- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: A realistic path for revolt
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:30 pm to Centinel
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:30 pm to Centinel
quote:
Did their benefits stop?
Okay, so you really are this dumb.
quote:
People can be incredibly resourceful
When they TRIED to leave, the neighboring police force STOPPED them from leaving the flooded city.
Your capacity for completely closing your eyes and ignoring realities is astounding. You may as well be saying, "Well, just let them eat cake!"
1
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:32 pm to keks tadpole
quote:
For you they are, unless you live in a Section 8.
the concept of this thread is to eliminate public assistance.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:32 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Prove it.
Would love to
quote:
Sounds like you're either just spouting out bull shite wishful thinking, or you have some kind of ideal economic theory with no basis in reality.
Oh like all of human existence? When resources dry up you adapt or leave. Are all these welfare people going to start becoming self sufficient? Great, im down with that too.
quote:
Let me put it as simply as I can: Even under the most stressful situation, these people didn't leave BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANYWHERE TO GO.
What? Plenty of people left New Orleans. Sorry bro you cant just make up facts out of thin air. Houston got a lot of New Orleans residents, as did Alabama. I met some
quote:
I don't want to live near you people.
The feeling is mutual. Wed be better off without yall, and y’all would be worse off.
quote:
Ah yes, the Ultimate Solution.
as if it wasn’t obvious you never were interested in an honest debate, at least you made it official
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:33 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
by simply no longer offering the copious safety net they
Profoundly irresponsible
You’re probably also one of these people that cheerleads fedgov dropping literal trillions on nation building in the Middle East and toys for the pentagon they don’t want and will never use. Then you have the gall (and lack the self awareness) to cry fiscal responsibility.
This post was edited on 12/19/18 at 12:35 pm
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:34 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Sounds like you're either just spouting out bullshite wishful thinking, or you have some kind of ideal economic theory with no basis in reality.
The far right are among the most idealistic, pie in the sky people out there.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:37 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Did their benefits stop?
Answer the question. A simple yes or no will suffice.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:46 pm to DeltaDoc
quote:If having more non-producing poor people made states more affluent in total, then all of the states with the most poor non-producing people would have the best budget situations. That's sort of self explanatory.
Works both ways. SNAP/TANF/Medicaid fill the coffers in these states. Hospitals and grocery stores are completely dependent on this money. You’d see services decline immediately.
Trust me. You aren't remotely calculating all of the costs associated with non-producing people. Especially when they make up significant portions of your population.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 12:56 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
You middle-class white people just don't have a single clue.
Pahleez.
quote:Actually, this is demonstrably false. Piss tons left.
The largest catastrophe to his this country in 2005, and yet people STILL didn't leave
New Orleans' population is over 13% lower today than in 2004.
quote:It's almost like you are from another planet. Mexico says Hi.
Gee, I think I'll just move to Nebraska!"
People relocate over time. The helpless in N.O. largely didn't move after the natural disaster because they individually didn't lose much in the way of stuff. And, the same benefits available in 2004 existed after 2005.
Try harder.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:01 pm to bamafan1001
quote:
Bro, your argument is intellectually dishonest
Holy shite.
Let's look at your argument:
"I don't like these people, therefore they should go somewhere else."
quote:
A hurricane and stopping government checks is not the same thing.
Except that the hurricane stopped the government checks - and they still didn't leave, BECAUSE THEY HAD NO WHERE TO GO. instead, many of them turned to looting and scrounging.
So here you are with what you see as an intractable problem. Your solution is to simply run away and force the problem on others. That's not exactly an honest solution to the problem.
And another thing, I want to go on record as saying that any American I hear talking anything about "revolt", "revolution" or any discussion of a dissolution of the Union, I'm going to label a traitor. I will have nothing to do with such treasonous talk, except to point out how absolutely cowardly and ridiculous it is.
My vote will always be with the United States of America, and NEVER with any of you sorry arse sons of bitches promoting sedition.
fricking bots.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:04 pm to bamafan1001
quote:
Don’t know how many times weve seen this bogus argument on this board. I agree that Alabama takes too many federal dollars. It is not the fault of the productive, tax paying citizens of this state. Those people see the least amount of federal funding
Regardless of which Reps/Senators enacted laws you don't support and the fact that not everyone in each states receives benefits like SNAP and Medicaid, the simple fact remains that the states that would have the hardest time breaking from the federal govt (because they receive so much from the federal govt) would be the big taker states like Kentucky, Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana, etc.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:04 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:I don't care if they leave or stay. If their benefits are cut off but they stay, OK.
"I don't like these people, therefore they should go somewhere else."
quote:You can't be serious. it didn't stop them permanently. Sheesh.
Except that the hurricane stopped the government checks - and they still didn't leave,
quote:It's not intractable
So here you are with what you see as an intractable problem.
quote:If you subsidize a thing, you pretty much always get more of that thing.
