StripersOnline › SurfTalk › Community Forums › Political Graffiti › What's an "Entitlement"?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What's an "Entitlement"? - Page 9

post #121 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Williams View Post


Bull*hit. Means-tested welfare is an evil. The fact that you don't see anything wrong with taking money from Joe and giving it to Jim is what's sad. No, not sad. It's bloody pathetic.
 

explain "necessary evil" then,

how can something be wrong,

something we should despise and oppose,

and still be "necessary"?

 

you sound like a child who doesn't want to brush his teeth or clean his room.

post #122 of 232
Because letting people starve would be more evil. So we choose the lesser evil as the necessary one. How can you pretend to be smart enough to tie your shoes and not get this?

Since your google is broken and you have lived in a cave all your life and don't know what a necessary evil is or what the phrase means, here. Just for you: Read a few and get the gist of it.

https://www.google.com/search?q=what+is+a+necessary+evil&rlz=1C1TSND_enUS411US411&aq=f&oq=what+is+a+necessary+evil&aqs=chrome.0.57j60j65j0l3.2649&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#hl=en&safe=off&rlz=1C1TSND_enUS411US411&q=necessary+evil+definition&revid=-1&sa=X&ei=YtdeUc-2NtTv0QHw2oHQBw&sqi=2&ved=0CJcBENUCKAA&bav=on.2,or.r_qf.&fp=2b177f6faa2d09cb&biw=853&bih=626
post #123 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Williams View Post

Because letting people starve would be more evil. So we choose the lesser evil as the necessary one. How can you pretend to be smart enough to tie your shoes and not get this?

Since your google is broken and you have lived in a cave all your life and don't know what a necessary evil is or what the phrase means, here. Just for you: Read a few and get the gist of it.

 

again,

feeding the hungry isn't "evil" in my book,

providing food for a child isn't something I would call evil and despise doing,

 

if you do.

so be it.

post #124 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by fish'nmagician View Post

again,
feeding the hungry isn't "evil" in my book,
providing food for a child isn't something I would call evil and despise doing,

if you do.
so be it.

Wealth redistribution is evil. Feeding the hungry is not evil. Try to follow the bouncing ball here. Taking from John to give to Joe is evil. Taking from your own pocket to give to Joe is good. Taking from Jim's pocket to give to Joe; not good.

And I didn't miss the part about you categorizing welfare as "feeding the starving children". It can just as well be categorized as "buying beer for trailer trash crack ho's and people faking disabilities". And if you think it's a good thing to do that, then again... dip into your own pocket and use your own money. If you want to feel good about your charitable nature, then use your own money because as long as you are supporting the seizure of resources from one for redistribution to another, you're doing something that runs entirely counter to charity.
post #125 of 232
I don't see how wealth redistribution can be evil if the people involved in the wealth distribution use their own free will and make a choice to accept the known terms.
post #126 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotcow? View Post

Nice non answer.

If these entitlement are necessary then would it not be in our best interests to run them as efficiently as possible?

You make it sound like GWB could have passed entitlement reform the way that Obama passed ACA.



waiting.gif
post #127 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Williams View Post

It can just as well be categorized as "buying beer for trailer trash crack ho's and people faking disabilities".

again,

would you describe doing that as NECESSARY?

I would not,

I'd call it waste or fraud.

 

legit welfare programs, IF necessary, are not evil.

 

you can spin all you want to,

but if you remain consistent and stop changing definitions,

you lose.

post #128 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Williams View Post

 If you want to feel good about your charitable nature, then use your own money because as long as you are supporting the seizure of resources from one for redistribution to another, you're doing something that runs entirely counter to charity.

RW,

if welfare is NECESSARY, ie the poor/needy/children won't be fed without it,

then you are admitting that charity alone won't get the job done.

 

as such, it's NEEDED and not evil.

 

 

if on the other hand you are saying it's waste and fraud,

then it's NOT needed, and could be called evil.

 

 

pick on,

stick with it,

and then back up your words,

 

you keep moving goal posts to defend the fact you despise feeding poor people.

post #129 of 232

icon14.gif

Originally Posted by Robert Williams View Post


Wealth redistribution is evil. Feeding the hungry is not evil. Try to follow the bouncing ball here. Taking from John to give to Joe is evil. Taking from your own pocket to give to Joe is good. Taking from Jim's pocket to give to Joe; not good.

