I'm afraid of Americans

Page 3 of 3 First 123

  1. Quote Originally Posted by AnabolicFrenz View Post
    The top 1% pay 39% of all federal taxes, the top 25% pay about 86%, and the top 50% pay 97%.

    The majority of the poor here stay poor cause it is easy for them. If they get everything for free anyway why work for it. If you have found a way to make money, started a business, worked your way up, whatever, why should you be punished so that someone who has not been able to accomplish what you did can live better?

    apparently you've never been poor, or haven't had any experience with the welfare system, but I know in my state, state assistance leaves you well below the poverty line if you don't have a job, and if you do have a full-time job, your benefits are cut and you end up in the same place. maybe if we gave people an incentive to acquire sustainable income rather than penalizing them for it, the poor wouldn't want to "stay poor" because it's easier.

  2. Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by jgassen15 View Post
    apparently you've never been poor, or haven't had any experience with the welfare system, but I know in my state, state assistance leaves you well below the poverty line if you don't have a job, and if you do have a full-time job, your benefits are cut and you end up in the same place. maybe if we gave people an incentive to acquire sustainable income rather than penalizing them for it, the poor wouldn't want to "stay poor" because it's easier.
    Or if we stopped giving them the handouts in the first place, and they'd be homeless and starve to death unless they got off their lazy asses and did something. Maybe that would motivate them. You'd think homelessness and starvation would be motivational wouldn't you?
    Animis Rep
    facebook.com/xAnimis
    animis.org/forum
    •   
       


  3. Yeah, the good ole USA has just got it all bass ackwards (sarcasm disclaimer). Europe is where it's at. We should take better notes.

    Muliculturism has Failed

  4. Quote Originally Posted by diablosho View Post
    EXACTLY! If we keep demonizing corporations, we will all end up unemployed CONSUMERS, while other countries will have BOOMING economies. Government is the problem, not companies.
    End up? I thought that was what was going on now. We live in a country in which Lady Gaga is one of the most influential women. Revolutionary France condemned and were outraged by the fact Marie Antoinette would wear fancy hair hats and buy pretty kittens while people were unemployed and starving (obviously a more dire situation than we are in now), but we have people sitting on their asses at home on state assistance with a full stack of People magazines wondering how they could get Kim Kardashian's new fragrance line or gawking at how cool Jay Leno's new mutil-million dollar ranch is that he needs to store is chin at. Consumerism drives capitalism.

  5. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Or if we stopped giving them the handouts in the first place, and they'd be homeless and starve to death unless they got off their lazy asses and did something. Maybe that would motivate them. You'd think homelessness and starvation would be motivational wouldn't you?
    motivate them to do what? Get a job at McDonald's at minimum wage full-time then still make car payments, rent, insurance, etc.?

  6. Quote Originally Posted by jgassen15 View Post
    motivate them to do what? Get a job at McDonald's at minimum wage full-time then still make car payments, rent, insurance, etc.?
    Who says "everyone" has to own a car?
  7. Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by jgassen15 View Post
    motivate them to do what? Get a job at McDonald's at minimum wage full-time then still make car payments, rent, insurance, etc.?
    Please read the constitution and bill of rights. It's all about what the government won't do to interfere with your life, not what the government owes you. Car payments? Maybe living inside your means is a better option, or not having children you can't afford to feed.
    Animis Rep
    facebook.com/xAnimis
    animis.org/forum

  8. and you're right, allowing people to starve has payed great dividends to governments in the past... although it's hard to gauge the poverty line in the U.S., roughly 40 million people is a lot to piss off. And does that apply to the mentally ill homeless(20-40%)? I guess we could just take their babies and nuke them, that'd be more efficient. Hell, stick 'em in Arizona, two birds/one stone.

  9. Quote Originally Posted by EasyEJL View Post
    Please read the constitution and bill of rights. It's all about what the government won't do to interfere with your life, not what the government owes you. Car payments? Maybe living inside your means is a better option, or not having children you can't afford to feed.
    Wow, if that's all the Constitution and Bill of Rights entail, I'm surprised we don't have more pissed off people in this country. I wish the FDA would read the Constitution so that I could buy any chemical I want to put in my body. I do second your stance on having children you can't feed. One slip-up is understandable, like 10 is a little redundant.
  10. Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by jgassen15 View Post
    Wow, if that's all the Constitution and Bill of Rights entail, I'm surprised we don't have more pissed off people in this country. I wish the FDA would read the Constitution so that I could buy any chemical I want to put in my body. I do second your stance on having children you can't feed. One slip-up is understandable, like 10 is a little redundant.
    birthrate per 1000 women on welfare is 3x the birthrate per 1000 women not on welfare. You create a serf class, and they remain that, and live that way indefinitely. Remove that prop, and they'll be forced to do things differently, or die. Its unfair that they outbreed the rest of the population, and then ignore the children to raise useless uneducated losers like themselves.
    Animis Rep
    facebook.com/xAnimis
    animis.org/forum
    •   
       


