I was only suggesting that some, many, even a lot of people are limited in their capabilities and are therefore not worth much in our economic system. They could live up to, or even somewhat exceed their potential, and still be limited to minimum wage jobs.
And while i'm on my soapbox, there is not one person in here, not one single person, who doesn't benefit financially off the fact that there are people making minimum wage. Not one.
Originally Posted by Doove
Your true colors are shining through with this one! Margaret Sanger believed the same things and you share the same solutions.......
This is a major difference between liberals and conservatives....conservatives believe in people.....What did poor people do 100 years ago before the welfare state? They made it without government.....every "POOR" person today has generations of ancestors who made it without government help....
Certainly there are individuals like Trig Palin who cannot survive without help....what about them? Well, a lot of them have family and friends to take care of them....the rest have charity
Who should do charity? Who did charity 100-200 years ago? Back then churches and private charitable organizations did charity....YES, THE EVIL RELIGIOUS PEOPLE DID THE CHARITY!!!!!!!! [and still do]....
in the "old days" people were forced by circumstances to do the best for themselves that they can....for those that couldn't provide for themselves or have family provide for them, private charity stepped up and took care of them....it worked, and worked efficiently.....people didn't get to free-load unless they found a willing sucker.......
government is incompetent and corrupt.....politicians see government charity as an opportunity to buy votes and increase their power......they worry about themselves, not the truly needy.....now the free-loaders have tens of millions of unwilling or ignorant suckers
government charity allows people NOT to take care of themselves....government gives charity not to the needy, but political supporters......
Who is responsible for taking care of people? Firstly, one should take care of oneself....if that person can't, then his family or friends should take care of him.....if no family or friends, then volunteers [private charity].....
there has always been volunteers to feed, clothe, doctor or house people.....of course, in the US, those considered "poor" can do that, but liberals think the poor should also have 54" HDTV's.......
60% of children in government schools received free or subsidized meals....do 60% of them NEED it? Their parents can't feed them? Is this fair?
With all the feeding programs in place to feed children outside of schools, there is no excuse for parents not to feed their kids....schools should not have to step in and do it.....I'll bet if some of these children who aren't getting fed [despite all the feeding programs] were taken away from their parents, most of these free-loaders would do a better job of parenting.......
Doove doesn't really care about the truly poor....if he did, he wouldn't want corrupt and incompetent government doing charity....Doove is a hater who wants money taken from those he hates.....he is an anarchist just like the character in his avatar......he just wants to watch the City on the Hill burn.......