This sums it up well.

[myrkul]

We'll give the kids a coat (Education system)
Violent people or people who have been tricked get a coat (Military)
Politicians get coats (Public Service Salary)
Even Bankers get a coat (Bailouts)

But you're worried about the POOR guy getting a coat!?!?!??!?!?

Did you know most Wal Mart employees qualify for welfare? How bout you stop bitching at poor people, and tell Wal Mart to get THEIR employees off welfare. And they aren't the only ones.

Boy, you are just on a roll. If missing the point were an Olympic event, you would be a gold medalist, and probably world record holder.

We're not worried about the poor guy getting the coat. As you see in the first frame, the poor guy got a coat voluntarily. Do you not see the connection between the second and third frames?

[oakpacific]

Who should be in a place to judge if I accumulate my wealth morally? The majority? They used to believe being a Jewish is immoral.

Yeah, deciding laws by majority decision is stupid. It's better to have a simple principle, that everyone can agree on, like, say, "No person has the right to initiate the use of force, threat of force, or fraud on another person or their property," and let people choose what other additional rules, if any, they want to live under, and who they would like to enforce those rules.

Taxation is not even law, it's retroactive. The law only say things like:" We decide that to get people to work more than 8 hours per day is detrimental to their health so from now on you can't do that anymore or you will get fined"  I am OK with such things. But taxation will say instead:"We made the decision that for the last 20 years you have been treating your workers in a totally wrong way, so x% of your wealth will be immediately confiscated to compensate them, and sorry for not having told your earlier!" And I am not even talking about the"if you are rich you must have exploited your workers" taxes

[Jutarul]

Too much of a simplification. It doesn't discuss how the coat came into existence.

Someone used a machine they owned, and thread and cloth that they owned, to make a coat. The man then bought the coat from that person (apparently as part of a suit, since it matches his pants).

That's exactly one way it can happen. But things are much more complicated in society.
E.g. imagine another scenario where the guy with the coat made blankets impractical. Now assume the guy who's freezing only had a blanket and no coat.

That said, I sympathize with what the picture tries to point out: taking away property from someone, in order to give it to somebody else, is an act of force - and that is at odds with our understanding of liberty.

[FinShaggy]

We'll give the kids a coat (Education system)
Violent people or people who have been tricked get a coat (Military)
Politicians get coats (Public Service Salary)
Even Bankers get a coat (Bailouts)

But you're worried about the POOR guy getting a coat!?!?!??!?!?

Did you know most Wal Mart employees qualify for welfare? How bout you stop bitching at poor people, and tell Wal Mart to get THEIR employees off welfare. And they aren't the only ones.

Boy, you are just on a roll. If missing the point were an Olympic event, you would be a gold medalist, and probably world record holder.

We're not worried about the poor guy getting the coat. As you see in the first frame, the poor guy got a coat voluntarily. Do you not see the connection between the second and third frames?

If there were enough charity in the world there would be no need for welfare.

You bitch at me for being about "ideas", but at least my ideas are solutions and not just me bitching like yours is. Sure, taxes and welfare suck. If you hate it so much, why don't you start a charity instead of crying??

[oakpacific]

We'll give the kids a coat (Education system)
Violent people or people who have been tricked get a coat (Military)
Politicians get coats (Public Service Salary)
Even Bankers get a coat (Bailouts)

But you're worried about the POOR guy getting a coat!?!?!??!?!?

Did you know most Wal Mart employees qualify for welfare? How bout you stop bitching at poor people, and tell Wal Mart to get THEIR employees off welfare. And they aren't the only ones.

Boy, you are just on a roll. If missing the point were an Olympic event, you would be a gold medalist, and probably world record holder.

We're not worried about the poor guy getting the coat. As you see in the first frame, the poor guy got a coat voluntarily. Do you not see the connection between the second and third frames?

If there were enough charity in the world there would be no need for welfare.

You bitch at me for being about "ideas", but at least my ideas are solutions and not just me bitching like yours is. Sure, taxes and welfare suck. If you hate it so much, why don't you start a charity instead of crying??

So, since it is not your property, perhaps you should first politely ask what do the owners think it's best to do with them, and work something out with them, before accusing them in the oppa government style?

[FinShaggy]

And by the way YOU are the king of missing the point.
I said that Wal Mart should get it's employees off welfare. That doesn't just apply to the welfare picture, but by YOUR logic (and that cartoon) applies to all of it.

If Wal Mart would PAY its employees, there would be less people needing coats. Then everyone could see who really needed coats.

[FinShaggy]

We'll give the kids a coat (Education system)
Violent people or people who have been tricked get a coat (Military)
Politicians get coats (Public Service Salary)
Even Bankers get a coat (Bailouts)

But you're worried about the POOR guy getting a coat!?!?!??!?!?

