FEMA rejects aid claims on homes battered by tornado

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

I am fully willing to promote government assistance policy that obligates the recipients to work to earn it.

I am against that...sort of. I think welfare should be ended, which would accomplish exactly what you advocate, obligate people to work to earn money. Why does the check need to come from the government?

[Zero Sum 305]

Because we've already covered the part about alternate and private funds not being available for X and Y reason.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Because we've already covered the part about alternate and private funds not being available for X and Y reason.

where? Please be specific.

Why on earth would someone that supports a "program" of people working for money (jobs) even think of having the government running it?

If you support people being dependent on government, then just go with welfare and say so. Be proud of your oppression! If, on the other hand you really "fully support..." having people earn their money, then say that.

"supporting a program of government assitance that requires people to work for benefits" is just mumbly mouthed trash talk and a defelction to continue government dependency. The two are mutually exclusive. Working "for your benefits" negates any need for "government assistance" (OH HOLY #######! Did you realize you just suggested people should be independent?)

[slim 1,533]

Yes, I have- that movie sort of exemplifies what happens when more people like you are born.

Burn!

Actually, if you pay attention to the kind of ideas I've mentioned before (options, options) you perhaps wouldn't have your panties in a wad.

Yes, because your "common sense" approaches of having achievers aid underachievers to compensate for inadequacies of government workers makes perfect sense on a larger scale. Ideas like that will probably save this country in no time flat!

Furthermore, to further appease your anger, I am fully willing to promote government assistance policy that obligates the recipients to work to earn it. I am sure though that the Tea nut in you might also have a problem with that too.

There should be no federal government assistance policy.

No, it is not. Paying taxes isn't totalitarian. That's the sort of reasoning the Unambomber put about in his batshit manifesto.

Paying taxes to a federal government is totalitarian.

This statement is meaningless and slightly hysterical. Disaster relief is bringing down the economy? Jesus Slim - the economy doesn't recover by leaving people in devastated communities destitute without homes, jobs or infrastructure. You have to spend some money to make money.

Actually, you don't have to spend money to make money. If you don't spend any money at all, people will figure it out for themseleves. Like illegal immigration, if there's no money there to be made... they'll go elsewhere.

The thing many fail to accept with the economy is the private sector is extremely efficient at dealing with it's own problems. Businesses that don't do good business fail and go away. Businesses that do well thrive. The problem we've run into recently is folks have intertwined the role of government into big business by regulating certain industries and making them "too big to fail." When a company fails and pulls out of a town, the town either moves on or comes up with different ways to make money.

What we see now is a company pulls out and the federal government pays people to stay. Just like paying people in Africa to live in the middle of the desert, or paying people in urban areas to watch cable and reproduce, it doesn't make sense financially yet we justify morally by saying, "we have to since they need our help." If we didn't help them, what would they do?

The idea that people are "fvcked" if the federal government is not there to "do it for them" is not only ridiculous and insulting, it demostrates a complete lack of any idea of how to get things done. I am pleased not to be in that crowd.

Here, here!

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

No slim, paying taxes is not Totalitarian.

And no, you can't make money if your infrastructure is fvcked. Not unless your economy relies on a currency of sea shells.

Edited June 17, 2011 by fishdude

[slim 1,533]

No slim, paying taxes is not Totalitarian.

And no, you can't make money if your infrastructure is fvcked. Not unless your economy relies on a currency of sea shells.

Paying taxes to a federal government is. Paying local or state taxes I completely understand. The fed, not so much.

In places where infrastructure has been fvcked, many people have been very successful at making money. Contractors and those working on rebuilding come to mind really quickly. Those working with the government ALWAYS make money.

Do away with the government assistance and the local money will stay in the local community.

[Zero Sum 305]

where? Please be specific.

Why on earth would someone that supports a "program" of people working for money (jobs) even think of having the government running it?

If you support people being dependent on government, then just go with welfare and say so. Be proud of your oppression! If, on the other hand you really "fully support..." having people earn their money, then say that.

"supporting a program of government assitance that requires people to work for benefits" is just mumbly mouthed trash talk and a defelction to continue government dependency. The two are mutually exclusive. Working "for your benefits" negates any need for "government assistance" (OH HOLY #######! Did you realize you just suggested people should be independent?)

Try to realize you've basically ignored < 6 pages of posts- independent of slim's whining about having to pay the national government taxes to help others in need. Try to read up some more before obviously f*cking up on the reading part and what I favor or not in the prior posts.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

You do not live in a Totalitarian state. If anything, the state you live in is denial.

[slim 1,533]

Try to realize you've basically ignored < 6 pages of posts- independent of slim's whining about having to pay the national government taxes to help others in need. Try to read up some more before obviously f*cking up on the reading part and what I favor or not in the prior posts.

Yeah Gary, if you disagree you have a reading and/or comprehension problem.

Keep it up, and you may end up being called ignorant, stupid, fascist, etc. Either agree or go home!

You do not live in a Totalitarian state. If anything, the state you live in is denial.

That's a nice play on words there but I'm pretty sure if I stop paying taxes someone from the government will come to my house and eventually haul me off to jail.

How is that not totalitarian?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Paying taxes to a federal government is. Paying local or state taxes I completely understand. The fed, not so much.

In places where infrastructure has been fvcked, many people have been very successful at making money. Contractors and those working on rebuilding come to mind really quickly. Those working with the government ALWAYS make money.

Do away with the government assistance and the local money will stay in the local community.

[Zero Sum 305]

Yeah Gary, if you disagree you have a reading and/or comprehension problem.

Keep it up, and you may end up being called ignorant, stupid, fascist, etc. Either agree or go home!

That's a nice play on words there but I'm pretty sure if I stop paying taxes someone from the government will come to my house and eventually haul me off to jail.

How is that not totalitarian?

We can disagree and we can also observe the deficiencies of others when appropriate and warranted.

[Zero Sum 305]

For example, its no surprise you, Gary, or Why Me go off on things they way you do.

Don't like to pay Uncle Sam taxes? Perfectly respectable in my opinion.

Beg for legislation that can opt you out of each and every outlay of tax revenue- and I do mean each and every one. If you don't like living in such a version of civilization, then find your own country to run the way you see fit. You have the freedom to do that.

[slim 1,533]

We can disagree and we can also observe the deficiencies of others when appropriate and warranted.

Deficiencies? When you disagree with someone are they now deficient too?

And what is "appropriate and warranted" in P&R? Whatever you (or the majority) say?

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

We can disagree and we can also observe the deficiencies of others when appropriate and warranted.

It's one thing to be a troll, and it's another to be a condescending antagonistic troll who results to insults to anyone that doesn't agree with them.

[slim 1,533]

Beg for legislation

I will never beg for legislation. What I will do is get legislation repealled.