Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Vox)   A Canadian study gave homeless people $7,500. How'd that turn out?   (vox.com) divider line
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

7523 clicks; posted to Main » and Politics » on 28 Oct 2020 at 8:30 AM (5 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



90 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-10-28 3:49:24 AM  
Well, obviously this could never work in the US because they gave that benefit to Canadians, and not Americans. American homeless would just spend the money on crank and bootleg cigarettes, or booze and porn magazines. Our poors are sooper special in how irresponsible and parasitic they are, while Canadian poors are just nicer.

/Hell
//One plz
///Just wanted to get the argument that some jackass would try out of the way early. Yes, I need a shower now.
 
Xai [TotalFark]
2020-10-28 6:02:15 AM  
This proves that it saves taxpayers money by reducing the cost of maintaining homeless programs - in just 1 year it produced net savings per person, so even with only a 50% retention in just 2 years this would be a net saving - and that's before you even consider the social benefits.

Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.
 
2020-10-28 8:33:05 AM  

Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.


And would this surprise you in any way?
 
2020-10-28 8:33:07 AM  

Xai: This proves that it saves taxpayers money by reducing the cost of maintaining homeless programs - in just 1 year it produced net savings per person, so even with only a 50% retention in just 2 years this would be a net saving - and that's before you even consider the social benefits.

Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.


Wait till I tell you about the state's desire to kill criminals.
 
2020-10-28 8:33:29 AM  
Timmie and Molson report record earnings?
 
2020-10-28 8:33:54 AM  
Well, this is obviously a lie, as it goes against our manufactured narrative that the hobos and rub-a-dubs will spend the money on booze and junk.  /s
 
2020-10-28 8:34:17 AM  
Sarah Palin slips over the border for free health care and a check, eh?
 
2020-10-28 8:34:37 AM  
Repeat from a few weeks back, but still worth bringing up again.  Homeless people don't want to be homeless, what a shock.
 
2020-10-28 8:41:59 AM  

Flappyhead: Repeat from a few weeks back, but still worth bringing up again.  Homeless people don't want to be homeless, what a shock.


They don't?  Then why are they outdoors so much?
 
2020-10-28 8:42:30 AM  
As long as everyone agrees that 'landlords' are the real problem
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-28 8:43:38 AM  
Sounds credible.
 
2020-10-28 8:48:11 AM  
A piece of what, subby?
 
d23 [OhFark]
2020-10-28 8:48:30 AM  

Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.


Yes this is true.  There is also that there is this concept of "deserving" that many Americans place on top of everything.  If the person is homeless because they were overtaken by a drug problem then he is not "deserving", for instance.  And sometimes the old protestant "if he/she got to this state then that must be an indication of a bad person" that people are taught growing up in the USA, that bad fortune is an indication of character flaws.

And on the purely economics side people can't think until next week a lot of the time.  The ability to see that if you spend money now that if prevents larger expenditure later is rare here these days.  Look at COVID: it will cost the economy 4x the cost of what the huge upfront expenditure could have been.
 
Xai [TotalFark]
2020-10-28 8:48:50 AM  

Harry Freakstorm: Flappyhead: Repeat from a few weeks back, but still worth bringing up again.  Homeless people don't want to be homeless, what a shock.

They don't?  Then why are they outdoors so much?


A lack of doors.
 
2020-10-28 8:50:11 AM  
Yes but remember they are Canadians not Americans. Here they would spend it in hookers and blow.
 
2020-10-28 8:52:16 AM  
Screened out  anyone homeless for more then two years, the mentally ill and relied on self reporting.
 
2020-10-28 8:52:23 AM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-10-28 8:54:27 AM  
Keep in  mind that this study only focused on homeless who were not experiencing addiction or other mental health issues. That doesn't devalue the study but we can't lose sight of the fact that a significant portion of the homeless population suffer from one or both is these issues.

Here's a better link: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/​british​-columbia/new-leaf-project-results-1.5​752714

Also, article is a repeat from October 7th or 8th.
 
2020-10-28 8:57:23 AM  

d23: Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.

Yes this is true.  There is also that there is this concept of "deserving" that many Americans place on top of everything.  If the person is homeless because they were overtaken by a drug problem then he is not "deserving", for instance.  And sometimes the old protestant "if he/she got to this state then that must be an indication of a bad person" that people are taught growing up in the USA, that bad fortune is an indication of character flaws.

