The now syandard Democ-rat election strategy - Page 2

Shi Huangdi · October 2, 2003, 01:34

Quote:

Originally posted by The Emperor Fabulous
Here, let me explain it to you socially.

John Doe is born into a family that sits well below the poverty line. His father is a works two jobs attempting to pull together enough money to feed his family. His mother is home caring for her other two children.

John Doe goes to public school. Because of the tax cuts, teachers salaries and certain programs are cut, creating lower level of education. Teachers who are willing to accept a small wage (usually those who are not very good) teach John. The afterschool programs he wants to go to are cut, leaving John with nothing to do once the bell rings.

However, John Doe sees where his parents are, and works hard. He avoids the prevalance of drugs, gangs, and other things which could take up his time since he is devoid of any activities afterschool. He does, however, take on a job, working 20 hours a week at minimum wage (plus another 15 hours under the table at below minimum to provide for his family). He takes on a second job when his father loses one due to his company downsizing.

John Doe goes through high school. While a smart and hardworking kid, he is unable to maintain more than a 2.5 GPA because he spent so much time working to help relieve some of the financial burden on his family. Due to this, he is unable to recieve any scholarships. He applies to State schools, but due to severe cuts in public funding, he is only offered 10% of what he needs to go to school.

John Doe decides that he must attend college in order to get a better future. He goes to a community college which, by picking up more hours at his second job, he can afford to go to. However, the community colleges were also hit by funding cuts. The professors have little experience, because all the good professors moved to good schools for more money. Again, John is faced with an education that is sub-par.

John Doe will not be disuaged. However, his mother is diagnosed with a dangerous but treatable disease. His family is without health insurance because of cuts in Medicare, and his father is unable to find work that will provide adequate health insurance. John finds more and more of his hours dedicated to working for a little more than minimum wage. He is still a hard worker, and while his grades are not stellar, he pulls out a 2.6 GPA for two years.

John Doe is accepted into State college. Due to his two years at community school, he is able to recieve funding for half his tuition. His father has found a second job, and while it doesn't pay as well as the one he had before, it does have health insurance. While John Doe still must work 35-40 hours per week to pay for school, he graduates with a degree in Computer Science.

John Doe is now in the workforce. At least, that's where he'd like to be. However, it is almost impossible for him to find a job in this economy. John Doe ends up taking a job that is below his qualifications, as well as below the money he needs. He is still a human as well: somehow between working and school he has found a girlfriend. Long story short, they marry. John must now provide for a family.

Slowly, as you'll see, though John has worked hard to get himself out of poverty, there are few jobs for him. His parents tried to provide for him, but he ended up providing for them. With cuts to welfare, he had no choice but to work as much as he did. With lack of jobs and a good salary, with a family to provide for, he falls right into his parent's situation raising him.

(The above scenario, in regards to his ability to work while attending school, is best case scenario.)

So you go ahead, Ming, and complain that a third of your money is taken. Go ahead David Floyd, and cry out that people are lazy. This has nothing to do with laziness. This is a common story. This, my friends, is real life.

You Suck.

David Floyd · October 2, 2003, 01:47

Quote:

So you go ahead, Ming, and complain that a third of your money is taken. Go ahead David Floyd, and cry out that people are lazy. This has nothing to do with laziness. This is a common story. This, my friends, is real life.

I don't give a ****. This still doesn't give John Doe a claim on my money. I earned it, and it's mine. He didn't earn it, so it isn't is. He clearly isn't lazy, but I also said that wealthy people shouldn't be responsible for other's misfortune, either.

What has this guy done to get a claim on my money? Had bad luck? Born into the wrong family? Well tough **** for him. Try to better yourself - just don't try to do it at my expense, unless I volunteer to help you.

monolith94 · October 2, 2003, 02:54

Focusing so much attention on your personal wealth seems unhealthy for the soul, Floyd. Relax. Learn to live with a budget. It's good for the heart.

David Floyd · October 2, 2003, 02:58

I'm not wealthy, I just see no reason why those who are should have to give money to others.

orange · October 2, 2003, 03:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln
The Democratic party is immoral. Why anyone would belong to a party that prides itself in being pro-abortion is beyone me. They thrive by stirring up minorities and trying to convince women that they would be beter off if they were men. They are the party of scum and I have no use for the entire orginization. Too bad they have duped so many decent people into thinking that they really care about them.

You used to be such a cool guy. What happened to the passive Christian we used to know and love?

