're trying to achieve and once more invite Anzik and Wofford29 to have a chat about our common ground and potential solutions to the welfare issue. Unless of course they too are more interested in scoring points than having a substantive discussion.

Go ahead. I'm here. Or is this another one of the ask, preach, and not answer tactics? Eventually you'll have to learn that in order to participate in a conversation you must first offer something rather than sitting back letting someone post an idea or opinion and then rather than discuss point and counterpoint you choose arguing constantly. It's not a phenomenon that the vast majority of threads you particpate in get locked or turn into a constant flame battle. You have an opinion, and a bad habit of posing it as truth. You have 500 posts and I'd be willing to bet well over 50% of them have one of the following words or form of phrase in them....

"red herring"
"ad hominem"
"rhetoric"
"diatribe"
"no one will answer me"
"anecdotal"
or some form of self fullfilling analogy to twist an arguement to your favor

And you wonder why people don't want to carry on conversations with you? You can't have an opinion when it's weighted next to yours, and you don't have to backup your claims but everyone else must. Yeah that's a great conversation to carry on.

 

[barbelith]

And another post from wofford29 that says not a single thing about the subject at hand and is instead all about me personally... but somehow I'm the problem with sidetracking these threads.

I take it you have nothing to contribute to a meeting of minds on welfare? I already got us started with some common ground, but sadly it seems you're more interested in sniping (while pretending you're not) than discussing (while pretending you are).

It's not a phenomenon that the vast majority of threads you particpate in get locked or turn into a constant flame battle.

I'm not sure two or three threads equals "the vast majority" and in any event it takes two to tango. So let's not pretend you or any of the usual suspects are any different about holding strong opinions and being willing to stand up for them.

 

[wofford29]

And another post from wofford29 that says not a single thing about the subject at hand and is instead all about me personally... but somehow I'm the problem with sidetracking these threads.

I take it you have nothing to contribute to a meeting of minds on welfare? I already got us started with some common ground, but sadly it seems you're more interested in sniping (while pretending you're not) than discussing (while pretending you are).

You're just furthering my point. You've posed a premise that we agree on common ground and have posed a challenge to participate in an effort to reform the system. Where's your plan though? Again you're waiting on someone else to pose an idea or opinion so you can argue rather than back up what you ask. It's not a personal attack. You can run a search on your posts and see the pattern. I'm not making this up. If anyone can read on this board, they can do the same.

I'm not sure two or three threads equals "the vast majority" and in any event it takes two to tango. So let's not pretend you or any of the usual suspects are any different about holding strong opinions and being willing to stand up for them.

You've particpated in like 4 total threads. That's why I asked you earlier if you even collect anything.

 

[barbelith]

You've posed a premise that we agree on common ground and have posed a challenge to participate in an effort to reform the system. Where's your plan though? Again you're waiting on someone else to pose an idea or opinion so you can argue rather than back up what you ask.

You're making an assumption and continuing to derail the thread by focusing on personality rather than substance. I called out two points of common ground. Perhaps you can find more? Nobody has a solution to the welfare issue but if you want me to put some more thoughts out why not just ask that instead of launching into yet another diatribe?

We all seem to agree welfare is a valid role for the government and we all seem to agree that a time limit should be imposed. Currently I think it's five years (cumulative across a lifetime) and that seems to be working. TANF enrollment has more than halved since the lifetime cap came into effect and I think this might be evidence that back-to-work programs (welfare in conjunction with education) work. I imagine some will oppose spending money on that but we need to figure out where the common ground is if we're going to try to address these problems.

You've particpated in like 4 total threads.

I've participated in more than four threads in this section alone.

 

[wofford29]

We all seem to agree some form of welfare is a valid application of government power and we all seem to agree on time caps. We also all seem to be experts in the field, so maybe we can come together and hash out a feasible welfare plan that addresses everyone's concerns.

Anyone want to take a shot at it?

You're making an assumption and continuing to derail the thread by focusing on personality rather than substance. I called out two points of common ground. Perhaps you can find more? Nobody has a solution to the welfare issue but if you want me to put some more thoughts out why not just ask that instead of launching into yet another diatribe?

