Tired of getting kicked around...

  • 56 results
  • 1
  • 2

This topic is locked from further discussion.

Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#1 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

I know that this country is facing a budget crisis. I live in California, and for the most part my state is bankrupt and getting worse. We've had cuts left and right. Unfortunately, the first to get cut are usually the elderly and disabled, meaning less money is being spent on us. We are kept poor.

In Obama's State of the Union speech, he plans to announce that's he's gonna cut the deficit by increasing spending in some areas but decreasing spending in others. Most likely, I believe the first to receive cuts is the disabled and the elderly. Why? Because we're always the first to get cut. Why you ask? There's noone out there who will stand up for us and say "We've had enough of this." Well, I'm angry and I'm tired. I've had enough of this ****. It's time to do something about it. However, the problem is I don't have any idea how to get started. Any advice? Serious answers please.

Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#2 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts
Are you disabled or just old?
Avatar image for 194197844077667059316682358889
194197844077667059316682358889

49173

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#3 194197844077667059316682358889
Member since 2003 • 49173 Posts
Maybe you should wait and see whether whatever benefits you are concerned about are going to be affected before mobilizing to prevent them from being affected?
Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#4 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

Are you disabled or just old? BranKetra

I'm disabled, actually. Jerry Brown is trying to force me to live somewhere I don't want to live, but that's a long story. The Governator was better for the disabled because of who his wife is, but Brown just doesn't care.

Avatar image for cybrcatter
cybrcatter

16210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#5 cybrcatter
Member since 2003 • 16210 Posts
I don't know about the disabled, but the elderly are most certainly not the first to receive cuts to any form of government benefits (at least in the States). Politicians are afraid of aggravating such a massive voting block.
Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#6 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts
First, figure out what is happening. If there really is a problem, there's always the news.
Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#7 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts
I don't know about the disabled, but the elderly are most certainly not the first to receive cuts to any form of government benefits (at least in the States). Politicians are afraid of aggravating such a massive voting block. cybrcatter
We'll, whenever I hear about cuts, the disabled and elderly are usually lumped together.
Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#8 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts
Maybe you should wait and see whether whatever benefits you are concerned about are going to be affected before mobilizing to prevent them from being affected?xaos
I don't know about the disabled, but the elderly are most certainly not the first to receive cuts to any form of government benefits (at least in the States). Politicians are afraid of aggravating such a massive voting block. cybrcatter
These are very intelligent men. Rule #1 of politics: You never f*** with old people...they are the only ones that really vote (statistically). Why do think no one ever mentions cutting social security? Also, where/who do you think should get cut first...if benefits have to be cut. I probably would start with the disabled.
Avatar image for bobaban
bobaban

10560

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#9 bobaban
Member since 2005 • 10560 Posts
The disabled is a small minority. So in the bigger scheme, you're disposable.
Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#10 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

Also, where/who do you think should get cut first...if benefits have to be cut.
I probably would start with the disabled.rawsavon

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

Avatar image for cybrcatter
cybrcatter

16210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#11 cybrcatter
Member since 2003 • 16210 Posts

[QUOTE="cybrcatter"]I don't know about the disabled, but the elderly are most certainly not the first to receive cuts to any form of government benefits (at least in the States). Politicians are afraid of aggravating such a massive voting block. The-Apostle
We'll, whenever I hear about cuts, the disabled and elderly are usually lumped together.

Where do you hear this from? Political opposition attempting to persuade voters by vilifying the other party? Sensationalized news outlets attempting to instill any type of negative emotion?

There's a reason medicare is still a POS. There's a reason why education is one of the first to feel cuts before anything having to do with the elderly. Children can't vote, and young adults don't vote with same proportions that the elderly do.

Everything is going to feel a cut in the years to come. It's inevitable with the amount of government debt we possess.

Avatar image for mrmusicman247
mrmusicman247

17601

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#12 mrmusicman247
Member since 2008 • 17601 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Also, where/who do you think should get cut first...if benefits have to be cut.
I probably would start with the disabled.The-Apostle

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

Too much on education? That's the first time I heard that. Then again, I live in Florida.

Avatar image for cybrcatter
cybrcatter

16210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#13 cybrcatter
Member since 2003 • 16210 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Also, where/who do you think should get cut first...if benefits have to be cut.
I probably would start with the disabled.The-Apostle

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

Children are the future of this country. The elderly are not.

But don't worry, cuts will happen that favor short term votes, not the long term prosperity of this country.

Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#14 whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

I know that this country is facing a budget crisis. I live in California, and for the most part my state is bankrupt and getting worse. We've had cuts left and right. Unfortunately, the first to get cut are usually the elderly and disabled, meaning less money is being spent on us. We are kept poor.

In Obama's State of the Union speech, he plans to announce that's he's gonna cut the deficit by increasing spending in some areas but decreasing spending in others. Most likely, I believe the first to receive cuts is the disabled and the elderly. Why? Because we're always the first to get cut. Why you ask? There's noone out there who will stand up for us and say "We've had enough of this." Well, I'm angry and I'm tired. I've had enough of this ****. It's time to do something about it. However, the problem is I don't have any idea how to get started. Any advice? Serious answers please.

The-Apostle

I'de contact your congress people.

Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#15 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

Think the elderly aren't among the first to feel the pain? Think again.

Avatar image for redstormrisen
redstormrisen

2015

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#16 redstormrisen
Member since 2007 • 2015 Posts
See, if you had a Left that actually has left wing policies then this kind of thing would be safeguarded against. But your country *is* safe from Communism... Good trade there guys
Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#17 whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

You'de think a good place to start budget cuts is by cutting out those groups that have committed fraud and stolen from the government.

Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#18 whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

See, if you had a Left that actually has left wing policies then this kind of thing would be safeguarded against. But your country *is* safe from Communism... Good trade there guysredstormrisen
But then in a communist or socialist system the government would take away your right to private property and freedom of religion and throw you in jail for criticizing them. Not to mention dictate that you're only allowed to have a certain number of children.

Avatar image for cybrcatter
cybrcatter

16210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#19 cybrcatter
Member since 2003 • 16210 Posts

Think the elderly aren't among the first to feel the pain? Think again.

The-Apostle

Are you really telling me that you think the elderly are the first to receive any sort of cuts to benefits, either directly or indirectly?

Who is championing this piece? "Senior Advocates"

If we lived in a world with unlimited resources and perfect governance, then you wouldn't see cuts. But we don't, and you will.

Everyone will have to share the burden of large government debt. Your demographic is not bearing the full force of country and state wide budget cuts.

Avatar image for redstormrisen
redstormrisen

2015

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#21 redstormrisen
Member since 2007 • 2015 Posts

[QUOTE="redstormrisen"]See, if you had a Left that actually has left wing policies then this kind of thing would be safeguarded against. But your country *is* safe from Communism... Good trade there guyswhipassmt

But then in a communist or socialist system the government would take away your right to private property and freedom of religion and throw you in jail for criticizing them. Not to mention dictate that you're only allowed to have a certain number of children.

FFs, Im not left wing but thats a blatent misconsption of what "socalism" is. It simply means large governemts redistributing wealth. Even communism doesnt actually specify censorship. Communism hs never ben tried as Marx outlined it, and its not evil.
Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#22 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Also, where/who do you think should get cut first...if benefits have to be cut.
I probably would start with the disabled.The-Apostle

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

So you would cut spending on the future contributors to the country...those that will provide future tax revenue to fund the gov and fuel economic growth versus the disabled that contribute far less (in some cases nothing)
:?

That seems to be a very short-sighted goal

Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#23 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

[QUOTE="The-Apostle"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Also, where/who do you think should get cut first...if benefits have to be cut.
I probably would start with the disabled.rawsavon

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

So you would cut spending on the future contributors to the country...those that will provide future tax revenue to fund the gov and fuel economic growth versus the disabled that contribute far less (in some cases nothing)
:?

That seems to be a very short-sighted goal

To put it mildly.

Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#24 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

[QUOTE="The-Apostle"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Also, where/who do you think should get cut first...if benefits have to be cut.
I probably would start with the disabled.rawsavon

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

So you would cut spending on the future contributors to the country...those that will provide future tax revenue to fund the gov and fuel economic growth versus the disabled that contribute far less (in some cases nothing)
:?

That seems to be a very short-sighted goal

As I said, we have nothing to show for education but we constantly increase spending as if that's gonna help. When it doesn't, we increase it even more despite that many schools are failing.

Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#25 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="The-Apostle"]

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

The-Apostle

So you would cut spending on the future contributors to the country...those that will provide future tax revenue to fund the gov and fuel economic growth versus the disabled that contribute far less (in some cases nothing)
:?

That seems to be a very short-sighted goal

As I said, we have nothing to show for education but we constantly increase spending as if that's gonna help. When it doesn't, we increase it even more despite that many schools are failing.

