No one is born with the U.S. owing them a job. There will always be a middle class. There will always be one lower and one higher.
Most people can learn a trade or get an education if they want to. If they do not put out an effort we should not be forced to reward their laziness with a lifetime of support. We especially should not have to pay to raise any children they choose to have.

There should be conditions for a person to be eligible for govt. subsidies. There should be a time limit for all benefits. Drug tests should be done just like any job.

The problem we have now is many people think the U.S. should support them for life. Their kids are brought up thinking we should support them also. We have several generations who live on the govt. dole.
The working people cannot continue supporting these people who refuse to work. We, the taxpayers, do not owe them a cent.

 

I do not necessarily disagree with you. I am disagreeing with the Republican assertion that anyone who finishes high school, obeys the law, takes a minimum wage job, and does not have illegitimate children will not be poor.

In order to believe that one has to have a very restricted idea of what poverty is.

 

*Deep Breath*

Bear with me. This involves research so it will take me a minute to refute the misconceptions here.

Actually I do not!

There were two people who deserve the credit for founding the Republican Party.

Horace Greeley--Editor of the New York Tribune

By the 1850's there was significant momentum built of anti-slavery sentiment. The only problem was that it was still fractured. There was no clear message, and all of the politicians that shared that sentiment was not under one umbrella. They were spread out amongst several. Greeley was one of the men to help change that.

He was able to successfully use the Tribune to fight against the extension of slave power and he did it so effectively that it became the leading newspaper in which opposed slavery openly. In the summer of 1862 he wrote the famous editorial "The Prayer of Twenty Millions," which demanded a more aggressive attack on the Confederacy and faster Emancipation of slaves.

I can find nothing to suggest that he owned slaves.

Salmon P Chase--Lawyer in Cincinnati Ohio

Was widely known for his work on behalf of runaway slaves and the white people that helped them. He became Lincolns Secretary of Treasury.

He also did not own slaves.

Charles Sumner--Academic Lawyer

Leader of Antislavery forces in Massachusetts and of the "Radical Republicans" in the United States Senate. He worked vigorously to destroy the confederacy, and free all slaves. During Reconstruction he fought to minimize the power of confederates and guarantee equal rights to the Freedman.

In 1856 S. Caroline Congressman (D) Preston Brooks nearly killed Sumner on the senate floor after Sumner delivered an intense "anti-slavery" speech called the "Crime Against Kansas."

In 1865-1871 Sumner fought hard to provide equal civil and voting rights for the Freedmen on the grounds that "Consent of the Governed" was a basic principle of "American Republicanism."

I can find nothing to support your claim that this Republican owned slaves.

I did not just fart a huge and gaseous fart and then check the skid mark in my underwear and give an interpretation of what I saw there when I said that the formation of the republican party was based on "antislavery" That was the very ideal in which different politicians were able to come together as a rallying point and a common interest in which they could believe and fight for. It was the very reason in which they formed the party, and even though I haven't researched every single member of the time, so far I have not found a single one of those founding republicans in which were "rich slave owners." That is just something that democrats say to throw people off.

The truth is that the Democrats can lay no claim on the emancipation of slaves. They played no role in that whatsoever but that doesn't stop the Dems from doing everything they can from discouraging others from seeing the truth in that matter.

You are correct in this statement. He did not start the Republican party. He was the first President of the Republican Party and he did switch from Whig to Republican which like I said before many people did because the antislavery movement was fractured among several parties.

Check your records. Many of the men in these earliest stages of the Republican party had long histories of fighting against slavers. This was not just a matter of convenience for them to line their pockets with gold. They fought long hard and passionately against the very idea of slavery for the sole reason that they believed that slavery was wrong. Read Sumner's speech against slaver and the account of his beating. He was nearly killed for what he believed right on the senate floor by a democrat for espousing his beliefs and for fighting for them.

I would also ask you kind Ridgerunning sir... Can you name me any Democrats during this era that fought for the Emancipation of Slaves? I have heard other Democrats and Liberals Deny Lincoln the credit for his part in helping them gain their freedom, but can you name me a Democratic president that is more responsible than Lincoln?

Also you say that the Republicans were just trying to stop Kansas and Nebraska from being able to offer more competition for agriculture and timber but what you ignore is that you are suggesting that it was proper and morally superior to argue that allowing men to be slaves in those states would somehow be better!!!

Yes the fight did begin by trying to stop slavery from being allowed in those newly acquired territories but you don't win these kinds of fights all at once. You have to start somewhere. Is it easier to take away a law and a practice that is already in effect in a territory or is it easier to prevent a newly acquired state from making the same mistake that the others have made?