We all seem to agree welfare is a valid role for the government and we all seem to agree that a time limit should be imposed. Currently I think it's five years (cumulative across a lifetime) and that seems to be working. TANF enrollment has more than halved since the lifetime cap came into effect and I think this might be evidence that back-to-work programs (welfare in conjunction with education) work. I imagine some will oppose spending money on that but we need to figure out where the common ground is if we're going to try to address these problems.

I'm not sure why you think I'm assuming when you can go back one page and read your own words. You've raised the question, so where is your proposal? I'll gladly participate in a discussion about welfare reform. My proposal in short, education, time lines, and goals that must be met to recieve a draw.

 

[pixletwin]

Lets keep the thread (lame though it is) on topic you guys.

 

[barbelith]

I'm not sure why you think I'm assuming when you can go back one page and read your own words.

I meant assuming I'm lying in wait to snipe down everyone's ideas.

My proposal in short, education, time lines, and goals that must be met to recieve a draw.

I think this is the bare bones of most peoples' proposals. I think most people are reasonable and compassionate and believe in federal aid when it comes down to it. The question is how to implement that. Right now our minimum wage is barely above the poverty line. We've already seen TANF and Section 8 mentioned in this thread but obviously there is far more to "welfare" than a single program.

In my opinion any real solution will cost money. But I disagree with some of my liberal peers that this is an issue that can be solved by throwing money at it. We have to invest intelligently. This means creative a social services infrastructure where the goal is not "meet shortfalls in subsistence" but rather "create self-sufficiency." That means job training and job placement for real careers, because additions to the middle class benefit everyone in the end. That's going to cost money.

Minimum wage doesn't resolve Section 8 issues and frankly I think we need some lateral thinking to address that problem. I'd start with round the clock police presence in blighted communities. Get rid of the crime. I'm sure everyone is familiar with broken window syndrome. The reverse also applies as any real estate agent knows.

I also support universal health care and free enrollment for all students at in-state universities. Two moves that would go a long way to helping families crawl out of poverty. Again these things cost money, but I think it's more accurately described as a social investment that will pay off in the future. This is not a problem that's going to be solved in a generation.

Meanwhile whatever we're doing now isn't really working. TANF enrollment is down but there are more children living in poverty in America than there have been for years.

 

[DarthNeil]

Yawn.

Are any of you guys interested in what appears to be endless nothingness?...

Can I lock this thread now or are we going to some more?...

 

[The Craw]

 

[Darth Madden]

<table width=350 align=center border=0 cellspacing=0 cellpadding=2><tr><td bgcolor="#EEEEEE" align=center>
<font face="Georgia, Times New Roman, Times, serif" style='color:black; font-size: 14pt;'>
<strong>You Are 40% Capitalist, 60% Socialist</strong>
</font></td></tr>
<tr><td bgcolor="#FFFFFF">
<center><img src="https://www.blogthingsimages.com/areyouasocialistorcapitalistquiz/politics-2.jpg" height="100" width="100"></center>
<font color="#000000">
You tend to be quite wary of businesses, especially big business.<br />
While you know that corporations have their place, you tend to support small, locally owned shops.<br />
As far as the rich go, you think they're usually corrupt and immoral.
</font></td></tr></table>
<div align="center"><a href="https://www.blogthings.com/areyouasocialistorcapitalistquiz/">Are You a Socialist or Capitalist?</a></div>

Thats what I got too.

 

[Anzik]