And on the purely economics side people can't think until next week a lot of the time.  The ability to see that if you spend money now that if prevents larger expenditure later is rare here these days.  Look at COVID: it will cost the economy 4x the cost of what the huge upfront expenditure could have been.


so...what good is making the choice to get better boots, if you starve in the meantime?  I guess the next person can steal it off your skinny dead ass later.
 
2020-10-28 8:59:58 AM  
Wait, so the bulge in the pants of that crazy crack head who jacking off in front of the restaurant window and then proceeded to take a dump in a flower pot, that bugle was actually $7,500 cash?
 
2020-10-28 9:01:49 AM  

Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.


This is why I am not a conservative anymore. Fargin iceholes. We have the same in Canada. The conservatives don't want to give people money. It might hurt the stock market. You know what? Fark all of those rich assholes hoarding their cash.

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

We have a Sikh leader of the NDP who cares more about Canadians at the bottom of our society than any of these conservatives. Conservatism has been shown to be a bunch of greedy assholes trying to keep everything for themselves at the expense of everyone else.  How long before Bastille Day?

The other things to consider is that we have free health care for all. Yes we have issues, but no one is going broke by being sick.

We also have legal weed. I can buy an ounce of decent pot from a government store for $100 including taxes. We've already seen the decline in drinking and hard drugs because of this.

I have 4 boys at home and business died with covid like everyone else's. My government has already given me $12k this year to pay my bills and stay alive. They have just set up another 6 months of benefits @ $1800 per month. Why worry about a deficit if the whole world is going through the same problems?

Americans have been taught forever that government hand outs are socialism. If the government supports people, they won't work is the mantra. Yet corporations receive trillions and close up shop anyway leaving the poor taxpayers to pick up the tab yet again.

America, they've played you for fools.

When that shiat-hole country is gone the world will be able to break free from this incredibly selfish, flawed, American model of government. Maybe then we can all look after each other without some freak screaming socialism.

Here's another tip. Jesus was a  socialist. Everything he taught was about sharing and looking after others. That is exactly opposite of america and their prosperity jesus.
 
d23 [OhFark]
2020-10-28 9:02:49 AM  

PickleBarrel: d23: Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.

Yes this is true.  There is also that there is this concept of "deserving" that many Americans place on top of everything.  If the person is homeless because they were overtaken by a drug problem then he is not "deserving", for instance.  And sometimes the old protestant "if he/she got to this state then that must be an indication of a bad person" that people are taught growing up in the USA, that bad fortune is an indication of character flaws.

And on the purely economics side people can't think until next week a lot of the time.  The ability to see that if you spend money now that if prevents larger expenditure later is rare here these days.  Look at COVID: it will cost the economy 4x the cost of what the huge upfront expenditure could have been.

so...what good is making the choice to get better boots, if you starve in the meantime?  I guess the next person can steal it off your skinny dead ass later.


What are you talking about exactly here when you are giving the people the money to by the better boots in the first place?
 
2020-10-28 9:03:29 AM  

hubiestubert: Well, obviously this could never work in the US because they gave that benefit to Canadians, and not Americans. American homeless would just spend the money on crank and bootleg cigarettes, or booze and porn magazines. Our poors are sooper special in how irresponsible and parasitic they are, while Canadian poors are just nicer.

/Hell
//One plz
///Just wanted to get the argument that some jackass would try out of the way early. Yes, I need a shower now.


You forgot guns. American homeless still want to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights
 
2020-10-28 9:04:56 AM  
Its a lot cheaper to give all Canadians a Basic Standard Income and then whatever your job makes ontop of that instead of spending large money on Shelters and other various programs.
Yes we would still need shelters and those programs but they could be scaled back some what since they wouldn't be strained so badly.
If any political party (other than the Treason Frogs 🐸) offered a guaranteed basic yearly income for all Canadians they'd get my vote and once people see the savings actually working they'd probably keep getting reelected.
Socialism, it does work as long as you're not American.
 
2020-10-28 9:05:22 AM  

d23: PickleBarrel: d23: Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.