Did you know most Wal Mart employees qualify for welfare? How bout you stop bitching at poor people, and tell Wal Mart to get THEIR employees off welfare. And they aren't the only ones.

Boy, you are just on a roll. If missing the point were an Olympic event, you would be a gold medalist, and probably world record holder.

We're not worried about the poor guy getting the coat. As you see in the first frame, the poor guy got a coat voluntarily. Do you not see the connection between the second and third frames?

If there were enough charity in the world there would be no need for welfare.

You bitch at me for being about "ideas", but at least my ideas are solutions and not just me bitching like yours is. Sure, taxes and welfare suck. If you hate it so much, why don't you start a charity instead of crying??

So, since it is not your property, perhaps you should first politely ask what do the owners think it's best to do with them, and work something out with them, before accusing them in the oppa government style?

Or, we should make it where those people aren't needy anymore and avoid the whole situation.

[oakpacific]

We'll give the kids a coat (Education system)
Violent people or people who have been tricked get a coat (Military)
Politicians get coats (Public Service Salary)
Even Bankers get a coat (Bailouts)

But you're worried about the POOR guy getting a coat!?!?!??!?!?

Did you know most Wal Mart employees qualify for welfare? How bout you stop bitching at poor people, and tell Wal Mart to get THEIR employees off welfare. And they aren't the only ones.

Boy, you are just on a roll. If missing the point were an Olympic event, you would be a gold medalist, and probably world record holder.

We're not worried about the poor guy getting the coat. As you see in the first frame, the poor guy got a coat voluntarily. Do you not see the connection between the second and third frames?

If there were enough charity in the world there would be no need for welfare.

You bitch at me for being about "ideas", but at least my ideas are solutions and not just me bitching like yours is. Sure, taxes and welfare suck. If you hate it so much, why don't you start a charity instead of crying??

So, since it is not your property, perhaps you should first politely ask what do the owners think it's best to do with them, and work something out with them, before accusing them in the oppa government style?

Or, we should make it where those people aren't needy anymore and avoid the whole situation.

You will be one of those people. Sooner or later, if things keep going the way they are.

[myrkul]

We'll give the kids a coat (Education system)
Violent people or people who have been tricked get a coat (Military)
Politicians get coats (Public Service Salary)
Even Bankers get a coat (Bailouts)

But you're worried about the POOR guy getting a coat!?!?!??!?!?

Did you know most Wal Mart employees qualify for welfare? How bout you stop bitching at poor people, and tell Wal Mart to get THEIR employees off welfare. And they aren't the only ones.

Boy, you are just on a roll. If missing the point were an Olympic event, you would be a gold medalist, and probably world record holder.

We're not worried about the poor guy getting the coat. As you see in the first frame, the poor guy got a coat voluntarily. Do you not see the connection between the second and third frames?

If there were enough charity in the world there would be no need for welfare.

You bitch at me for being about "ideas", but at least my ideas are solutions and not just me bitching like yours is. Sure, taxes and welfare suck. If you hate it so much, why don't you start a charity instead of crying??

Do you have any idea how much Americans give to charity? There is no need for welfare. Before welfare, mutual aid groups and private charities did a fine job of taking care of the less fortunate.

Welfare as we know it is a direct result of the great depression, which in turn is a direct result of the federal reserve and inflation. Government created a problem that it had to step in and "fix."

[FinShaggy]

There are CEOs and Family members (The Waltons) making Billions of dollars a year. If each of them gave up 1 Billion, they could pay everyone of their employees in the entire country more. If they each gave up 2 billion, they could probably get 20% of the Welfare recipients OFF welfare.

Imagine if EVERY company did that.

Sure, job creators are great. But they owe you money for work, you don't owe them money for creating a job for you.

[myrkul]

There are CEOs and Family members (The Waltons) making Billions of dollars a year. If each of them gave up 1 Billion, they could pay everyone of their employees in the entire country more. If they each gave up 2 billion, they could probably get 20% of the Welfare recipients OFF welfare.

Imagine if EVERY company did that.

Sure, job creators are great. But they owe you money for work, you don't owe them money for creating a job for you.

Yes, they do owe them money for work. That's called "pay," and if I recall from my days working at Wal-mart, we did get paid.

[FinShaggy]

Do you have any idea how much Americans give to charity? There is no need for welfare. Before welfare, mutual aid groups and private charities did a fine job of taking care of the less fortunate.

Welfare as we know it is a direct result of the great depression, which in turn is a direct result of the federal reserve and inflation. Government created a problem that it had to step in and "fix."

Most of Americas charity goes to Sarah Mcgloclin, Dogs, Cats, Africa, Cancer, Jerrey's Kids & Aids... Not poor people.

Again,
If you don't like where the government money goes right now, then start your own charity and make it where those people are no longer needy. That way your charity can supply welfare before the government ever has to.

[FinShaggy]

There are CEOs and Family members (The Waltons) making Billions of dollars a year. If each of them gave up 1 Billion, they could pay everyone of their employees in the entire country more. If they each gave up 2 billion, they could probably get 20% of the Welfare recipients OFF welfare.

Imagine if EVERY company did that.

Sure, job creators are great. But they owe you money for work, you don't owe them money for creating a job for you.

Yes, they do owe them money for work. That's called "pay," and if I recall from my days working at Wal-mart, we did get paid.

Please try reading. I said the job creator owes money, the worker owes NO money to the job creator.

Most job creators feel entitled to money, just for "helping" others by paying them.

[hawkeye]

And by the way YOU are the king of missing the point.
I said that Wal Mart should get it's employees off welfare. That doesn't just apply to the welfare picture, but by YOUR logic (and that cartoon) applies to all of it.

If Wal Mart would PAY its employees, there would be less people needing coats. Then everyone could see who really needed coats.

Isn't this Walmart thing a myth?  That most of them are actually getting along just fine.

And what does qualify for welfare mean exactly?  If we are going by what government says then it seems to be a pretty broad category and a lot of people who most of us would consider don't need welfare seem to fall into it.

[tiberiandusk]

The poor will depend on the system. No way around it when you're born in a mud hole and told you won't be shit EVER. Not saying this is always the case but I'm surely seen it with my own eyes.. Most people that start at the bottom stay there because:

1. their born into poverty
2. lack education
3. skill-less and unmotivated

The third being a direct effect of the previous.

Give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. Teach a man how to fish, he'll eat for a lifetime. Give a man a fish every day, he'll depend on your good graces to survive.

You need a place to fish to begin with.

[FinShaggy]

And by the way YOU are the king of missing the point.
I said that Wal Mart should get it's employees off welfare. That doesn't just apply to the welfare picture, but by YOUR logic (and that cartoon) applies to all of it.

If Wal Mart would PAY its employees, there would be less people needing coats. Then everyone could see who really needed coats.

Isn't this Walmart thing a myth?  That most of them are actually getting along just fine.

"Getting along just fine" is completely possible, that doesn't mean they don't qualify or use welfare though.

[oakpacific]

There are CEOs and Family members (The Waltons) making Billions of dollars a year. If each of them gave up 1 Billion, they could pay everyone of their employees in the entire country more. If they each gave up 2 billion, they could probably get 20% of the Welfare recipients OFF welfare.

Imagine if EVERY company did that.

Sure, job creators are great. But they owe you money for work, you don't owe them money for creating a job for you.

It's strange that those children getting beaten up will often do even worse in the school.

[Nolo]

When the poor get money from the government it's called welfare.  When the rich get money from the government its called a bailout.  

[oakpacific]

We'll give the kids a coat (Education system)
Violent people or people who have been tricked get a coat (Military)
Politicians get coats (Public Service Salary)
Even Bankers get a coat (Bailouts)

But you're worried about the POOR guy getting a coat!?!?!??!?!?

Did you know most Wal Mart employees qualify for welfare? How bout you stop bitching at poor people, and tell Wal Mart to get THEIR employees off welfare. And they aren't the only ones.

Sounds about right.  When the poor get money from the government it's called welfare.  When the rich get money from the government its called a bailout. 

Two wrongs don't make one right.

[myrkul]

If you don't like where the government money goes right now, then start your own charity and make it where those people are no longer needy. That way your charity can supply welfare before the government ever has to.

I never said I don't like where the money goes (though I certainly do object to paying for the murder of brown people on the other side of the planet). I take issue with the way they get it.

There are CEOs and Family members (The Waltons) making Billions of dollars a year. If each of them gave up 1 Billion, they could pay everyone of their employees in the entire country more. If they each gave up 2 billion, they could probably get 20% of the Welfare recipients OFF welfare.

Imagine if EVERY company did that.

Sure, job creators are great. But they owe you money for work, you don't owe them money for creating a job for you.

Yes, they do owe them money for work. That's called "pay," and if I recall from my days working at Wal-mart, we did get paid.

Please try reading. I said the job creator owes money, the worker owes NO money to the job creator.

Most job creators feel entitled to money, just for "helping" others by paying them.

Please try reading. I was agreeing with you that the workers are owed money for work. Again, that is called "pay." And, again, I clearly recall getting a paycheck when I worked at Walmart. They even cashed it for me.