• Current Events & Politics
    Welcome Guest
    Please read before posting:
    Forum Guidelines Bluelight Rules
  • Current Events & Politics Moderators: deficiT | tryptakid | Foreigner

CE&P social thread: why do the people I disagree with hate freedom so much?

Status
Not open for further replies.
bmxxx said:
i wonder what, if any, correlation exists between ppl who don't work or dislike work, and ppl who think wealth should be distributed from those who produce and create jobs, to those who just sit around 24/7
Click to expand...

As a marxist who was working 72 hours per week for $10/hr without overtime doing commercial construction before the inevitable capitalist crisis, I am in favor of wealth distribution and the direct invest of real work, skills training and free education. :)
 
first, i hope that my last post was seen as the joke it was (if the white-colored text saying "take the bait take the bait" beneath it wasn't seen ;] )

that said, does anyone deny that welfare programs of most any sort actually provide disincentive to productivity? I cannot fathom that my IRL experiences, wherein that is almost universally the case, are anomalous to myself.
 
Not really, I was having the same discussion with my dad (a conservative, lol) the other night, and he was arguing the exact same thing. When I looked up the numbers on the Department of Commerce website, ~80% of welfare recipients remain on welfare for less than five years. About 20% for less than 7 months, 20% from 7-12 months, 20% for 1-2 years, 20% from 1-5 years and 20% stay for 5+ years. And these numbers are from 2009, at the height of unemployment and the recession.

Career welfare queens are vastly outnumbered by people trying to get on their feet again.
 
goddamnit droppers i fucking hope you're joking :|
/will vomit if you're being cereal.
//that is, if you believe you're taking a paycut, not just if you're working for the gov which i know you are.
 
Bardeaux said:
Can I ask exactly what it is you do?

Also, was your pay cut voluntary? :P
Click to expand...

Voluntary; I am a person corrupt businesses fear and regular ones find to be a nuisance. I make back the money lost in benefits, a sense of pride. and I Like the work.
bmxxx said:
goddamnit droppers i fucking hope you're joking :|
/will vomit if you're being cereal.
//that is, if you believe you're taking a paycut, not just if you're working for the gov which i know you are.
Click to expand...

I technically monetarily did. Cereal as a heart attack.
 
Droppersneck said:
Voluntary; I am a person corrupt businesses fear and regular ones find to be a nuisance. I make back the money lost in benefits, a sense of pride. and I Like the work.


I technically monetarily did. Cereal as a heart attack.
Click to expand...
ok, you may be serious but i think you're wrong. You do not come across as someone who could have just as easily taken a higher-paying private sector job (your 1st sentence backs that up lol), but chose to take a pay cut in order to provide 'for the greater good'.
/the way you tout it is as i described in a post on the previous page, wherein i mention how a majority of public servants act as if they're helping us all at their own expense, by virtue of working these jobs, under a false impression they could just as easily have gotten more personal benefits by private work but decided against it to 'help society'. That's not to say your job doesn't help society <i wouldn't know one way or another>, or that you should be prohibited from taking pride in the fact that your job does/may be of a net-benefit to society. but pretending you're "taking one for the team" by doing so, as many, many public servants do, is silly and almost universally bullshit. get off that high horse lol ;)
 
lol nice link! honestly i'm curious as to why drug-addiction isn't a proper "disability" (in the US) for benefits. I know PLENTY of ppl who're 'disabled' with things such as generalized anxiety disorder, whose 'disability' is no more severe than many things that most experience and would never consider as a 'disability'.
/the new DSM, due out in '13 or '14 iirc, will be re-defining its diagnosis on "addiction", and honestly i would fucking LOVE to see someone try to set precedent with a crack or marijuana "addiction". And that's not to say I want to see them game the system; rather, i want to see some light shone on the hard truth that, in a fuck-load of instances, drug addictions are FAR more debilitating than many psych diseases that currently qualify one for a free ride on society's dime
//Anecdote: one such person, who gets a full "life expenses" ride for generalized anxiety disorder (that is of the severity most would laugh at the very idea of qualifying for such benefits), also has a drug problem - and, after seeing the state give a monthly stipend, medicaid, and housing+food benefits for, found themselves raided and arrested for their "addiction disability" and were caged. I hate that it happened, but the irony of the state giving them "free 'life-expenses'", and then caging them for drug usage* that was COMPLETELY in-line and of zero surprise given all the completely obvious facts of their life adn condition, is just soo ridiculous that it's absurd.
(*this drug usage was, w/o any question in even cops' and legal eyes, 100% personal usage amounts and zero intent, they were just using narcotics and sinking into their 'disability' even moreso)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just for you guys...
merry-clackamas-and-have-a-happy-newtown-year.jpg
 
bmxxx said:
that said, does anyone deny that welfare programs of most any sort actually provide disincentive to productivity?
Click to expand...

Of course they do. When Welfare gives you healthcare, and a shitty low-paying job does not, then there's a large incentive to stay on Welfare.

A large part of that could be rectified by making sure that low-wage workers still have the benefits they'd otherwise receive on Welfare. After all, the solution isn't to take away healthcare from the poor, but to ensure they'll still have it if they work.

Make sure the poor keep their benefits, and you'd remove much of the incentive not to work.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top