Yes this is true.  There is also that there is this concept of "deserving" that many Americans place on top of everything.  If the person is homeless because they were overtaken by a drug problem then he is not "deserving", for instance.  And sometimes the old protestant "if he/she got to this state then that must be an indication of a bad person" that people are taught growing up in the USA, that bad fortune is an indication of character flaws.

And on the purely economics side people can't think until next week a lot of the time.  The ability to see that if you spend money now that if prevents larger expenditure later is rare here these days.  Look at COVID: it will cost the economy 4x the cost of what the huge upfront expenditure could have been.

so...what good is making the choice to get better boots, if you starve in the meantime?  I guess the next person can steal it off your skinny dead ass later.

What are you talking about exactly here when you are giving the people the money to by the better boots in the first place?


This exact discussion caused a huge riff between me and one of my friends.  We played the thought exercise, "What if it was cheaper and more effective to give homeless people mansions?"  Even though it would have saved him money on his taxes, he was still opposed to it.  And at that point, I just gave up.  I'm not going to reason someone out of a position they didn't use reason to get themselves out of.  This is why America can't ever be great.
 
2020-10-28 9:06:08 AM  

WhiskeySticks: Wait, so the bulge in the pants of that crazy crack head who jacking off in front of the restaurant window and then proceeded to take a dump in a flower pot, that bugle was actually $7,500 cash?


that's some big bugle
 
2020-10-28 9:08:22 AM  
Here in the US, we got enough to send some checks to charities to feed the poor.  Then the Senate decided to buy a SCOTUS girl, which used us all the money and time left over.
 
2020-10-28 9:12:11 AM  

Tyrosine: Keep in  mind that this study only focused on homeless who were not experiencing addiction or other mental health issues. That doesn't devalue the study but we can't lose sight of the fact that a significant portion of the homeless population suffer from one or both is these issues.

Here's a better link: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/b​ritish-columbia/new-leaf-project-resul​ts-1.5752714

Also, article is a repeat from October 7th or 8th.


Pretty much this.  There is a huge difference between someone falling on hard times and losing everything versus the person covered in their own shiat digging through garbage cans while having a conversation with a unicorn.  Both people need help, but only one of those people will benefit from a large lump sum of cash.
 
2020-10-28 9:14:05 AM  

Por que tan serioso: As long as everyone agrees that 'landlords' are the real problem
[Fark user image 425x302]


I'm a landlord. My entire rental stock is Affordable or Social Housing. I'd love to hear your thoughts as to how I'm the problem.
 
Xai [TotalFark]
2020-10-28 9:15:05 AM  

d23: Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.

Yes this is true.  There is also that there is this concept of "deserving" that many Americans place on top of everything.  If the person is homeless because they were overtaken by a drug problem then he is not "deserving", for instance.  And sometimes the old protestant "if he/she got to this state then that must be an indication of a bad person" that people are taught growing up in the USA, that bad fortune is an indication of character flaws.

And on the purely economics side people can't think until next week a lot of the time.  The ability to see that if you spend money now that if prevents larger expenditure later is rare here these days.  Look at COVID: it will cost the economy 4x the cost of what the huge upfront expenditure could have been.


The irony is that people are being cruel because they aren't being truly selfish. Like they are actively cutting off their nose to spite their face, but honestly there seems to be a lot of that in American society - where people will literally pay to make other people's lives worse.
 
2020-10-28 9:15:33 AM  

Jeebus Saves: Tyrosine: Keep in  mind that this study only focused on homeless who were not experiencing addiction or other mental health issues. That doesn't devalue the study but we can't lose sight of the fact that a significant portion of the homeless population suffer from one or both is these issues.

Here's a better link: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/b​ritish-columbia/new-leaf-project-resul​ts-1.5752714

Also, article is a repeat from October 7th or 8th.

Pretty much this.  There is a huge difference between someone falling on hard times and losing everything versus the person covered in their own shiat digging through garbage cans while having a conversation with a unicorn.  Both people need help, but only one of those people will benefit from a large lump sum of cash.


Agreed, but one side of American politics will use this as a reason to help nobody.  For conservatives, if one person can abuse the system, then the whole system must be scrapped (unless it's rich people abusing the tax code, that's just "smart" and they can be "elected" "president").
 
2020-10-28 9:16:12 AM  

Xai: d23: Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.