This is more left balogne. On the one hand they want cheaper gas prices, but on the other they fight tooth and nail to keep us from drilling for more oil. Make up your minds would ya! Jeesh.

The funniest thing about that is that they say they are so concerned about the environment and that's the reason that they don't want us drilling more oil and yet their fight against us doing the drilling causes other countries on the planet to do the drilling instead. These countries typically do not care as much about the environment. They do not try as hard as we do to drill in environmentally safe ways so in essence letting them do all of the drilling is actually worse for the environment than if we did it ourselves. Go Green!

But then when the subject of gas prices come up the republicans are the ones at fault. You guys crack me up!

 

They will not stay poor as they will get a better job or move up in the company. A minimum wage job is an entry level position, not a career.

 

As an added note to this utterly retarded comment. (I'm sorry Ridge, but it really is an ignorant comment).

The dems are always saying these kinds of things about how the republicans want to keep the poor people down and kick them while they are in the gutter. They also say the Democrats want to tax the rich and not the poor but this is another false statement.

Let's take the cigarrette tax for example.

Who smokes more? Rich people or poor people?

New York is leading the charge on the cigarette tax. New york is also one of the most liberal states with the most liberal leadership. A pack of cigarettes in New York is $12. This my friends is a tax specifically targeted on poor people. And it is not done by the Republicans.

The same thing can be said for the lottery. We use the excuse that it is "for the schools," but again. This is nothing more than another tax on the poor and again the lottery charge is led by the Dems and not the republicans.

 

I have never heard a republican say this. Can you support this claim?

 

Why I'm calling out civil rights hustlers Sharpton and Dyson

I have read this messages a number of times stated by a number of Republicans, including David Brooks, a columnist on The New York Times.

Juan Williams is perhaps most famous for saying this in his book Enough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America - and What We Can Do About It.

This is what he said on a July 30, 2013 edition of Fox News Channel's "The Five"

------

1. Stay in school and graduate from the highest level of school

2. Take a job and hold it, no matter what job,

3. Marry after you have finished your education

4. Don’t have children until you are at least 21-years-old and married
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013...out-civil-rights-hustlers-sharpton-and-dyson/

------

Now I am not saying that this is bad advice. What I am saying is that this advice will not get one out of the working poor unless one has a reasonably high IQ. A few lucky breaks along the way help too.

I am defining "working poor" as making less than twice minimum wage with no benefits.

During the 1950's Juan Williams' advice would have gotten a poor person into the lower middle class. The economy has changed since then.

Liberals usually pretend that The Bell Curve has been "decisively refuted" because they think it justifies a high degree of economic inequality.

Conservatives often pretend the same thing, because The Bell Curve implicitly denies that there is very much moral significance to the distribution of wealth and income.

In his more recent book Coming Apart: The State of White America, 1960-2010 Charles Murray has documented the increase in social pathology among white blue collar workers. When people lose hope for the future they often seek refuge in temporary and dysfunctional pleasures in the present.

 

A minimum wage job is frequently a dead end job that leads no where but the grave yard if one can afford a grave.

 

john how many refineries have you ever worked in or around?
in this area that i live in there are literaly tens of thousands that can and will tell you that they are told to shut down individual protions because they are producing too much fuel
all that does is drive the costs up when they shut down
i have friends out west that work on solar and wind electrical farms that are told to slow their production down to let the coal and nuclear plants take the load

does that sound like a winning plan?

also you make the same mistakes all republicans do where it concerns where i stand, you believe that i must be a democrat and like them you could not be further from reality
i am niether and both at the same time

i do not understand why we need to import oil while we allow other nations to drill in our waters and take the resource back to their nations just to sell it back to us at a profit
i also do not understand how it is that a national resource is owned by a comapny and not the whole of the nation


and saying the lottery is a tax on the poor is a blatantly false thought because there is noone forcing them to buy tickets or face a penalty

 

Shooter wonders where these people are getting their "Facts" about what the parties stand for.

Here is what the dummycrats and publicans say they stand for.

http://www.democrats.org/democratic-national-platform

http://www.gop.com/2012-republican-platform_home/

Regardless of what the parties say they stand for, and what they do, Shooter does know that working hard and living a moral life leads to success.

He had many minimum wage, part time jobs. Mainly while he was in school. What he learned from his jobs was what employers expected of employees, the problems small business owners face every day, how to be productive. he didn't earn enough money to be "successful" or move out of the lowest wage earning class. He did learn something from every job he had, and that knowledge allowed him to get better jobs.

