I am curious why you have such an interest in Walmart type corporations and their vacated cement? Originally Posted by GPLol.
Lol.I know you were using it as an example, that is why I said "walmart type". Why would you have to feel shame?
Again, it's an example. Shame on me for striving to encourage those who CAN change the world..... Originally Posted by SweetElizabeth
GP, do you not like my points of view shared at the political thread because I am a woman, or an escort? Or do you simply enjoy teasing me?I am not teasing you, I asked a legitimate question. No where did I indicate that I do not like your points of view. I am a firm believer that everyone should have the opportunity to share their thoughts on a subject. Are you afraid to answer the question?
;-) Originally Posted by SweetElizabeth
I know you were using it as an example, that is why I said "walmart type". Why would you have to feel shame?
I am not teasing you, I asked a legitimate question. No where did I indicate that I do not like your points of view. I am a firm believer that everyone should have the opportunity to share their thoughts on a subject. Are you afraid to answer the question?
You throwing in the " because I am a woman, or an escort?" part was a VERY low cheap shot. DO you feel I should not question anything you say BECAUSE you are a woman, or an escort? (how does it feel when I turn it around on you?)
If you play nice and fair in a debate, an actual intelligent conversation can take place. When you take uncalled for cheap shots like you did, then it can turn nasty real quick! Originally Posted by GP
The idea that "everyone is created equal" albeit sounds very noble, is not based in reality. Some people ARE smarter or more genetically gifted than others. Some people are lucky. Originally Posted by GPAgain, we're in agreement. In fact, i've made that very same argument dozens of times.
Some people just work VERY hard to get where they are. I don't think that we should take away from the those people to bring the less fortunate up to their level.I don't either. Nor do i think anyone is even suggesting we give to the unfortunate until they are up to our level. Contrary to what a lot of people want to believe, the vast majority of people living off government assistance aren't exactly living the high life. They're living off little more than our scraps.
Yes, there is always some schmuck who got the short end of the straw and will need our help.Just like there is always some schmuck who will abuse the system. More on that in a second.
I don't think anyone is against someone being helped out temporarily by the government through our taxes. Unfortunately, I am not as willing as you are to hold my nose and put up with the abuse.Fair enough. So it seems that, on the core issue at least, we agree more than we disagree. Which, i'd suggest, is probably true for the entire country. That said, where we seem to disagree vehemently is how to deal with the abuse. Check that, where we seem to disagree is in how to view the abuse. I view it as a necessary evil in allowing truly needy people to live a semi-respectable existence. If i may, conservatives, at least according to their rhetoric, seem to view it as a reason to kill the entire system.
What's the solution? I have absolutely no freaking clue.And back to our schmuck. I don't think there is a solution that's better than the one we have now. Mainly because, no matter what system we try to come up with, there is ALWAYS going to be schmucks abusing it. For better or worse, it's that simple.
I don't either. Nor do i think anyone is even suggesting we give to the unfortunate until they are up to our level. Contrary to what a lot of people want to believe, the vast majority of people living off government assistance aren't exactly living the high life. They're living off little more than our scraps.yet many choose to live this way over working any job
