I stand alone?

[Tgace]

If you lose 49% of your brain, does the majority matter anymore? Perhaps it depends on how you cut it...

Tongue Firmly Planted in Cheek

upnorthkyosa

Yeah, but that 1% more than yours makes all the difference.

 

[PeachMonkey]

They may be saying "Im being taxed to death already, how can I pay for more social programs and keep my own roof over my head."

... which is understandable. This is why we have to work to convince people how social programs help *everyone*, not just the very poorest, and how a properly regulated societal safety net makes everyone's lives better.

And how a lack of it will eventually bring down all but the wealthiest.

 

[Tgace]

I don't know how to insert typing in the middle of quotes.

a. I can speak for my family. We were definitely not poor but nor were we rich. I didn't buy clothes at second-hand stores (rich peoples' castoffs, I believe you called them) because I had my older sisters hand me downs to wear. Both of my parents worked. My first car was a 6 y.o Chevette when I was a college senior. After college and grad school, I owed $36,000 to the government in student loans (this is 20 years ago, college was a lot cheaper)
My siblings all have similar stories. Of the 6 of us, I know 3 voted Bush, one Kerry, and I am not sure about the other two.

Same here. Dad worked, mom stayed home. Dad was constantly on the bubble of his company closing down (did after I moved out). Lay offs, home haircuts, reduced school lunches, hand me downs, scant x-mass'es, rural living, loaned my way through college, still never owned a new car. I owe, I owe so off to work (and second front jobs) I go.

 

[Tgace]

... which is understandable. This is why we have to work to convince people how social programs help *everyone*, not just the very poorest, and how a properly regulated societal safety net makes everyone's lives better.

And how a lack of it will eventually bring down all but the wealthiest.

But I doubt I will see the ammout of money taken by the gvt. on my check stub get any less.....

 

[PeachMonkey]

But I doubt I will see the ammout of money taken by the gvt. on my check stub get any less.....

Maybe not. But if you feel like you get your money's worth out of it (or more), maybe you'd feel better about that.

 

[Melissa426]

... which is understandable. This is why we have to work to convince people how social programs help *everyone*, not just the very poorest, and how a properly regulated societal safety net makes everyone's lives better.

And how a lack of it will eventually bring down all but the wealthiest.

It's that "properly regulated" part that scares me :uhyeah: !
Who decides what is proper? And how is it regulated? Answer that to my satisfaction and I am behind you all the way.

Peace,
Melissa

 

[PeachMonkey]

I have been on mission trips too (inside and outside the US) and I don't recall being asked if Jesus was a Republican or a Democrat.

I'm sure you weren't.

Regardless of "party affiliation", though, the messages of compassion, love, sharing, and peace that Christ (and the figures of so many other religions) delivered would mark him as a "hippie" and a "liberal" nowadays.

 

[Tgace]

Maybe not. But if you feel like you get your money's worth out of it (or more), maybe you'd feel better about that.

What programs are you referring to (in regards to the "average working man/woman")? Social Security? National Health Plan?

 

[PeachMonkey]

It's that "properly regulated" part that scares me :uhyeah: !
Who decides what is proper? And how is it regulated? Answer that to my satisfaction and I am behind you all the way.

This shouldn't be a difficult concept. We live in a representative Republic; WE decide what is proper, and how these things are regulated.

Right now, many of us have been led to believe that the social safety net is not important; that it costs too much; that it is poorly managed; that it serves primarily the lazy. This is a deliberate assault on centuries of progress by a limited few who wish to tear government down to its bare minimum necessity. (If you don't believe me, I suggest you Google Grover Norquist, and learn more about his philosophies and his influence on the current administration).

We can have a society that benefits everyone if we choose to.

 

[PeachMonkey]

What programs are you referring to (in regards to the "average working man/woman")? Social Security? National Health Plan?

Yep, and lots more. Everything from roads and police and national defense to social security, a single-payer health plan, welfare, student loans, regulatory agencies to protect us from the worst impulses of some businesses and some people... the works.

There are a lot of things in the traditional left agenda that I don't agree with (like gun control, being anti-nuclear power, etc)... and there are extremist loons on the left, just like on the right. Most people, though, are reasonable people that care about others, and I think we can work together to build a world where we all do better. Where the best aspects of the building of individual wealth and general commonwealth are merged.

We have examples that can partially help us see the way... European countries that measure their success based on everyone's quality of life rather than on raw productivity or GDP, for instance.

 

[Melissa426]

I'm sure you weren't.

Regardless of "party affiliation", though, the messages of compassion, love, sharing, and peace that Christ (and the figures of so many other religions) delivered would mark him as a "hippie" and a "liberal" nowadays.

Hippie implies free love and acid trips to me. Not something Jesus stood for.

Liberal? Like getting hummers in the White House? Like being a skirt- chaser ala JFK?

I am making generalizations now, which is what I originally accused upnorthkyosa of doing, which is why I objected to his post.

Please don't claim "fruits of the spirit" for either side, unless you preface your statements as opinions or generalizations.

