100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: Stand your ground Law should it be changed or reformed? | |
|---|---|
|
|
|
I understand there needs to be a way out for the poor that would be incentive enough. What about offering student financial aid and welfare as a package deal to those who want to become professional but can't afford to pay the rent? That would be a great incentive for people to get out of poverty. Everyone I know wants a college education and be able to pay rent at the same time, unfortunately many are unable and this keeps them from achieving anything. It's just an idea. There could be a welfare to business owner program as well. It should depend on the direction someone wants to go. If they don't want to do anything then I guess they should get on some anti depressants so they can stop wishing they were dead. I'm joking...most people want to do something in life. The ones who don't have mental problems or drug addiction problems, and they are a whole other category. [/quote Estelle, many people grew up poor and did not attend college. ( black and white) But they made a mark and name for themselves without the help of welfare or any financial aid... how???.. by WORKING HARD and working your way UP... from the BOTTOM. By working 2 or 3 jobs to make the rent until you established yourself. By determination and sacrifice.. that is how you do it Oh and I know all about growing up poor. as does my 3 brothers and 4 sisters... ( Dad died young, leaving Mom with 8 kids.. all under 16 yrs. old)...all successful in their respective fields. No welfare.. no financial aid.. We worked to get where we all are. your incentive... How about Pride Enough of this " someone has to do something for me B.S" YOU WANT IT... GO EARN IT. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Your idea to fix the system is to keep doing the same thing that we've been doing for decades that got us to this point. Why will it work this time? Because we will spend more money? The amount of money isn't the problem. The policies are the problem. Scrap them. Stop letting me crash on your couch. Throw my a$$ out, and make be responsible for myself. Stop giving me that free ride. I bet I'll figure out how to take care of myself, and I'll be better off because you threw me out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
and the kids?
yes, adults who don't have to don't have to do ANYTHING BUT look after themselves, I understand but the children who suffer along with the adults when they hit hard times, make that a bit less doable without some help |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That excuse has also been used for decades. Let's just throw more money at a failed system because some people are irresponsible. The easy answer, and somewhat harsh, is if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. But families, churches and charities take care of people more effectively and more efficiently than the government.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I think not a good message from people here. I guess it is time to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We finally agree!
But I'm still right!  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That excuse has also been used for decades. Let's just throw more money at a failed system because some people are irresponsible. The easy answer, and somewhat harsh, is if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. But families, churches and charities take care of people more effectively and more efficiently than the government. that's ridiculous actually, because it ignores the fact that children grow over a period of 18 years,, during which all types of things can happen that constitute 'hard times' whether you can afford them at one point doesn't GUARANTEE you will always be able to do it ,,,,,things change, that's reality and children shouldn't be left to suffer when those hard times hit their parents.. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That excuse has also been used for decades. Let's just throw more money at a failed system because some people are irresponsible. The easy answer, and somewhat harsh, is if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. But families, churches and charities take care of people more effectively and more efficiently than the government. that's ridiculous actually, because it ignores the fact that children grow over a period of 18 years,, during which all types of things can happen that constitute 'hard times' whether you can afford them at one point doesn't GUARANTEE you will always be able to do it ,,,,,things change, that's reality and children shouldn't be left to suffer when those hard times hit their parents.. Prior to the government "helping" people by encouraging them to remain on the dole churches, communities, charities, and families handled these issues more effectively and efficiently. Or did you intentionally overlook that part? More of the same policies will yield more of the same results. I'm not ok with sending the poor a message that they can't move up. Why are you? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One more thing. If I were black and my ancestors were enslaved by the ancestral government of this country, I would totally milk the welfare system for what it's worth. You say you are Christian so you believe in eye for an eye right? It's interesting you want to go back to 1913, or did you mean before 1865?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you would rather be poor and reliant on a government that, 150 years ago allowed the oppression of your ancestors than to rise above a system that now says, "you need us because you're incapable of taking care of yourself"? Wow. No wonder blacks are still disproportionately impoverished.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Tue 02/17/15 05:49 PM
|
|