Education reform is the answer there, not cutting funding.

Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#26 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="The-Apostle"]

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

The-Apostle

So you would cut spending on the future contributors to the country...those that will provide future tax revenue to fund the gov and fuel economic growth versus the disabled that contribute far less (in some cases nothing)
:?

That seems to be a very short-sighted goal

As I said, we have nothing to show for education but we constantly increase spending as if that's gonna help. When it doesn't, we increase it even more despite that many schools are failing.

Nothing to show for it???
I think everyone in college right now or all the grads on the site would say otherwise.

Also, if you are basing it on results, then what do the disabled do that those being educated do not :?
-what is your basis for taking from one group (education) to either give to another or not take from another group (disabled) ?

As cybr said, we do not have unlimited resources.
It would be nice to take care of everyone. But that is not an option.
With my vote, I choose to take away from those that are more of a drain than a benefit to me and the economy versus another group that will benefit me more

Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#27 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts
TL;DR version: Having an educated, capable workforce both now and in the future is more important to me than helping the disabled (if forced to choose). Also, I do have a sense of obligation to help the elderly that paved the way for us (paid their dues)
Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#28 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

Education reform is the answer there, not cutting funding.

worlock77

That's true. How do you propose we do that?

Avatar image for cybrcatter
cybrcatter

16210

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 1

User Lists: 0

#29 cybrcatter
Member since 2003 • 16210 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]

[QUOTE="The-Apostle"]

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

The-Apostle

So you would cut spending on the future contributors to the country...those that will provide future tax revenue to fund the gov and fuel economic growth versus the disabled that contribute far less (in some cases nothing)
:?

That seems to be a very short-sighted goal

As I said, we have nothing to show for education but we constantly increase spending as if that's gonna help. When it doesn't, we increase it even more despite that many schools are failing.

How can you possibly, in good conscience, say that we have nothing to show for education? You expect others give you, a disabled person, money out of their tax dollars while you would ask that children receive less money for education?

If we're going to go the greedy rout, then I say we give you none at all. I could use that extra money for a nice scotch tomorrow.

Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#30 whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

TL;DR version: Having an educated, capable workforce both now and in the future is more important to me than helping the disabled (if forced to choose). Also, I do have a sense of obligation to help the elderly that paved the way for us (paid their dues)rawsavon
I would say that a better option than cutting aid to the elderly or to education would be to start budget cuts is by cuttingfunding forthose groups that have committed fraud and stolen from the government

Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#31 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]TL;DR version: Having an educated, capable workforce both now and in the future is more important to me than helping the disabled (if forced to choose). Also, I do have a sense of obligation to help the elderly that paved the way for us (paid their dues)whipassmt

I would say that a better option than cutting aid to the elderly or to education would be to start budget cuts is by cuttingfunding forthose groups that have committed fraud and stolen from the government

Doing away with PP would not have the results you think it would ...law of unintended consequences my friend (think about what they do) Unless you plan on replacing them with something else...then it was a zero sum gain
Avatar image for brandojones
brandojones

3103

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 3

User Lists: 0

#32 brandojones
Member since 2005 • 3103 Posts

It's ok. It will probably be a lot worse in a couple of months... :P

Avatar image for SgtKevali
SgtKevali

5763

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#33 SgtKevali
Member since 2009 • 5763 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]Also, where/who do you think should get cut first...if benefits have to be cut.
I probably would start with the disabled.The-Apostle

I'd start with education. We spend too much on it already with nothing to show for it.

Yeah, cut the only thing that allows even a margin of social permeability EVEN MORE (you live in California).

Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#34 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts

It's ok. It will probably be a lot worse in a couple of months... :P

brandojones
Good. I hope it does serve as a symbolic impetus for change (even if it does not actually mean anything). I am in favor of decreasing spending and increasing taxes. ...we need to look no further than Japan for an example as to what can happen when spending is not brought under control
Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#35 whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"]TL;DR version: Having an educated, capable workforce both now and in the future is more important to me than helping the disabled (if forced to choose). Also, I do have a sense of obligation to help the elderly that paved the way for us (paid their dues)rawsavon

I would say that a better option than cutting aid to the elderly or to education would be to start budget cuts is by cuttingfunding forthose groups that have committed fraud and stolen from the government

Doing away with PP would not have the results you think it would ...law of unintended consequences my friend (think about what they do) Unless you plan on replacing them with something else...then it was a zero sum gain

Well if they're gonna break the law and steal from the government why should the government fund them?

