On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Post a random video of a black woman starting a fight Think he just proved that "welfare-state" is wrong.
We should start a Circular Logic Scumbag Rightist meme.
I still believe that anyone in this country can be successful and/or rich if they truly work at it, is that so wrong?
This is a bit of a personal story, so take it as anecdotal evidence, but I met a French expat couple in my travels and when I asked him why he left France, he told me that there was too much government regulation and he simply couldn't make a living there with all of the collectivist policies and high taxes. Despite him saying these things, he still says that he supports the socialist welfare state system, even though it was the very reason he left his country to work abroad as an expat to begin with. That's not the kind of system I want in my country, no offense to anyone who supports that kind of system.
In a free society socialists can still live in that kind of society if they want to:
On February 12 2012 08:13 Lightwip wrote: For hundreds of years, Europe spent fortunes on a military so that they could colonize the entire world. But after they killed each other so much in WWII that they just couldn't do it anymore, they decided to start complaining about how the United States does things(all the while complaining about American WWI/II isolationism). Funny how it works, huh?
It doesn't necessarily mean that you're rich if you work hard. However, the United States has a great degree of upward mobility. Even the poorest of immigrants can succeed here if they work hard. If you can do something really well that few other people can do that is useful, you can become extremely wealthy(CEO and such). It's harder to do this when you have to pay a fortune in taxes for government programs, no?
Of course the United States has problems, but so does Europe(Euro crisis for example). But don't think that what works for Europe must work for the United States too. It's two entirely different situations. European counties have a much less diverse and a much smaller population and landmass. Things tend to run more smoothly in general under such circumstances. Ever tried to build a transcontinental railroad? Probably not, because Europe doesn't have to have such large projects. That one project defined an era and had a complicated mess of turmoil, corruption, and politics that Europe avoided because of their division.
Europe(and Canada) and the United States are not the same. Let's not pretend the same things apply for both of them.
This is a myth. economic mobility is much lower in USA than in Canada and Scandinavian countries, even with much higher taxes.
On February 12 2012 08:13 Lightwip wrote: For hundreds of years, Europe spent fortunes on a military so that they could colonize the entire world. But after they killed each other so much in WWII that they just couldn't do it anymore, they decided to start complaining about how the United States does things(all the while complaining about American WWI/II isolationism). Funny how it works, huh?
It doesn't necessarily mean that you're rich if you work hard. However, the United States has a great degree of upward mobility. Even the poorest of immigrants can succeed here if they work hard. If you can do something really well that few other people can do that is useful, you can become extremely wealthy(CEO and such). It's harder to do this when you have to pay a fortune in taxes for government programs, no?
Of course the United States has problems, but so does Europe(Euro crisis for example). But don't think that what works for Europe must work for the United States too. It's two entirely different situations. European counties have a much less diverse and a much smaller population and landmass. Things tend to run more smoothly in general under such circumstances. Ever tried to build a transcontinental railroad? Probably not, because Europe doesn't have to have such large projects. That one project defined an era and had a complicated mess of turmoil, corruption, and politics that Europe avoided because of their division.
Europe(and Canada) and the United States are not the same. Let's not pretend the same things apply for both of them.
This is a myth. economic mobility is much lower in USA than in Canada and Scandinavian countries, even with much higher taxes.
You believe Obama is a socialist, when he's generously considered "moderate" (more like center-right). I can't really take you seriously.
If you think there is anything moderate about Obama, then I feel sorry for you. He might be "centre-right" in a socialist or communist country, but in a freedom loving country, he is anything but.
In my country Obama would be a far-right candidate. I dont feel like a slave in my communist country. Its a strange world.
Obama wants to "fundamentally transform" (his words, not mine) America into a country like Norway, so how would he be far-right? Obama's views are in-line with the mainstream left in Europe.
Out of the UK, France, Switzerland, Germany, the Low Countries, and Scandanavia, there aren't any socialist countries. Stop using the word when you don't know what it means.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Basically, no system is perfect. You can look for the worst common denominator, or you can look at the average person and the average results. If you want to base your argument that liberalism is wrong because I shouldnt pay money to help poor people because or a youtube video of a woman fighting in a dennys, then so be it. The real world has actual statistics. Ones that show that the things youre defending are factually untrue. Many have been posted in this thread. You choose not to believe any of it, then you use anecdotal evidence and circular reasoning to try to prove a point. Taxes are not evil. They pay for things. However, taxation is distributed fairly, based on your income. Your income is fascilitated by the society you live in. You pay back into that society for giving you the infrastructure, services, and opportunity to make the money you do. If you only make a little, you pay a little, if you make a lot, you pay more. Instead of having to mortgage your home, or go bankrupt to pay for a costly surgery that your insurance company (if you have one) may or may not cover, we pay a small % of our income yearly into a fund, that allows everyone the right to be treated. The system is set up for the primary function of keeping people healthy, instead of making profits.
We do the same for infrastructure, education, etc... and it all seems to work out. We have MUCH stricter regulations on business and the banks, and guess what, we didnt get totally raped by the recession because of that. Do you want to know why we have these regulations? The CONSERVATIVE party here wanted to do exactly what the US did in allowing them to play with peoples money. The LIBERALS didnt allow it, keeping our money seperate from the banks money (which they are allowed to play with as much as they like). The conservatives cried about it not being in line with a free market, it will reduce competition, blah blah, and now looking back, it saved our asses. Not everything is black and white. I agree with the conservative party on some of its ideas, and I agree with the Liberals on others. The problem is your guys conservative party is SO polarized and extreme on everything, that it doesnt allow for your citizens to hold beliefs that other systems and ideas can sometimes be right.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Post a random video of a black woman starting a fight Think he just proved that "welfare-state" is wrong.
We should start a Circular Logic Scumbag Rightist meme.
If you're right, if all the -insert euphemism for people with dark skin here- in america are lazy, stupid, spoiled and have all the opportunities that everyone else has, what would happen to these people in a taxless state?
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
Dude, the wealthiest Americans do in fact work the hardest. The ones that are born in to wealth had parents that worked hard for them. It's fair.
If you're going to work hard, save your money, and invest, then you deserve all your wealth and shouldn't have it taken away only to be given to someone too lazy to work.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
SO we agree that to have a good start at life, you need a good education. The Capitalist system is the very reason that they aren't getting a education. Poor parents gives the child poor education, and with poor education you stay poor.
The best answer is for the government to finance a education for these children, so these can have a real shot at life. The money will later be payed back with taxes (they will pay more taxes because they will have a higher income, because of better education).
Look, no one denies that there can be rags to riches stories. But there is a reason that rag to riches stories is so rare. The fact is to jump from a lower class to a high class takes a mutiplitude of factors.
1) you have to work hard 2) you have to have great talent 3) luck
I don't think its an insult to Michael Jordan to state that his wealth was all of his own effort. He works harder than the majority of people and he certainly had talent. But he would have never been this sucessful if we didn't have the NBA, or have a large segment of the population to spend money on useless things such as jerseys.
People try to climb the ladder all the time, people who climbed near the top should make sure that the ladder can still be climbed for the next generation.
On February 12 2012 08:13 Lightwip wrote: For hundreds of years, Europe spent fortunes on a military so that they could colonize the entire world. But after they killed each other so much in WWII that they just couldn't do it anymore, they decided to start complaining about how the United States does things(all the while complaining about American WWI/II isolationism). Funny how it works, huh?
It doesn't necessarily mean that you're rich if you work hard. However, the United States has a great degree of upward mobility. Even the poorest of immigrants can succeed here if they work hard. If you can do something really well that few other people can do that is useful, you can become extremely wealthy(CEO and such). It's harder to do this when you have to pay a fortune in taxes for government programs, no?
Of course the United States has problems, but so does Europe(Euro crisis for example). But don't think that what works for Europe must work for the United States too. It's two entirely different situations. European counties have a much less diverse and a much smaller population and landmass. Things tend to run more smoothly in general under such circumstances. Ever tried to build a transcontinental railroad? Probably not, because Europe doesn't have to have such large projects. That one project defined an era and had a complicated mess of turmoil, corruption, and politics that Europe avoided because of their division.
Europe(and Canada) and the United States are not the same. Let's not pretend the same things apply for both of them.
This is a myth. economic mobility is much lower in USA than in Canada and Scandinavian countries, even with much higher taxes.
That's not the only thing the poster got wrong. Europe has a larger population.
I do believe I mentioned European COUNTRIES.The EU is too loose a group to count.
You can't bunch up all European countries in one group, and generalize everything. Saying Government involvement is bad, and point your finger at Greece, is misinformation.
On February 12 2012 08:13 Lightwip wrote: For hundreds of years, Europe spent fortunes on a military so that they could colonize the entire world. But after they killed each other so much in WWII that they just couldn't do it anymore, they decided to start complaining about how the United States does things(all the while complaining about American WWI/II isolationism). Funny how it works, huh?
It doesn't necessarily mean that you're rich if you work hard. However, the United States has a great degree of upward mobility. Even the poorest of immigrants can succeed here if they work hard. If you can do something really well that few other people can do that is useful, you can become extremely wealthy(CEO and such). It's harder to do this when you have to pay a fortune in taxes for government programs, no?
Of course the United States has problems, but so does Europe(Euro crisis for example). But don't think that what works for Europe must work for the United States too. It's two entirely different situations. European counties have a much less diverse and a much smaller population and landmass. Things tend to run more smoothly in general under such circumstances. Ever tried to build a transcontinental railroad? Probably not, because Europe doesn't have to have such large projects. That one project defined an era and had a complicated mess of turmoil, corruption, and politics that Europe avoided because of their division.
Europe(and Canada) and the United States are not the same. Let's not pretend the same things apply for both of them.
This is a myth. economic mobility is much lower in USA than in Canada and Scandinavian countries, even with much higher taxes.
That's not the only thing the poster got wrong. Europe has a larger population.
I do believe I mentioned European COUNTRIES.The EU is too loose a group to count.
