Comments
1 - 20 of 62 Comments Last updated Oct 5, 2012
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Sep 18, 2012
 
Okay -- let's do what we do.

Post away!!
boundary painter

San Antonio, TX

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Sep 18, 2012
 
Toj wrote:
Okay -- let's do what we do.
Post away!!
Love it! KFUN would play these easy listening songs (if we were a
real station)

Till You Come Back to Me (Aretha Franklin)
You Haven't done Nothing (Stevie Wonder)
Who Do You Think You Are (Bo Donaldson and the Heywoods)
Vincent (Don McLean)
Baby, Come Back (Player)
It Doesn't Have to Be That Way (Jim Croce)
Long, Long Time (Linda Rondstadt)

“Licensed to Ill”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Sep 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
I disagree that "those people only care about what they can get from others". Have you ever heard of the working poor? Or people who have worked for many years and are now laid off.
You say it so flippant, lumping everyone in one class. Entitlements go to many people. Some people probably should not be allowed to get a free ride while others need the help up.
Some are mentally ill. Some don't have an education and have never learned what to do.
I'm not saying their aren't any who are putting their best food forward, but the vast majority have mad very poor choices in life. Virtually every single person I know of or have heard of that is on welfare has major issues, are unreliable, irresponsible, drug issues, alcohol issues, you name it.

Do you really think they give a crap that other people have to take away from their own families to provide them with free stuff?

I know people on food stamps. My cousin, who had 3 kids with her husband, who left him, got knocked up by some 21 year old kid without a pot to piss in and now is receiving all sorts of welfare. Meanwhile her older kids are running amok, cause she's out having a good time.

My other buddy, who couldn't hold a job if he wanted to, is another one who comes to mind. He got a great job was going to be this guys go to man, had his own van, had guys working for him. Showed up late all the time, showed up to a clients house smelling like weed (they called and complained). He got fired. He has a million excuses why every job he's ever had, he's f'd up.

I have an uncle who never could hold down a job. My father has bent over backwards to help him. He told my brother he doesn't even want to see his face, and had the balls to say everyone knows he's worked hard his whole life. He is the laziest man I have ever met.

Most of these folks are in denial and can't even be honest with themselves. It's poor choices in life, Toj. You can go ahead and pity these folks and say they should be our focus. As far as I'm concerned we have a safety net and we have other things that we should be focusing on, other than ever increasingly helping poor people. Poor people aren't the only people in this country. It's not ALL ABOUT THEM and what they want.

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Sep 18, 2012
 
Oops, boundary, nice idea but wrong idea. This thread is for political fights! Honest injun!

Since: Mar 09

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Sep 18, 2012
 
Is this supposed to be the politics thread, or the politics-free thread?

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Sep 18, 2012
 
j_m_w wrote:
Is this supposed to be the politics thread, or the politics-free thread?
Political. I thought, would a tinfoil hat ever want to join a knitting circle? Eh. So I named it knitting circle.

“The two baby belly, please!”

Since: Sep 09

Evanston IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Sep 18, 2012
 
Huh, now I have somewhere to rant and don't feel like ranting.

Perhaps if I read a few more of Sub's posts, I'll get riled up again.
:D
PEllen

Chicago, IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Sep 18, 2012
 
j_m_w wrote:
Is this supposed to be the politics thread, or the politics-free thread?
Remember the Kittens thread from when Angela was single? In that mode.

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Sep 18, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
I'm not saying their aren't any who are putting their best food forward, but the vast majority have mad very poor choices in life. Virtually every single person I know of or have heard of that is on welfare has major issues, are unreliable, irresponsible, drug issues, alcohol issues, you name it.
Do you really think they give a crap that other people have to take away from their own families to provide them with free stuff?
I know people on food stamps. My cousin, who had 3 kids with her husband, who left him, got knocked up by some 21 year old kid without a pot to piss in and now is receiving all sorts of welfare. Meanwhile her older kids are running amok, cause she's out having a good time.
My other buddy, who couldn't hold a job if he wanted to, is another one who comes to mind. He got a great job was going to be this guys go to man, had his own van, had guys working for him. Showed up late all the time, showed up to a clients house smelling like weed (they called and complained). He got fired. He has a million excuses why every job he's ever had, he's f'd up.
I have an uncle who never could hold down a job. My father has bent over backwards to help him. He told my brother he doesn't even want to see his face, and had the balls to say everyone knows he's worked hard his whole life. He is the laziest man I have ever met.
Most of these folks are in denial and can't even be honest with themselves. It's poor choices in life, Toj. You can go ahead and pity these folks and say they should be our focus. As far as I'm concerned we have a safety net and we have other things that we should be focusing on, other than ever increasingly helping poor people. Poor people aren't the only people in this country. It's not ALL ABOUT THEM and what they want.
Sorry you have an effed up family. I am not aware of anyone in my family in this situation. I was talking about the citizens of the United States of America, not our personal extended families and friends. But, if you think your family represents the cross section of most Americans, tell me why you believe they do.