Plus I fail to see how cutting funding to a group that's activities lower the number of potential taxpayers would be a "zero sum gain".

Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#36 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="whipassmt"] I would say that a better option than cutting aid to the elderly or to education would be to start budget cuts is by cuttingfunding forthose groups that have committed fraud and stolen from the government

whipassmt

Doing away with PP would not have the results you think it would ...law of unintended consequences my friend (think about what they do) Unless you plan on replacing them with something else...then it was a zero sum gain

Well if they're gonna break the law and steal from the government why should the government fund them?

Plus I fail to see how cutting funding to a group that's activities lower the number of potential taxpayers would be a "zero sum gain".

Would you rather pay to prevent those babies or pay to take care of them (think of the people that use their services...SES)
Avatar image for whipassmt
whipassmt

15375

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 24

User Lists: 0

#37 whipassmt
Member since 2007 • 15375 Posts

[QUOTE="whipassmt"]

[QUOTE="rawsavon"] Doing away with PP would not have the results you think it would ...law of unintended consequences my friend (think about what they do) Unless you plan on replacing them with something else...then it was a zero sum gainrawsavon

Well if they're gonna break the law and steal from the government why should the government fund them?

Plus I fail to see how cutting funding to a group that's activities lower the number of potential taxpayers would be a "zero sum gain".

Would you rather pay to prevent those babies or pay to take care of them (think of the people that use their services...SES)

pay for them to live. Plus as it is now are birth rate is to low, which is causing trouble for our social security as there are more retirees than workers. Also more people means more revenue for grocery stores and toy stores, which are then taxed on that revenue as well as more jobs in the day care field and in education.

Avatar image for The-Apostle
The-Apostle

12197

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 10

User Lists: 0

#38 The-Apostle
Member since 2004 • 12197 Posts

It's ok. It will probably be a lot worse in a couple of months... :P

brandojones
I lol'd. Lol'd because it shows how out of control government spending is. :(
Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#39 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts

So, what TC is saying here is basically:

The physically disabled should be taken care of better. The economy is in poor shape. A way to improve disability would be to transfer funding from education. The reasoning behind this is "they have not shown they are doing anything with the education offered via government funding."

TC is physically disabled himself/her.

-Am I right, so far?

Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#40 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts

[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="whipassmt"]

Well if they're gonna break the law and steal from the government why should the government fund them?

Plus I fail to see how cutting funding to a group that's activities lower the number of potential taxpayers would be a "zero sum gain".

whipassmt

Would you rather pay to prevent those babies or pay to take care of them (think of the people that use their services...SES)

pay for them to live. Plus as it is now are birth rate is to low, which is causing trouble for our social security as there are more retirees than workers. Also more people means more revenue for grocery stores and toy stores, which are then taxed on that revenue as well as more jobs in the day care field and in education.

So you think paying for welfare for them to live is cost effective in reducing our budget issues (versus paying for PP to prevent this situation) :? Also, you can't really say anything about the birth rate with immigration. Furthermore, social security was built on a faulty model...an ever increasing (almost exponential) population growth model. This model was doomed to fail...the population cannot continue to grow forever at a rate that will support those at the top. It is a pyramid scheme and nothing more.
Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#41 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts

So, what TC is saying here is basically:

The physically disabled should be taken care of better. The economy is in poor shape. A way to improve disability would be to transfer funding from education. The reasoning behind this is "they have not shown they are doing anything with the education offered via government funding."

TC is physically disabled himself/her.

-Am I right, so far?

BranKetra
That seems to be an adequate synopsis of the events thus far
Avatar image for XileLord
XileLord

3776

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 6

User Lists: 0

#42 XileLord
Member since 2007 • 3776 Posts

[QUOTE="redstormrisen"]See, if you had a Left that actually has left wing policies then this kind of thing would be safeguarded against. But your country *is* safe from Communism... Good trade there guyswhipassmt

But then in a communist or socialist system the government would take away your right to private property and freedom of religion and throw you in jail for criticizing them. Not to mention dictate that you're only allowed to have a certain number of children.

I don't think any one sided pure system is good and that goes for Communism, Capitalism and Socialism. It's good to not limit yourself to one specific ideal and rule out others just because of the name. It's to bad that in America you have an entire party dedicated towards "SOCIALISM EVIL SOCIALISM COMMUNISMMM BURN IT ALL WOOT CAPITALISM 100% ALL THE WAY" and it's not right.