Asher · October 2, 2003, 03:06

Quote:

Originally posted by David Floyd
I'm not wealthy, I just see no reason why those who are should have to give money to others.

How did you afford a trip to London?

monolith94 · October 2, 2003, 03:06

They're giving it to the government. What the government does with the money after that is done by the people WE elected.

According to you, we've elected a bunch of thieves and robbers. I feel we've elected a bunch of schills for corporate interests. We're both hoping to beat the other in the next election. That's just the way these things work.

BTW, trying to take the moral high ground in politics is self-defeating...

Asher · October 2, 2003, 03:06

Quote:

Originally posted by orange
You used to be such a cool guy. What happened to the passive Christian we used to know and love?

Incontinence comes with old age for some people, and it can aggitate one I suppose.

JohnT · October 2, 2003, 03:06

What I'm still trying to figure out is how EF's fictional story proves any sort of factual point. Anyone wanna clue me in how that works?

Asher · October 2, 2003, 03:09

Quote:

Originally posted by JohnT
What I'm still trying to figure out is how EF's fictional story proves any sort of factual point. Anyone wanna clue me in how that works?

It's intended to illustrate how the real-world system would treat a fictional individual.

For example, if I created a fictional individual who shot up a police pricinct, it would be a factual point that he'd be arrested or shot dead at some point.

It's not factual in that it's actually happened, but it certainly is in its applicability to the real world.

Saras · October 2, 2003, 04:04

Quote:

Originally posted by Ming
I have no problem with my taxes being spent on the communtiy and to help the disadvantaged. However, I do have a problem with HOW that money is being spent. The current welfair system is a joke... it's a black hole of spending, and doesn't do squat. It doesn't help people get back on their feet, or help them improve their situation. It's amazing that studies show that each dollar spent on welfair is the equilivent of about 10 cents of money that comes from private charities. When businesses and private organization put money against the problem, they get results. The government programs as they are today don't. So I'm pissed that I have to give such a large part of my income to programs that just piss the money away.

The school system is the same way... as pointed out in other threads... the US puts a lot of money into it, and it still sucks. The answer isn't to throw more money after already badly spent money. The answer is to rethink how to spend the money so that it is more effective.

Again... why can privately run charities be so much more effective with less money... Because Government programs are misguided and poorly managed.

Chip in the farm subsidies in US, France, rest of EU and other industrialised nations, that keep the 3rd world in the ****.

Gatekeeper · October 2, 2003, 04:16

In the end, a program — be it run by the government or by a private entity — is only as *good* or as *bad* as the person or people who is/are responsible for it.

Irresponsible, uncaring people can and do screw up things they get their hands on. Government waste and abuse along with corporate excesses have proven this time and time again. It all comes down to the caliber of the person/people with the responsbility.

Gatekeeper

Q Classic · October 2, 2003, 06:56

yeah, america's going down the shitty shitty shitty, and it's not 'cause of the terrorists, either.

uh Clem · October 2, 2003, 07:31

Quote:

For example, if I created a fictional individual who shot up a police pricinct, it would be a factual point that he'd be arrested or shot dead at some point.

Actually, he'd be elected Governor.

Q Classic · October 2, 2003, 07:32

David Floyd · October 2, 2003, 08:01

Asher,

Quote:

How did you afford a trip to London?

How does going to London make me wealthy? Oh, OK, I get it, I'm wealthy compared to the average homeless person. Still not wealthy though

Monolith,

Quote:

They're giving it to the government. What the government does with the money after that is done by the people WE elected.

According to you, we've elected a bunch of thieves and robbers.

Actually that's exactly right, but the people who vote for politicians on the grounds of their social programs are a bunch of thieves and robbers, too.

Zulu Elephant · October 2, 2003, 08:28

The bottom line is that the rich pay a portion of their taxes to the poor because the rich benefit from the economic system.

The whole country picks which system to use (capitalist/socialist/whatever) through voting and if all these darn thieving social programs were got rid of to let you keep a bit more of your money, the poor would soon realise that they might like to create an economic system that favours their skills rather than yours.

Saras · October 2, 2003, 08:42

Quote:

Originally posted by Zulu Elephant
The bottom line is that the rich pay a portion of their taxes to the poor because the rich benefit from the economic system.

The whole country picks which system to use (capitalist/socialist/whatever) through voting and if all these darn thieving social programs were got rid of to let you keep a bit more of your money, the poor would soon realise that they might like to create an economic system that favours their skills rather than yours.

... and join labor unions, and demand better wages. Oh wait, they can do that already