Three fluids that keep a kid from making Eagle......

Gasoline
Alcohol
Perfume

So you don't think someone growing up in Greenwich Ct. won't have more advantages that someone growing up in So. Boston?

of course, but so? So you think we should level the playing field? The bulk of my career has been in Boston and there are many guys I know who brag of coming from Southie and are extremely successful.

The govt owes these people nothing, its not their role. The government should enforce equal opportunity and those in the slums and in the best areas have equal opportunity. There are countless success stories.

Theres no need for us to debate, we'll never agree. Im tired of the constant assault on my wages while I have to fund every single things I do and will every pay for by myself. When I did my taxes I was sick to my stomach for days, it was a disgrace and all I ever hear is more, more, more (in my John Fogarty singing voice).

The government made a law that rich people who make money and have an extreme gain on an investment are required, by law, to make a charitable donation to the healthcare of others at the threat of imprisonment and fines is something out founding fathers would have spit at. Its a shame and a sham.

Nobody said the world is a Level Playing Field

You guys type faster than me....

more for zimmy on the self reliance......

Foreclosure limbo: Staying without paying. - Jun. 9, 2011

- by law - you sign a truth in lending act. LAW - which says what your total payments on your home could be. These deadbeats, errrr, ummm, ahhh, I mean hapless victims of wall st greed, signed that agreement.

It seemed that your point was that you were able to succeed and therefore everyone should be able to succeed.

You also seem to think that everyone who is a lefty wants to take everyone's $ and redistribute it. Which isn't true.

Sounds like you just can't understand normal thinking :rotf2:

Wall street bailout cost less than half of the savings and loan bailout in the 80's under reagan.

Gm bailout saved an enormous amount of jobs and tax payer money in the long term.

Obamacare is projected to save money in the long term

Kids parents should decide if they can have cupcakes

Again, reality is very different than what the Palinites state. Firing guns and ringing bells to warn the British :rotf2:

From what I've read we were about 18-24 hours from not being able to take money out of ATM's. Once Lehman blew up the entire system started to shut down. I certainly thought the Paulson plan was really reckless after the fact, but the more is revealed you realize how desperate they really were.

Like 2 million jobs and a lot of small to mid size businesses. The automotive supply chain is enormous.

While it lays some foundation it doesn't really solve the problems.

Perhaps if they made good decisions we wouldn't have so many people growing up with medical problems and adding to the cost of health care. While some of these stories are pretty silly, the only way to change the behavior of a large group is by forced modeling. It's why Apple doesn't support Flash on the iPad :hihi:

-spence

Both the banks and the people who took the loans are responsible for the results of those loans. Still doesn't answer my question about lack of self reliance compared to when? The 1920's? 1970's? 2005? People throw out this crap without backing it up.

IMHO it doesn't make a difference what decade it is, self reliance is
self reliance.

If anyone wants to work hard,be loyal to his employer, reliable and trustworthy,
they will be able to get a job and go up the ladder in what ever their endeavor.

It all comes from within, the effort and willingness to work as hard as you can.

Since I've only been around since the 70's, I'll use the 70's through 90's as my measuring stick.
RIJimmy and Justplugit have already made the case, but clearly you don't get it. It's easy enough to see that there are more people on government assistance than there were in the past 40 years. Even someone as clueless as you could look that up.:smash: While some really need it, many people are on it because to them, it beats hard work. I also see it almost daily in my job. People get hired and work just long enough to be eligible for government programs. Then, they ask me to type them up a letter so they can get welfare, etc... This is a fact. I've had people tell me that's why they quit or got fired.

I'm not in a position to write that letter for anyone, if I was I couldn't do it. That's the unfortunate truth, it's easier to get a 'kiss in the mail' than work for it, sometimes it even pays more.

I've heard many people say it's their money and the deserve it.

Unfortunately, I guess myself and others can't sleep playing the system like that, and we're the one's getting squeezed.

Might want to check your numbers there mr. elightened. Sometimes people aren't as smart as they think, others may not be as clueless as you think. The population today is much larger, but all things equal, less welfare today than the 70's, 80's or 90's. Just as I thought, you throw crap around without knowing what you are talking about. I understand you get upset if someone has a different view of things than you, but you might benefit from actually looking at the numbers rather than going on your "feelings"

Graph shows monthly benefits in 2006 dollars.

Amazing statistics :rolleyes: It appears (because it doesn't have adequate labeling) to be average monthly benefit per person, not total gvt outlay. It would be nice if it really showed something useful...

Label didn't show up. Value of monthly benefits adjusted to value of dollar in 2006.

Wonder if Hugo gets Obamacare for his bag of pus

Chavez recovers after surgery in Cuba: officials

Seniors face Medicare cost barrier for cancer meds - Yahoo! News

I went in CVS last week for 3 prescriptions. Bronchitis. $185 for a inhaler.

