Burden of the working man

[Baron Max]

The original point was, without an efficient welfare structure in the US youd have to walk to work or to the store/bar passing cripples, the mentally handicapped, the elderly all begging for change along your way. ...
When in fact the streets would be absolutely over-run with people begging for change.

You've not been walking around the downtown areas of any large cities lately, have you? They're every-fuckin'-where!!!

And if we made it illegal for those people to be there, arrested them and hauled them off in cattle cars to somewhere else, then we wouldn't have those people begging on the streets!

And if you like and want 'em so much, then we'll haul 'em to your house ...fair enough?

..., pretty much every empoverished nation on earth has aid agencies tirelessly slogging their guts out for next to nothing, but thats entirely secondary to the original point.

And doesn't that prove to you that there are very few people who actually give a shit about those people? And if "the people" don't give a shit, should they be forced to hand over their hard-earned money to some liberal government officials?

Baron Max

 

[lucifers angel]

So ...people can breed babies, but they don't have to take care of them? And they can breed more babies after they shove the disabled off onto the charity of the government?

The government has become a substitute for personal responsibility. Why do I see that as ...wrong?

Baron Max

sorry but i think your an hateful man (if you are a guy that is) people who claim disabilty living allowance need the extra money because they need to get to medical appointments, and it can be dangerous for them to catch the bus, walk the streets (because they could harm themselves or someone else) and people who ahve disabled children do not take the DLA easily, and we sure has hell do not shove them onto someone else to care for. many many people need extra care will you be the one to say they cant have it?? because i would love to see you do it in a carers meeting!!!

 

[fishtail]

yeah many people cant work, but there are a number of people who claim D.L.A and Incapacity benefit when they are not ill or sick, its not hard to fool the goverment to beliveing your sick, but many people want to work but simply can not, and it has nothing to do with the lilly livered liberals in this country either.

Years ago i had quite a bad car smash resulting in loads of personal broken bits, after hospitalisation my GP recommended i should register disabled, the very thought struck a bad note, i had a full recovery and apart from the occasional twinge am fine.
But why did the GP push this disablement notion?

 

[lucifers angel]

Years ago i had quite a bad car smash resulting in loads of personal broken bits, after hospitalisation my GP recommended i should register disabled, the very thought struck a bad note, i had a full recovery and apart from the occasional twinge am fine.
But why did the GP push this disablement notion?

perhaps he thought you wouldnt get any better, but disabilities are not only visuale either, most are mental disabilities

 

[heliocentric]

You've not been walking around the downtown areas of any large cities lately, have you? They're every-fuckin'-where!!!

Theyre really not, its just nothing like how it is in poorer countries.
I was reading a travel guide to india a while back and there was a whole section on how to deal with beggars. Youre litterally swamped by them as soon as you leave your hotel, you can actually attract a small crowd of them around you pretty quickly. And it isnt uncommon for certain beggars to learn your movements throughout your day and follow you around.
Its seriously *nothing* like the odd beggar you get here and there in western cities.

And if we made it illegal for those people to be there, arrested them and hauled them off in cattle cars to somewhere else, then we wouldn't have those people begging on the streets!

I think youre missing the point, the reason why you have so few beggars compared to developing nations is because your society has a welfware net.
So yes if you make it illegal to beg, then noone loses out atall.

Take away that saftey net however and make begging illegal and youd see your streets littered with people who cant work (for whatever reason) stealing and using ever increasingly tricky tactics to get food in their mouths.
It really would not be pretty.

And if you like and want 'em so much, then we'll haul 'em to your house ...fair enough?

Id rather governments simply cracked down on begging and concentrated on the various programs in place to offer support/get them back into work.
Simply letting homeless people into your house helps absolutely noone in the long term.

And doesn't that prove to you that there are very few people who actually give a shit about those people? And if "the people" don't give a shit, should they be forced to hand over their hard-earned money to some liberal government officials?

Baron Max

No, its just basic economics. If you can barely feed yourself then feeding others doesnt even come into the picture.
Its not like people in india 'dont give a shit' its more like theyre dirt poor and couldnt help if they wanted to in most cases.

 

[dixonmassey]

It's because of all the fuckin' lilly-livered, doo-gooder liberals in your government, that's why!

The world made out just fine for gazillions of years of human existence without government handouts, yet now governments feel the need to give money to people just for the asking!

When I see articles like you posted, I always wonder why they didn't post the info on available jobs at the same time. In the USA, we have want ads in the paper with thousands of jobs listed, yet there still unemployed people getting handouts?! Why not get them one of those jobs instead?

I'm tellin' ya' ....it's the fuckin' lilly-livered, doo-gooder liberals that's gonna' be the downfall of every civilization in the world. ..if we continue to allow them to set policy.