Yes this is true.  There is also that there is this concept of "deserving" that many Americans place on top of everything.  If the person is homeless because they were overtaken by a drug problem then he is not "deserving", for instance.  And sometimes the old protestant "if he/she got to this state then that must be an indication of a bad person" that people are taught growing up in the USA, that bad fortune is an indication of character flaws.

And on the purely economics side people can't think until next week a lot of the time.  The ability to see that if you spend money now that if prevents larger expenditure later is rare here these days.  Look at COVID: it will cost the economy 4x the cost of what the huge upfront expenditure could have been.

The irony is that people are being cruel because they aren't being truly selfish. Like they are actively cutting off their nose to spite their face, but honestly there seems to be a lot of that in American society - where people will literally pay to make other people's lives worse.


*Gestures to everything*
 
2020-10-28 9:20:08 AM  

djloid2010: Well, this is obviously a lie, as it goes against our manufactured narrative that the hobos and rub-a-dubs will spend the money on booze and junk. /s

Many of them will!  Many of them will spend the money on booze and drugs and crap, so let's all stop freaking out about it FFS!  It's still vastly cheaper to just give them the handouts and rehabilitate the reachable ones than piss away all the money on police presence, legal costs, incarceration, etc.  Making people invisible is crazy expensive.  We're spending extra tax money just for the privilege of kicking people when they're down.  But point that out and then "conservatives" go "well then let's not spend any money at all" and then you get debacles like the Kansas experiment.

Conservatives are the stupidest farking psychopathic wastes of oxygen on this planet.
 
2020-10-28 9:21:16 AM  

Xai: Harry Freakstorm: Flappyhead: Repeat from a few weeks back, but still worth bringing up again.  Homeless people don't want to be homeless, what a shock.

They don't?  Then why are they outdoors so much?

A lack of doors.


Wait, how can you be outdoors if you don't have any for positional comparison? Do you really mean "out of doors"?
 
Xai [TotalFark]
2020-10-28 9:21:39 AM  

mr-b: Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.

This is why I am not a conservative anymore. Fargin iceholes. We have the same in Canada. The conservatives don't want to give people money. It might hurt the stock market. You know what? Fark all of those rich assholes hoarding their cash.

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

We have a Sikh leader of the NDP who cares more about Canadians at the bottom of our society than any of these conservatives. Conservatism has been shown to be a bunch of greedy assholes trying to keep everything for themselves at the expense of everyone else.  How long before Bastille Day?

The other things to consider is that we have free health care for all. Yes we have issues, but no one is going broke by being sick.

We also have legal weed. I can buy an ounce of decent pot from a government store for $100 including taxes. We've already seen the decline in drinking and hard drugs because of this.

I have 4 boys at home and business died with covid like everyone else's. My government has already given me $12k this year to pay my bills and stay alive. They have just set up another 6 months of benefits @ $1800 per month. Why worry about a deficit if the whole world is going through the same problems?

Americans have been taught forever that government hand outs are socialism. If the government supports people, they won't work is the mantra. Yet corporations receive trillions and close up shop anyway leaving the poor taxpayers to pick up the tab yet again.

America, they've played you for fools.

When that shiat-hole country is gone the world will be able to break free from this incredibly selfish, flawed, American model of government. Maybe then we can all look after each other without some freak screaming socialism.

Here's another tip. Jesus was a  socialist. Everyt ...


In my opinion conservativism isn't actually about corporations or the rich or any of that, despite the claims they make - I find these all to be lies to shield the truth, and the truth is it's opposition to change, any change. This is why they don't want to help the homeless etc, because things would change and they find that terrifying - that these homeless people might get a job, buy a house, become their neighbour. They can't cope with it, so they oppose it.
It's why they oppose public transport, new housing, etc.

But of course that's my opinion.

The thing is if we were all immortal and a single nation then opposition to change might technically work, but the problem is and always has been time, because if the 60 year old wants things to stay the same and gets their wish, that when they are 70 things will be the same - this also means that the 20 year old with nothing still has nothing at 30 and the worst thing about all this is that the rest of the world wouldn't stand still with our country, they'll move past us.
 
2020-10-28 9:27:11 AM  
Well it could never work here because look what happened, we gave everyone $1200 and a lot of them still haven't gone back to work. Them lazy good for nothings.
 