Your solution is to simply run away and force the problem on others.
quote:Depending on the situation, being a traitor is a noble thing. The people in Prague who revolted against the USSR are were heroes.
I want to go on record as saying that any American I hear talking anything about "revolt", "revolution" or any discussion of a dissolution of the Union, I'm going to label a traitor.
quote:Well that's just silly. If Stalin type gets in charge of the nation, valuing the USA would REQUIRE sedition.
My vote will always be with the United States of America, and NEVER with any of you sorry arse sons of bitches promoting sedition.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:06 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
Let's look at your argument:
"I don't like these people, therefore they should go somewhere else."
Not an argument, just wishful thinking.
Im done with you bro. It’s clear you are a fool and one of those types that thinks screaming louder than the next guy is the key to winning an argument. Enjoy your pats on the back from your fellow leftists.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:10 pm to DevinTheDude
quote:
the simple fact remains that the states that would have the hardest time breaking from the federal govt
But if you cut all the aid programs, they'd no longer be "taker" states.
Those federal dollars aren't lining the coffers of the state government. They're going to the people on those programs.
Now of course there is no way it would be politically feasible because all the people on the dole would immediately vote out any politician, no matter the party, who even hinted at cutting aid programs.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:15 pm to DevinTheDude
quote:
Regardless of which Reps/Senators enacted laws you don't support and the fact that not everyone in each states receives benefits like SNAP and Medicaid, the simple fact remains that the states that would have the hardest time breaking from the federal govt (because they receive so much from the federal govt) would be the big taker states like Kentucky, Mississippi, Alabama, West Virginia, South Carolina, Louisiana, etc.
Ok lets play a game. If you are on food stamps, section 8, unemployment, the whole shebang etc, and the state you live in sends you a letter that says: Dear Mr, we are informing you that in one calendar year from today, you will no longer receive SNAP, housing assistance, unemployment, etc. Other states will continue to offer these services
What would you do?
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:16 pm to ShortyRob
quote:
I don't care if they leave or stay. If their benefits are cut off but they stay, OK.
While I'm okay with the sentiment, if you remove their benefits and ignore them, then they will probably become desperate and turn to crime. Then you will have more of burden on society to incarcerate them as you had to simply issue them benefits. The solution, IMO, is how you structure the benefits. If they're hungry, issue to them commodities like rice potatoes, oil, salt etc., not frozen dinners, soft drinks and ice cream. Have government food distribution centers where they can go pick up their food, unless they have a disability that keeps them from showing up to get their food - and no, obesity should not be considered a disability.
In short, give them food, but in such a way that incentivizes them to go get their own food.
quote:
Well that's just silly. If Stalin type gets in charge of the nation, valuing the USA would REQUIRE sedition.
You're WRONG, traitor.
In our country, when you get a despot in the executive office, the other branches of government step up to restrict his power up until he can be legally removed from office. Our system is set up to protect us from demagogues like Trump who occasionally get in office.
So if you call me silly for standing by my country, I will simply call you a traitor-bot.
What's really curious to me is that when the Republicans are getting their way and the democrats complain, the response from the right is always the same, "If you don't like it, leave." When the Democrats are getting their way, and the Republicans complain, their complaint is usually something like this thread: "I'm unhappy, so the people I don't like should leave."
So I say to the right what the right says to the left:
If you don't like what's going on where you are, get the frick out.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:17 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
If they're hungry, issue to them commodities like rice potatoes, oil, salt etc., not frozen dinners, soft drinks and ice cream. Have government food distribution centers where they can go pick up their food, unless they have a disability that keeps them from showing up to get their food - and no, obesity should not be considered a disability.
We used to do this. And then it was decided it was too "demeaning." Government cheese and peanut butter was some good shite btw.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:28 pm to WildTchoupitoulas
quote:
I'm going to label a traitor.
Oh no. Don't do that. You'll destroy people's lives.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:30 pm to Centinel
quote:
Now of course there is no way it would be politically feasible because all the people on the dole would immediately vote out any politician, no matter the party, who even hinted at cutting aid programs.
It often is politically impossible to remove an entitlement once it's in place, but voters don't always vote in their interest.
The ACA dropped uninsured rates up to 10% points in states including Kentucky, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Montana, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Texas- yet many of those same voters who received the benefit have in the aftermath continually voted for the party that has publically vowed to repeal the program that got them on health insurance. All those states went red in 2016. This can happen when identity politics comes to the forefront like in 2016.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:34 pm to DevinTheDude
quote:
yet many of those same voters who received the benefit have in the aftermath continually voted for the party that has publically vowed to repeal the program that got them on health insurance.
And your statistics backing this up?
Most of the poor in those states had no need for the ACA. They were already on Medicaid.
Posted on 12/19/18 at 1:39 pm to Centinel
We used to do that until progressives whined that people's feelings were being hurt.
We need to go back to shaming those that can work, don't and take handouts.
We need to go back to shaming those that can work, don't and take handouts.
Page 4 of 6
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News