You talk about Europe as a single entity when it suits you, when you are finger painting a historical narrative, when it doesn't Europe is "too lose a group to count"?
On February 12 2012 08:13 Lightwip wrote: For hundreds of years, Europe spent fortunes on a military so that they could colonize the entire world. But after they killed each other so much in WWII that they just couldn't do it anymore, they decided to start complaining about how the United States does things(all the while complaining about American WWI/II isolationism). Funny how it works, huh?
It doesn't necessarily mean that you're rich if you work hard. However, the United States has a great degree of upward mobility. Even the poorest of immigrants can succeed here if they work hard. If you can do something really well that few other people can do that is useful, you can become extremely wealthy(CEO and such). It's harder to do this when you have to pay a fortune in taxes for government programs, no?
Of course the United States has problems, but so does Europe(Euro crisis for example). But don't think that what works for Europe must work for the United States too. It's two entirely different situations. European counties have a much less diverse and a much smaller population and landmass. Things tend to run more smoothly in general under such circumstances. Ever tried to build a transcontinental railroad? Probably not, because Europe doesn't have to have such large projects. That one project defined an era and had a complicated mess of turmoil, corruption, and politics that Europe avoided because of their division.
Europe(and Canada) and the United States are not the same. Let's not pretend the same things apply for both of them.
There's actually a good amount of data out there that shows that western European countries like (lets take one of those "socialist" countries) Denmark has more social mobility than the U.S.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
SO we agree that to have a good start at life, you need a good education. The Capitalist system is the very reason that they aren't getting a education. Poor parents gives the child poor education, and with poor education you stay poor.
The best answer is for the government to finance a education for these children, so these can have a real shot at life. The money will later be payed back with taxes (they will pay more taxes because they will have a higher income, because of better education).
Not entirely true. You don't need an education to realize that living off of welfare and stealing is wrong.
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
No I mean, I can't argue with you. I'm just obviously so delusional.
actually you know what? i'm right because i'm right. and i win the argument because im right. therefore im right. maybe you'll take to that logic.
What? I'm not sure if you're trolling now or what. I give you reasons and a video of why this welfare-state is wrong, and you make some outrageous comment. Cool.
Yes, he is trolling you. He's trolling you because you still haven't realized your justification of the "fact" that the wealthiest Americans are such because they work the hardest was completely circular. He's trolling you because everyone in the thread called you out on it and you selectively ignored that.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than your anecdotes, what your mom and dad told you, and YouTube videos? If so, what? We're all curious.
Simple question: are your blanket statements about the US's working class based on anything other than what your psychology teacher told you?
I made no blanket statements. I was simply wondering whether you were getting your "facts" from anywhere. So far it seems that either you're not, or that you don't want to share.
I'm actually wondering about the video that YW linked. If Ron Paul supporters stick around, wouldn't they vote for him at the convention? Additionally, since Ron Paul supporters are extremely loyal, wouldn't they be assigned to the convention and hence vote for him and hence give him more delegates?
On February 12 2012 07:58 Dzemoo wrote: ^ I'm not going to quote all that so I'll just reply like this.
You need to get off of the notion that every single person is going to use the system the way it's going to be used. Whenever I go south of downtown their are tons of welfare recipient single mothers with brand new iPhones, all of their kids have Jordans, etc. None of these people work. They start fights, rob homes, and sell drugs, all while receiving the money of hard working Americans. I DO NOT want to help these people out. You're looking at this in a way that everybody has good intentions and nobody is looking to abuse the system, which is simply not true.
sorry to disagree with your anecdotal evidence, but i cant imagine a single mother who goes around starting fights, robbing homes, selling drugs.
btw, are you going to keep avoiding your embarrassing circular argument?
You can't? Then you need to get out into the real world.
Haha, the top rated comment describes the video wayyy too good.
"What do you get when you take 1. Pregnant women with no idea who the baby's daddy is. 2. Ghetto moms raising trashy kids with no fathers. 3. Ghetto kids being raised in the ghetto, seeing mom be a hoe and lazy. 4. Not getting a good education, learn to only talk ebonics. 5. Ghetto kids turning into ghetto teenagers 6. Never getting a job because welfare is easy to get. 7.Ghetto teenagers getting other ghetto teenagers or becoming pregnant, therefore restarting the whole process. AKA this video"
This is a great example of what happens when you give money to everyone. It's sad liberals can't see the world for what it is.
SO we agree that to have a good start at life, you need a good education. The Capitalist system is the very reason that they aren't getting a education. Poor parents gives the child poor education, and with poor education you stay poor.
The best answer is for the government to finance a education for these children, so these can have a real shot at life. The money will later be payed back with taxes (they will pay more taxes because they will have a higher income, because of better education).
Not entirely true. You don't need an education to realize that living off of welfare and stealing is wrong.
Refusing to take the welfare wont give them an education and ability to move upwards economically.
EPT![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Intergenerational_mobility_graph-1.jpg/500px-Intergenerational_mobility_graph-1.jpg)