I dropped $600 in one day on doctor visit and medication.

I can't make money that fast. How's that Massachusetts model working out you used O'bama. I put an application in for Mahealth the next night. I'm gonna live off all you #^&#^&#^&#^&bums now. :hee:

And there you have it. The childish, uninformed response I was waiting for. You pick and choose your statistics to suit your weak argument. I'm not sure why you use only welfare statistics when I never mentioned welfare? I guess it's because it was the only graph you could find that worked for you? Since the 1970's there have been more and more government assistance programs introduced. Some of these programs got people off welfare and into a new or different assistance program. You need to take a broader, more informed look at things before popping off. :rotf2:

Hows this as change in tone Zimmy from the democratic party......


1960s...

YouTube - ‪John F Kennedy 'Ask not'‬‏


2009........ " If I help him, hes gonna help me.

Nuff said Boss.

YouTube - ‪Obama Is Going To Pay For My Gas And Mortgage!!!‬‏

For Christ sake Jim.
Seriously, a JFK clip vs an ignorant voter?
what are you bored at the office today? I expect better from you :D

It has been hashed here many many times. there are ignorant voters on both sides. I bet with a few minutes on youtube I can find a racist or anti-gay or Obama is a muslim clip from a McCain or GWB supporter.

Now if Obama was saying 'I'm going to pay their cas and mortgage" You have a valid comparision.

we are talking about a change in the country, a movement away from self reliance. Kennedy's speech was a call to action. Americans understood and believed in it. It would fall on deaf ears today.
I think these clips perfectly illustrates the change. This lady would have been deemed a commie in 1961 and marched out of the country if she made those remarks.

I think the comparison of is valid in showing the perverse sense of entitlement American's believe they have coming to them from the government.

We've gone from a country that would do anything to stay off the dole to a country that refuses to work for anything

here you go Bryan....

blames everyone EXCEPT the individuals that took the loans. No blame whatsoever on the individuals, ie: self reliance

YouTube - ‪Obama To Wall Street "We Want Our Money Back"‬‏

then there my favorite of all time...

YouTube - ‪Obama-Spread the wealth around‬‏

Might look at your own responses before you throw out the childish charge. There are more people today, so it is irrelevant to the discussion to point out that there are more people on government assistance. Also, ther people did not make your point for you. I asked you directly and you have not given one shred of evidence to back up your point. Here is another inflation adjusted graphic that covers social insurances and public assistance. Do you have anything to back up your statement or are you only going to give circumstantial evidence of what you "see at work"?

The strange thing is that the conservative side usual lambasts liberals about basing their view points on "how they feel". That is much of what I see from the other side in these pages. Lots of perceptions and feelings and little factual basis or based on distortions of the truth. The discussions would have more value if the argument was that taxes shouldn't be raised on the wealthiest to pay for others health care or the amount of government assistance is too high. The argument that people are less self reliant than the 1970's or 80's is nearly impossible to back up with any data and is based on a personal perception rather than reality. Putting JFK up against that woman though is an amusing way to make the argument, though :biglaugh:

I never claimed that I'm not childish. There are a lot of people on this site that would verify that I'm about as childish as it gets.

As for your statistics, you post these graphs that back up your position, which is all well and good. What you don't post is a graph showing a state by state breakdown of state assistance to families. In 1996, Clinton signed a bill taking much of the federal assistance money and allocating it to the states for state run assistance programs. There's a huge amount of state $'s going to families on these programs. Why don't you look it up.

Also, you need to look at the size of families when you compare numbers from the 70's to present. Benefits are paid out based on the number of people in the family receiving them, and the average family size has decreased since the 70's. That would also help to explain the decrease in dollars per family being paid out.

Actually, he doesn't blame everyone except the individuals. He specifically addresses the Wall Street bailout and the responsibility to cover the costs of the bailout by firms that benefited from it. If this were a discussion of the causes of housing collapse, then you would be correct. Since it isn't and unless you are implying that the financial firms should have been left to collapse, then it is almost totally unrelated to self reliance.

Medicaid costs and CHIP are included in the second graph and they are definitely a concern. I will agree 100% on that. However, the reality is that those costs have grown astronomically with increase in costs for health care, not that people are less self reliant. The problem needs to be approached from the perspective that the rise in costs make the programs unsustainable, which gets lost in the argument when it is approached from the angle that people rely on the government more today than ever. It may cost more today, but a huge number of the people that receive assistance work 40 hours a week in low paying jobs that do not offer health care. The problem starts with the lack of good jobs and the insane rise in costs in medical care. 40 years ago if you were a laborer for Bethlehem Steel or in a textile mill, you had health coverage. Those jobs are gone. I have heard the same argument about lazy no good bums living off the government my entire life and to say it is worse now is factually untrue. Medical assistance and heating assistance cost more, and the economy tanked, so these are major issues that need to be addressed as much now as ever.