For me, the most interesting thing here is that the cost of welfare is decreasing; normally, that would be a sign of success, just as the formerly increasing costs of welfare are a sign of failure. In the leftie mind, though, that process is reversed. Having increasing cost and enrollment in an entitlement program is taken as a sign of success, as more and more people become dependent on govt and therefore, lose their ability to be independent. Conversely, the lefties consider the drop in welfare spending to be a sign of failure, as more people regain their independence. I can’t think of a better way to express what the left really stands for: total dependence on govt and a loss of individual independence.
robert108 - 09:07pm on 07/30/2006
Lowered welfare rolls and spending are a failure for the left. As people become more independent (responsible) they are less likely to vote for liberals. Self-reliant people don’t feel compelled to vote politicians into office who only want to keep others dependent like they once were. It’s a sink or swim world and if you are on welfare you have already sunk. Like I said the other day, if poverty itself isn’t incentive enough to get off your ass and change your circumstances then poverty isn’t all that bad. If you listen to liberals they are always claiming that people can’t survive without help, it’s been repeated so often that the people stop believing they can. Liberals want to keep people on welfare and keep them voting liberals into office. I’ve always advocated helping those who cannot take care of themselves and kicking those who can but won’t take care of themselves squarely in their lazy asses. They are robbing the people who need help. Our truly needy could live well if they didn’t have the truly worthless siphoning off their money.
bullwinkle - 11:07pm on 07/30/2006
Most, if not all, federal program ‘no teaching people how to fish’ should be eliminated or at least closely revisited.
aNONOMISLY - 12:07pm on 07/31/2006
As a lefty, I disagree with you both. I feel that decreased welfare is a sign of success and increased independence. When people know that they are not going to get a handout, it makes them more responsible for their own actions, and perhaps gives them more drive to try to improve their situatution.
jeneile - 12:07pm on 07/31/2006
jeniele: Come to the light! You are way too smart to be a leftie, if you know even this one thing.
robert108 - 12:07pm on 07/31/2006
robert108, you’re not the only one who tells me that I’m a closet republican.... I’m on the fence some of the time. I think the next election will make or break it for me.....
jeneile - 12:07pm on 07/31/2006
One thing that I would really like to see is more money being put towards higher education grants/ scholarships rather than social welfare programs. Tuition increases every year put college out of reach for some.
jeneile - 01:07pm on 07/31/2006
jeniele: Whoa! I just complimented you for having too much common sense to be a leftie. Believe it or not, there are many gradations between being a leftie and being a Republican, much less a Conservative.
robert108 - 01:07pm on 07/31/2006
jeniele: There are some that would say all the taxpayer money being funneled into the child indoctrination system(oops! I meant the public education system) is responsible for the huge increases in the cost. I am one of them. Whenever you separate the consumer from the payer in a system, and allow money to be freely confiscated to fund the endeavor, you get rising costs and diminishing supply. That is exactly what is happening. You also get a system which is topheavy in administration costs.
robert108 - 01:07pm on 07/31/2006
jeneile said, One thing that I would really like to see is more money being put towards higher education grants/ scholarships...
What do you think is going to happen to the price when you make it so that most people don’t have to pay? I’ll tell you what is going to happen - it’s going to go up.
For me, the most interesting thing here is that the cost of welfare is decreasing; normally, that would be a sign of success, just as the formerly increasing costs of welfare are a sign of failure. In the leftie mind, though, that process is reversed. Having increasing cost and enrollment in an entitlement program is taken as a sign of success, as more and more people become dependent on govt and therefore, lose their ability to be independent. Conversely, the lefties consider the drop in welfare spending to be a sign of failure, as more people regain their independence. I can’t think of a better way to express what the left really stands for: total dependence on govt and a loss of individual independence.
Lowered welfare rolls and spending are a failure for the left. As people become more independent (responsible) they are less likely to vote for liberals. Self-reliant people don’t feel compelled to vote politicians into office who only want to keep others dependent like they once were. It’s a sink or swim world and if you are on welfare you have already sunk. Like I said the other day, if poverty itself isn’t incentive enough to get off your ass and change your circumstances then poverty isn’t all that bad. If you listen to liberals they are always claiming that people can’t survive without help, it’s been repeated so often that the people stop believing they can. Liberals want to keep people on welfare and keep them voting liberals into office. I’ve always advocated helping those who cannot take care of themselves and kicking those who can but won’t take care of themselves squarely in their lazy asses. They are robbing the people who need help. Our truly needy could live well if they didn’t have the truly worthless siphoning off their money.
Most, if not all, federal program ‘no teaching people how to fish’ should be eliminated or at least closely revisited.
As a lefty, I disagree with you both. I feel that decreased welfare is a sign of success and increased independence. When people know that they are not going to get a handout, it makes them more responsible for their own actions, and perhaps gives them more drive to try to improve their situatution.
jeniele: Come to the light! You are way too smart to be a leftie, if you know even this one thing.
robert108, you’re not the only one who tells me that I’m a closet republican.... I’m on the fence some of the time. I think the next election will make or break it for me.....
One thing that I would really like to see is more money being put towards higher education grants/ scholarships rather than social welfare programs. Tuition increases every year put college out of reach for some.
jeniele: Whoa! I just complimented you for having too much common sense to be a leftie. Believe it or not, there are many gradations between being a leftie and being a Republican, much less a Conservative.
jeniele: There are some that would say all the taxpayer money being funneled into the child indoctrination system(oops! I meant the public education system) is responsible for the huge increases in the cost. I am one of them. Whenever you separate the consumer from the payer in a system, and allow money to be freely confiscated to fund the endeavor, you get rising costs and diminishing supply. That is exactly what is happening. You also get a system which is topheavy in administration costs.
jeneile said, One thing that I would really like to see is more money being put towards higher education grants/ scholarships...
What do you think is going to happen to the price when you make it so that most people don’t have to pay? I’ll tell you what is going to happen - it’s going to go up.