If each individual would take personal responsibility and do something nice for somebody else in need we would not need these programs.
i'm tired of this bullshit line. Do you honestly think this will ever happen on a scale large enough to make a difference? To seriously reduce poverty and hunger? To provide healthcare? You know damn well it will never happen. So does Hannity, Limbaugh, and every other conservative bullshit artist that says this shit. Give me a break.
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
i'm tired of this bullshit line. Do you honestly think this will ever happen on a scale large enough to make a difference? To seriously reduce poverty and hunger? To provide healthcare? You know damn well it will never happen. So does Hannity, Limbaugh, and every other conservative bullshit artist that says this shit. Give me a break.
It's the tragedy of the commons. Most of us want a little more. Most people probably wish they made, oh, 10-20% more. But they'll always feel that way, no matter how much they get (or are taxed). So most don't give a lot of money to reduce poverty and health care.
If everyone bought a car that got 2 mpg more, we'd save tons of oil and reduce less. Same if everyone walked, rather than drove for shorter trips.
By this logic (the right wingers, not Corny), we should just do away with (or finish doing away with) all pollution laws and say "if polluting companies would just forgo some profit for the good of the world, things would be better." Sure. But they won't.
Philanthropy is nice, but shit, half the people on this fairly liberal board think that all poor people are lazy and helping them out just reinforces that laziness. Philanthropy will not get it done in terms of feeding the poor and dealing with healthcare. It's not that people want this to occur, it's that they want what's theirs.
So the question is not whether or not people voluntary philanthropy could make a real dent, because we all in an honest moment know that they cannot. The question is whether there is a government role in doing so. I happen to think so, because I think the market fails when good blue collar jobs have been replaced by wal mart, when one job is not enough to feed your kids and when so many kids don't have health care. Then again, I don't think there is a one-to-one relatioship between "hard work" and "success."
I cannot come up with a new sig till I get this egg off my face.
It's the tragedy of the commons. Most of us want a little more. Most people probably wish they made, oh, 10-20% more. But they'll always feel that way, no matter how much they get (or are taxed). So most don't give a lot of money to reduce poverty and health care.
If everyone bought a car that got 2 mpg more, we'd save tons of oil and reduce less. Same if everyone walked, rather than drove for shorter trips.
By this logic (the right wingers, not Corny), we should just do away with (or finish doing away with) all pollution laws and say "if polluting companies would just forgo some profit for the good of the world, things would be better." Sure. But they won't.
Philanthropy is nice, but shit, half the people on this fairly liberal board think that all poor people are lazy and helping them out just reinforces that laziness. Philanthropy will not get it done in terms of feeding the poor and dealing with healthcare. It's not that people want this to occur, it's that they want what's theirs.
So the question is not whether or not people voluntary philanthropy could make a real dent, because we all in an honest moment know that they cannot. The question is whether there is a government role in doing so. I happen to think so, because I think the market fails when good blue collar jobs have been replaced by wal mart, when one job is not enough to feed your kids and when so many kids don't have health care. Then again, I don't think there is a one-to-one relatioship between "hard work" and "success."
i hear ya. This whole "charity should take the place of social programs" business, actually makes me angry to a certain degree. Its laughably ridiculous. Who wil be providing this altruism? The middle class? The middle class is all but extinct. The few remaining members are paying the bills and maybe eating out a few times a month. Poor folks, obviously, will not be making donations to EACHOTHER. Where will the generosity come from. It would HAVE to come from the rich, and everyone knows the filthy rich in this country did not get that way by being charitable.
"When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
Good luck...aint gonna happen. You get to be their slave every time. Especially right now.
so think about it, and wtfu (wake the f up) shake yourself if necessary
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
More importantly, who's afraid we will elect someone who will "Stay the Course"?
--Our economy can not afford to stay the course.
--Our foreign policy can not afford to stay the course.
--Our entire system of government can not afford to stay the course.
It's ok to look out for your own party, but not at the expense of the entire Nation, not at the expense of the Constitution and not at the expense of the integrity of the Office of the President of the United States.
Right now, I don't see a candidate out there (Democrat or Republican) willing to put the American family before Iraq needs, even though they see you struggling, see you trying to hold your head up. They keep saying they know there's a bumpy road ahead, those bumps are turning into potholes for too many Americans.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
More importantly, who's afraid we will elect someone who will "Stay the Course"?
--Our economy can not afford to stay the course.
--Our foreign policy can not afford to stay the course.
--Our entire system of government can not afford to stay the course.
It's ok to look out for your own party, but not at the expense of the entire Nation, not at the expense of the Constitution and not at the expense of the integrity of the Office of the President of the United States.
Right now, I don't see a candidate out there (Democrat or Republican) willing to put the American family before Iraq needs, even though they see you struggling, see you trying to hold your head up. They keep saying they know there's a bumpy road ahead, those bumps are turning into potholes for too many Americans.
I'm not so sure about this one.
The Democrats are running on a bunch of people issues. Healthcare, fair wages, a tax structure that will help those that need the money, environmental standards, as opposed to the standard scare tactics, moral issue agenda of the right.
The Republicans want to cut the programs in place now to help the low income rise up. No minimum wage increases, affordable health care, lessen environmental standards, privatise everything. Tax cuts to the rich for a supposed 'trickle-down economy', that never seems to trickle down. But they are against terrorists, abortion, gay people, and immigration.