Free market is great but not when big corporations are beating you in the A** with almost no protection at all from your government.

and what's wrong with limiting the amount of children you can have? I think you'll see population laws become a lot more prominent within the next 50-100 years. This planet only has so many resources and with almost 7 billion were already eating at it pretty bad, just imagine it almost doubled in the next 100 years.

Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#43 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts
[QUOTE="rawsavon"] So you think paying for welfare for them to live is cost effective in reducing our budget issues (versus paying for PP to prevent this situation) :?

At face-value, I don't. However, if a plan were laid out to introduce them to taking care of themselves, it could be good.
Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#44 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts
[QUOTE="BranKetra"][QUOTE="rawsavon"] So you think paying for welfare for them to live is cost effective in reducing our budget issues (versus paying for PP to prevent this situation) :?

At face-value, I don't. However, if a plan were laid out to introduce them to taking care of themselves, it could be good.

Good luck with that...especially with unemployment at its current rate. Every technological advance we have comes at the cost of needing to employ less people...nothing in life is free. So I do not foresee a situation where there will be enough jobs overall (some industries will always be in demand) to enable all these people to be self-sufficient
Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#45 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts
[QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="BranKetra"][QUOTE="rawsavon"] So you think paying for welfare for them to live is cost effective in reducing our budget issues (versus paying for PP to prevent this situation) :?

At face-value, I don't. However, if a plan were laid out to introduce them to taking care of themselves, it could be good.

Good luck with that...especially with unemployment at its current rate. Every technological advance we have comes at the cost of needing to employ less people...nothing in life is free. So I do not foresee a situation where there will be enough jobs overall (some industries will always be in demand) to enable all these people to be self-sufficient

Space colonization. It's already happening with space stations.
Avatar image for rawsavon
rawsavon

40001

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#46 rawsavon
Member since 2004 • 40001 Posts
[QUOTE="BranKetra"][QUOTE="rawsavon"][QUOTE="BranKetra"] At face-value, I don't. However, if a plan were laid out to introduce them to taking care of themselves, it could be good.

Good luck with that...especially with unemployment at its current rate. Every technological advance we have comes at the cost of needing to employ less people...nothing in life is free. So I do not foresee a situation where there will be enough jobs overall (some industries will always be in demand) to enable all these people to be self-sufficient

Space colonization. It's already happening with space stations.

It is not really a matter of 'space' (pun not intentional) for the people to work on...we have ample space here in the US. It is a matter of the jobs necessary to function. We are getting to the point where we are too 'smart' for our own good...where we are so efficient and productive that many people are just not needed to get by Hell, it used to take a huge team of accountants weeks to do what I do in less than a day b/c of technology This is exactly what the unabomber feared
Avatar image for coolbeans90
coolbeans90

21305

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#47 coolbeans90
Member since 2009 • 21305 Posts

I normally participate in threads like these, but cyber and rawsavon seem to have covered the bases.

Considering the magnitude of funding for both Medicare and Social Security coupled with the fact that they tend to not get cut, old people definitely aren't getting shafted.

Avatar image for MagnumPI
MagnumPI

9617

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 2

User Lists: 0

#48 MagnumPI
Member since 2002 • 9617 Posts

Of course they are going to cut the elderly and disabled once the elderly and disabled are a burden they can no longer afford. I don't doubt your suspicions.

Avatar image for branketra
branketra

51726

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 9

User Lists: 9

#49 branketra
Member since 2006 • 51726 Posts



It is not really a matter of 'space' (pun not intentional) for the people to work on...we have ample space here in the US.
It is a matter of the jobs necessary to function. We are getting to the point where we are too 'smart' for our own good...where we are so efficient and productive that many people are just not needed to get by

Hell, it used to take a huge team of accountants weeks to do what I do in less than a day b/c of technology

This is exactly what the unabomber fearedrawsavon

^I understand that with technological improvements come less work. That is the idea, after all.

I'm not talking about "elbow room," though. It's more about pioneering. Something to be motivated about. "The final frontier"

Avatar image for worlock77
worlock77

22552

Forum Posts

0

Wiki Points

0

Followers

Reviews: 0

User Lists: 0

#50 worlock77
Member since 2009 • 22552 Posts

Of course they are going to cut the elderly and disabled once the elderly and disabled are a burden they can no longer afford. I don't doubt your suspicions.

MagnumPI

They're not going to cut the elderly. No one wants to piss off the largest voter block.