  11. Finding an effective means to control that birthrate is hard though. You could just put birth control in the water, but I know if I grew bitch tits I'd be pissed. Plus wouldn't that be one of those government infringements you were telling me to read about in that Constitution deal. Simply removing benefits would also cause those children to suffer who didn't ask to be raises in a colony of useless, unedcutated, bunnies.
  12. Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar

    Quote Originally Posted by jgassen15 View Post
    Finding an effective means to control that birthrate is hard though. You could just put birth control in the water, but I know if I grew bitch tits I'd be pissed. Plus wouldn't that be one of those government infringements you were telling me to read about in that Constitution deal. Simply removing benefits would also cause those children to suffer who didn't ask to be raises in a colony of useless, unedcutated, bunnies.
    So the children suffer, some starve and die. It means the next generation of useless slugs leeching off society will be smaller. I don't see the problem there.
    Animis Rep
    facebook.com/xAnimis
    animis.org/forum

  13. Here's the solution. If you are on government assistance, you can no longer vote. PERIOD! I have had enough of people taking my money, and then they tell me I owe them more! I'll give you what I think you deserve.

  14. And anybody that says you can't make it in society anymore once you become homeless is blind. There are plenty of people that have come back. Is it hard. Yep. Life IS hard, and the only way to change that fact is to RUIN everyone else's lives.

  15. Man...this thread needs a title change to: The thread with the most gross generalizations ever!

    sorry but it needed to be said

  16. Quote Originally Posted by diablosho View Post
    Here's the solution. If you are on government assistance, you can no longer vote. PERIOD! I have had enough of people taking my money, and then they tell me I owe them more! I'll give you what I think you deserve.
    But you have no problem with the government taking your money for friviolous spending? Or the funding of pharmaceutical companies that end up putting out drugs like Vioxx, that kill people? Do you even know how much of your taxes go to social programs? What about the fact that half as much money that is spent on social programs goes just towards the INTEREST on national debt. And you must have been homeless considering your expertise on the subject. In my opinion you are oversimplifying the problem in using people on government assistance as a scapegoat. Realistically, I don't think a whole lot of people on government assistance vote anyway, and even if they do, you are seriously overestimating the power of your vote.

  17. Quote Originally Posted by jgassen15 View Post
    But you have no problem with the government taking your money for friviolous spending? Or the funding of pharmaceutical companies that end up putting out drugs like Vioxx, that kill people? Do you even know how much of your taxes go to social programs? What about the fact that half as much money that is spent on social programs goes just towards the INTEREST on national debt. And you must have been homeless considering your expertise on the subject. In my opinion you are oversimplifying the problem in using people on government assistance as a scapegoat. Realistically, I don't think a whole lot of people on government assistance vote anyway, and even if they do, you are seriously overestimating the power of your vote.
    Oh God, this topic again....Ugghh...look. I have a HUGE problem with the government taking ANY of my money, unless it is going towards firefighters, police, or military. **** the IRS, **** welfare, **** medicare, **** ALL of that ****. I just don't care. The reason healtchare is so expensive is BECAUSE of medicare. Since the government is paying (and they really do NOT look at prices), the doctors/pharms charge more. But since it is illegal to charge more for one group than another, they increase the cost for us as well, which increases the cost of our health insurance. I am MORE than willing to help people that CANNOT help themselves, but that is not the case here. And, our government does not fund pharmaceutical companies. They may give grants for studies and what not, but to the best of my recollection, our government has yet to purchase a pharmaceutical company.

    And, since I'm busy doing homework, I don't have too much time to find official statistics, but here's some stats from usgovernmentspending.com: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...et_2010_4.html

    It shows that in 2010:
    -3.4% GDP on Welfare
    -5.7% GDP on Healthcare
    -1% GDP on Education (which is 1% too much, since education is a state's concern, not federal government).
    -1.3% GDP on interest.
    -.003% GDP on protection (police/fire/prisons/legal)

    By my count, that's a little over 10% GDP WASTED. And your comment "What about the fact that half as much money that is spent on social programs goes just towards the INTEREST on national debt" is obviously not true, as welfare expendature alone shows that not to be the case (3.4% / 2 = 1.7% GDP, and we only paid 1.3% GDP on interest). This makes you wrong by AT LEAST .4% GDP (as I'm sure there are other social programs that are not included in these statistics). And the real kicker is, whenever you hear government officials talking about cutting costs, it's always police, firefighters, and prisoners first. But look at the numbers! We hardly spend any money on these things at all, and yet, these and Defense are always the first places to look for cost savings, instead of the real culprits (i.e. the leech protection services). This is what's known as SCARE TACTICS, and liberals have become VERY good at using them.