2020-10-28 9:28:40 AM  

Xai: In my opinion conservativism isn't actually about corporations or the rich or any of that, despite the claims they make - I find these all to be lies to shield the truth, and the truth is it's opposition to change, any change.

Huh?  Conservatives love change.  Just only change that improves their lives and/or makes others' lives worse.

Last I heard, the "trade war" is going so well that the federal government is now the source of about 40% of Iowa farmers' revenue.  Tens of billions of dollars thrown at them, because they vote.  They don't think it's "socialism" (as they define it, which is basically any tax expenditure they don't approve of).  That's very much a change.  And Republicans very much want to change the legality of abortion, to the extent that Senators were refusing to get tested for COVID-19 to ram through a Supreme Court Justice, in the name of making poor people's lives worse.
 
2020-10-28 9:28:47 AM  

Por que tan serioso: As long as everyone agrees that 'landlords' are the real problem
[Fark user image 425x302]


Nice. Apparently you missed the Fark Landlord congregation thread yesterday...
 
2020-10-28 9:30:26 AM  

Tyrosine: Keep in  mind that this study only focused on homeless who were not experiencing addiction or other mental health issues. That doesn't devalue the study but we can't lose sight of the fact that a significant portion of the homeless population suffer from one or both is these issues.

Here's a better link: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/b​ritish-columbia/new-leaf-project-resul​ts-1.5752714

Also, article is a repeat from October 7th or 8th.


How did Fark get to it so quickly?
 
2020-10-28 9:33:37 AM  

Tyrosine: Por que tan serioso: As long as everyone agrees that 'landlords' are the real problem
[Fark user image 425x302]

I'm a landlord. My entire rental stock is Affordable or Social Housing. I'd love to hear your thoughts as to how I'm the problem.


Quick question- what is your average rent versus your average mortgage payment including escrow?
 
2020-10-28 9:35:31 AM  
Jesus was a socialist.
 
2020-10-28 9:35:44 AM  

Prof. Frink: Xai: Harry Freakstorm: Flappyhead: Repeat from a few weeks back, but still worth bringing up again.  Homeless people don't want to be homeless, what a shock.

They don't?  Then why are they outdoors so much?

A lack of doors.

Wait, how can you be outdoors if you don't have any for positional comparison? Do you really mean "out of doors"?


The people in the study were fresh out of doors (two years or less). So, $7500 in Canada buys a few doors* I suppose. I tried to get in to the study but I was shown the door (the one on my apartment).

(*likely quite nice wooden and aluminum ones as the US government seems afraid of Canadian wood and metal, but I digress)
 
2020-10-28 9:36:57 AM  

Por que tan serioso: Tyrosine: Keep in  mind that this study only focused on homeless who were not experiencing addiction or other mental health issues. That doesn't devalue the study but we can't lose sight of the fact that a significant portion of the homeless population suffer from one or both is these issues.

Here's a better link: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/b​ritish-columbia/new-leaf-project-resul​ts-1.5752714

Also, article is a repeat from October 7th or 8th.

How did Fark get to it so quickly?


The squirrel knocked up the hamster and was forced to quit drinking and get a job. I don't think it'll last though, so we'll get back to normal shortly.
 
2020-10-28 9:39:04 AM  
I'm actually surprised that Canada actually had economically homeless people to try this on.
 
2020-10-28 9:46:11 AM  
Headline is a bit misleading, Canada didn't give the poor across the board money, it was a study by a not for profit that gave 50 people money.  Similar experiments have been done in quite a few cities/counties in the US, Canada and many many other areas of the world.  Results vary, some are positive, some negative. Some very conservative economists are for this as a way to cut the bloat out of the system.

And for all the whining about conservatives in this thread, why not hammer on the liberals in San Francisco (who spend $364 million a year on homeless)  or Seattle ($51 million)   That way, you won't even have to go to Walmart and talk to any conservatives to get the program you want.  Just convince those who run the homeless programs in every big city to fork over $7500 to each homeless person.
 
