Yeah, people are bruised and battered, unrecognizable. Wasting away, even…
I’m not sure where you get 700 billion for TARP. TARP was supposed to cost the taxpayers 300 billion originally, though most of the recipients of TARP have already paid the money back with interest. The CBO currently believes that the final cost to taxpayers will be 25 billion, though Treasury Secretary believes even that number is too high. Finally, TARP was signed into law by George W. Bush, not Obama.
Lots of people are a paycheck from the street, so to speak and there but for the grace of God, go we.
I can’t believe that letting innocent children, here in our own country, should go without. It isn’t their fault and they didn’t ask to be born.
We are all better people and a better nation if we try to take care of the lesser of us, and not allow callow politicians to throw people to the street.
How a society treats it’s poor, it’s sick, it’s old and it’s hungry, tells a lot about a country and how it’s humanity or lack of it, so goes the country.
Sort of like the tales of woe you are pushing in this thread? I won’t even get into the comic book drama about the evil Republicans, since I think any sarcasm on my part might be wasted effort.
So, we’ve moved from people in the US starving (or being hungry) to health care, without missing a beat. And you say Obama made (not was going to make, or would have made) it (presumably healthcare) affordable, but that the Republicans took away the subsidy for affordable COBRA? And this has already happened or is happening? Do you have a cite, since I honestly don’t know much about it and am always willing to learn.
You are right…people can get sick of cancer or heart attacks all the time. And some of those people will die. And some of them will be without health insurance (though if they survive the initial heart attack then no matter how poor they will get some sort of treatment in a hospital in most cases). The thing we as a society need to decide is what price we are willing to pay to fix this problem.
Regardless, though, this has nothing to do with why Americans aren’t currently rioting in the streets. You see, for most people, even poor people, health care, while important, isn’t worth having a revolution over. After all, as with the food thing, they CAN get health care, especially the urgent type, if they are having problems. So, until that isn’t the case anymore and when people are REALLY starving or chronically hungry that isn’t likely to change in favor of the OPs fantasy.
And by strawmaning your opposition and using over the top hyperbole you don’t do your cause any favors, as it’s easier to dismiss someone using those tactics as a ranter than to take them seriously. There are a lot of liberals on this board, but most of them are thoughtful and take the time to understand the issues and not use over the top hyperbole and silly comic book caricatures to make their points…instead they use logic and reason, backed up by boat loads of facts and cites. Learn from them, since they are VERY good at making the liberal case.
-XT
Yeah, you’re right, abortion should be free.
But less flippantly, of course the U.S. should practice “safety net” democracy, as pretty much all the western liberal democracies do. Just don’t go overboard with it, like the Greeks.
Isn’t that why we have food stamps?
If someone is getting $700 of food stamps for a family of four, there’s no way that family is going hungry. They may not be able to afford anything else, they may not be able to afford the rent, they may not be able to afford the cable bill, or the phone bill, or to put gas in the car, or clothes, or shoes, or the dentist, or to fix the broken refrigerator.
But they’re going to have plenty of food. So the nonsense about how she has to beg her kids to eat less is just nonsense.
Denial is a powerful thing.
Do you always debate by using personal attacks?
You should go read what you wrote…what you are mistakenly accusing me of thinking and saying. Your comment does not even rise to the level of debate.
The “safety net” has too many holes in it, I’m afraid. I’m not going to give your insipid remark about abortion the dignity of an answer.
How much do you think it costs to feed a family of four a balanced nutritious diet every day?
It just so happens that I’m a member of a family of four, and I do the cooking and grocery shopping, so I happen to have a pretty good idea. And we don’t spend $700 a month on food.
The kids might be dressed in rags, and have rotten teeth, but they aren’t going to bed hungry.
I have a family of three…now two, since my kid is in college. That’s way more than %700.00 a month, I can tell you that.
Rotten teeth aren’t an option here. It doesn’t look good and dental infections can travel to the brain and kill.
Hey guys. Ashen Lady is just trying to SAVE OUR CITY! RIGHT NOW!
As for the OP, we just went through a terrible recession. We don’t riot in the US everytime we have a recession because most people realize that recessions end, and things get better. This one is just going to take longer. Employment is a lagging indicator, btw.
Well, that’s always going to be a consequence of compromise-based politics. I guess it might be nice to have a “Social Welfare Czar” with vast powers and budgets to hand out food, rent vouchers, coupons for free clothing, etc. but it’s a hard sell in current American politics.
Well, you probably should, because behind the flippancy is a perfectly valid point - anything that makes abortion more expensive, including cutting federal funding for it (or restricting federal funding to health-care providors who also provide abortions), or adding more regulations to it, or adding waiting periods for it, is going to have a disproportional effect on the poor, who will end up having their poverty reinforced by more children than they can handle.
Frankly, rather than fret about how tough the poor have it, making abortion free to them is one of the easiest ways to address the problem, by at least giving them to chance to self-limit their numbers (as well as allowing teenage girls to delay motherhood until they finish their educations, giving them a better chance at self-reliance). I have to figure the only (or at least main) reason abortion is not heavily subsidized in the U.S. is that it, like the safety-net funding issues referenced above, is a hard political sell, unlikely to get a candidate that many extra votes while giving potential opponents opportunity to use rhetoric about “the lazy poor” and “killing the unborn” and whatnot.
Feeding hungry kids is a no-brainer…abortion has nothing to do with this equation.
Abortion reduces the numbers of hungry kids, making it easier to distribute resources effectively, but this is getting into hijack territory so I’ll drop it.
I’m sorry, but either you have extravagant tastes in food or you are delusional. $700 a month is more than sufficient to feed a family of 4 for a month. Hell, $400 is enough to feed a family of 4 for a month if you cut out the junk food and snacks and buy the ingredients to prepare the meals (and the picture in your article clearly showed a pretty nice kitchen there). In many countries in the world, people would kill to have $100 US a month as a food allowance.
Good grief.
-XT
I meant that college is way more expensive than $700.00 a month…:smack: