quote:

ORIGINAL: Real0ne

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

FR

Yes, we all depend on the mechanism of government to do things that individuals cannot do for themselves, or that cannot be practically done any other way.

so what is the purpose for the establishment of government in your opinion?

quote:

For or against...

Are people who are on food stamps dependent on those instruments?

make a case that depending on the government to ensure you have food on the table isn't a form of dependency, and that the act of becoming independent, as when a child grows up and moves means they were never dependent in the first place. I see res ipsa loquitur.

Is this res ipsa loquitur as you see it?

quote:

Is this a system designed to make people dependent? Or to prevent dependency by assisting them until they can get back on their feet and assist themselves out of a problem they did not make themselves?

quote:

thats not entirely true
people can also be forced into "acquiescence" by government or external sources.

quote:


This year there will be about 46 million. That would be about 15 percent of the population.

You have a very interesting definition of the term "falling numbers."

quote:

ORIGINAL: SilverBoat

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aylee

quote:

Is this a system designed to make people dependent?

Yes. If you want to have more of something, subsidize it.

quote:

Or to prevent dependency by assisting them until they can get back on their feet and

No, it makes them more dependent. It pays them to continue being poor. And the more we keep making it more comfortable to be poor, the more people will continue applying for the job of being poor.

quote:

assist themselves out of a problem they did not make themselves?

I will buy that for widows and orphans. Not for drunks or the lazy or the other undeserving poor.

So, based on your reasoning, the tax-breaks for pump-n-dump 'capital-gains' and vulture-capital 'dividends' should continue to subsidize the 'financial' industry, because ripping off a few trillions from the 99% to make the 1% richer is 'good' for the national economy, unity, etc?

Do you realize that the Fed shut off publication of the M3 'Money Supply' data, because they were trying to hide the ten-trillions they've been loaning the banks at 0.5%?

Here's a question for you: Who owns the most US Government Debt? I'll give you a couple of hints: it ain't China, and they own nearly half the $15-Trn in US debt, and the US citizens are paying a steady 2% on that. We're pumping $130-Bn/yr into subsidizing that 'industry.'

Why the hell do you think the deficits keep piling up? If it was really hurting the big banks, would they still be bribing politicians to spend more than receipts?

...

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

quote:

quote:

Or to prevent dependency by assisting them until they can get back on their feet and

No, it makes them more dependent. It pays them to continue being poor. And the more we keep making it more comfortable to be poor, the more people will continue applying for the job of being poor.

Then why are food stamp numbers falling?

quote:

But if rick the dick has his way, those numbers will be dropping soon.