Baron Max

It's hard to believe but many "help wanted" ads are just there for the heck of it, to create an illusion of searching for the "right man", if right man is already found. In your quest to create jungle, "dog - eat - dog" society (never created before) wouldn't be fair to "free" rich and mighty ones from government handouts also? Military budget, science funding is nothing but handout to the rich + many others.

 

[dixonmassey]

Simply letting homeless people into your house helps absolutely noone in the long term.

Have you tried? If not (99.999999 chance) how would you know that it doesn't help?

 

[Baron Max]

Simply letting homeless people into your house helps absolutely no one in the long term.

Yeah, ....and that's the oldest bullshit excuse there is to keep from personally helping people. And we all buy into it because then we don't have to help, we don't have to actually do anything.

And I'm sure that you'll note ....if we all use that same excuse for not helping, then ....yeah, you're right, no one gets helped. And with the excuse, "It's not my fault!"

Its not like people in India 'dont give a shit' its more like theyre dirt poor and couldnt help if they wanted to in most cases.

You should do some checking before you make such claims! Check out the number of wealthy people in India ...then come back and make that same statement ...with a straight face!

Baron Max

 

[heliocentric]

Yeah, ....and that's the oldest bullshit excuse there is to keep from personally helping people. And we all buy into it because then we don't have to help, we don't have to actually do anything.

Sorry but its pure pragmatism, even aid agencies (at least in the UK) advise against it. They also advise against handing out money to beggars in the street (which i dont do anymore either).
For the simple reason that there's already money and attributable resources in place to help these people. By 'helping' people on the street all youre really doing is compounding their situations and making them far less likely to pursue adequate help through the proper channels.

That being said, if there was no welfare system in place, id eagerly give money/handouts to people on the street again as i used to.

And I'm sure that you'll note ....if we all use that same excuse for not helping, then ....yeah, you're right, no one gets helped. And with the excuse, "It's not my fault!"

Youre *not* helping anyone in the long term though, this is my whole point. Youre just creating the illusion of having helped someone and affording yourself some short term self-satisfaction.
Youre just over-simplifying incredibly complex social situations by atempting to invoke some kind of perceived pseudo-hypocrisy (as use'll).

You should do some checking before you make such claims! Check out the number of wealthy people in India ...then come back and make that same statement ...with a straight face!

Baron Max

Yeah and the (very few) wealthy people in india actually do help and employ vast numbers of indians. Which kind of ruins your whole argument in a round-about way.

 

[Baron Max]

For the simple reason that there's already money and attributable resources in place to help these people.

Yeah, by the liberal doo-gooders in government stealing from those who have it, and giving it to those who don't. ...and usually without their consent and/or blessings.

I know it's a difficult concept, but that money that the government hands out comes from the people ...it didn't grow on trees!

Yeah and the (very few) wealthy people in india actually do help and employ vast numbers of indians. Which kind of ruins your whole argument in a round-about way.

Got any reliable sources for that info? Or are you just saying that because it sounds good? Without substantial info and data, no, my argument is not ruined at all. The reason there's so many poor, destitute Indians is because the wealthy are not REQUIRED to give their money to help others ...as we are in the west.

Baron Max

 

[redarmy11]

Personally I'd rather have my taxes spent on people than on guns and bombs. But I'm funny that way.

Anyway, blame China. They were giving handouts to their farmers back when Columbus was but a twinkle in his great-great-great-great-great-great-great-grandfather's eye. In comparison to all this new-fangled laissez-faire economics, the idea that a state should support its poorest and its weakest would seem to have quite a long pedigree.

 

[heliocentric]

Yeah, by the liberal doo-gooders in government stealing from those who have it, and giving it to those who don't. ...and usually without their consent and/or blessings.

haha, are you really this naive? i can never work out if its all put-on to be honest.
A quick googling will reveal that plenty of right-wing conservatives both support and have helped implement the welfare state.
The liberal boogey-man youre constantly trying to take down doesnt even exist.

Got any reliable sources for that info? Or are you just saying that because it sounds good?

Google Mukesh Ambani, hes a conspicuous consumer if ever ive seen once, but hes creating thousands of jobs for indian people trying to make abit of bread.

Without substantial info and data, no, my argument is not ruined at all. The reason there's so many poor, destitute Indians is because the wealthy are not REQUIRED to give their money to help others ...as we are in the west.

Baron Max

Which was my entire argument.. :bugeye:
lack of good, efficient social welfare = shitloads of people begging on the street, this is what youd have to deal with day today without that social saftey net in place.
And i can garantee if that ever happened in the states youd be on here bleating about all the destitutes littering the sidewalks, id also be willing to bet youd expect private charities (those pesky do-gooders again) to magically sort it all out for you.