That excuse has also been used for decades. Let's just throw more money at a failed system because some people are irresponsible. The easy answer, and somewhat harsh, is if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. But families, churches and charities take care of people more effectively and more efficiently than the government. that's ridiculous actually, because it ignores the fact that children grow over a period of 18 years,, during which all types of things can happen that constitute 'hard times' whether you can afford them at one point doesn't GUARANTEE you will always be able to do it ,,,,,things change, that's reality and children shouldn't be left to suffer when those hard times hit their parents.. Prior to the government "helping" people by encouraging them to remain on the dole churches, communities, charities, and families handled these issues more effectively and efficiently. Or did you intentionally overlook that part? More of the same policies will yield more of the same results. I'm not ok with sending the poor a message that they can't move up. Why are you? prior to the overwhelming need for help, families stayed together and MEN provided after the great depression, and the great wars, poverty rates became unable to be managed thru mere churches and charities the population grew quite a bit, families breaking up became more acceptable, the job industry changed , manufacturing took a great hit, technology and ecommerce grew,, and the times changed along with them so that what USED to work no longer was enough,,, it still isn't,, this isn't 1945 Im not ok with sending the poor the message that they should be grateful to be workhorse/slaves? Are you? I agree things can improve, but I don't agree that welfare is the problem. people will fall on hard times and need help, not all of them go to churches or have access to a charity that isn't already overwhelmed,,, the problem is about training and educating people about how to strive, and not just struggle and survive,,, about adapting the system to the changing needs of the population,,,, about encouraging the 'job makers' to pay decent wage for the time and efforts of honest people trying to survive,,, about re vamping the 'credit' system that almost mandates people take on debt to prove themselves worthy of decent home rates, loan rates, insurance rates,,, and any number of other things that are now standards in our culture,,, ..lots of improvements can be made,, ditching the help so many depend upon through the rough times is not one of them |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That excuse has also been used for decades. Let's just throw more money at a failed system because some people are irresponsible. The easy answer, and somewhat harsh, is if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. But families, churches and charities take care of people more effectively and more efficiently than the government. that's ridiculous actually, because it ignores the fact that children grow over a period of 18 years,, during which all types of things can happen that constitute 'hard times' whether you can afford them at one point doesn't GUARANTEE you will always be able to do it ,,,,,things change, that's reality and children shouldn't be left to suffer when those hard times hit their parents.. Prior to the government "helping" people by encouraging them to remain on the dole churches, communities, charities, and families handled these issues more effectively and efficiently. Or did you intentionally overlook that part? More of the same policies will yield more of the same results. I'm not ok with sending the poor a message that they can't move up. Why are you? prior to the overwhelming need for help, families stayed together and MEN provided after the great depression, and the great wars, poverty rates became unable to be managed thru mere churches and charities the population grew quite a bit, families breaking up became more acceptable, the job industry changed , manufacturing took a great hit, technology and ecommerce grew,, and the times changed along with them so that what USED to work no longer was enough,,, it still isn't,, this isn't 1945 Im not ok with sending the poor the message that they should be grateful to be workhorse/slaves? Are you? I agree things can improve, but I don't agree that welfare is the problem. people will fall on hard times and need help, not all of them go to churches or have access to a charity that isn't already overwhelmed,,, the problem is about training and educating people about how to strive, and not just struggle and survive,,, about adapting the system to the changing needs of the population,,,, about encouraging the 'job makers' to pay decent wage for the time and efforts of honest people trying to survive,,, about re vamping the 'credit' system that almost mandates people take on debt to prove themselves worthy of decent home rates, loan rates, insurance rates,,, and any number of other things that are now standards in our culture,,, ..lots of improvements can be made,, ditching the help so many depend upon through the rough times is not one of them Again, "you can't, so you need me." That's almost like an abusive marriage, is it not? Why do you support policies that have failed for decades? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One more thing. If I were black and my ancestors were enslaved by the ancestral government of this country, I would totally milk the welfare system for what it's worth. You say you are Christian so you believe in eye for an eye right? It's interesting you want to go back to 1913, or did you mean before 1865? Well, well, well someone finally comes clean...^^^A perfect example of poverty mentality.... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
So you would rather be poor and reliant on a government that, 150 years ago allowed the oppression of your ancestors than to rise above a system that now says, "you need us because you're incapable of taking care of yourself"? Wow. No wonder blacks are still disproportionately impoverished. there are three elements the struggling families with children deal with 1. needing money for the bills 2. needing to raise their kids' and/or 3. needing to hire someone else to raise the kids while they work to pay bills so, if the choice is between being poor and having someone else raise the kids while you work,, or being poor and home to raise the kids yourself I can totally understand the latter being tempting I prefer not to abandon my kids daily for a paycheck that still leaves me explaining why we don't have food or cant get some new clothes so they don't look like peasants at school Thankfully, I was blessed to finally find a real JOB with pay that can compensate for that balance. Not without plenty of others verbally belittling me for not just accepting ANYTHING that was available. I have a plan, it doesn't involve lining someones pockets while I continue to struggle and pinch my own the first part of the plan, a DECENT PAYING JOB is achieved. I prefer to find a way to be my own boss, so I can be home AND make the money, in lieu of a man that will take on at least half of the two person job,,, that second part of my plan is in the works but thank Goodness I did have a 'welfare' system for that time that I didn't have the funds, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