    And, yes, I HAVE been homeless, I've been in jail a few times, I did live in the projects, I GREW UP IN ARIZONA, I was in the military, and I am currently an unemployed student. So what do ya say, am I QUALIFIED?!?
    Last edited by diablosho; 02-15-2011 at 10:39 PM. Reason: Added some extra info...just for kicks! :D

  18. Quote Originally Posted by diablosho View Post
    Oh God, this topic again....Ugghh...look. I have a HUGE problem with the government taking ANY of my money, unless it is going towards firefighters, police, or military. **** the IRS, **** welfare, **** medicare, **** ALL of that ****. I just don't care. The reason healtchare is so expensive is BECAUSE of medicare. Since the government is paying (and they really do NOT look at prices), the doctors/pharms charge more. But since it is illegal to charge more for one group than another, they increase the cost for us as well, which increases the cost of our health insurance. I am MORE than willing to help people that CANNOT help themselves, but that is not the case here. And, our government does not fund pharmaceutical companies. They may give grants for studies and what not, but to the best of my recollection, our government has yet to purchase a pharmaceutical company.

    And, since I'm busy doing homework, I don't have too much time to find official statistics, but here's some stats from usgovernmentspending.com: http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/...et_2010_4.html

    It shows that in 2010:
    -3.4% GDP on Welfare
    -5.7% GDP on Healthcare
    -1% GDP on Education (which is 1% too much, since education is a state's concern, not federal government).
    -1.3% GDP on interest.
    -.003% GDP on protection (police/fire/prisons/legal)

    By my count, that's a little over 10% GDP WASTED. And your comment "What about the fact that half as much money that is spent on social programs goes just towards the INTEREST on national debt" is obviously not true, as welfare expendature alone shows that not to be the case (3.4% / 2 = 1.7% GDP, and we only paid 1.3% GDP on interest). This makes you wrong by AT LEAST .4% GDP (as I'm sure there are other social programs that are not included in these statistics). And the real kicker is, whenever you hear government officials talking about cutting costs, it's always police, firefighters, and prisoners first. But look at the numbers! We hardly spend any money on these things at all, and yet, these and Defense are always the first places to look for cost savings, instead of the real culprits (i.e. the leech protection services). This is what's known as SCARE TACTICS, and liberals have become VERY good at using them.

    And, yes, I HAVE been homeless, I've been in jail a few times, I did live in the projects, I GREW UP IN ARIZONA, I was in the military, and I am currently an unemployed student. So what do ya say, am I QUALIFIED?!?
    well i'm sorry you take open discussion personal, but notice you got your statistics from "governmentoverspending.com".. .and i hardly call .4% WAY off base, now you're just splitting hairs. Why don't you look at the numbers? We have 5% of the world's population and incarcerate 25% of the world's prisoners. I don't call that prison cuts. These SCARE TACTICS you speak of (which in no way can you rationalize to one politcal party but to American government as a whole) are exactly what I'm talking about. I do think our police are underfunded and undereducated, but they have us so convinced another terrorist attack is imminent that we don't bat an eyelash at the fact that our Defense fund is draining our economy and shorting what is labled as "protection" in your numbers. What technique does our government always employ? When hemp was threatening the timber industry, marijuana supposedly made minorities rape white women. Airport security is more difficult to get through than Fort Knox. Our police have less education than a lot of people, and less training than our military, but on a micro-level govern a lot of what we do as citizens as they drive around in their thrifty cars with guns when we hope we don't get pulled over for something trivial whenever we see them. You say you've been in jail so you know how belated our justice system is, I received a jail sentence for something I was charged with 18 months previous to my sentencing, and I even took a plea deal. Underfunding is prevalent, but I also think we need to take efficiency into consideration.