His experiences led to two things;
A clear idea of what he wanted
A path to get there

Today, nearing retirement, he has been successful. He is happy with his career, he makes good money, he has contributed to his community and society at large. He has raised a family. His children are productive members of society.

Those who say one cannot get ahead with hard work and determination are liars. They are naysayers. They want the government to provide everything, and for the individual to be responsible for nothing.

For them Shooter has little but contempt. How dare they belittle anyone willing to try and succeed, rather than wait for some government somewhere to provide for them.

 

OI! DL! Have you actually read Coming Apart?? Cause, we know you never read the Bell Curve, even though you cite it like it was the bible.

You need to present your "facts and Logic" in support of your contention that it takes more than hard work to move into the middle class, that it takes a reasonably high IQ and a few lucky breaks.

Or, you need to state that it is only your opinion.

Cause I'm telling you, in real life, I see people every day who are moving into the middle class (and beyond) from low wage entry level jobs. I'm seeing people manage, in spite of the shitty economy, to improve their lot in life.

I'm seeing people succeed in spite of government interference, in spite of naysayers like you, and in spite of a shitty economy.

And they're doing it mainly with hard work.

So, DL; put up or put a cap on it.

 

And I have seen the opposite.

 

A minimum wage job is a starting point. It usually don't take any or little training or experience. It doesn't take much effort to get one. As people gain experience and knowledge they can advance to a better paying job. A person cannot expect to start at the top. Millions of people have started at minimum wage or less jobs and advanced to a much higher paying job.
There are many people with an IQ in double digets who have taken the time to learn a trade and advance to a good paying job. They didn't do that by sitting on their ass and complaining. It takes an effort. If a person does not want to put in the effort to rise above minium wage they do not deserve a better paying job.

 

Don't worry I know. If he could dispute the arguments he would. Instead he opted for a cop out "You don't live here, how would you know ?"

I don't live on the moon either, but I know you need a spacesuit if you fancy a stroll.

 

Rather than debate it with you I will point out it is an American problem and it will be Americans who have to live with it or solve it. I enjoy people from all over the globe but not when they jump into our business.

 

I don't doubt this one bit. You are correct in saying that I don't live near nor work in the oil industry. I don't look good coated in oil residue.

I don't have to in order to understand how industry in general works. You have a certain amount of orders to fill and you fill them. When the orders are full you stop production. That's how it always works.

That doesn't change the truth in my statement at all though. If you increase the amount of players in the game. Add to the degree of competition, the price goes down. That's also how it works.

The cost is derived on a larger scale than that. It is not just decided from one company in one region.

I don't know. You show know evidence nor do you provide motivations. You simply state a hypothetical friend as evidence of some huge conspiracy. I don't buy into conspiracies that easily.

I am glad to hear this. I am skeptical of all politicians. I prefer politicians that act and think based on core beliefs and are willing to make decisions on those beliefs despite the political backlash that they may receive. This is why I personally respect the decisions of people like Abraham Lincoln. What he did was not necessarily the most popular thing he could have done and it ended up costing him his life. I wish we had more independent thinkers in washington. It is also the only reason I responded to this thread at all. Rick o shay degraded the only independent thinkers that we have in the republican party. You may not agree with the ideas of the "tea Party" but they act based on their beliefs and not on the whims of others.

Are you taking the reference here literally? I did not mean that it was a tax in a legal sense. I get that they have a choice but I also get that this is a manipulation of our politicians on the rationality of the poor. Many poor people feel trapped. Like they don't have a hope for the future. I see these people every day clinging to the lottery like it is their last line of defense in a cruel world and my heart goes out to them because the chances that they will ever win an amount of money significant enough to change their lives is so slim that it will just never happen. The worst part is that even if it does it won't be the same thing if they had earned the money on their own. Having large sums of money drop into your lap doesn't change the way that you view yourself in the mirror. Only earning money based on your own efforts can do that.

The lottery can never bring you happiness.

 

Fine have it your way, but somehow I think if we were in agreement, you would welcome my endorsement in your point of view, regardless of my nationality. But because our opinions are opposing you are choosing to not to engage.

 

Is this a joke?

 

The health care bill that some people are so proud of don't seem to be doing that well.
This morning on the local news it was reported that 35 people have signed up for it in the state I live in. That isn't 35,000 or 3,500, or even 350. Thirty five total.

 

As the President has stated it is a mess do to the website. They have brought in more programmers to fix it. Never fear it will be 35,000 or more when they get the site fixed.