If you reward selfishness, you get more selfishness.
It seems many conservative policies strive for self-reliance.
The result is suffering and death.
Punishing the poor and weak for being so, even as you work make their situation worse, is not helpful.
*bated
I am eating sardines for lunch.
I stand corrected, fishbreath.
But that’s not really the same thing. At all. The reason that your taxes varied in this case is solely because of what legislators have chosen to do, nothing to do with what you chose to do.
That’s not something that’s really relevant to my business. However, one thing that I have looked into are training credits, I spend a whole lot of money on giving people the skills they need to produce the quality work I need from them. Such credits for training do not exist.
But I’m confused a bit, you said R&D tax credit, but your next sentence said deduction. Those are two different things. Of course you can deduct them, you get to deduct pretty much anything that is a legitimate cost of doing business. Credits are much more valuable things, that are given as an incentive to do something above and beyond the costs of doing business. Which did you actually mean?
I want to be crystal clear on what you mean here. Are you saying that you believe that providing someone with the basic necessities needed to prevent them from dropping dead in the street is a form of “reward”?
To be more specific - things like healthcare, food, and a roof over their head, or a way to acquire those things (eg food stamps)
You are right, I was wrong, I should not have used deductions.
We were surprised what was included in R&D. I need to do some research.
What l am saying is a friend of mine was the maintenance man for a low income housing unit. Except for a few people with medical issues, most of the people could have made more money but they didn’t want to because the better paying jobs were “hard”. They came right out and said this to my friend, because he knew my company was hiring.”If I earn more I’ll lose my benefits “.
They were getting a check for doing nothing. I didn’t like working all the hours I did. I felt I had no choice.
I have no problem supporting people truly in need. If someone wants to watch Tv all day but could work, that I have a problem with.
Just so no one plays the racist card these were all white people.
Do you tend to base your political decisions on what your friends say, as opposed to looking at the findings of studies that look at these issues through, for example, statistical analysis?
Actually the card I’m going to play is “Congratulations on personally knowing a welfare queen. I don’t think your anecdote is data, and I don’t think your buddy is at all representative of the situation.”
As a sidenote, if your benefit system is set up to disincentivize advancement because getting a $2/hr raise loses you several hundred dollars a month of benefits, that’s a flawed system - or one that was deliberately designed to keep the underclass impoverished.
In the interest of fighting ignorance, can you steer me to these sources?
If it is too much to ask, can you suggest the verbiage for my google search?
I’m not agreeing that the results of a system means it was designed with that result in mind.
That is another problem I have with liberal policies.
They seem totally unaware of unintended consequences.
You’re hilarious. You seem to think that the structure of welfare and its cutoffs was wholly shaped by liberals. You also seem to think that conservative policies are somehow immune to unintended consequences. Or perhaps your position is that when conservative policies do harm it’s deliberate?
Sure, if you are interested in what sources I am referencing you are welcome to open another thread and ask there, and I will happily post my sources. But the point of this thread is an honest attempt to see the other side, and I think this is a key point. You are basing your opinion on how we should run society on an anecdote. To me, your anecdote is entirely irrelevant in a discussion of social policy. But clearly it isn’t irrelevant to you, because you shared it. I think that’s a key philosophical difference that goes a long way towards explaining why we need a thread like this, so I’d prefer if we focused on the question I asked in this thread, and discuss my sources in another.
I am glad you said “seem to think” as I have never posted what you made up in your head.
Can we limit discussion of what I post to what I actually post?
I am glad I amuse you, like a clown.
Sorry I am a little slow, can you restate the question, or give a post number?
This does not seem like a good faith attempt to try and understand the other side.
Why is there an assumption that any of it is stupid?
Pretty sure that happens on both sides.
And for a long time there was an ardent belief that trump conspired with russians to steal the 2016 election. There was no reluctance to believe all sorts of really crazy conspiracy level bullshit about trump because the regular trump wasn’t horrible enough.
Point it out all you want but it happens on both sides
Yes and that should be condemned.
Do you want to compare the worst elements of the right to the worst elements of the lerft?
I can point to a few riots over the last year that can be attributed to the left.
Both sides do it.
In this I believe they are. maybe not equally so but neither side has clean hands.
Am I the only one that remember people saying that covid 19 is horrible but protesting for BLM was more important?
Free needles is a bad example of a personal responsibility issue. If one drug user with HIV shares needles and spreads the disease to a bunch of other drug users, and then one of them has accidental blood contact with someone who isn’t having unsafe sex or drugs, suddenly someone who took complete personal responsibility is now a victim of something they had no fault in.
I made nothing up, of course.
And I never said it was - my sentence had an “or” in it. However it’s quite clear that the current welfare program is not a ‘liberal’ policy - it’s hella years old, it has been put through the hands of multiple administrations, and it was written back in the day when both sides worked on and contributed to government policy. To pretend that it was crafted entirely by liberals -as you do in the following sentence- is absurdly ignorant.
You single out liberal policies. Which is an explicit statement, by you, that you think that non-liberal policies do not have this flaw, or do not have it in to the same degree.
Your words do indeed still have the meaning you intended them to have when you wrote them.
Sure:
Explicit statement or implied?