    I wasn't talking about healthcare specifically, but on the subject of pharmaceutical companies....are you kidding? Pharmaceutical companies spend more money on marketing than development and research. There are countless examples of different drugs the FDA "approved" then recalled shortly after several people died, but surpressed the development of supplements that were more effective with less toxicity in clinical trials. It is the government's job to monitor and either approve or throw out these drugs, but they continue to not only do a piss poor job, but have been notoriously slow to react when they have information that these drugs are INDEED dangerous. When you go to the doctor do you not see that tissue boxes, syringe boxes, etc. are stained with drug ads. Do you not think that the FDA receives generous "donations" from certain drug companies to extradite the approval? If you consider the nature of pharmaceutical companies (i'm not trying to scream conspiracy) what motivaiton do they have to develop cures? If they made a cure, their drug would be taken, the disease would cease, as would the need for the drug. However, if we are chornically ill, we would need to chronically administer a drug to suppress or modulate the symptoms. Much, much more money in that. Just a thought.

  19. Quote Originally Posted by jgassen15 View Post
    well i'm sorry you take open discussion personal, but notice you got your statistics from "governmentoverspending.com".. .and i hardly call .4% WAY off base, now you're just splitting hairs. Why don't you look at the numbers? We have 5% of the world's population and incarcerate 25% of the world's prisoners. I don't call that prison cuts. These SCARE TACTICS you speak of (which in no way can you rationalize to one politcal party but to American government as a whole) are exactly what I'm talking about. I do think our police are underfunded and undereducated, but they have us so convinced another terrorist attack is imminent that we don't bat an eyelash at the fact that our Defense fund is draining our economy and shorting what is labled as "protection" in your numbers. What technique does our government always employ? When hemp was threatening the timber industry, marijuana supposedly made minorities rape white women. Airport security is more difficult to get through than Fort Knox. Our police have less education than a lot of people, and less training than our military, but on a micro-level govern a lot of what we do as citizens as they drive around in their thrifty cars with guns when we hope we don't get pulled over for something trivial whenever we see them. You say you've been in jail so you know how belated our justice system is, I received a jail sentence for something I was charged with 18 months previous to my sentencing, and I even took a plea deal. Underfunding is prevalent, but I also think we need to take efficiency into consideration.


    I wasn't talking about healthcare specifically, but on the subject of pharmaceutical companies....are you kidding? Pharmaceutical companies spend more money on marketing than development and research. There are countless examples of different drugs the FDA "approved" then recalled shortly after several people died, but surpressed the development of supplements that were more effective with less toxicity in clinical trials. It is the government's job to monitor and either approve or throw out these drugs, but they continue to not only do a piss poor job, but have been notoriously slow to react when they have information that these drugs are INDEED dangerous. When you go to the doctor do you not see that tissue boxes, syringe boxes, etc. are stained with drug ads. Do you not think that the FDA receives generous "donations" from certain drug companies to extradite the approval? If you consider the nature of pharmaceutical companies (i'm not trying to scream conspiracy) what motivaiton do they have to develop cures? If they made a cure, their drug would be taken, the disease would cease, as would the need for the drug. However, if we are chornically ill, we would need to chronically administer a drug to suppress or modulate the symptoms. Much, much more money in that. Just a thought.
    Alright dude, I really don't have the inclination to do all the research in this discussion. Time for you to pony up some numbers like I did. I got my information from USGOVERNMENTSPENDING.com (which I'm assuming you didn't look at), not governmentoverspending.com. I don't even know where you got that website from. And .4% GDP is significant! Hell, that's almost 1/3rd (if I remember correctly) as much as we spent on interest alone! And again, pharmaceutical companies are PRIVATE companies, so the fact that they are advertising is not a concern of mine. Why do you care how much money pharmaceutical companies spend and on what? And of all the people to suggest cutting police or firefighters, how many were republicans? Now, if you want to talk about prisoners, they are there because they belong there...true story. Look at the recividism rate (I believe it was 60% or so). Do you think that they just HAPPENED to be discriminated against by the police MULTIPLE times! Come on! Hell, I was arrested for selling weed a few times, so I know something about recividism. It's difficult to make a change, but it's doable! Of all the things to cut, you're willing to let criminals go free without doing their time, because we have a bunch of criminals?!? And the only thing I took personally in your last post was that you acted like you knew me, and made broad generalizing statements about my past, which you could not possibly know about, in an attempt to discredit me. So no, I have no problem with open discussion, but the minute you attempt to discredit me on fallacies and false assumptions, we will have problems.

  20. I mistook your post for another guy's post with the governmentoverspending deal, however, I'm not sure how I can provide numbers as all that I've said in my last post about the criminilization of marijuana which is common knowledge and academically accepted, airport security which is obvious, the undereducation of police which should be obvious http://www.policeacademyrequirements...te/california/, the efficiency of our judicial system (I merely asked if you had the same experience as me).