And I didn't miss the part about you categorizing welfare as "feeding the starving children". It can just as well be categorized as "buying beer for trailer trash crack ho's and people faking disabilities". And if you think it's a good thing to do that, then again... dip into your own pocket and use your own money. If you want to feel good about your charitable nature, then use your own money because as long as you are supporting the seizure of resources from one for redistribution to another, you're doing something that runs entirely counter to charity.

 

And because there just ain't no way in hell that some would ever consider being charitable, starving children are just collateral damage in the war against " beer for trailer trash crack ho's and people faking disabilities."

 

And in your war, I thought that you might go with smart bombs, i.e.

Originally Posted by Robert Williams View Post   Several decades ago we invented something known as "smart bombs". But I can see why you'd go with the dumb ones since that would suit you.
post #130 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by fish'nmagician View Post

again,
would you describe doing that as NECESSARY?
I would not,
I'd call it waste or fraud.

legit welfare programs, IF necessary, are not evil.

you can spin all you want to,
but if you remain consistent and stop changing definitions,
you lose.

Get yourself a cup of coffee and try to follow the bouncing ball.

Welfare is a necessary evil.
Welfare is taking money from people who work for it and giving it to people who don't.
Charity is a good thing.
It is taking money from your own pocket and giving it to people who need it.
Charity is not welfare and welfare isn't charity.
And welfare isn't "feeding the children, either".

Welfare is: Section-8 housing for a lot of people who "aren't children".
Welfare is: Obamaphones for a lot of people who "aren't children".
Welfare is: Monthly payments and free healthcare for a lot of people who "aren't children".
Welfare is: EBT cards for a lot of people who "aren't children".

Welfare is a necessary evil. And characterizing it as "feeding starving children" is dishonest equivocation.
post #131 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Robert Williams View Post


Get yourself a cup of coffee and try to follow the bouncing ball.

Welfare is a necessary evil.
Welfare is taking money from people who work for it and giving it to people who don't.
.

sigh,

stop playing with balls and use some logic,

 

if welfare is necessary, then it implies that without it people will starve,

that implies that they have NO other means of legally obtaining the food, right?

 

if they are just lazy, and CHOOSE not to work,

then the welfare isn't necessary, right?

 

in the instances where welfare IS necessary,

then it's not evil,

 

you are following a bouncing ball,

but it's bouncing back and forth between two different issues.

 

welfare fraud,

and legit welfare.

 

welfare fraud isn't necessary,

and it is evil.

post #132 of 232
FnM, tell us when your side is going to address the fraud, waste and abuse.
post #133 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gotcow? View Post

FnM, tell us when your side is going to address the fraud, waste and abuse.

since entitlements are a Democratic sacred cow, it's doubtful they will,

 

your side seems to think feeding children is evil,

it's hard to imagine what they think of welfare FRAUD,

when are they going to address it?

 

why haven't they already?

post #134 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by fish'nmagician View Post

sigh,
stop playing with balls and use some logic,

if welfare is necessary, then it implies that without it people will starve,
that implies that they have NO other means of legally obtaining the food, right?

if they are just lazy, and CHOOSE not to work,
then the welfare isn't necessary, right?

in the instances where welfare IS necessary,
then it's not evil,

you are following a bouncing ball,
but it's bouncing back and forth between two different issues.

welfare fraud,
and legit welfare.

welfare fraud isn't necessary,
and it is evil.

Welfare, itself, is a necessary evil. Charity is a good thing but welfare isn't charity. Welfare isn't 'feeding the hungry". Feeding the hungry is feeding the hungry. Welfare is taking money from people who work for it and giving it to people who don't work for it.
post #135 of 232
Quote:
Originally Posted by fish'nmagician View Post

since entitlements are a Democratic sacred cow, it's doubtful they will,

your side seems to think feeding children is evil,
it's hard to imagine what they think of welfare FRAUD,
when are they going to address it?

why haven't they already?

If democrats won't fix this we are screwed as a country and the only thing we have to look forward to is bankruptcy and a slow painful death.

The Ironic part is that the people that the democrats profess to want to help most are in fact the ones that will be hurt the most when it fails.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Political Graffiti
StripersOnline › SurfTalk › Community Forums › Political Graffiti › What's an "Entitlement"?