Am I to understand you think the government should stop giving food stamps, insurance and other "entitlements" to your family? If that happened, what do you think would happen?

How did these people really get to where they are? Training? Education? Parents who did not teach them? Mental illness?

Or do they just not care and that's the problem?

Working poor constitutes nearly 1 in 3 Americans.

Are you having personal money issues? Anything with money I get this vibe from you of "Mine! Mine! Mine! Don't touch."

What do you think we should do with people who do not have a job, cannot feed themselves or their family and cannot afford housing? What would your solution be?

It's easy to say you'd cut off funding. What do you do with those people then?

“Licensed to Ill”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Sep 18, 2012
 
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry you have an effed up family. I am not aware of anyone in my family in this situation. I was talking about the citizens of the United States of America, not our personal extended families and friends. But, if you think your family represents the cross section of most Americans, tell me why you believe they do.
This is why I get frustrated talking to you. The point of my comments isnít for you to take a condescending attitude and say you are sorry that I have a fíd up family and tell me how no one in your family that is in that situation. I couldn't care less that they are in that situation. It's their life; they live it as they see fit. I think they are idiots.

The point of my comment is that most folks who are on these programs are complete fí ups.

You, from the sounds of it have NO real world experience with folks who receive entitlements. So how would you know about what they are like and what causes them to be there? Tell me why you donít think most of the folks who are on these programs are complete fí ups.
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
Am I to understand you think the government should stop giving food stamps, insurance and other "entitlements" to your family? If that happened, what do you think would happen?
How did these people really get to where they are? Training? Education? Parents who did not teach them? Mental illness?
Or do they just not care and that's the problem?
Working poor constitutes nearly 1 in 3 Americans.
No, I didnít say no entitlements. This all started over what Romney said, and he was right to a certain degree.

How did they all get there; by and large by poor decision making?
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>Are you having personal money issues? Anything with money I get this vibe from you of "Mine! Mine! Mine! Don't touch."
No, Iím not. Are you on welfare? You seem pro welfare. You are about as sensitive as you were when I commented on men getting fíd over in divorce proceedings because you are divorced and a female.

Once again, I never said I had a problem with welfare. At the same time weíve done enough for those people, they should be the focus of our policies. Obamaís biggest accomplishment was doing more for those people, however. He has done very little for everyone else.
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>What do you think we should do with people who do not have a job, cannot feed themselves or their family and cannot afford housing? What would your solution be?
It's easy to say you'd cut off funding. What do you do with those people then?
I donít have a problem with a basic safety net. My heart just doesnít bleed for folks who are on the dole. They are largely fí ups in my opinion. I don't think they should starve, but I don't think we should do anymore for them, especially if it is basically just handing them money and buying them things that most of us do ourselves.

Keep your eye on the ball. This whole discussion started over what Romney said, and itís true. He isnít going to get those votes. It may not be 47 percent, but itís a bout 1/3 and when you consider there are 15% of folks like you, who think the main function of government should be to provide folks with an ever increasing level of benefits, he was right. He can kiss off 47% of America.

“bELieve”

Since: Jun 09

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Sep 18, 2012
 
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
Am I to understand you think the government should stop giving food stamps, insurance and other "entitlements" to your family? If that happened, what do you think would happen?
How did these people really get to where they are? Training? Education? Parents who did not teach them? Mental illness?
Or do they just not care and that's the problem?
Working poor constitutes nearly 1 in 3 Americans.
You seem to be lumping in Welfare with Social Security Disability. People with mental and physical disabilities would qualify for SSD, but not welfare (I am not an expert, but I have a sister-in-law who receives SSD assistance, when she is not too proud to accept it).

