Home › Forums › Financial Markets/Economics › $500k and 33years old, when is enough enough?
- This topic has 980 replies, 33 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 3 months ago by
svelte.
-
AuthorPosts
-
December 21, 2010 at 9:44 PM #644445December 21, 2010 at 10:06 PM #643361
jstoesz
ParticipantSeriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle!
December 21, 2010 at 10:06 PM #643432ParticipantSeriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle!
December 21, 2010 at 10:06 PM #644013ParticipantSeriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle!
December 21, 2010 at 10:06 PM #644149ParticipantSeriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle!
December 21, 2010 at 10:06 PM #644470ParticipantSeriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle!
December 21, 2010 at 10:16 PM #643376CA renter
Participant[quote=jstoesz]Seriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle![/quote]
jstoesz,
In any society, all throughout history, there has always been a bell curve WRT the productive vs. the lazy. These people will exist, no matter what we do. Even if we were to kill them all off tomorrow, within ten years (or less), we’d have a whole new batch of them.
Welfare is not for the poor, it’s for the rich. Without a social safety net that keeps people’s heads above water and allows them to survive, these people would turn on the wealthy and steal what they need/want, and they would be willing to kill and injure in order to do so. Look around, and think about societies that have existed all throughout history where there was such a wide disparity of wealth (including access to healthcare). How has that worked out for them? Any long-term success stories?
Welfare keeps the “least productive” placated, so that the productive people can go about their business. Also, it doesn’t serve anyone’s interests to have a bunch of sick, contagious people walking around spreading diseases. We ALL benefit when we provide healthcare to all of our citizens.
December 21, 2010 at 10:16 PM #643447Participant[quote=jstoesz]Seriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle![/quote]
jstoesz,
In any society, all throughout history, there has always been a bell curve WRT the productive vs. the lazy. These people will exist, no matter what we do. Even if we were to kill them all off tomorrow, within ten years (or less), we’d have a whole new batch of them.
Welfare is not for the poor, it’s for the rich. Without a social safety net that keeps people’s heads above water and allows them to survive, these people would turn on the wealthy and steal what they need/want, and they would be willing to kill and injure in order to do so. Look around, and think about societies that have existed all throughout history where there was such a wide disparity of wealth (including access to healthcare). How has that worked out for them? Any long-term success stories?
Welfare keeps the “least productive” placated, so that the productive people can go about their business. Also, it doesn’t serve anyone’s interests to have a bunch of sick, contagious people walking around spreading diseases. We ALL benefit when we provide healthcare to all of our citizens.
December 21, 2010 at 10:16 PM #644028Participant[quote=jstoesz]Seriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle![/quote]
jstoesz,
In any society, all throughout history, there has always been a bell curve WRT the productive vs. the lazy. These people will exist, no matter what we do. Even if we were to kill them all off tomorrow, within ten years (or less), we’d have a whole new batch of them.
Welfare is not for the poor, it’s for the rich. Without a social safety net that keeps people’s heads above water and allows them to survive, these people would turn on the wealthy and steal what they need/want, and they would be willing to kill and injure in order to do so. Look around, and think about societies that have existed all throughout history where there was such a wide disparity of wealth (including access to healthcare). How has that worked out for them? Any long-term success stories?
Welfare keeps the “least productive” placated, so that the productive people can go about their business. Also, it doesn’t serve anyone’s interests to have a bunch of sick, contagious people walking around spreading diseases. We ALL benefit when we provide healthcare to all of our citizens.
December 21, 2010 at 10:16 PM #644164Participant[quote=jstoesz]Seriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle![/quote]
jstoesz,
In any society, all throughout history, there has always been a bell curve WRT the productive vs. the lazy. These people will exist, no matter what we do. Even if we were to kill them all off tomorrow, within ten years (or less), we’d have a whole new batch of them.
Welfare is not for the poor, it’s for the rich. Without a social safety net that keeps people’s heads above water and allows them to survive, these people would turn on the wealthy and steal what they need/want, and they would be willing to kill and injure in order to do so. Look around, and think about societies that have existed all throughout history where there was such a wide disparity of wealth (including access to healthcare). How has that worked out for them? Any long-term success stories?
Welfare keeps the “least productive” placated, so that the productive people can go about their business. Also, it doesn’t serve anyone’s interests to have a bunch of sick, contagious people walking around spreading diseases. We ALL benefit when we provide healthcare to all of our citizens.
