re: .

quote:

---

fricking sad. So now the water department has to go out and cut that shite out of the ground and replace the valve. Whos gonna pay for that? 

---

It's like everyday society hits a new low.
It's depressing as hell.

quote:

---

I got that from the same article you quoted. Why in the frick can you use a quote from it to support your argument, but I can't use a quote from it to support mine?

---

Because the article supports my position and not yours, without conjecture?

quote:

---

THIS SITUATION IS TOTALLY UNNECESSARY AND IS BEING HANDLED TERRIBLY.

---

I agree, had these people paid up they wouldn't be getting cut off

quote:

---

This isn't conjecture?!

---

The 60% that pay oncenter they are cut off isnt. I'm out playing golf, poorly, tbc later

quote:

---

The 60% that pay oncenter they are cut off isnt.

---

I was obviously talking about the part I quoted, where the guy takes their payment as proof that they can afford it, which is your position. It is conjecture. The fact that they manage to pay in order to turn the water back on is no more proof that they can afford the bill, than the fact that so many thousands went so long without paying the bills is proof that they can't afford it.

quote:

---

I'm out playing golf, poorly

---

At least we have something in common.

quote:

---

tbc later

---

Please don't, I've had enough, and I probably won't respond. You guys are just too set in your ways to even have a meaningful discussion with. The arguments always go round and round, with conservatives attacking everything from different angles which contradict one another, but are somehow all in agreement that they are correct. Like this thread, with you arguing that everybody can pay their bills but don't want to and would rather buy xboxes and get their hair did, while placing the burden on me to provide irrefutable proof (which apparently there is no such thing, since you claim things false from the same article that you claim things as truth to support your own position) that there are people who are not wasteful yet still can't pay their bills. Then there's another guy arguing that payment plans won't work because they can't afford to pay the bills already, so they just need to be cut off, and frick the kids and the elderly. Then there was the cholera tangent, and who knows what that was supposed to prove other than the blatantly obvious fact that removing fresh water from thousands of homes in a small area can ONLY be bad from a health standpoint. One guy told me I had to "make up my mind" whether you get cholera by ingesting food or by ingesting water. And he got an upvote! And then back to you arguing that nobody in America is poor, because you've seen poor and this ain't it. frickin right this ain't it, this is the first world. Our people eat, drink clean water, and bathe regularly (most of us). And then you condemn people for having decent clothes and getting "made up" with nail polish and hairdos, but not paying their water bills, as if they have squandered their entitlement money on lavish things. Tell them to get a job, but expect them to do so wearing old, tattered, dirty clothes because they have sacrificed such "luxuries" in order to pay for the necessities.

True, nobody has a right to water, or food, or electricity, or shelter. But it is too easy to say that people who don't have these things don't deserve them, and I refuse to do that. Some people just don't have a chance without help, and it's worse when their government is failing them. We do have an entitlement problem, no doubt, because it's hard to distinguish the truly needy from the people who take advantage. A crusade of cutting off everybody results in some helpless needy feeling the pain, when it's the moochers who need to feel the pain. And it will never, ever be ok with me to hurt innocent bystanders in pursuit of some ideal. I understand it's going to happen, but nothing can make it alright.

That's all I have to say. Sorry for the rant.

quote:

---

If they have a 50+ inch TV and cable then screw them.

---

frick the cable, if they have a tv and no water, then frick em, feed those poors to the other poors and be done with it.

quote:

---

The 60% that pay oncenter they are cut off isnt. I was obviously talking about the part I quoted, where the guy takes their payment as proof that they can afford it, which is your position. It is conjecture. The fact that they manage to pay in order to turn the water back on is no more proof that they can afford the bill, than the fact that so many thousands went so long without paying the bills is proof that they can't afford it. quote: I'm out playing golf, poorly At least we have something in common. quote: tbc later Please don't, I've had enough, and I probably won't respond. You guys are just too set in your ways to even have a meaningful discussion with. The arguments always go round and round, with conservatives attacking everything from different angles which contradict one another, but are somehow all in agreement that they are correct. Like this thread, with you arguing that everybody can pay their bills but don't want to and would rather buy xboxes and get their hair did, while placing the burden on me to provide irrefutable proof (which apparently there is no such thing, since you claim things false from the same article that you claim things as truth to support your own position) that there are people who are not wasteful yet still can't pay their bills. Then there's another guy arguing that payment plans won't work because they can't afford to pay the bills already, so they just need to be cut off, and frick the kids and the elderly. Then there was the cholera tangent, and who knows what that was supposed to prove other than the blatantly obvious fact that removing fresh water from thousands of homes in a small area can ONLY be bad from a health standpoint. One guy told me I had to "make up my mind" whether you get cholera by ingesting food or by ingesting water. And he got an upvote! And then back to you arguing that nobody in America is poor, because you've seen poor and this ain't it. frickin right this ain't it, this is the first world. Our people eat, drink clean water, and bathe regularly (most of us). And then you condemn people for having decent clothes and getting "made up" with nail polish and hairdos, but not paying their water bills, as if they have squandered their entitlement money on lavish things. Tell them to get a job, but expect them to do so wearing old, tattered, dirty clothes because they have sacrificed such "luxuries" in order to pay for the necessities. True, nobody has a right to water, or food, or electricity, or shelter. But it is too easy to say that people who don't have these things don't deserve them, and I refuse to do that. Some people just don't have a chance without help, and it's worse when their government is failing them. We do have an entitlement problem, no doubt, because it's hard to distinguish the truly needy from the people who take advantage. A crusade of cutting off everybody results in some helpless needy feeling the pain, when it's the moochers who need to feel the pain. And it will never, ever be ok with me to hurt innocent bystanders in pursuit of some ideal. I understand it's going to happen, but nothing can make it alright. That's all I have to say. Sorry for the rant.