Do you think that the current assistance system is working efficiently and the way it was designed to, or are there changes that you, as an American citizen and a taxpayer (I am just assuming here) would like to see made? Do you believe that the national government should be in charge of these programs, the state governments, or that they would be better administered by private (either for-profit or not-for-profit) agencies?

I hope you don't take this as an attack, but I know where Sub stands on this issue from past discussions and I find that sometimes it helps to state your actual position rather than just respond to his (often verbose) comments if you want other people to join the conversation.

“Licensed to Ill”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Sep 18, 2012
 
Jess in NJ wrote:
<quoted text> (often verbose).
I'm thorough, jerk face!1

:p

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Sep 19, 2012
 
Jess in NJ wrote:
<quoted text>
You seem to be lumping in Welfare with Social Security Disability. People with mental and physical disabilities would qualify for SSD, but not welfare (I am not an expert, but I have a sister-in-law who receives SSD assistance, when she is not too proud to accept it).
Do you think that the current assistance system is working efficiently and the way it was designed to, or are there changes that you, as an American citizen and a taxpayer (I am just assuming here) would like to see made? Do you believe that the national government should be in charge of these programs, the state governments, or that they would be better administered by private (either for-profit or not-for-profit) agencies?
I hope you don't take this as an attack, but I know where Sub stands on this issue from past discussions and I find that sometimes it helps to state your actual position rather than just respond to his (often verbose) comments if you want other people to join the conversation.
Personally, I wouldn't lump them but most people think Social Security Benefits (the disability benefits are social security) and welfare are "entitlements".

Social Security is administered at the Federal level while the welfare is administered at the state and county level.

I think there are a lot of welfare cheats and SS cheats. Both programs need to be overhauled but I don't think that will happen effectively in the current government environment. Too many people want a "win" for their side.

If it was administered at the Federal level or at the State level with Federal monitoring assistance, having a database to cross check with the IRS with social security, it might have a chance to lower the amount of those getting benefits who should not.

I don't think we have to increase these programs but streamline them.

I have to get ready for work so I have to stop here but there's a start.

As for Sub, I feel he's lumping everything and he's been itching to fight. He can't help himself it seems. By saying he gets frustrated then name calls instead of asking a specific question turns the conversation. He throws the kitchen sink out there and seems to go on a sideshow.

I'm not really Republican, Democrat or anything. I dislike it when people throw out names like "liberal". People use that as if it is a dirty word. People forget what an actual "liberal" is. It's a left wing Democrat and most Democrats are not that.

There are centered Republicans. Unfortunately, I have been seeing too many Republicans listening to the right wing faction and are getting away from finding answers and are in it for the "win". Both sides are. Then no one wins.

I will comment more here when I have the time.

And Sub, quit thinking people are stupid when they don't agree with you. Not everyone has the time to fully state everything they believe in on Topix.

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Sep 19, 2012
 
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
This is why I get frustrated talking to you. The point of my comments isnít for you to take a condescending attitude and say you are sorry that I have a fíd up family and tell me how no one in your family that is in that situation. I couldn't care less that they are in that situation. It's their life; they live it as they see fit. I think they are idiots.
The point of my comment is that most folks who are on these programs are complete fí ups.
You, from the sounds of it have NO real world experience with folks who receive entitlements. So how would you know about what they are like and what causes them to be there? Tell me why you donít think most of the folks who are on these programs are complete fí ups.
<quoted text>
No, I didnít say no entitlements. This all started over what Romney said, and he was right to a certain degree.
How did they all get there; by and large by poor decision making?
<quoted text>
No, Iím not. Are you on welfare? You seem pro welfare. You are about as sensitive as you were when I commented on men getting fíd over in divorce proceedings because you are divorced and a female.
Once again, I never said I had a problem with welfare. At the same time weíve done enough for those people, they should be the focus of our policies. Obamaís biggest accomplishment was doing more for those people, however. He has done very little for everyone else.
<quoted text>
I donít have a problem with a basic safety net. My heart just doesnít bleed for folks who are on the dole. They are largely fí ups in my opinion. I don't think they should starve, but I don't think we should do anymore for them, especially if it is basically just handing them money and buying them things that most of us do ourselves.
Keep your eye on the ball. This whole discussion started over what Romney said, and itís true. He isnít going to get those votes. It may not be 47 percent, but itís a bout 1/3 and when you consider there are 15% of folks like you, who think the main function of government should be to provide folks with an ever increasing level of benefits, he was right. He can kiss off 47% of America.
I don't have time right now but I will answer later. Now you are saying Romney is right "to a certain degree".

