Political Discussion
Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=183902
Printed Date: 27 January 2026 at 1:56am
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Political Discussion
Posted By: oldsoldier
Subject: Political Discussion
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 2:56pm
|
Explain the differance in 'Promote the General Welfare' as stated in the Constitution as a role of government, and 'Provide the General Welfare' as the current trend in government sees it.
I see the differance as Government providing the means for the individual to succeed ie education, and private enterprise and support, not government providing financial assistance on the backs of others who follow the Promote model. Earning a 'entitlement' or being forced into a situation (ill or injured) is quite differant than 3rd generation welfare reciepiants because they know nothing better. The US OTR Trucking industry is 600,000 drivers short of providing the full services in transportation of goods, call any trucking company, if you are breathing you are hired at approx starts 0f $35K plus with free training, and still the number remains the same. Sacrifice (ie time away from home) for a goal is too foriegn to many, when I trained drivers for Werner/US Express/Crete Carriers I knew when Joey Spoiledbutt was quiting, right after the third or fourth I miss you call from momma, and the living in a closet frustration of poor Joey. ------------- 
|
Replies:
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 3:19pm
|
what i see is this turning out bad
------------- 
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 3:22pm
|
Show me numerical evidence of 3rd generation welfare recipients, and I'll keep listening.
------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: __sneaky__
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 3:24pm
------------- "I AM a crossdresser." -Reb Cpl Forum Vice President RIP T&O Forum |
ParielIsBack wrote:Posted By: Gatyr
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 3:26pm
|
Well, we shouldn't assume that the two are mutually exclusive. It's possible to promote via providing, as they do with education, law enforcement, etc. It's also important to note that the general welfare is the welfare of the society. No doubt the welfare of a society is inversely related to the crime rate. By providing for less-privileged, crime is generally reduced. Moreover, society benefits from a population that is generally affluent. If those welfare recipients are no longer recipients at some random time, not only will they have virtually no chance of integrating into society as a productive person, they will likely become more of a detractor because society will either have to deal with the crimes being committed to survive or pay for what will be a failed attempt at rehabilitation. Also, point of clarification, I don't think many right-minded people advocate unconditional welfare support for just anyone. If you are arguing against that, you won't find much opposition unless one party misunderstands the other. ------------- 
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 3:32pm
|
Check the state welfare charts for inner city numbers, or go down to your local cities 'poor' neighborhoods and see for yourselves. The US Dept of Labor can also give you numbers on available Jobs and available employees in area.
head start for ya http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=3844 - http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/index.php?Article_ID=3844 -------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 3:44pm
|
Wow, 7.5% of current recipients are third generation recipients. So, 92.5% aren't. Perhaps we should pick a number to focus on here. I'm not saying our welfare system isn't broken. It is, and like many parts of our government, it needs a rework. Frankly, I'll take added welfare costs over people tapping my phones. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 4:02pm
|
Wow, a true cop-out. It does not effect me so ignore as required. 7.5% is still to high, when you consider the normal 5-7% unemployment rate (not todays reaction to markets). And having governmental policies continue to foster this "entitlement' over personal effort mindset will only keep this number growing. The old pre-reform 'breeding for dollars' more kids stay unwed- bigger check that helped create the current social issues in the inner cities. The old projects in NYC, here is a home for free, a few years later a war zone looking like Beirut, now privatized, ownership, and yes stricter qualifacations made the NYC 'projects' become at least a DMZ.
You recieve something for nothing how can you assign value to it? -------------
|
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 4:12pm
|
That is not 7.5% on welfare higher than the unemployment rate. That is 7.5% of the unemployed/on welfare. It isn't a sense of entitlement that is the government's fault. It is solely the fault of lazy bums who see it as an easy way to make money/health insurance. You blame the government, I blame the person abusing the system. ------------- Que pasa? 
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 4:30pm
This is the prerogative of being a 20-year old male. I don't think we should have a welfare system as we have it today. That said, it's clearly not the most pressing issue we're facing right now. Therefore, yes, I will ignore it. I'm not a resident of the projects, nor have I spent much time in them, but I think you fail to understand just how difficult it is to get out. Everyone does what they can to get what they want, and the problem with current welfare is not necessarily that we're paying people based on family size or some such, but that our society places goals in front of these people that don't make logical sense. That's before we begin talking about black culture, which is probably the biggest obstacle facing most of the poorest people in this country. Rappers should absolutely be ashamed of the messages they've been putting out for at least the last two decades, because they're continuing the cycle of violence and totally failing to help the neighborhoods they came out of. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 11:18pm
------------- 
Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos. |
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 11 December 2009 at 11:22pm
Who says you have to get married? And a dmz? Not exactly. ------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 9:42am
|
Also, exaggerate much? I doubt there was ever artillery hitting a project in NYC. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 10:25am
|
The concept- DMZ: two armed parties (Police and Gangs/Criminals) staring at each other across a agreed defined line of no aggressive action.