Barack and Hillary are pro war. They say they are against war because they have to in order to have any hopes of winning.
I am just curious where you get Barack being "pro war". You got any beef to go with that comment? I can tell you in 2004 when he was running in the Democratic primary (before the Democrats even considered being against the war) in Illinois he was speaking out against the way. So he's so pro war that he was against the war before it was cool to be anti-war?
I'm sure you'll respond with something about him leaving all military options on the table when it comes to Iran. Don't you think that there are plans on the table for pretty much any military action in any hot spot across the world? Any leader that didn't have a plan for if the shit hits the fan is unfit to be commander in chief.
the media darlings are so in love with Barack and Hillary, but i'm so scared that a liberal will win the election and completely destroy our country, Barack seems like the least polarizing democratic candidate so theres a good chance he will win the nomination, but he will become an extreme liberal if elected because of all the pressure on the democratic side, it will be a sad day for all americans if a democrat takes the office with a full majority in the congress.
no liberal could destroy this country more than Bush has, we are a nation of laws, and he has ignored our nations laws, scared people into reelecting him, how we will recover from the damage to our constitution his administration has done is beyond me.
"Music, for me, was fucking heroin." eV (nothing Ed has said is more true for me personally than this quote)
Comments
2006 - Leeds Festival
2007 - London
2009 - Manchester / London
2010 - Berlin
2012 - Manchester I / Manchester II / EV Manchester
i'm tired of this bullshit line. Do you honestly think this will ever happen on a scale large enough to make a difference? To seriously reduce poverty and hunger? To provide healthcare? You know damn well it will never happen. So does Hannity, Limbaugh, and every other conservative bullshit artist that says this shit. Give me a break.
It's the tragedy of the commons. Most of us want a little more. Most people probably wish they made, oh, 10-20% more. But they'll always feel that way, no matter how much they get (or are taxed). So most don't give a lot of money to reduce poverty and health care.
If everyone bought a car that got 2 mpg more, we'd save tons of oil and reduce less. Same if everyone walked, rather than drove for shorter trips.
By this logic (the right wingers, not Corny), we should just do away with (or finish doing away with) all pollution laws and say "if polluting companies would just forgo some profit for the good of the world, things would be better." Sure. But they won't.
Philanthropy is nice, but shit, half the people on this fairly liberal board think that all poor people are lazy and helping them out just reinforces that laziness. Philanthropy will not get it done in terms of feeding the poor and dealing with healthcare. It's not that people want this to occur, it's that they want what's theirs.
So the question is not whether or not people voluntary philanthropy could make a real dent, because we all in an honest moment know that they cannot. The question is whether there is a government role in doing so. I happen to think so, because I think the market fails when good blue collar jobs have been replaced by wal mart, when one job is not enough to feed your kids and when so many kids don't have health care. Then again, I don't think there is a one-to-one relatioship between "hard work" and "success."
i hear ya. This whole "charity should take the place of social programs" business, actually makes me angry to a certain degree. Its laughably ridiculous. Who wil be providing this altruism? The middle class? The middle class is all but extinct. The few remaining members are paying the bills and maybe eating out a few times a month. Poor folks, obviously, will not be making donations to EACHOTHER. Where will the generosity come from. It would HAVE to come from the rich, and everyone knows the filthy rich in this country did not get that way by being charitable.
Good luck...aint gonna happen. You get to be their slave every time. Especially right now.
so think about it, and wtfu (wake the f up) shake yourself if necessary
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
--Our economy can not afford to stay the course.
--Our foreign policy can not afford to stay the course.
--Our entire system of government can not afford to stay the course.
It's ok to look out for your own party, but not at the expense of the entire Nation, not at the expense of the Constitution and not at the expense of the integrity of the Office of the President of the United States.
Right now, I don't see a candidate out there (Democrat or Republican) willing to put the American family before Iraq needs, even though they see you struggling, see you trying to hold your head up. They keep saying they know there's a bumpy road ahead, those bumps are turning into potholes for too many Americans.
I'm not so sure about this one.
The Democrats are running on a bunch of people issues. Healthcare, fair wages, a tax structure that will help those that need the money, environmental standards, as opposed to the standard scare tactics, moral issue agenda of the right.
The Republicans want to cut the programs in place now to help the low income rise up. No minimum wage increases, affordable health care, lessen environmental standards, privatise everything. Tax cuts to the rich for a supposed 'trickle-down economy', that never seems to trickle down. But they are against terrorists, abortion, gay people, and immigration.
Exactly. What is the difference already?
I am just curious where you get Barack being "pro war". You got any beef to go with that comment? I can tell you in 2004 when he was running in the Democratic primary (before the Democrats even considered being against the war) in Illinois he was speaking out against the way. So he's so pro war that he was against the war before it was cool to be anti-war?
I'm sure you'll respond with something about him leaving all military options on the table when it comes to Iran. Don't you think that there are plans on the table for pretty much any military action in any hot spot across the world? Any leader that didn't have a plan for if the shit hits the fan is unfit to be commander in chief.
http://www.reverbnation.com/brianzilm
and still one of the best posters on the pit
no liberal could destroy this country more than Bush has, we are a nation of laws, and he has ignored our nations laws, scared people into reelecting him, how we will recover from the damage to our constitution his administration has done is beyond me.
Stop by:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf