BF wants sex without a protection/condom!

[qwertz]

It would be more efficient to have a mod sort this out by providing the necessary info and locking the thread. Not even I would read through eight pages of bickering! But anyway, it's you're (pl.) battle, so I'll let you continue.

Shut up .

[qwertz]

Irony in saying I'm not understanding or ignoring the the post? Especially when said person has mistaken who he is speaking to and made unfounded assumptions about them?

It's simple really. I don't disagree with Welfare in principle. You and Cam do. You and Cam belittle anyone who does not come around to your view point. Would you like a graph that shows poverty prior to welfare being introduced and after and see the drop in poverty in every case? It's a sad state of affairs that we are heading back to those pre welfare levels with the rising cost of everyday living thanks to the glory of Capitalism. (I support a true free market, but it does not exist in any western country).

Sure it would be great if everyone had a job and was able to support themselves. Unfortunately it's not going to happen. Even if it was, what would happen in the current economic climate in places all around the world since the GFC? No welfare means a whole lot of people are not going to be able to support their families. I would rather there be a welfare system for people in need than to have vast number of innocent people suffering needlessly. You say welfare should be left for local communities. Why? In times past everything was left to small communities including military. If the government wants to take responsibility for one, it takes responsibility for all.

The main point being, dont have children if you cant.

[Mathias]

You say welfare should be left for local communities. Why? In times past everything was left to small communities including military. If the government wants to take responsibility for one, it takes responsibility for all.

Logic fail.

[IndiReloaded]

Irony in saying I'm not understanding or ignoring the the post? Especially when said person has mistaken who he is speaking to and made unfounded assumptions about them?

It's simple really. I don't disagree with Welfare in principle. You and Cam do. You and Cam belittle anyone who does not come around to your view point. Would you like a graph that shows poverty prior to welfare being introduced and after and see the drop in poverty in every case? It's a sad state of affairs that we are heading back to those pre welfare levels with the rising cost of everyday living thanks to the glory of Capitalism. (I support a true free market, but it does not exist in any western country).

Sure it would be great if everyone had a job and was able to support themselves. Unfortunately it's not going to happen. Even if it was, what would happen in the current economic climate in places all around the world since the GFC? No welfare means a whole lot of people are not going to be able to support their families. I would rather there be a welfare system for people in need than to have vast number of innocent people suffering needlessly. You say welfare should be left for local communities. Why? In times past everything was left to small communities including military. If the government wants to take responsibility for one, it takes responsibility for all.

You didn't watch the vid and don't understand the basic meaning of being liberal. I'll wait for you to say something new.

As for the poverty levels, I already made a rebuttal to that paper you posted. You haven't responded. Poverty levels haven't decreased b/c of welfare, they have decreased b/c our economic model has changed. There would be fewer poor today even without welfare systems having been implemented. Are you actually reading and undertstanding the information you are saying supports your point?

Your income is your property, minus what you pay in taxes. That money belongs to the government, whether you like it or not. You don't get to decide how they spend it.

Is this really how the typical american 'thinks'?

Who is the government? Who is 'they'? You don't have any say? LOL!

Last time I checked, your government was comprised of civil *servants*. I hadn't realized the government owned anything. My mistake--I thought that taxes was more of a stewardship and a sacred trust.

[IndiReloaded]

It would be more efficient to have a mod sort this out by providing the necessary info and locking the thread. Not even I would read through eight pages of bickering! But anyway, it's you're (pl.) battle, so I'll let you continue.

Other posters are following this thread. If you don't like it, don't read. Cam just needs to stop calling people stupid (they aren't, just ignorant) and the mods won't bother.

[doppelgaenger]

Other posters are following this thread. If you don't like it, don't read. Cam just needs to stop calling people stupid (they aren't, just ignorant) and the mods won't bother.

If you don't like my posts, don't read them.

[IndiReloaded]

I often don't but in this case, you actually posted to me directly:

You guys really need to learn how to pick your battles. Indi, that's ten minutes of your life you will never get back. Was it worth it?

LOL, Dopple. Sometimes you can really go eetee.

[MaidenMinx]

May I request that we use the term 'uninformed' rather than ignorant? And maybe 'of different opinion' rather than stupid?

[CAM]

If the government wants to take responsibility for one, it takes responsibility for all.

Government is not some separate entity. I a social contract based society, we comprise government. All of us. Combined, we are the sovereign. Government exists because we say it does--we create it to protect our rights and our property. We do not form government to be compassionate. At best we are humane to those who are not able to provide for themselves due to mental or physical incapacity. We provide just enough for them to survive because to provide more would be encourage reproduction and more misery.

Sounds cold, huh? Guess what--that is the history of 200,000 of human beings. Of that 200,000 years, we have only seriously discussed social welfare in Western society for roughly 410 years. Of that four century span we have only view social welfare as a property right for 78 years...that 0.04% of all human history. As a property right, we say that should you meet some political definition (it is relative and changeable), we will take property from some individuals and give it to others simply because they exist, regardless of effort of any kind.

I'm sure that you could care less about this. You crap on nearly 800 years of human history that led us to develop the modern idea of individualism and individual rights, property ownership, and legal due process. In the interest of your monthly check, you wish to return to pre-modern society so that you can simply exist. I doubt that you would actually like it back then, but that's where you are taking us. And, you bitch about capitalism...guess what gave you every pleasureable toy and trinket and experience that you currently lust after and wish to spend you undeserved government check? All those exciting things you want were made by people who work hard to produce that stuff and to sell it to you for a profit...because what they sell, you want more than they do...they are driven by profit and you are driven by momentary pleasure.

[CAM]

If you want to read the socialist "plan," then go read Bernstein's "Evolutionary Socialism."

Rosa baby, you were wrong.
Karl, also wrong.
Vlad, old buddy...well you got at least 50 percent of it correct.

[CAM]

May I request that we use the term 'uninformed' rather than ignorant? And maybe 'of different opinion' rather than stupid?

I'm using pixie dust on my text before posting. And, Glade.

[IndiReloaded]

..........

[MaidenMinx]

I'm using pixie dust on my text before posting. And, Glade.

Wow Cam, are you this much of a jerk all the time? I hope that's working for you.

[roobarb]

I'm sure that you could care less about this. You crap on nearly 800 years of human history that led us to develop the modern idea of individualism and individual rights, property ownership, and legal due process. In the interest of your monthly check, you wish to return to pre-modern society so that you can simply exist. I doubt that you would actually like it back then, but that's where you are taking us. And, you bitch about capitalism...guess what gave you every pleasureable toy and trinket and experience that you currently lust after and wish to spend you undeserved government check? All those exciting things you want were made by people who work hard to produce that stuff and to sell it to you for a profit...because what they sell, you want more than they do...they are driven by profit and you are driven by momentary pleasure.

I love how you make so many assumptions on what I do or do not crap on based on your own narrow minded view points. Show me where I said I wanted to abolish capitalism and bring about socialism. Go on. One post where I specifically state anything you suggest that I do believe.

I support welfare in principal, I disagree with the current practice. Welfare takes many forms and not once have you stopped to question what forms I do believe in. Just assumed I'm all for open slather blank cheque writing.
I support a true open market capitalism. What you see today is not a true free market. That doesn't mean I am against capitalism or do not appreciate the lifestyle that the current system brings.

Any more straw men you want to throw at me?

@Indi - I haven't forgotten what you've posted. I'm spending time looking up more about what you post (both for and against) so I can make an more informed response.

[qwertz]

If you don't like my posts, don't read them.

If you don't like this thread, don't read it.