    As far as FDA recalls of drugs they had deemed fit, this is from their website in 2010: http://www.fda.gov/Drugs/DrugSafety/.../ucm238565.htm, I care what private companies do that are REGULATED by my taxes. I've not taken any prescription drugs other than when I've had knee surgeries in the last few years, but if I do sometime, I would like to know that I'm being fairly charged (we pay for their development, then to take them a the pharmacy), what I'm taking is safe, and what I'm taking is my best chance at relieving whatever ailment I have acquired. Not to mention despite all of the great things about capitalism, pharma industries, just like any other industry, are in the business to make money. That is why I added my opinon about how the pharmaceutical companies have a stake in our illness.

    I could talk all day about prison reform, and yes I am aware of the recdivism rate, however, I see that more as the inefficiency and incompetency of our rehabilitation programs in prison rather than these people are ALL inherently bad. I said nothing about releasing anyone from prison, I don't think that recreational drug users should be incarcerated when 50% of those imprisoned are for drug crimes: http://www.drugwarfacts.org/cms/Prisons_and_Jails#Data (considering they can't even prevent the influx of drugs into prisons). I am a proponent of the Harm Reduction plan for drug control which has been reported as effective in Vancouver, but time will tell. The government doesn't care all that much if a Housewife in the OC is addicted to Hydro, but if I'm caught with an oz. of weed I go to jail.

  21. i'm outtie though.. i've been posting on different political forums for like 3 hours straight now and now I have to go throw some weights around... this exchange could go on forever... valid points diablo and everyone

  22. How could anyone choose Dubya as an Avatar?

  23. Quote Originally Posted by SpargelJanusz View Post
    How could anyone choose Dubya as an Avatar?
    LOL....yet another stupid question.
    Training around a jacked up neck.

  24. Bottom line is that this country is screwed one way or another unless we get back to basics. How about changing immigration policies today? Remember when you had to be sponsored by a family member, who would vouch for you, and if you didn't work would have to support you? Maybe that would get rid of the billboard signs up around many third world country airports that state "Massachusetts offers the best benefits for immigrant families". Yup we do offer the best welfare benefits in the country, and we will lay off every cop and firefighter to keep offering them. Hell our govenor is even tried to sneak, and I mean sneak, a provision in some state statue that would ALLOW ILLEGALS to go to state colleges for FREE. And in Massachusetts they are no longer called "illegal aliens" they are "undocumented workers".

  25. Quote Originally Posted by AE14 View Post
    Man...this thread needs a title change to: The thread with the most gross generalizations ever!

    sorry but it needed to be said
    I didn't see many gross generalizations. When you speak about the poor, indigent, uneducated, or the welfare population you encompass every race, color, sex, and sexual orientation. Now if people were stating that certain races, color, sex, or any other legally protected class, was responsible more then any other then it would be a generalization.

    I am all for helping people truly in need, but when a country that is on the verge of bankruptcy is looking for solutions to "intergenerational" welfare, then something has to give. Some families are 4 generations deep in handouts.

    One area that needs to be focused on is education. We need to educate these young women that having babies will only make success even harder. Having a baby at a young age without a family and financial support structure compromises that child for its entire childhood. When a single mother chooses to seek independence for herself and "gets a minimum wage job" the child now has no parent at home. This double edge sword is one that needs careful thought. Mom working and making not much more then she would receive in government handouts, and not being there to parent her kid, or her staying at home and trying to instill some values in her child?
  26. Never enough
    EasyEJL's Avatar

    All things told, as Machiavelli said

    Quote Originally Posted by Machiavelli
    It is best to be both feared and loved; however, if one cannot be both it is better to be feared than loved.
    Animis Rep
    facebook.com/xAnimis
    animis.org/forum

  27. There is so much ignorance in this thread that I do not know where to start a discussion.

  28. Quote Originally Posted by SolidusSnake View Post
    There is so much ignorance in this thread that I do not know where to start a discussion.
    LOL.....it started with the OP and the very first post.
    Training around a jacked up neck.
  

  
 

Similar Forum Threads

  1. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-18-2008, 01:42 PM
  2. Afraid of Ordering
    By E J in forum Nutraplanet
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 01-11-2008, 01:21 AM
  3. Be afraid...be very afraid..
    By tattoopierced1 in forum General Chat
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 01-17-2007, 11:59 AM
  4. I was so afraid this would happen...
    By Rodja in forum MMA
    Replies: 23
    Last Post: 11-29-2006, 12:34 AM
  5. If you compete... Be Afraid
    By diamonddave in forum General Chat
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 05-28-2006, 08:36 AM
Log in
Log in