Please restate exactly what Romney is correct about. He's right to write off 47% of the country? All for his "win". That's exactly the kind of thinking this country does not need.

“Licensed to Ill”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Sep 19, 2012
 
Toj wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't have time right now but I will answer later. Now you are saying Romney is right "to a certain degree".
Please restate exactly what Romney is correct about. He's right to write off 47% of the country? All for his "win". That's exactly the kind of thinking this country does not need.
He's partially right and more right than wrong. 47% pay no federal income taxe, but that doesn't mean they are on entitlements and want the government to care for them (that's where he's wrong). Only about 1/3 of households are on non-SS and non-medicare entitlements. So, although 47% pay no taxes, it's actually only a 1/3 (which is still a significant portion of voters) who are never going to vote for him.

He's also right in that in terms of the 47% who pay no federal income tax, the thought of lowering taxes, as he proposes to do, has absolutely no appeal to them. If you don't pay any federal income taxes, you couldn't care less if someone is going to lower taxes that you don't pay.

I'd also say that even though only 1/3 are on entitlements he can STILL kiss off about 47% of the electorate, because there are a good 15% of folks who are like cycle and Angela and from talking to you, you too who identify with the mentality that he pointed out. The notion of being self sufficient is a foreign concept to some. So even if all 47 percent are not dependent themselves, there are still 47% who believe that poor people "are victims, who believe that government has the responsibility to care for them. Who believe that they are entitled to health care, to food, to housing." He'll never get these votes, and that really was his point even if it was not exactly accurate and inelegant.

Sheesh, why wasn't the liberal media all over Pelosi when she said we had to pass Obamacare before American's can find out is in it:

http://www.youtube.com/watch...
cycle003

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Sep 19, 2012
 
The err of your analysis is the assumption that people who get welfare are automatically going to vote for those who support welfare. The reality is that a huge portion of the electorate vote against their own interest in favor of ideology or even ignorance. I guarantee you that a significant portion of people receiving entitlements don't see themselves as being one of *those* people.

In other words, MANY people receiving entitlements vote Republican. I know some of these people, and they will typically say "Well, that's *different*" when referring to their situation.

“Licensed to Ill”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Sep 19, 2012
 
cycle003 wrote:
The err of your analysis is the assumption that people who get welfare are automatically going to vote for those who support welfare. The reality is that a huge portion of the electorate vote against their own interest in favor of ideology or even ignorance. I guarantee you that a significant portion of people receiving entitlements don't see themselves as being one of *those* people.
In other words, MANY people receiving entitlements vote Republican. I know some of these people, and they will typically say "Well, that's *different*" when referring to their situation.
It's proven that folks on the dole disproportionately vote in favor of democrats. You are correct that it is not in absolute terms. I will give you that, but I still think he's generally right that no matter what he does he will never get 47 percent or thereabout of the electorates votes. Whether that is a combination of folks on welfare being disproportionately democrat and folks like you, who would be hard pressed to ever vote for a republican, his general premise is correct.

Could he have spoken more elegantly, sure. Go watch Obama's interview where he argues with George Stephanopoulos that the healthcare mandate is not at tax:

http://www.youtube.com/watch...

Also, note that his own lawyers argued before the Supreme Court that it was a tax.

What's worse a liar or someone who spoke off the cuff, in inelegant fashion, and who acknowledges that he could have phrased it better.

“The two baby belly, please!”

