created by: Rick | Jun 8, 2010

Arkansas

5,824 votes

Did you vote today?

Click on an option to vote

  • Yes
  • No
  • Other (explain below)
Comments
24,221 - 24,240 of 29,063 Comments Last updated 1 hr ago
Pondering

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26115
Jul 30, 2013
 
Joe wrote:
<quoted text>
Denial will not help, I will help you with prayer and information.
FacebookYouTubeDr. Phil BlogBe On Dr. Phil
Parenting
Printer Friendly Version of this Article
Be on the Show
Is Your Mom Your Nemesis?
Hate Your Kids?
Fighting w/ your Spouse Tearing your Family Apart?
Young and In Love: Should We Get Married?
Teen with Big Decision!
Sexual Predator Warning Signs
Dr. Frank Lawlis, chairman of the Dr. Phil Advisory Board and Dr. Phil's mentor, offers some insight into the development of a sexual predator:
"The typical sexual predator is very immature in his or her understanding of intimacy. It is like they really want closeness, but they lack the skills to feel satisfaction and trust. These feelings of frustration erupt into anger many times, and it is in this stage that the individual can become dangerous. Their acts are desperate. They try to find intimacy and caring for themselves, but when they can't find it in appropriate ways, they demand it or find a child who has little resistance," says Dr. Lawlis. "It is common to find parents of sexual predators also weak in skills of affection. Consequently, they cannot train or offer to meet these needs for their child. And then the cycle continues."
There are some common characteristics of sexual predators. If you're worried your teen may be a sexual predator, look for these warning signs:
•Refusal to take responsibility for actions and blames others or circumstances for failures
•A sense of entitlement
•Low self-esteem
•Need for power and control
•Lack of empathy
•Inability to form intimate relationships with adults
•History of abuse
•Troubled childhood
•Deviant sexual behavior and attitudes
From the book, Protecting Your Children from Sexual Predators, by Dr. Leigh M. Baker.
Other Tips on Spotting a Sexual Predator:
•Often offend where they won't get caught — when they have misdirected people's attention
•Often married or in relationships
•Offend when the victim is handy
•Not always strangers, often family members, family friends and neighbors
•Most attracted to adults
•Good manipulators (seduction is an integral part)
•Overly self-indulgent
•Arrogant
•Sexualize, objectify women
•Typically known as rationalizers, intellectualizers, justifiers
•Great helpers — are there to lend a helping hand — prey on people in need, when they can insinuate themselves in your life
•Use stressful and vulnerable situations to get in — they find a need they can fill and they use that to get next to the victim
You seem to have researched this topic a lot, part of rehab?

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26116
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality Check wrote:
I've heard it all. I came across this article today http://wallstcheatsheet.com/stocks/obamacare-... . It talks about people who only work for health benefits quitting the workforce and getting on welfare. It says that would be a good thing because the idea is that there will be others who are unemployed that will fill those positions thus making it a washout. It also says that the unemployment rate could rise as much as 0.3-0.6 percentage points as a result of this. First off, I don't know anyone who takes a job solely for the purpose of health care. Everyone takes a job for the paycheck first and foremost, then they consider the benefits but the paycheck is first. Second, if this is supposed to result in a washout, then why would the unemployment rise at all? Whouldn't those who are still looking for work be the first to fill the positions, or would this phenomenon cause another phenomenon where those who are not even looking for work simultaneously go out and all go to these places and fill the jobs? That is the only scenario where the unemployment could actually rise assuming that those who quit all filed for unemployment benefits but the article said they would just go to welfare which implies that they wouldn't be looking at all. The liberal mindset is so screwed up. It takes taxes for our government to run so taking people out of the labor pool only puts more strain on those who stay in and it hurts their quality of life and kills their ambition to succeed. What I find even more disturbing is that it appears as though the liberals are coming out of the closet about their true intentions. I mean putting it in print for all to read that people leaving the workforce to get on welfare being a good thing is sickening. We only have a two more chances to save this nation. One in November of 2014 and the other in November 2016. If we elect the same people we have been electing for the past 30 years (Democratic and Republican), then we are just voting for the same thing we have now. If some fresh new blood doesn't enter the political arena, then the prospect of us climbing out of this hole is bleak at best.
said they would just go to welfare"

"unemployment rate could rise as much as 0.3-0.6 percentage points as a result of this"

REALLY THIS IS WHAT I READ;

will quit and sign up for Medicaid or subsidized coverage on the newly-created insurance exchanges. Garthwaite, Gross, and Notowidigdo calculated that the Obamacare-related decrease in the labor supply among this group of low-income workers could reduce

the employment rate by between 0.3 and 0.6 percentage points.

