|
I would find a really nice rental property in Saugatuck, MI, and live out the rest of my days with that money. Plus I would give each of my family members so much money a month, to help them out. I would probably buy myself a newer car. And, maybe do some traveling.
|
|
|
|
|
Many police departments love the war on drugs because they can steal peoples assets and get to use the money to pay salaries and buy more guns. That is a driver for the huge increase in the swat style raids.
|
|
|
|
Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all.
I don't think that statement was exactly putting the guy in a positive light. I guess because my friend is highly intelligent, very skilled in a variety of sets and will retire with a beautiful home on a lake in a scenic part of Quebec with a good pension and a couple rental properties. I guess the janitor I know doesn't fit your view does he? I'm happy for your janitor friend, but that's not how it is for mine. Sorry if that offends you, but it has nothing to do with looking down on him. I quite respect him for his work when so many in his position would choose differently. Mr. Nate would not take a handout so long as he could work. |
|
|
|
|
So, all the experts agree this is a lie and that the data can be retrieved so what is Camp going to do about it? Certainly there are honest IT Tech employees in DC that work for the government and do those backup and know where to go get the data and Camp needs to get that ordered asap before obama has the entire server destroyed to hide the facts.
|
|
|
|
|
Under the very best of circumstances, government is slow and wasteful. Both its structure and the incentives make it that way. At its worst, government is not only slow and wasteful, but is also incompetent and corrupt. That is why government should be limited. Government should be doing less, not more. Government is essential, so we must be expected to tolerate a limited amount of slowness and waste, but we should not tolerate incompetence or corruption.
|
|
|
|
|
I suppose I should say our janitors are not well paid, and I doubt they get great benefits either. I know and like the man, and he walks to work from his small shotgun style house that has probably been around since who knows when. He is a hard working guy.
|
|
|
|
The problem arises when these unproductive people have children. Cutting welfare benefits from these people means that their children are affected. If we can find a way do see that children are taken of and their parents are not maybe we can get people to be more productive.
There is such a thing as generational welfare, and being trapped in a cycle of poverty. It does involve a mindset, but it is far more complicated than can be explained away with "lazy and entitled". If you start with poor education and lack of skill sets, combine it with limited opportunity, or the availability of only low/minimum wage employment that keeps them in poverty...then you get "what's the point?" They do better (financially) by simply staying put. There's also this: People who are disabled, but still capable of doing simple jobs or tasks that pay low...get their welfare benefits cut, so they stay stuck in the same or worse situation. I don't really buy that. I mean, I believe that is the justification, I just don't believe it's valid. Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all. But they have the integrity to want to work regardless, and to put in the hours for their pay even if they could make as much sitting around on welfare and every government benefit they can qualify for. There are people who could be on welfare and do just about as well as they do at their jobs, but they work anyway because it's the right thing to do. I don't feel sorry for those who choose to do the opposite. Government benefits should be for those who are truly in need, not those who just figure they're just as well off not working. don't look down on the guys who keep our schools clean. Any work is honorable, and as a matter of fact I have a friend that is a janitor at a school and he does fine, he even bought a fixer upper on a lake in the beautiful Laurentians http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurentian_Mountainsand he renovated it and it's gorgeous. Not to mention the bennies and pension from a gov. job. The guy works hard, does good work and is enjoying his life. It is what we make of it.........life. Nobody ever said it would be easy, but it ain't impossible either. My friend the janitor is living a dream... lakeside in the Laurentians The glass really is half full......... What in the world made you think I was looking down on him after saying that he has integrity to work at a job that doesn't pay well because he has a work ethic? |
|
|
|
The problem arises when these unproductive people have children. Cutting welfare benefits from these people means that their children are affected. If we can find a way do see that children are taken of and their parents are not maybe we can get people to be more productive.