December 21, 2010 at 10:16 PM #644485Participant[quote=jstoesz]Seriously…permabear, it is really that simple? What about the unintended consequences? What about people like ucg’s brother? Isn’t it possible that it is just one more step to mass irresponsibility? I guess we already have that, so what is one more government teet to suckle![/quote]
jstoesz,
In any society, all throughout history, there has always been a bell curve WRT the productive vs. the lazy. These people will exist, no matter what we do. Even if we were to kill them all off tomorrow, within ten years (or less), we’d have a whole new batch of them.
Welfare is not for the poor, it’s for the rich. Without a social safety net that keeps people’s heads above water and allows them to survive, these people would turn on the wealthy and steal what they need/want, and they would be willing to kill and injure in order to do so. Look around, and think about societies that have existed all throughout history where there was such a wide disparity of wealth (including access to healthcare). How has that worked out for them? Any long-term success stories?
Welfare keeps the “least productive” placated, so that the productive people can go about their business. Also, it doesn’t serve anyone’s interests to have a bunch of sick, contagious people walking around spreading diseases. We ALL benefit when we provide healthcare to all of our citizens.
December 21, 2010 at 10:17 PM #643366Participant[quote=permabear]I would say 95% of the US population doesn’t realize that socialized medicine is good for citizens, good for small businesses, and leads to lower taxes for the majority of people.
The only people it’s bad for are the ultra-rich and large healthcare corporations.
Our corporate-owned media continues to spread mass disinformation for their own gain. It’s really too bad.[/quote]
Bingo, Permabear.
What’s funny is that people who live in countries with “socialized” medicine (which is far better and more affordable than our healthcare) can’t understand how Americans have been so brainwashed that they would oppose something that is obviously in their best interests.
None of the “Limbaugh followers” in the U.S. ever seem to question why we’re the only developed nation that considers healthcare a “privilege” instead of a right.
BTW, if you ask these people which country has the best healthcare system, they will ignorantly claim that the U.S. does, when in fact, we lag far behind those “evil, socialist” countries.
December 21, 2010 at 10:17 PM #643437Participant[quote=permabear]I would say 95% of the US population doesn’t realize that socialized medicine is good for citizens, good for small businesses, and leads to lower taxes for the majority of people.
The only people it’s bad for are the ultra-rich and large healthcare corporations.
Our corporate-owned media continues to spread mass disinformation for their own gain. It’s really too bad.[/quote]
Bingo, Permabear.
What’s funny is that people who live in countries with “socialized” medicine (which is far better and more affordable than our healthcare) can’t understand how Americans have been so brainwashed that they would oppose something that is obviously in their best interests.
None of the “Limbaugh followers” in the U.S. ever seem to question why we’re the only developed nation that considers healthcare a “privilege” instead of a right.
BTW, if you ask these people which country has the best healthcare system, they will ignorantly claim that the U.S. does, when in fact, we lag far behind those “evil, socialist” countries.
December 21, 2010 at 10:17 PM #644018Participant[quote=permabear]I would say 95% of the US population doesn’t realize that socialized medicine is good for citizens, good for small businesses, and leads to lower taxes for the majority of people.
The only people it’s bad for are the ultra-rich and large healthcare corporations.
Our corporate-owned media continues to spread mass disinformation for their own gain. It’s really too bad.[/quote]
Bingo, Permabear.
What’s funny is that people who live in countries with “socialized” medicine (which is far better and more affordable than our healthcare) can’t understand how Americans have been so brainwashed that they would oppose something that is obviously in their best interests.
None of the “Limbaugh followers” in the U.S. ever seem to question why we’re the only developed nation that considers healthcare a “privilege” instead of a right.
BTW, if you ask these people which country has the best healthcare system, they will ignorantly claim that the U.S. does, when in fact, we lag far behind those “evil, socialist” countries.
December 21, 2010 at 10:17 PM #644154Participant[quote=permabear]I would say 95% of the US population doesn’t realize that socialized medicine is good for citizens, good for small businesses, and leads to lower taxes for the majority of people.
The only people it’s bad for are the ultra-rich and large healthcare corporations.
Our corporate-owned media continues to spread mass disinformation for their own gain. It’s really too bad.[/quote]
Bingo, Permabear.
What’s funny is that people who live in countries with “socialized” medicine (which is far better and more affordable than our healthcare) can’t understand how Americans have been so brainwashed that they would oppose something that is obviously in their best interests.
None of the “Limbaugh followers” in the U.S. ever seem to question why we’re the only developed nation that considers healthcare a “privilege” instead of a right.
BTW, if you ask these people which country has the best healthcare system, they will ignorantly claim that the U.S. does, when in fact, we lag far behind those “evil, socialist” countries.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.