Let me point out a couple of things,

1. It said decrease UE not increase as you stated.

"liberals are coming out of the closet about their true intentions"

2.Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg are Right Wing publications.

3. The article clearly stated many times,

"Affordable Care Act could have on the labor market"

In other words, the article was based on what if's.

Possibilities not probabilities.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26117
Jul 30, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Pondering wrote:
<quoted text> You seem to have researched this topic a lot, part of rehab?
How is it conceivable to say a lot of research when only one article on the matter was put up?

The poster said they picked him out due to his comments,
it could be a consular who knows what they are talking about.

You notice the person did not deny being what he was accused of and so often speaks of, a child molester. He sure fit the profile posted.

Enough so that I had a conversation about this with the county Sheriff today.
Pondering

Jonesboro, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26118
Jul 30, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
How is it conceivable to say a lot of research when only one article on the matter was put up?
The poster said they picked him out due to his comments,
it could be a consular who knows what they are talking about.
You notice the person did not deny being what he was accused of and so often speaks of, a child molester. He sure fit the profile posted.
Enough so that I had a conversation about this with the county Sheriff today.
The question was asked earlier, why would a child molester go to a site frequented by voters? Unless you're a democrat you have to be an adult to vote.
Pondering

Jonesboro, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26119
Jul 30, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
said they would just go to welfare"
"unemployment rate could rise as much as 0.3-0.6 percentage points as a result of this"
REALLY THIS IS WHAT I READ;
will quit and sign up for Medicaid or subsidized coverage on the newly-created insurance exchanges. Garthwaite, Gross, and Notowidigdo calculated that the Obamacare-related decrease in the labor supply among this group of low-income workers could reduce
the employment rate by between 0.3 and 0.6 percentage points.
Let me point out a couple of things,
1. It said decrease UE not increase as you stated.
"liberals are coming out of the closet about their true intentions"
2.Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg are Right Wing publications.
3. The article clearly stated many times,
"Affordable Care Act could have on the labor market"
In other words, the article was based on what if's.
Possibilities not probabilities.
Obama is even hiring part timers to avoid Benefits
Reality Check

North Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26120
Jul 30, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
said they would just go to welfare"
"unemployment rate could rise as much as 0.3-0.6 percentage points as a result of this"
REALLY THIS IS WHAT I READ;
will quit and sign up for Medicaid or subsidized coverage on the newly-created insurance exchanges. Garthwaite, Gross, and Notowidigdo calculated that the Obamacare-related decrease in the labor supply among this group of low-income workers could reduce
the employment rate by between 0.3 and 0.6 percentage points.
Let me point out a couple of things,
1. It said decrease UE not increase as you stated.
"liberals are coming out of the closet about their true intentions"
2.Wall Street Journal and Bloomberg are Right Wing publications.
3. The article clearly stated many times,
"Affordable Care Act could have on the labor market"
In other words, the article was based on what if's.
Possibilities not probabilities.
Then what does "pathway from work to welfare" mean?
Misread decrease, thought it said increase. Still, that only means that more people will be added to those not loking for work which aren't counted but they're still not working and paying taxes to help this country run. I consider that a bad thing. As long as we are assuming things, I don't think that many will go from unemployment to fill those positions. Those jobs, which pay minimum wage, are a dime a dozen. Every fast food restaraunt from coast to coast is looking for help and have been for years. If nobody wanted those jobs before people went on the "pathway from work to welfare", then nobody will want those jobs after.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26121
Jul 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
Then what does "pathway from work to welfare" mean?
Misread decrease, thought it said increase. Still, that only means that more people will be added to those not loking for work which aren't counted but they're still not working and paying taxes to help this country run. I consider that a bad thing. As long as we are assuming things, I don't think that many will go from unemployment to fill those positions. Those jobs, which pay minimum wage, are a dime a dozen. Every fast food restaraunt from coast to coast is looking for help and have been for years. If nobody wanted those jobs before people went on the "pathway from work to welfare", then nobody will want those jobs after.
I have no idea what that means, nor do I understand how you can quit your and job,

quote: "and sign up for Medicaid or subsidized coverage".