There is such a thing as generational welfare, and being trapped in a cycle of poverty. It does involve a mindset, but it is far more complicated than can be explained away with "lazy and entitled". If you start with poor education and lack of skill sets, combine it with limited opportunity, or the availability of only low/minimum wage employment that keeps them in poverty...then you get "what's the point?" They do better (financially) by simply staying put. There's also this: People who are disabled, but still capable of doing simple jobs or tasks that pay low...get their welfare benefits cut, so they stay stuck in the same or worse situation. I don't really buy that. I mean, I believe that is the justification, I just don't believe it's valid. Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all. But they have the integrity to want to work regardless, and to put in the hours for their pay even if they could make as much sitting around on welfare and every government benefit they can qualify for. There are people who could be on welfare and do just about as well as they do at their jobs, but they work anyway because it's the right thing to do. I don't feel sorry for those who choose to do the opposite. Government benefits should be for those who are truly in need, not those who just figure they're just as well off not working. |
|
|
|
hey.. al-malaki has to go... and lets sit back and watch how the terrorists... terrorists that were captured and jailed and let go... take over chemical weapons.... (hey, are they considered weapons of mass destruction?) nah, nothing bad is going ot come of this.... Washington — Sunni extremists in Iraq have occupied what was once Saddam Hussein’s premier chemical-weapons production facility, a complex that still contains a stockpile of old weapons, State Department and other U.S. government officials said. U.S. officials don’t believe the Sunni militants will be able to create a functional chemical weapon from the material. (they didn't know that terrorists were taking over iraq, so one should not have a lot of faith in what this administration knows or doesnt' know, cause Obama keeps telling the american people that he didn't know about fast and furious, benghazi attacks, syria, irs..... ) The weapons stockpiled at the Al Muthanna complex are old, contaminated and hard to move, officials said. Nonetheless, the capture of the chemical-weapon stockpile by the forces of the Islamic State of Iraq and al-Sham, known as ISIS or ISIL, the militant group that is seizing territory in the country, has grabbed the attention of the U.S. “We remain concerned about the seizure of any military site by the ISIL,” Jen Psaki, the State Department spokeswoman, said in a written statement. “We do not believe that the complex contains CW materials of military value and it would be very difficult, if not impossible, to safely move the materials.” The takeover underscores the chaos gripping Iraq and the possibility that the growing Sunni rebellion could further destabilize the Middle East. Not lost on U.S. government and military officials is the irony that the latest chapter in a war designed to strip Iraq of chemical weapons could see radical Sunni extremists take control of that same stockpile. The rise of ISIS has reignited the debate about the 2003 invasion of Iraq by the Bush administration and the 2011 decision by the Obama administration to withdraw remaining military forces from the country. The takeover of a chemical weapons stockpile—even if the weapons are useless—seems likely to further intensify those debates Read more at http://patdollard.com/2014/06/al-qaeda-isis-seizes-control-of-saddam-husseins-chemical-weapons-facility/#9XlLcV2Ubp9H3ceW.99 |
|
|
|
|
I have a question.... why doesn't obama say that the terrorists have to go?? they are the ones murdering the citizens..... ??
|
|
|
|
|
The entire concept of Christianity is based on the game show "Let's make a deal." I will do good things and in return, I will receive ever lasting life. I get a pay back for my efforts. It is only when you do good, for the sake of others with no desire for payback that you are actually manifesting the highest form of charity. And, any review of today's churches shows they are far far away from this charity.
|
|
|
|
|
Government is not necessary for our fundamental living needs. The word Government implies "governance" over a group of people. If everyone is governing, then the word Government would no longer apply. It's like this: If everyone has power, than nobody does.
|
|
|
|
Many Americans seem to hold strong views on welfare but seldom can agree on the statistics. This website claims that only 4.1 % of Americans are on welfare while other sites claim its higher. Many folks claim its predominantly blacks who are on welfare which as far as this site suggests is not the case at all. Some claim whole families have existed for generation on welfare but here it suggests that over 80% of those are supported with assistance for less than 5 years. Like most everything in America today its political as well. Many conservative are against welfare and some want it abolished altogether. Many liberals support assistance and even want to see it increased. Many on both sides want to see firmer controls on who can and cannot collect and for how long. What do you think of these stats? Any surprises? Do you have others you think are more accurate? How do you feel about welfare? What are your views? www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statisticsYour stats look pretty good ; now if you could learn to read and comprehend; you'd understand what conservatives are talking about. 20% of the people who receive welfare are generational clients. That doesn't strike you as wrong? ONE family in FIVE on welfare have made a career of it. Since this story is just talking about "welfare"; I'm guessing it doesn't include the chronic un-employed, or those that found a good "doctor" and are signed up for lifetime disability payments because they have a "personality disorder", or a "bad back" at age 27. Also your stats show that over 55% of their "welfare" recipients are minorities----- what percentage of the general population do they represent? |
|
|
|
In order to claim Christianity is 'just as bad' as an excuse for Islam , the accusers have go back in history several hundred years and then distort the truth.