Since: Sep 09

Evanston IL

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Sep 19, 2012
 
Sublime1 wrote:
<quoted text>
It's proven that folks on the dole disproportionately vote in favor of democrats. You are correct that it is not in absolute terms. I will give you that, but I still think he's generally right that no matter what he does he will never get 47 percent or thereabout of the electorates votes. Whether that is a combination of folks on welfare being disproportionately democrat and folks like you, who would be hard pressed to ever vote for a republican, his general premise is correct.
Could he have spoken more elegantly, sure. Go watch Obama's interview where he argues with George Stephanopoulos that the healthcare mandate is not at tax:
http://www.youtube.com/watch...
Also, note that his own lawyers argued before the Supreme Court that it was a tax.
What's worse a liar or someone who spoke off the cuff, in inelegant fashion, and who acknowledges that he could have phrased it better.
I have to go to a meeting in a moment, so I can't provide a link to back this up but I read that the majority of people who would fall into this 47% are located in the deep south, which has voted republican even since I can remember.

Also I don't believe that he spoke off the cuff, I believe he was speaking to the audience. And it was only inelegant because it got recorded and other people heard it.

Oh, and all politicians are liars. We just have to decide which liar bothers us the least.

Toj

“Equality”

Since: Jul 12

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Sep 19, 2012
 
I hope I have timne tonight to devote to this discussion. I'm crazy busy and have been only able to pop in and out of Topix. Here's something I thought was very interesting. It was a comment from a former IRS agent:

"One of my great frustrations in 27 years working for the Internal Revenue Service was the number of people making six figures who paid no income tax. Sometimes they did it legally, sometimes illegally, but the agency lacked the resources and inclination to go after them. Right now, and for the past five years or so, IRS has been trying to collect only what is really easy to collect, with very few difficult cases even attempted."

“Licensed to Ill”

Since: Aug 08

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Sep 19, 2012
 
squishymama wrote:
<quoted text>
I have to go to a meeting in a moment, so I can't provide a link to back this up but I read that the majority of people who would fall into this 47% are located in the deep south, which has voted republican even since I can remember.
Also I don't believe that he spoke off the cuff, I believe he was speaking to the audience. And it was only inelegant because it got recorded and other people heard it.
Oh, and all politicians are liars. We just have to decide which liar bothers us the least.
It was off the cuff and he was just talking like we do on here. Sometimes I say stuff and upon further reflection, I say well, maybe that was too strong and really I should have said X. There is some truth to what he said:

From what I have found:

"Most people on welfare in red states are minorities, especially blacks in the South. TANF Table 21 on the HHS website Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Percent Distribution of TANF recipients by Ethnicity/Race shows in nearly all southern red states blacks (voting 85-90% Democrat) make up 60-85% of welfare recipients. In Mississippi, in 2007-08, 87.1% of those on welfare were black. In Louisiana 78%, in Georgia 81.2%, in Arkansas 60.9%, in North Carolina 63.9%, in S. Carolina 71.7%, in Virginia 61.1%, in Tennessee 58.2%."

I couldn't find the chart mentioned in that post for that year, but I found for 2002 and those numbers look fairly close:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/character...

So, yes, what you say may be true, but a disproportionate share of welfare in these red states is received by card carrying democrats. Very few black folks ever vote republican, for example. Heck, I think Romney got booed at the NCAA convention. It just is what it is.

Having said that, I'm sure some black folks on welfare vote republican and some white folks on welfare vote republican. It's just that statistically they are significantly more likely to vote democrat.

I think Romney's mistake was to speak in absolutes, but there a lot of truth to his underlying understanding.

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

First Prev
of 4
Next Last
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

18 Users are viewing the Chicago Forum right now

Search the Chicago Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
IL Illinois Governor Recall Amendment (Oct '10) 20 min truth slayer 1,866
BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 1 hr Rogue Scholar 05 175,066
Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 3 hr XYZ 1,083,049
One kilometre high and counting (Jul '07) 3 hr NITiN 22
Once slow-moving threat, global warming speeds ... (Dec '08) 5 hr Subliminal 45,866
Six-year-old girl watches in horror as police '... 5 hr hands on AR 7
IL Who do you support for Governor in Illinois in ... (Oct '10) 7 hr raphael 3,841
Topix Chitown Regulars (Aug '09) 14 hr Sublime1 97,573
•••
•••
•••
•••

Chicago Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Chicago People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Chicago News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Chicago
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••