So what about this budget BO has come up with?

Basic economics. A farmer can produce all the crops he can, but if the people he sells them to don't have money to buy 'em then the crop doesn't sell.

You need people at the bottom to be able to buy products and services. The example I gave, of giving a billion dollars to a few large companies who then take the money and put it into their personal bank accounts means that the money fails to enter the economy, while giving the same amount of money to people who are at the bottom and can't afford to put it into their personal bank accounts, most wouldn't even have an account anyway, so they inject it into the economy immediately with immediate results.

The poor and lower middle-class buy products and services from small businesses. Those small businesses then can afford to expand their product line, and will need to hire some of those poor and lower-middle-class people, who then have more money to inject into the economy.

It's not about a handout, it's about basic economics. You say large corporations are more worthy of that billion dollars, I say that is unbelievably stupid. It shows an immense lack of understanding for basic economics. The economy thrives when the poor and lower middle-class have money to spend. The economy withers when they don't, irregardless of the billions given to large corporations. Don't want to give money to the poor? Then expect the economy to suffer. Want to give money to big corporations? That's just idiotic lol

 

Here is a quote from moen, posted earlier today. I'm not trying to steal his words but they are as appropriate on this subject as they are the other:
"The simple transfer of funds, even if it is to the victims of poverty, will not eradicate or reduce poverty. It will merely alleviate the symptoms of poverty in the short run. It is not a durable solution."

 

Your example of a couple who have a cell-phone and cable bills has a point, that they shouldn't have either since they are in poverty. I've agreed with you on that point twice now. They shouldn't be spending money on frivolous things, and would be better off learning how to manage their money better.

But, your argument against giving aid to people in poverty is really about your concern over your personal taxes. You don't want to pay the taxes that you do pay, and the idea that the people in your example are getting some of your tax-dollars infuriates you, that should be obvious to anyone by now: "Why should they receive any of my money?! They don't manage their finances properly!!!"

So again, this is about you wanting less taxes, and you wanting those tax-dollars collected spent in a manner you prefer. That the couple in your example received aid through your church is irrelevant to the basic issue of the taxes you pay going to people you don't want it going to. You could have chosen to not give aid to the couple, or at the very least made even more of a stink about it, but you can't do anything about the taxes collected from you being spent in a way you don't like it spent, and that's the real issue here.

 

Duh. Wouldn't everyone want to pay less out in taxes & have the tax money they do contribute be spent in a manner they feel responsible? Kinda goes without saying, doesn't it? To these accusations I plead guilty as charged.
Back to your other point, we did help those people. Hopefully the money we gave them helps today & the advice we gave them helps in the future. Nothing remotely associated with taxes so keep trying if that's the angle you're going for.

 

Duh, it's about how generous you are to people ...that you believe don't deserve your generousity... but that view is myopic. Of course, it's related to taxes in the broader sense, and also in your particular basic beliefs that these people you have been so generous too are underserving of assistance since they do not manage their finances as well as they should.

You can claim otherwise as much as you want, but my opinion stands that at it's heart, your particular issue is directly related to the taxes you are paying and the belief that undeserving people are receiving your tax-dollars.

 

How am willing to stack my generosity up against yours any day.

Exactly how dense are you? My generosity isn't determined by taxes but maybe it is limted by my tax liability.

Then, of course, you would be wrong again.

 

You make much more money than I do, and my level of income doesn't allow for me to be very generous, BUT... if I had an income such as yours you'd lose that bet.

YOU? Calling ME dense? LOL ...You don't deny that you don't want your tax dollars spent on poor people, who you believe are undeserving of YOUR money, and you don't deny that you believe you are paying too much in taxes. You say you are generous ad nausium, yet whine about those people you are generous to. And YOU call ME dense? lol ...YOU can't make the connection? LOL "I'm generous! It has nothing to do with my taxes..." (whispers) "...but maybe my tax liability"... (LAUGHS hysterically)

(shakes head) ...Ca-looooo-less.

 

"IF" huh? Typical...you aren't willing to put forth the effort to achieve success but you're pretty darn quick to say what you would do better or differently if you had the money.
By the way, you can be generous without it being only about the money. You can donate your time, your talent or your labor. But I guess you never thought about that one, huh?