Medicaid I can understand, but how in the world do they expect the unemployed to pay their share of premium for subsidized coverage in an exchange?
Reality Check

North Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26122
Jul 31, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no idea what that means, nor do I understand how you can quit your and job,
quote: "and sign up for Medicaid or subsidized coverage".
Medicaid I can understand, but how in the world do they expect the unemployed to pay their share of premium for subsidized coverage in an exchange?
It came from one of your fellow liberals. You tell me. I only know that this happens in low income families, especially those who live off of the government. I see it alot from my tenants and their friends. They will do ANYTHING to stay on the government dole. They used to work very hard at giving the appearance that they simply couldn't find jobs. Now, with Obama in office, they don't even try to hide the fact that they're not going to get a job, they don't even want a job. It is much more common than people realize. I can guarantee that our town isn't an isolated case. Every town has a percentage of the population that lives that way. The people who make a good living simply bury their heads in the sand in their glass house and pretend that way of life doesn't exist. They are also the ones who are sympathetic to the lies people tell to keep generations on welfare and out of the workforce. Never working means their skillset is actually below a minimum wage job yet America pays an average of $42,000 per person per year on our entitlements. There is NO WAY those people, who have raised their standard of living to $42,000 per year will ever find a job that bridges the gap between what they are qualified to do and what they need to keep their standard of living. It's why I have a real problem with our entitlement society.
Reality Check

North Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26123
Jul 31, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I have no idea what that means, nor do I understand how you can quit your and job,
quote: "and sign up for Medicaid or subsidized coverage".
Medicaid I can understand, but how in the world do they expect the unemployed to pay their share of premium for subsidized coverage in an exchange?
You are really a smart person and I hate the fact that you use your intelligence and political savy to support the liberal agenda that are using things like welfare and other entitlements to control the population. If you look at history, you will find that leaders like Hitler, Stalin, Lennon, and Marx along with other world leaders all initialized universal health care as one of the first things during their rule. Once a government controls healthcare, they can control any aspect of citizens lives. Governments can rule that any activity we perform can have significant health ramifications thus the ability to make laws to prohibit those activities. Sure, for every Germany or Russia, there is a Denmark or Switzerland where socialized healthcare isn't abused. I, for one, don't want to take that chance. I will always choose personal freedom and personal accountability any day over government intrusion.
Guest

Jonesboro, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26124
Jul 31, 2013
 
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
It came from one of your fellow liberals. You tell me. I only know that this happens in low income families, especially those who live off of the government. I see it alot from my tenants and their friends. They will do ANYTHING to stay on the government dole. They used to work very hard at giving the appearance that they simply couldn't find jobs. Now, with Obama in office, they don't even try to hide the fact that they're not going to get a job, they don't even want a job. It is much more common than people realize. I can guarantee that our town isn't an isolated case. Every town has a percentage of the population that lives that way. The people who make a good living simply bury their heads in the sand in their glass house and pretend that way of life doesn't exist. They are also the ones who are sympathetic to the lies people tell to keep generations on welfare and out of the workforce. Never working means their skillset is actually below a minimum wage job yet America pays an average of $42,000 per person per year on our entitlements. There is NO WAY those people, who have raised their standard of living to $42,000 per year will ever find a job that bridges the gap between what they are qualified to do and what they need to keep their standard of living. It's why I have a real problem with our entitlement society.
And that 42K is why Barney is for it. He works 20 hours a week at 8.25 an hour so he grosses 8,600 a year. Add his entitlements and tax savings, he's clearing a college professor's income.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26126
Jul 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
You are really a smart person and I hate the fact that you use your intelligence and political savy to support the liberal agenda that are using things like welfare and other entitlements to control the population. If you look at history, you will find that leaders like Hitler, Stalin, Lennon, and Marx along with other world leaders all initialized universal health care as one of the first things during their rule. Once a government controls healthcare, they can control any aspect of citizens lives. Governments can rule that any activity we perform can have significant health ramifications thus the ability to make laws to prohibit those activities. Sure, for every Germany or Russia, there is a Denmark or Switzerland where socialized healthcare isn't abused. I, for one, don't want to take that chance. I will always choose personal freedom and personal accountability any day over government intrusion.
I presume you meant Vladimir Lenin not "Lennon".
In a communist society many things are controlled by the state.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26127
Jul 31, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
It came from one of your fellow liberals. You tell me. I only know that this happens in low income families, especially those who live off of the government. I see it alot from my tenants and their friends. They will do ANYTHING to stay on the government dole. They used to work very hard at giving the appearance that they simply couldn't find jobs. Now, with Obama in office, they don't even try to hide the fact that they're not going to get a job, they don't even want a job. It is much more common than people realize. I can guarantee that our town isn't an isolated case. Every town has a percentage of the population that lives that way. The people who make a good living simply bury their heads in the sand in their glass house and pretend that way of life doesn't exist. They are also the ones who are sympathetic to the lies people tell to keep generations on welfare and out of the workforce. Never working means their skillset is actually below a minimum wage job yet America pays an average of $42,000 per person per year on our entitlements. There is NO WAY those people, who have raised their standard of living to $42,000 per year will ever find a job that bridges the gap between what they are qualified to do and what they need to keep their standard of living. It's why I have a real problem with our entitlement society.
Entitlements and welfare, are you suggesting they are the same thing?