If you only beat your wives and honor kill your daughters, then you're a 'moderate' Muslim. A 'moderate' by Islamic standards would be a murderous, misogynistic, raving lunatic by Christian standards.
And let's not forget that we Americans are the ultimate targets for those currently trying to gain control of Iraq and its oil billions. That will finance just about any terrorist attack on America that these fanatics bent on world domination can dream up. Everything has its price, including nuclear weapons.
Men never do evil so completely or so joyfully than when they do it from religious conviction. Blaise Pascal. All religions are evil. It is true that Islam is particularly ghastly and looks likely to be for the foreseeable future. The Bushite invasion was in pursuit of Iraqi oil but it could not be sustained. All they achieved was to make it available for fanatics to fight over. As to nuclear weapons it appears that some shadowy American background figures are doing their best to push the idea, making claims that the Russian arsenal is depleted and old. |
|
|
|
|
And all religions are evil, at the moment it must be said that Islam is particularly ghastly.
In the Middle Ages, when Christianity was doing much the same things this post is condemning Islam, Muslim scholars were making massive advances in astronomy, mathematics and other pursuits.
Societies have a close relationship with their principal religion and mankind will stagnate so long as religions are anchoring them.
I do agree that Islam, if it continues with the present bunch of fanatics leading them, will probably go in reverse.
“Men never do evil so completely or so joyfully than when they do it from religious conviction.” Blaise Pascal.
|
|
|
|
You may feel safe and treated well Skwanderer - as an American male professional of substance and with connections, that would likely be true in many Islamic nations. Your comfort level says little about the extent of radical activity and sentiment, which more often targets other Muslims who are insufficiently Islamic... We're still holding at Guantanamo the Indonesian terrorist leader, Riduam Isamuddin (better known as "Hambali") who was Bin Laden's chief of operations in SE Asia, leader of Jemmah Islamiyah. Thai Police and CIA captured him in 2005. Abu Bakar Bashir, who acted as JI's spiritual leader, and was finally convicted (only after Indo govt bowed to international pressure) of conspiracy for his part in Bali bombings, and got 2 and 1/2 years - a slap on the hand considering the act. He walks free today, and is still popular. Zero doubt elements in the country are sympathetic to, give safe haven to other Jihadists, though they have local goals. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riduan_Isamuddinhttp://www.cfr.org/indonesia/jemaah-islamiyah-k-jemaah-islamiah/p8948http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Bakar_Bashir |
|
|
|
It seems many of our early politicians realized that political parties could and probably would be sources of strife and conflict and the nation would be better off without them. I doubt they would have thought that we would reach a time where compromise was a dirty word and members of different political parties could actually hate each other. The two party system is so entrenched in America its hard to imagine the nation without them. Many of us would like to see a third party to give us more choice but I wonder if anyone thinks we would be better off without any political parties at all? In fact....how would the government work without organized political parties? Are these parties necessary for democratic nations to remain free and governed by the people? Without the ordered structure of parties would politics be an exercise similar to "herding cats"? Are political parties doing more harm than good? What do you think? http://www.scholastic.com/teachers/article/political-partieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_parties_in_the_United_StatesWe created that via our Tea Party Movement. We Now have Collectivist Liberals on the Radical and Extreme Left wing, the DC Insider Republican Moderates, and our Individualist, Conservative Tea Party Movement. I do Not see how you might eliminate the two Very entrenched party Enemies. Consider the huge money the Insider GOP has spent fighting against our Fiscal Conservatism with our Tea Party candidates who still kicked their butts! The "Demopublican" Party owns all the keys to the DC castle! |
|
|
|
Hey, good questions - if meant seriously. Of course, you all missed the point of the OP (can't say I am surprised), but hey, this could be a good discussion, if you are willing to think outside of your boxes.
I doubt you are serious though - at least several of those questions have been dealt with by scholars - but whether due to fear or what not, you are not aware of them.
No, they haven't.AiG and ICR do not employ scholars. Yes they have, and yes they do. That is extremely dishonest way to skirt the issue, driver. Not exactly a shocker ..... |
|
|
|
|
Hey, good questions - if meant seriously. Of course, you all missed the point of the OP (can't say I am surprised), but hey, this could be a good discussion, if you are willing to think outside of your boxes.
I doubt you are serious though - at least several of those questions have been dealt with by scholars - but whether due to fear or what not, you are not aware of them.
|
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