One of the biggest problems with government programs is that government runs them with government employees. Now living in a state where 1/3 of the population works for the state, I know a lot of state employees.
Government workers suffer from burnout and apathy. They have no incentive to be better at their jobs because they get annual raises and promoted on seniority. They have drone jobs that they perform in drone like fashion. It's a generalization and there are exceptions, but by in large they don't have much in the way of enthusiasm and inspiration.
Government employees, whether elected or hired, are stewards of tax payers money and often, since it's not their money, they really don't watch it carefully. They have no reason to try harder or fear of reprisal since its nearly impossible to fire someone that works for the state. I know one person that was fired from their state job. It was sexual harassment and she got her job back.
Complacency and apathy are human nature unless there is incentive either way.
We know the problems inherent in the current system and it doesn't get fixed. Lets privatize some of it. Private companies can fire people when they do a bad job and give them a bonus when they do a good job. In Philadelphia there are three 911 operators and or dispatchers that have made errors that have cost people their lives. They are being retrained.Lets get people who we can encourage with a bonus for following protocol and serving clients. Have people that can be fired if they rush a client through the process, or neglect another. But reward the person that goes above and beyond for someone.
When was the last time you felt compassion from someone at motor vehicle? Wouldn't it be nice if it were more like dealing with Sideshow customer service?
The second front is that the recipients know how to work the system.
I am going to put forth an unpopular idea. We did a disservice when we classified shame as a bad thing. When I was 11 my father was disabled and we got generics. Not the colorful generics we know today, black and white labeled and canned. We also wore cheap sneakers and 'dungarees' (jeans didn't come along till the 80's). It was embarrassing and it left an impression on me that I would never need it again. But we have taken away the stigma that its ok if you can't be independent or even try. Now foodstamps or family first cards allow you to buy name brands and purchase them discreetly. Lets put it back to qualifying for generics. Lets remove the ability to use them for unhealthy foods like Soda and Doritos. Assistance should cover milk, water, bread, produce, meat, baby formula and food. For 17 years I worked for supermarkets and its truly unbelievable how many people on assistance use it for the worst kinds of food and have an attitude of entitlement. It is too frequent that they come in on the day their check expires and demand things with no sense of humility or gratitude. I once had a shopper that came in on the last day of her WIC check and demand her special baby formula, $28 per can. Unfortunately the last of our supply had been shoplifted. All I could think of is my own children that we bottle fed on Parent's Choice, Walmarts generic formula and my wife and I both worked.
Recipients need to be accountable too. If they are not actively looking for a job that can sustain them and whatever dependents they might have then they must be getting training that can help them do it. If their grades slip they should get dropped. If they screw up their job they don't get back in. If they can't pass routine drug tests they don't get the benefits. Employers get to drug test, and as far as I'm concerned, if our tax dollars are paying you, that makes you my employee and here's your cup. I would be happy to give them swimming lessons but after that they can sink or swim, I don't want to swim with them on my back.
To all the ladies: Having 7 children with different fathers is not acceptable, especially if you can't identify him. You get benefits for three kids, and we can even make exceptions for twins and triplets. Sorry there has to be a limit. So if you're collecting benefits for two and sleeping around, maybe you should take care of that government program that pays for tubal ligation.
Sperm donors: If you have three kids with three different mothers and you can't pay, say hello to prison.
Prison should bring back hard labor and crappy but nutritious food. Prison should be something they want to avoid. It should be harsh and it should be unpleasant. It can't be that bad since so many go back.


Yes I know I'm insensitive and horrible to some of you. So what. Personal responsibility and accountability will solve most of the issues and make independent citizens that can have some pride. Give people the opportunity to pull themselves up instead of the opportunity to sit in your lap.
America is the land of opportunity. Thats why people try and come here more than any other place in the world. You have opportunity here to do anything your brains, talent, ambition can carry you to. There are no external, malevolent forces keeping you down, just your own complacency.

I am living the American dream. My father was disabled, my mom a social worker. They divorced. I graduated High School 198 in a class of 380. I had to save for 6 months to afford community college. I worked as a Janitor, at McDonalds, construction, pumped gas, and settled into stocking shelves. By the time I was 23 both my parents were dead. I worked hard, became the crew chief and within five years a grocery manager. Now I own my own business, have a wife and two kids. My neighborhood stinks but I've done it all by myself with the opportunity God gave me. I have had no particular advantage. I have had no job that required connections, racial preference or even above average intelligence. I am nothing special.

 

[barbelith]

Anzik - I wrote a lengthy response to your last post but chose to delete it. Let's just say we disagree on many fundamentals but I think in practical terms we could probably devise a SIM welfare plan that would largely satisfy us both, and that ought to count for something.

 

[devilof76]

Mixed economies are the best solution.

Half-free? I suppose the only problem with our current mixed economy is that the wrong half-tyrants are in power?