Where did you get that figure of 42k per person?

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26128
Jul 31, 2013
 
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
It came from one of your fellow liberals. You tell me. I only know that this happens in low income families, especially those who live off of the government. I see it alot from my tenants and their friends. They will do ANYTHING to stay on the government dole. They used to work very hard at giving the appearance that they simply couldn't find jobs. Now, with Obama in office, they don't even try to hide the fact that they're not going to get a job, they don't even want a job. It is much more common than people realize. I can guarantee that our town isn't an isolated case. Every town has a percentage of the population that lives that way. The people who make a good living simply bury their heads in the sand in their glass house and pretend that way of life doesn't exist. They are also the ones who are sympathetic to the lies people tell to keep generations on welfare and out of the workforce. Never working means their skillset is actually below a minimum wage job yet America pays an average of $42,000 per person per year on our entitlements. There is NO WAY those people, who have raised their standard of living to $42,000 per year will ever find a job that bridges the gap between what they are qualified to do and what they need to keep their standard of living. It's why I have a real problem with our entitlement society.
No beef with corporate welfare?

2010, The Walton's wealth has risen and most other Americans' wealth declined, it is now the case that the Walton family wealth is as large as the bottom 48.8 million families in the wealth distribution (constituting 41.5 percent of all American families) combined.

The report analyzes data from Wisconsin's Medicaid program, estimating that a single 300-person Wal-Mart Supercenter in that state likely costs taxpayers at least $904,542 per year and could cost up to $1,744,590 per year, or roughly $5,815 per employee.

Two sides to every argument, here is what Wal-Mart had to say.

Wal-Mart, in an analysis posted on its website, described the report as "flawed," criticizing the reliance on the data from Wisconsin to make "vast generalizations." In its rebuttal, the company said the report failed to take into account Wal-Mart's size and that the number of its workers on Medicaid is similar to other big retailers and comparable to the national average.



Now did they just say, others are doing it so it is okay for us to do the same?

Did I happen to mention the Walton's are big time Republicans?

Reality Check

North Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26129
Jul 31, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Entitlements and welfare, are you suggesting they are the same thing?
Where did you get that figure of 42k per person?
First off, let me say as I usually do, but didn't in this occasion, that you need to take this article along with every other article with a grain of salt. I couldn't find the article I had found previously but I did find this: http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/budget-...

This article breaks down to $68,000 per recipient (in the 19% for welfare and other entitlements). Even though that number would strengthen my argument, I have a hard time believing the dollar amount is that high. Just my opinion.
Duh

Jonesboro, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26130
Jul 31, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
I presume you meant Vladimir Lenin not "Lennon".
In a communist society many things are controlled by the state.
That could even be said to be a description of communism.

Since: Dec 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26131
Jul 31, 2013
 
Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
First off, let me say as I usually do, but didn't in this occasion, that you need to take this article along with every other article with a grain of salt. I couldn't find the article I had found previously but I did find this: http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/budget-...
This article breaks down to $68,000 per recipient (in the 19% for welfare and other entitlements). Even though that number would strengthen my argument, I have a hard time believing the dollar amount is that high. Just my opinion.
Are you familiar with the Heritage foundation? You would be wise to consider those numbers high coming from that group, however that is another story.

I agree they are to high, and my opinion why they are.

If you will notice they added Welfare to Entitlement programs to reach the their 62%.

They are not the same, just as their name suggests.

Social Security and Medicare ,unemployment, are entitlement programs and by far make up the bulk of that 62%.

Medicaid, SSI, food stamps, and housing assistance would be Welfare programs.

Entitlement programs either the recipient, or the recipient employer has paid into those funds and are entitled to get their money back.

Welfare you did not have to pay a dime to anyone to receive benefits.

'Entitlement'

Why are conservatives trying to convince me that is a dirty word.