---

In other words , youre tired of blaming the government and being wrong?????

quote:

---

Detroit is a scrappers paradise. Strip some wire, pay your water bill.

---

What's always blown my mind, is they will take the trouble to go through the painstaking process to pull and strip wire, load it up, and take it to the scrap yard to make a few bucks but they won't go get a job.

quote:

---

where the guy takes their payment as proof that they can afford it, which is your position

---

Yes it is. I fail to see how someone of sound mind and cognitive ability could hold any other.

quote:

---

It is conjecture.

---

It is as close to absolute proof as can possibly be given outside of acquiring everyone in question's bank statements.

quote:

---

The fact that they manage to pay in order to turn the water back on is no more proof that they can afford the bill, than the fact that so many thousands went so long without paying the bills is proof that they can't afford it.

---

No. You're just wrong here and I think you know it.

quote:

---

I probably won't respond.

---

Victory.



...but let's keep going:

quote:

---

with conservatives attacking everything from different angles which contradict one another, but are somehow all in agreement that they are correct

---

Broad generalizations. We don't do that, remember?

quote:

---

(which apparently there is no such thing, since you claim things false from the same article that you claim things as truth to support your own position)

---

the problem is your reading comprehension as applied to the article, not my usage of the same Sorry.

quote:

---

Then there was the cholera tangent,

---

Look, SpidermanTUba started that shite show (pun intended). Don't lump us in with that martian...he's one of you lefties after all.

quote:

---

you condemn people for having decent clothes and getting "made up" with nail polish and hairdos, but not paying their water bills, as if they have squandered their entitlement money on lavish things.

---

with the straightest of faces, I say to you: Yes.

quote:

---

True, nobody has a right to water, or food, or electricity, or shelter

---

good then we agree.

quote:

---

But it is too easy to say that people who don't have these things don't deserve them

---

now who's contradicting themselves?

quote:

---

it's hard to distinguish the truly needy from the people who take advantage.

---

look for the manicures and hair coloring

quote:

---

Yes it is. I fail to see how someone of sound mind and cognitive ability could hold any other.

---

So you fail to recognize the concept of borrowing and/or temporary budget shifts?

quote:

---

Victory.

---

The simple fact that you consider a discussion to be a competition explains a lot. If you budge at all from your initial position, you consider it a loss or failure, rather than a successful compromise. This thread is a microcosm of the current political landscape where nothing productive is accomplished.

quote:

---

the problem is your reading comprehension as applied to the article, not my usage of the same Sorry.

---

My reading comprehension is just fine. Denying something is not the same as it not being true.

quote:

---

Look, SpidermanTUba started that shite show (pun intended). Don't lump us in with that martian...he's one of you lefties after all.

---

He brought it up as a possible side-effect of the cut-off campaign. It was a couple of you righties saying things like "nobody in Detroit can get cholera because nobody in Detroit has cholera". I mean, frick.

quote:

---

now who's contradicting themselves?

---

If you think that "having" means the same as "deserving", or that "not having" means the same as "not deserving"... I don't know what to say to that. If you really, honestly, truly think that, and if that is a common belief among your party, then I think I'm starting to understand the mindset of this board. It doesn't make any goddamned sense, but I might understand it.



And now I'm done.




At least for the night.

quote:

---

One last thing to clear up: the contradiction I was referring to was your assertion that certain things are "not a right", but at the same time people "deserve them"...and the implication being that it should be provided to them regardless of ability to pay...seems contradictory to me.

---

It is only contradictory if you feel that people are only deserving of their natural/legal rights, or things that they've earned, and nothing more. I choose to feel that people are deserving of more simply by virtue of existing. Nobody has a right to be helped, supported, or loved, but certainly they are deserving, right? I did not mean to imply that everyone deserves things provided to them regardless of ability to pay. I only meant that everyone is deserving of the help and support necessary to reach a certain standard of living in this country, whether it be financial help for the truly helpless/needy, or help with budgeting and lifestyle choices for those who don't know any other way, or whatever. It is a problem, and it pisses me off, for sure, that some people love to receive handouts as help, but reject other forms of help that will truly make a difference for everybody. But, believe it or not, there are people who want to contribute and work, but the work just isn't there for them, and I don't think those people should have to pay for the choices of others. Obviously, the same goes for you and I, as we shouldn't have to pay for those poor choices, either. If you have an idea for determining who is who (and don't say go door to door looking for nail polish and xboxes ), I'm all ears. But until there's a way to figure out who is needy and who is mooching without invading people's personal lives, I prefer to cast a wide net to be sure that the deserving get help... even though it's not their right.


Hope that clears it up.