Peace,
Melissa

 

[Tgace]

I must admit that my job has soured me on on the "societal safety net". Ive lost count of the number of people I have dealt with who have gvt. benefit cards and food stamps in their pockets and drive thier cars home with steaks, plasma TV's and DVD's to thier gvt subsidized apartments with the free heat cranked up to "solar surface". Granted I do deal with a certain segment of society and there are plenty of people using the system as an "assist" (heck my first child was born on medicare and feed by WIC untill I got out of grad school). But the problem with government programs is that...well they're ran by governments.

How do we keep people from turning the "safety net" into a hammock?

 

[Tgace]

Yep, and lots more. Everything from roads and police and national defense to social security, a single-payer health plan, welfare, student loans, regulatory agencies to protect us from the worst impulses of some businesses and some people... the works.

Who pays for it? If the gvt. takes much more, we might as well go to a Communist system where I work and the gvt. provides everything.

 

[Melissa426]

This shouldn't be a difficult concept. We live in a representative Republic; WE decide what is proper, and how these things are regulated.

Right now, many of us have been led to believe that the social safety net is not important; that it costs too much; that it is poorly managed; that it serves primarily the lazy. This is a deliberate assault on centuries of progress by a limited few who wish to tear government down to its bare minimum necessity. (If you don't believe me, I suggest you Google Grover Norquist, and learn more about his philosophies and his influence on the current administration).

We can have a society that benefits everyone if we choose to.

I agree with you! Well, mostly.
As a representative Republic, we do decide. That was the election on Tuesday.
Social safety is very important.
It does cost too much.
It does not serve primarily the lazy, but the lazy have figured how to take advantage of our support for their own gain and at the expense of those who are truly in need.
We can have a society that benefits everyone if we choose!

Peace, Melissa

 

[PeachMonkey]

Hippie implies free love and acid trips to me. Not something Jesus stood for.

You're missing my point. People who nowadays espouse messages of loving all without question, of peace, of giving everything you have to help others, are usually accused of being hippies, liberals, pinkos, commies, socialists. Ironic since these people are usually very religious, and their diety called for that same behavior.

Liberal? Like getting hummers in the White House? Like being a skirt- chaser ala JFK?

Again, you not only missed my point, but decided to get insulting. Particularly since, if you think that only "liberal" presidents and politicians cheated on their wives, you are ignorant.

Please don't claim "fruits of the spirit" for either side, unless you preface your statements as opinions or generalizations.

Sounds like a deal, if you don't put words in my mouth when you don't understand my point.

 

[PeachMonkey]

Ive lost count of the number of people I have dealt with who have gvt. benefit cards and food stamps in their pockets and drive thier cars home with steaks, plasma TV's and DVD's to thier gvt subsidized apartments with the free heat cranked up to "solar surface". Granted I do deal with a certain segment of society and there are plenty of people using the system as an "assist" (heck my first child was born on medicare and feed by WIC untill I got out of grad school). But the problem with government programs is that...well they're ran by governments.

I have a hard time imagining anyone on government benefits buying plasma televisions. I can, however, imagine people on government benefits not being able to get health care because no doctor will take them, barely being able to eat, and needing those benefits even though they work two jobs, because I have experienced all of that.

Governments are people, selected by people. They are not inherently more or less effective than any other beaureaucracy.

How do we keep people from turning the "safety net" into a hammock?

Not an easy question to answer, mind you, but it's worth tackling, since the alternative is to stop helping people in order to punish those few who abuse the system.

The same kind of effective leadership that helps in any organization should help here.

 

[PeachMonkey]

Who pays for it? If the gvt. takes much more, we might as well go to a Communist system where I work and the gvt. provides everything.

Comparing our levels of taxation, which are the lowest in the industrialized world, with communism is a bit of a stretch.

We can fund this system if everyone pays their share... including having the wealthy pay a far larger percentage than everyone else. We've talked about this idea in other threads.

 

[PeachMonkey]

I agree with you! Well, mostly.
As a representative Republic, we do decide. That was the election on Tuesday.

Yep. And I still submit that people are not given the best information on how society can work better for us all... and that information is key to having a truly informed electorate.

Social safety doesn't cost too much for the rest of the industrialized world... why are Americans so against it?

 

[Tgace]

I have a hard time imagining anyone on government benefits buying plasma televisions.

Believe me, been there, done that, seen the electronics. Not that they are purchasing said items solely with their gvt. money. Some are supplementing it with "side jobs" if you get my drift...........

 

[Tgace]

Comparing our levels of taxation, which are the lowest in the industrialized world, with communism is a bit of a stretch.

Yeah I was being a little facetious there. All the same, i live a fairly modest lifestyle, used cars, modest home, heck I dont even have cable. I earn a decent wage but my wife doesn't work full-time out of the home. Almost all of my $$ gets spent on bills and regular living. If my "share" gets any larger its gonna get tough. The cry for more taxes for more government programs isnt pulling my heart strings....