bobadobalina:

It was luck that Arnold Schwarzenegger grew up in post WWII Austria where he could not even afford a pair of shoes and ended up a famous actor, a successfully businessman and leader of one of the largest economies in the world?

It's luck that you're semi-literate. "successfully businessman?"

The biggest problem is out of "The poor" there are distinct groups that are separate but lumped together in how their treated.

A. Those useful members of society who want to better themselves and make something of thier lives, they want to do better and are willing to put forth effort to do so, and are willing to accept help to achieve that end. Some of these peiple are homeless, some are struggling at the very bottom of the ladder.

THESE are the people that would gladly sign up for some kind of work/co-op program that would allow useful projects to get completed in exchange for the basics and assistance to move forward (job traininig, educational assistance etc..)

Going 100% on the people I see around my area (Cincinnati/Dayton) These people are in the minority (maybe 5-10% if we're lucky)

B. People who would normally fall into the A. category but have some huge roadblock in addition to being poor/down on their luck etc.. Health/medical problems, infirmity,

These people would help but would need some kind of specialized jobs and/or health assistance to get to a point where they could feel useful

Again this is the minority 5-10%

C. People who are chemically dependent who really want help and want to get back on track.

Again these people would help but would need some kind of specialized jobs and/or health assistance to get to a point where they could feel useful, and would need to follow up to maintain, or lose out.

I fully support efforts to help these people, I've been in bad spots and given one bad turn would easily have been homeless in addition to broke.

My issue is with the "other people"

D. The rest.....
The people who take the easy way out, don't care, don't want to be more, deal or swim in drugs,.. The uneducated that have no desire to ever learn/better themselves.
The thugs, the criminals, the lazy, the drifting by from handout to handout/welfare check to welfare check.

That's about 50-70% of the "Poor/homeless people" I see. To be honest I have to agree with the GOP on this one,... I really don't care what happens to these people they just drain/leach/mooch of the rest of us and bring us all down, setup a literal welfare state for these people, move them all to some giant housing facility, trade food and drink for sterilization and let them just phase out. If that's what they want, why deny it to them.

As long as we treat ALL these people the same, the people from D. will just squander the resources/opportunities/assistance that the people from group A/B/C would have used to better themselves.

Figuring out who needs what is the biggest problem, but the bleeding hearts will always find a way to litigate/legitimize that group D. is just as deserving as group A. and to me that's a pretty fundamental divide that needs to be crossed. Admitting that some people aren't worth helping and/or don't want help is something no one will ever take responsibility for saying no matter how true it is.

Huggermugger: Provide very basic simple affordable housing.

Provide jobs.

This utter bullshiat about hustling them into shelters and then chain-ganging them to clean the side of roads and turn big rocks into little ones and the like is just humiliating and degrading them, and making a profit off of them to boot.

Teabaggers want to imprison and enslave the poor.

Liberals want to keep the poor from starving and being homeless, and then to put them in a situation where they can get a job where they can start to be a contributing member of society.

If they're too debilitated by mental illness and/or chronic substance abuse, then they should get the appropriate treatment so that they can then be well enough to contribute to society as much as they're able to.

I don't see what the problem is. OH, of course, other than the prosperity gospel and the Randroid mentality of hating the poor more than anything.

That's a brilliant argument except for the fact that.
A. The teabaggers (as much as I hate them) err on the side of "Do nothing for the poor, and lockup/kill the criminals." Which is stupid but negligence isn't the same as seeking to destroy.
B. In your model all the poor people are just "Golly I'm down on my luck, if only someone would help me I'd be working hard tomorrow" and that's just not the case. A LOT of the poor would rather take all you would give them then wash out/skip the job interview/not show up for the training etc.. and just collect the money and/or abuse the system and get whatever they can out of it till it fails and the next free handout system comes along.

Liberals Assume (incorrectly) that "The poor" are just down on their luck, and are just as deserving of help as everyone else, and that there's no way anyone would ever *want* to stay poor if there was another option. When you're that poor you'd never bite the hand that feeds you.

Conservatives Assume (incorrectly) that "The poor" are so becasue they abused the system and/or just wants a free handout. When you don't see any way out you just look for whatever makes tomorrow a little better, next week/year doesn't come into it.

It's probably 50/50 and as long as each sides plan only caters to the poor that they believe exists, both plans will always fail.

How about we be liberal with the people who prove they want to better themselves, and conservative with the people who prove they just want the free ride.

Nah,.. No politician would EVER have the balls to do something like that.

bobadobalina: 2wolves: bobadobalina:

It was luck that Arnold Schwarzenegger grew up in post WWII Austria where he could not even afford a pair of shoes and ended up a famous actor, a successfully businessman and leader of one of the largest economies in the world?

It's luck that you're semi-literate. "successfully businessman?"

It's probably genetics that make you totally stupid. Would you call building a billion dollar magazine empire (for starters) a successful business?

You're changing the subject. You got schooled, couldn't admit you were in error, and plowed ahead.

As for your opinion of my intelligence? I'll just move right on as it really pisses off narrow minded twunts like yourself.

bobadobalina: 2wolves: bobadobalina: 2wolves: bobadobalina:

It was luck that Arnold Schwarzenegger grew up in post WWII Austria where he could not even afford a pair of shoes and ended up a famous actor, a successfully businessman and leader of one of the largest economies in the world?

It's luck that you're semi-literate. "successfully businessman?"

It's probably genetics that make you totally stupid. Would you call building a billion dollar magazine empire (for starters) a successful business?

You're changing the subject. You got schooled, couldn't admit you were in error, and plowed ahead.

Just like I did when I saw your mom naked

Mom has been dead for over 30 years. Are you a pervert on top of being semi-literate?