Reality Check

North Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26132
Jul 31, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
No beef with corporate welfare?
2010, The Walton's wealth has risen and most other Americans' wealth declined, it is now the case that the Walton family wealth is as large as the bottom 48.8 million families in the wealth distribution (constituting 41.5 percent of all American families) combined.
The report analyzes data from Wisconsin's Medicaid program, estimating that a single 300-person Wal-Mart Supercenter in that state likely costs taxpayers at least $904,542 per year and could cost up to $1,744,590 per year, or roughly $5,815 per employee.
Two sides to every argument, here is what Wal-Mart had to say.
Wal-Mart, in an analysis posted on its website, described the report as "flawed," criticizing the reliance on the data from Wisconsin to make "vast generalizations." In its rebuttal, the company said the report failed to take into account Wal-Mart's size and that the number of its workers on Medicaid is similar to other big retailers and comparable to the national average.
Now did they just say, others are doing it so it is okay for us to do the same?
Did I happen to mention the Walton's are big time Republicans?
I would answer your question with a some of questions of my own. How many jobs does a person who has never worked create? How many jobs does the CEO of Wal Mart create? What is their economic impact on the American economy? We need to give businesses who employ people that pay taxes to support the function of this nation as many business breaks as possible to enable them to hire as many people as possible. Having said that, I do believe that if a company CEO's are found taking the tax breaks and using them for their own personal use, then jail time is in order along with removal of the tax breaks. A company should be able to show a trail that clearly shows the usage of the funds for their intended purpose. As for the Walton's wealth, do you really think that they got their wealth off of the sale of one product? No, they get their wealth a few cents or dollars at a time. Since they probably have over 100K items in each Wal Mart and probably around 3,000-5,000 Wal Marts world wide, it wouldn't take long for revenues to add up. Especially since Wal Mart turns their inventory at least 2.5 times per year which is about average for retailers. Not to mention they are a publicly traded company. On the income front, did you know that income inequality has sped up and the gap has widened significantly under Obama? More so than under Bush. Under Obama, the rich are getting richer faster and the poor are getting poorer faster. He is not about income equality. He is about control and power regardless of who can survive his governing and who can't.
Dont Know Nothing

Medford, OR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26135
Aug 2, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Reality Check wrote:
<quoted text>
How many jobs does the CEO of Wal Mart create? What is their economic impact on the American economy? We need to give businesses who employ people that pay taxes to support the function of this nation as many business breaks as possible to enable them to hire as many people as possible. Having said that, I do believe that if a company CEO's are found taking the tax breaks and using them for their own personal use, then jail time is in order along with removal of the tax breaks. A company should be able to show a trail that clearly shows the usage of the funds for their intended purpose. As for the Walton's wealth, do you really think that they got their wealth off of the sale of one product? No, they get their wealth a few cents or dollars at a time. Since they probably have over 100K items in each Wal Mart and probably around 3,000-5,000 Wal Marts world wide, it wouldn't take long for revenues to add up. Especially since Wal Mart turns their inventory at least 2.5 times per year which is about average for retailers. Not to mention they are a publicly traded company. On the income front, did you know that income inequality has sped up and the gap has widened significantly under Obama? More so than under Bush. Under Obama, the rich are getting richer faster and the poor are getting poorer faster. He is not about income equality. He is about control and power regardless of who can survive his governing and who can't.
lol it still amazes me that you are on here spewing rhetoric. "We need to give businesses who employ people that pay taxes to support the function of this nation as many business breaks as possible to enable them to hire as many people as possible." Tell that to your Republican buddies on the hill who just shot down a bill to reduce corporate tax rates and in exchange for an infrastructure bill. "I do believe that if a company CEO's are found taking the tax breaks and using them for their own personal use, then jail time is in order along with removal of the tax breaks." That is about the smartest thing I have heard you say; however, why should CEO's take advantage of tax breaks that would nullify all the breaks they receive already in the tax code that allows them to pay under 15% and sometimes lower than 10%? 25% or 30% is still higher than that last time I checked. Concerning Wal-Mart, you would think you would know a little about a business that started in your home state. I grew up there years ago and I still know how it started and how the family got their wealth. Sam worked for JCP to start out, quit and started his own business, and did excellent. He then found a bigger space and opened up a chain of Ben Franklin Stores. Those stores did excellent as well. He then opened the first Wal-Mart Discount City store in 1962, and stocked the shelves with AMERICAN made products. Something Wal-Mart and other retailers have forgotten how to do. He then passed away and left stock shares to his children to avoid estate taxes, and so will the rest of his family. Forget helping the AMERICANS that helped build your business by paying in your share of taxes, lets give away stock shares and take advantage of capitol gains taxes and other tax breaks to avoid paying in as much money as possible. LOL, your reasoning is a joke. Please inform yourself on what you are talking about before you actually start talking. Oh and that income equality gap started growing when? Oh yeah, when Bush first offered the tax breaks. The US economy is not your strong point is it? Nor is knowledge of the Constitution, bill of rights, political science, any of our founding fathers, Declaration of Independence, Arkansas history, US history, our marginal tax rate and tax code, or intellectual capitol. When you quit practicing your artificial ignorance, the rest of the world will be here in reality waiting.
Reality Check

North Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26136
Aug 2, 2013
 
Dont Know Nothing wrote:
<quoted text>lol it still amazes me that you are on here spewing rhetoric. "We need to give businesses who employ people that pay taxes to support the function of this nation as many business breaks as possible to enable them to hire as many people as possible."
Believe me, if it were up to me, corporations would pay 0% in corporate taxes. You do realize it was Wal Mart that brought Chinese merchandise into the American market don't you? Wal Mart is the reason that every retail store now carries merchandise made overseas. But make no mistake, you and every other consumer are behind those decisions, are the reason products with Made in America on them are now a needle in a haystack instead of a dime a dozen. American consumers drive the disposable society we live in. American consumers only care about price and it shows in our purchasing habits. Stop buying things not made in America and the Made in China products will start disappearing from the shelves. Retailers won't stock things that don't sell. Why do liberals always want to blame someone else for things they either caused or helped cause? Please tell me how putting in a business, where a ton of capital is required and only the business owner can lose everything if it is not repaid, that also offers products and services to make life easier for the buying public isn't helping the public. You and other liberals always come from the position of "we bought your product and now your rich and evil" standpoint, yet nobody twisted your arm to buy the services or products. I will never get that. If you think someone is too rich or evil then stop shopping with them. You don't see the 70-80 hour weeks that many of these "rich evil" people go through. All you look at are quarterly earnings reports and wish that someone would take from them and give to you so you can continue working the 40 hour or less week you work yet increase your lifestyle. It's insulting but it clearly shows how little you know about business so I really can't take much offense.
Reality Check

North Little Rock, AR

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#26137
Aug 2, 2013
 
BARNEYII wrote:
<quoted text>
Are you familiar with the Heritage foundation? You would be wise to consider those numbers high coming from that group, however that is another story.
I agree they are to high, and my opinion why they are.
If you will notice they added Welfare to Entitlement programs to reach the their 62%.
They are not the same, just as their name suggests.
Social Security and Medicare ,unemployment, are entitlement programs and by far make up the bulk of that 62%.
Medicaid, SSI, food stamps, and housing assistance would be Welfare programs.
Entitlement programs either the recipient, or the recipient employer has paid into those funds and are entitled to get their money back.
Welfare you did not have to pay a dime to anyone to receive benefits.
'Entitlement'
Why are conservatives trying to convince me that is a dirty word.
If you think Welfare, SSI, and food stamps have not become entitlements then I now have a greater understanding of why you support liberalism. You have never been exposed to the lives these individuals live. You are ignorant of the meat and potatoes of the issue. You are only looking at the numbers and listening to the left wing spin of those numbers. I agree that entitlement was set up to mean exactly what you said. HOWEVER, the prevelent thought is that income and corporate taxes on the wealthy should go up so that those receiving welfare, SSI, and food stamps may have a better quality of life which makes those programs entitlements. If funds are taken out of a person's income for a dedicated program, that program is an entitlement. You can't get around that even if you use the historical definition of entitlements. That should explain why conservatives see the word entitlement as dirty. You should too.

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

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

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.

19 Users are viewing the El Dorado Forum right now

Search the El Dorado Forum:
Title Updated Last By Comments
looking for a good looking woman for a road trip 1 hr prickem 14
Greg Stanfill 7 hr take a look at this 3
Christina Duschak 8 hr take a look at this 4
dumb a meth heads (Dec '12) 8 hr take a look at this 19
Green Mystery Liquid In Creek 10 hr Tinman Ex Gringo 21
Where is the best dance school in El Dorado? 13 hr EDF is the best 21
AR More than 1,000 dead birds fall from sky in Ark (Jan '11) 15 hr whiskers 9,792
•••
•••
•••
•••

El Dorado Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

El Dorado People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

El Dorado News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in El Dorado
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••