 

Again, awfully close to being libelous there David. Your personal belief that I personally, and the poor in general, are "unwilling" to put in the effort is unwarranted... there is no way you can say that about all of them. As for my income, it can be said that I give a larger percentage of my money away, albeit to my girlfriend to pay bills lol ...and I can probably win the argument over who spends more money on frivolous things... not to mention the fact that you apparently have a lot of time on your hands to waste on this site, as you've been posting all day, and that's fairly typical of you. As to donating my time and labor, that can also be seen as inappropriate behavior considering my financial situation is considerably low... that my time would be better served earning money and not wasting my time and energy on things that would not serve my financial interests... which should appeal to your greedy Republican values lol

 

...so again, your guesses are wayyyyyy off LOL

 

I do believe you personally are unwilling to put forth the effort. I have never said, implied nor do I believe "the poor in general" are guilty of the same.

 

I'm sitting in my office, what are you doing? Anything constructive?
I enjoy jumping online between appointments and meetings, the drivel spewed by you and those like you gives me the comedy relief I need during a busy workday.
And since you seem so concerned about my day, you'll be happy to know I'm heading to the Y for my weekly basketball league then I'll take the wife & kids out to eat. I'm only in the office Mon-Wed so my posting tomorrow will be a little light. I hope you'll be okay with that.

 

The issue lies with an employers search for information about a prospective employee. Employers are increasingly searching internet accounts held by those prospective employees.

Users on this site are, for the most part, anonymous, but with the linking features on this site this account may be accessed through other accounts like Facebook and Twitter, which are being scrutinized more and more, and allow invasive searches.

If an employer sees comments that label a prospective employee negatively the employer may not wish to hire that person, or if the person is already an employee they could be fired.

Now, I know it's your opinion that I don't work enough, but frankly, your comments don't help, despite your belief that it does, and if I lost a job because of your comments, and I was able to show that in court, you'd likely be found guilty of libel.

Granted, there's a lot of if/thens there... but it's not inconceivable that one man's poor opinions of another person can result in actual loss for that other person.

One point the law would look at is whether or not the comment was true or not. It may be your belief that tom and I are lazy, but can you prove that in court? On our side we'd have to prove we're not lol

As for your statement that you've "never said the poor are unwilling to put in the effort"... I disagree. It's your second biggest complaint... behind your taxes are too high/being wasted. That's my opnion. If you can prove in a court of law that you have suffered a loss as a result of this posting of my belief then you'd likely win a libel case against me lol

 

Ok then show me where I've ever said this. I bet you won't be able to!

You claim I made the statement so prove it....not being able to prove your accusation would be libelous, right?

 

Another bet you'd lose lol ...you really are a horrible gambler... let's play some poker

Anyway... ...prove it. in fact, prove anything. I say you can't lol ...for example: What if I was to say I worked at a law firm in Chicago? ...or that I owned and operated a ranch in Colorado? What would that mean to your 'beliefs' now? That I've lied? Prove it lol

I'll say this about you, and while some may take it as a compliment, it really isn't one: You stick to your beliefs.

 

Once again, I'll ask that you back up this assertion.

 

David, if someone has derogatorily accused you of something in print but can't back it up, perhaps you should consider consulting an attorney in order to file a libel claim. I believe the operators of this website keep all its data, so it's simple to retrieve the data by doing a search. Of course, as with just about any post on this forum, the comments are not intended to be libelous but are simply opinions; thus your claim may be difficult to prove. But, I think if someone is going to falsely accuse you in print of something and not even have the decency to prove their point, then a libel claim may be an option. I think people who are so low as to initially bring up the topic of libel claims in an opinion forum are just scummy. But, that's just my opinion.

 

So you're saying you believe the opposite? ..that the poor, in general, are willing to put forth the effort? They don't waste money needlessly on tvs, cable programming, cell phones then either right? Because wasting money needlessly can mean not putting forth enough "effort". Care to back up your claim then? ...as you say.

 

I didn't make a claim one way or the other....but you are saying I did.

I am simply asking that you back up what you say. Whatsa matter? Can't?
I think it's time for you to either put up or shut up. What was that you were saying in another thread about not being able to admit to being wrong?

 

Maybe I'll consult with one of our company attorneys Monday morning. Neh, on second thought, I don't care what some nameless morons on an obsure internet site say about me...it's all part of the game in my opinion (just as everything here is opinion, right?). I would suggest that those among us who can't handle the heat consider leaving the kitchen.