2020-10-28 9:48:49 AM  

Xai: I find these all to be lies to shield the truth, and the truth is it's opposition to change, any change. This is why they don't want to help the homeless


I think it's more of how they view the role of government.  They don't think the government should be that involved with peoples lives.  It's not some big evil plot to be cruel.  It's not that they don't want to help the homeless, they just don't see it as the governments role, especially at the federal level.  And contrary to the thinking around here, Americans are very generous and charitable.  There are hundreds if not thousands of nonprofits and charities that help the homeless.  So with that in place, why does the government need to do more, and would it be any more effective?
 
2020-10-28 9:53:43 AM  

moto-geek: Prof. Frink: Xai: Harry Freakstorm: Flappyhead: Repeat from a few weeks back, but still worth bringing up again.  Homeless people don't want to be homeless, what a shock.

They don't?  Then why are they outdoors so much?

A lack of doors.

Wait, how can you be outdoors if you don't have any for positional comparison? Do you really mean "out of doors"?

The people in the study were fresh out of doors (two years or less). So, $7500 in Canada buys a few doors* I suppose. I tried to get in to the study but I was shown the door (the one on my apartment).

(*likely quite nice wooden and aluminum ones as the US government seems afraid of Canadian wood and metal, but I digress)


Yeah, Canadian heavy-metal acts are definitely packing the concert venues. *snicker*
 
2020-10-28 9:57:20 AM  
Interesting. Give people enough money that they can meet their basic needs and invest a little in themselves, and they spend less money, not more, on booze and drugs and whatnot. It's almost as if getting them to a place where their lives are more than seemingly hopeless, grinding poverty leads to prioritizing something besides temporary escape from the misery.

That's what it did for Ray. In addition to getting housing, he used the cash transfer to take the courses he needed to become a front-line worker serving people with addictions. "Now I can work in any of the shelters and community centers in the area," he told me

The first thing he wanted to do after getting his own most basic needs met was to help others in similar situations. Good on Ray.
 
2020-10-28 9:57:30 AM  

mr-b: Xai: Considering this, that means anyone opposed to such schemes actually wants to spend more money to merely punish homeless people for being poor.

This is why I am not a conservative anymore. Fargin iceholes. We have the same in Canada. The conservatives don't want to give people money. It might hurt the stock market. You know what? Fark all of those rich assholes hoarding their cash.

It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

We have a Sikh leader of the NDP who cares more about Canadians at the bottom of our society than any of these conservatives. Conservatism has been shown to be a bunch of greedy assholes trying to keep everything for themselves at the expense of everyone else.  How long before Bastille Day?

The other things to consider is that we have free health care for all. Yes we have issues, but no one is going broke by being sick.

We also have legal weed. I can buy an ounce of decent pot from a government store for $100 including taxes. We've already seen the decline in drinking and hard drugs because of this.

I have 4 boys at home and business died with covid like everyone else's. My government has already given me $12k this year to pay my bills and stay alive. They have just set up another 6 months of benefits @ $1800 per month. Why worry about a deficit if the whole world is going through the same problems?

Americans have been taught forever that government hand outs are socialism. If the government supports people, they won't work is the mantra. Yet corporations receive trillions and close up shop anyway leaving the poor taxpayers to pick up the tab yet again.

America, they've played you for fools.

When that shiat-hole country is gone the world will be able to break free from this incredibly selfish, flawed, American model of government. Maybe then we can all look after each other without some freak screaming socialism.

Here's another tip. Jesus was a  socialist. Everything he taught was about sharing and looking after others. That is exactly opposite of america and their prosperity jesus.


Fark user imageView Full Size


Sleep tight, Muricans
 
2020-10-28 9:57:49 AM  

Prof. Frink: moto-geek: Prof. Frink: Xai: Harry Freakstorm: Flappyhead: Repeat from a few weeks back, but still worth bringing up again.  Homeless people don't want to be homeless, what a shock.

They don't?  Then why are they outdoors so much?

A lack of doors.

Wait, how can you be outdoors if you don't have any for positional comparison? Do you really mean "out of doors"?

The people in the study were fresh out of doors (two years or less). So, $7500 in Canada buys a few doors* I suppose. I tried to get in to the study but I was shown the door (the one on my apartment).

(*likely quite nice wooden and aluminum ones as the US government seems afraid of Canadian wood and metal, but I digress)

Yeah, Canadian heavy-metal acts are definitely packing the concert venues. *snicker*


stop dissing Anvil, jerk.
 
Displayed 50 of 90 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.