msharmony
on
Tue 02/17/15 06:12 PM
|
|
That excuse has also been used for decades. Let's just throw more money at a failed system because some people are irresponsible. The easy answer, and somewhat harsh, is if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. But families, churches and charities take care of people more effectively and more efficiently than the government. that's ridiculous actually, because it ignores the fact that children grow over a period of 18 years,, during which all types of things can happen that constitute 'hard times' whether you can afford them at one point doesn't GUARANTEE you will always be able to do it ,,,,,things change, that's reality and children shouldn't be left to suffer when those hard times hit their parents.. Prior to the government "helping" people by encouraging them to remain on the dole churches, communities, charities, and families handled these issues more effectively and efficiently. Or did you intentionally overlook that part? More of the same policies will yield more of the same results. I'm not ok with sending the poor a message that they can't move up. Why are you? prior to the overwhelming need for help, families stayed together and MEN provided after the great depression, and the great wars, poverty rates became unable to be managed thru mere churches and charities the population grew quite a bit, families breaking up became more acceptable, the job industry changed , manufacturing took a great hit, technology and ecommerce grew,, and the times changed along with them so that what USED to work no longer was enough,,, it still isn't,, this isn't 1945 Im not ok with sending the poor the message that they should be grateful to be workhorse/slaves? Are you? I agree things can improve, but I don't agree that welfare is the problem. people will fall on hard times and need help, not all of them go to churches or have access to a charity that isn't already overwhelmed,,, the problem is about training and educating people about how to strive, and not just struggle and survive,,, about adapting the system to the changing needs of the population,,,, about encouraging the 'job makers' to pay decent wage for the time and efforts of honest people trying to survive,,, about re vamping the 'credit' system that almost mandates people take on debt to prove themselves worthy of decent home rates, loan rates, insurance rates,,, and any number of other things that are now standards in our culture,,, ..lots of improvements can be made,, ditching the help so many depend upon through the rough times is not one of them Again, "you can't, so you need me." That's almost like an abusive marriage, is it not? Why do you support policies that have failed for decades? according to whom have they failed? if the economy wasn't 'failing' families which need decent wages and opportunities, welfare could work even better assistance programs keep millions off the streets and with food in their bellies, a good portion of them children and elderly and disabled why cant you understand that its human to 'need' to need some help sometime,, there is no shame in it and it has nothing to do with 'can't' ? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That excuse has also been used for decades. Let's just throw more money at a failed system because some people are irresponsible. The easy answer, and somewhat harsh, is if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. But families, churches and charities take care of people more effectively and more efficiently than the government. that's ridiculous actually, because it ignores the fact that children grow over a period of 18 years,, during which all types of things can happen that constitute 'hard times' whether you can afford them at one point doesn't GUARANTEE you will always be able to do it ,,,,,things change, that's reality and children shouldn't be left to suffer when those hard times hit their parents.. Prior to the government "helping" people by encouraging them to remain on the dole churches, communities, charities, and families handled these issues more effectively and efficiently. Or did you intentionally overlook that part? More of the same policies will yield more of the same results. I'm not ok with sending the poor a message that they can't move up. Why are you? prior to the overwhelming need for help, families stayed together and MEN provided after the great depression, and the great wars, poverty rates became unable to be managed thru mere churches and charities the population grew quite a bit, families breaking up became more acceptable, the job industry changed , manufacturing took a great hit, technology and ecommerce grew,, and the times changed along with them so that what USED to work no longer was enough,,, it still isn't,, this isn't 1945 Im not ok with sending the poor the message that they should be grateful to be workhorse/slaves? Are you? I agree things can improve, but I don't agree that welfare is the problem. people will fall on hard times and need help, not all of them go to churches or have access to a charity that isn't already overwhelmed,,, the problem is about training and educating people about how to strive, and not just struggle and survive,,, about adapting the system to the changing needs of the population,,,, about encouraging the 'job makers' to pay decent wage for the time and efforts of honest people trying to survive,,, about re vamping the 'credit' system that almost mandates people take on debt to prove themselves worthy of decent home rates, loan rates, insurance rates,,, and any number of other things that are now standards in our culture,,, ..lots of improvements can be made,, ditching the help so many depend upon through the rough times is not one of them Again, "you can't, so you need me." That's almost like an abusive marriage, is it not? Why do you support policies that have failed for decades? according to whom have they failed? if the economy wasn't 'failing' families which need decent wages and opportunities, welfare could work even better assistance programs keep millions off the streets and with food in their bellies, a good portion of them children and elderly why cant you understand that its human to 'need' to need some help sometime,, there is no shame in it and it has nothing to do with 'can't' ? According to the fact that we have a growing number of people ON the system instead of getting OFF the system! But more money will make a bad idea good, I suppose. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That excuse has also been used for decades. Let's just throw more money at a failed system because some people are irresponsible. The easy answer, and somewhat harsh, is if you can't feed 'em, don't breed 'em. But families, churches and charities take care of people more effectively and more efficiently than the government. that's ridiculous actually, because it ignores the fact that children grow over a period of 18 years,, during which all types of things can happen that constitute 'hard times' whether you can afford them at one point doesn't GUARANTEE you will always be able to do it ,,,,,things change, that's reality and children shouldn't be left to suffer when those hard times hit their parents.. Prior to the government "helping" people by encouraging them to remain on the dole churches, communities, charities, and families handled these issues more effectively and efficiently. Or did you intentionally overlook that part? More of the same policies will yield more of the same results. I'm not ok with sending the poor a message that they can't move up. Why are you? prior to the overwhelming need for help, families stayed together and MEN provided after the great depression, and the great wars, poverty rates became unable to be managed thru mere churches and charities the population grew quite a bit, families breaking up became more acceptable, the job industry changed , manufacturing took a great hit, technology and ecommerce grew,, and the times changed along with them so that what USED to work no longer was enough,,, it still isn't,, this isn't 1945 Im not ok with sending the poor the message that they should be grateful to be workhorse/slaves? Are you? I agree things can improve, but I don't agree that welfare is the problem. people will fall on hard times and need help, not all of them go to churches or have access to a charity that isn't already overwhelmed,,, the problem is about training and educating people about how to strive, and not just struggle and survive,,, about adapting the system to the changing needs of the population,,,, about encouraging the 'job makers' to pay decent wage for the time and efforts of honest people trying to survive,,, about re vamping the 'credit' system that almost mandates people take on debt to prove themselves worthy of decent home rates, loan rates, insurance rates,,, and any number of other things that are now standards in our culture,,, ..lots of improvements can be made,, ditching the help so many depend upon through the rough times is not one of them Again, "you can't, so you need me." That's almost like an abusive marriage, is it not? Why do you support policies that have failed for decades? according to whom have they failed? if the economy wasn't 'failing' families which need decent wages and opportunities, welfare could work even better assistance programs keep millions off the streets and with food in their bellies, a good portion of them children and elderly why cant you understand that its human to 'need' to need some help sometime,, there is no shame in it and it has nothing to do with 'can't' ? According to the fact that we have a growing number of people ON the system instead of getting OFF the system! But more money will make a bad idea good, I suppose.
a better economy will make a good idea better when there is a depression or recession, SURPRISE< more people will need more help however , most on welfare(the types people complain about , mainly aid to family and stamps for food), are not on longer than 3-5 years,,, so it is TEMPORARY for when people have hard times,, and that's not a dent on character when it happens most don't enjoy trying to feed 4 people on 300 a month or pay their expenses for a family of 4 with another 300 on a card its a temporary means until they get back on their feet everyone needs some help sometimes,,, |
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
ALBYAK
on
Tue 02/17/15 06:20 PM
|
|
I totally believe in welfare and helping retrain able bodied people who need it for a short period of time 1 to 4 years but then let the freeloaders starve if they refuse to find work. Where we have really messed up it turning the truly needy mental patient out on the streets to survive on their own and sometimes prey on us. They commit crime after crime on us and the government does nothing because they have no money to pay fines....today we only enforce laws that make the politicians friends more money by making the government more money to give them. Help those that really need help and screwdriver the freeloaders!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I totally believe in welfare and helping retrain able bodied people who need it for a short period of time 1 to 4 years but then let the freeloaders starve if they refuse to find work. Where we have really messed up it turning the truly needy mental patient out on the streets to survive on their own and sometimes prey on us. They commit crime after crime on us and the government does nothing because they have no money to pay fines....today we have only enforce laws that make the politicians friends more money by making the government more money to give them. Help those that really need help and screwdriver the freeloaders! best statement here,,,, 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 this was a stand your ground/treyvon martin thread,,,
|
|
|
|
|