Walk any project anywhere you will immediately be able to ID where the DMZ (Police Slang) is. Interesting that many missed the concept....and immediately went to literal. So far no artillery has been thrown across the DMZ between the Korea's either, just the occasional illegal crossing, a few rounds or axe handles exchanged, and the tunneling (several found)by the North. -------------
|
Posted By: Bolt3
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 1:00pm
|
I think your concept of NYC projects is based upon movies.
------------- <Removed sig for violation of Clause 4 of the New Sig Rules> |
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 1:17pm
ever think that maybe it was because that isnt alot of money and not due to laziness?
if a gangbanger wants to kill a cop, this so called 'DMZ' will not exist. im pretty sure gangsters have not sat down with cops and agreed on a line of no action -------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 2:30pm
This exists only in your imagination. I know a lot of cops from Newark, Trenton, and Camden, who would like to disagree with you. Also, everything doesn't have to have a metaphor. The creation of a metaphor for everything (especially wars) is just a way to put on blinders and ignore the facts about the situation. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: jmac3
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 2:49pm
------------- Que pasa?
|
Posted By: High Voltage
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 3:24pm
------------- 
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 4:31pm
|
Try again grew up in upper Manhatten in the 50's-60's. Saw the projects go up and what they turned into. And later a a US Marshall picking up inmates from MCC New York for transport to other FCI's and to Stewart for air transfer I was in the city a lot, and dealt with NYPD daily. We talked. -------------
|
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 4:42pm
|
50-60's =/= 90's-2000's try again -------------
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 7:05pm
|
When do you think the breakdown of the inner city family values (breeding for dollars, free housing fiasco in projects, etc) have its roots. The Great Society of the 60's under Johnson started the decline, we are now in the third generation of the same problems we have been throwing money at for 45plus years, with no real result. Same issues of the 60's thru today still fester in the inner cities.
Look at a picture of any 'slum' of 1969 and the same area today....nothing has really changed except maybe the minority group occupying the 'slum'. NYC, Detroit, LA, Chicago...same story differant city. Once the populace finds out they can recieve something for nothing there is no incentive to move on or up. And the 'enclave' mentality of the newer immagrant populations to form "Little (pick a nation)" instead of assimulating into American society the problems in the area only intensify. -------------
|
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 9:02pm
|
so there were bloods and crips alongside of some latin kings back in the 60's?
-------------
|
Posted By: oldsoldier
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 10:27pm
|
Gangs exsisted, street crime exsisted...and it was not glorified, it ran under the media radar by mutual consent. The media was quite differant then, not info-tainment, or raings driven 'if it bleeds it leads'. -------------
|
Posted By: slackerr26
Date Posted: 12 December 2009 at 11:37pm
|
i highly doubt that gangs back then were as violent and drug driven as they are now
-------------
|
Posted By: ParielIsBack
Date Posted: 13 December 2009 at 1:31am
|
Mexican cartels armed with armored cars and machineguns >> American gangs The point is not what the inner cities were like in the '60's. It's that directly linking welfare and gang violence borders on the obscene, in any time period. The situation isn't that simple. Welfare affects the same people that see drugs and gang violence as a route to greater economic status. If you can somehow get from there to it causing drug trafficking and gang violence, be my guest. But that doesn't make it any more true. ------------- BU Engineering 2012 |
Posted By: StormyKnight
Date Posted: 13 December 2009 at 3:22am
|
I've probably posted about this before, but it seems relevant to this thread. Buddy of mine has been managing a government funded apartment complex in a small downtown city. He used to be a cop in the same city and used to bust drug-dealers in the same place for years. The irony isn't lost on him. He has a belief that people are 'de-evolving'. He sees it everyday where he works now. These people get apartments and they pay according to their incomes. Apparantly, when you are on welfare, your government assistance goes according to how many children you have. The more kids you have, the more welfare money/assistance you get. He has seen people with no jobs or abilities to provide for themselves have children to increase the amount of money they get. He has also seen these children, once they turn 18 years old apply for an apartment and basically get it for free since they have no job. So, you have these people having kids to increase their welfare payments, providing an example to these same kids who follow in their footsteps. It is hard to argue against his 'de-evolution' theory.
Welfare is supposed to be a stopgap measure to fall back on when times are hard, not a means of making it through life. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Hitman
Date Posted: 13 December 2009 at 3:40am
|
Are the poor taking advantage of us? Or did we take advantage of them? I can admit that the only reason I am going to university is because my grandparents were white surbanites in the post WW2 world. They raised a bunch of hippies who either made farms or became professionals. The poor exisist so that I can live comfortably. What North American televsision has taught me is that money will make me happy. I also have learned that I am a post-materialist. The only reason I care about human rights and freespeech is because I have never experienced financial uncertainty. Well, now that we are in a recession, I think that is even more important to help out the most disadvantaged member of our society. You never know when you might be worse of than you we're before.
------------- |
Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 13 December 2009 at 4:14am
I can't drive a truck. I have a feeling the people of Earth are going to need me. ------------- 
|
Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 13 December 2009 at 10:55am
I like the cut of your jib, sir. |