I back this 100% and will give money to it. We haven’t seen this kind of altruism since the ‘30s. People won’t easily forget this nor where it came from. If this is a symptom of the backlash, it couldn’t take a more beautiful form.
The most important principle of Liberty and Freedom is responsibility. To be free, a person must have the liberty to make their own choices and pursue their own goals and accept responsibility for the consequences of their choices.
Without responsibility, you cannot be free. If you aren’t responsible for the outcome of your choices then you aren’t responsible for the choices you made. From that we get statements like, “You didn’t build that!” as our President said. You aren’t responsible for the company you built. You aren’t responsible for the invention you created. You aren’t responsible for your health, your college education, your home mortgage, and your credit cards. If not you, then who is responsible? The government, of course, and since it’s the government’s responsibility, the government has the duty to protect you from “bad choices”. A government that believes it knows better than its citizens what choices they should make is the definition of totalitarian.
Like the banks that profited from their good choices and passed to the government responsibility for their bad choices, the occupy Wall Street movement is proffering the same option for individuals. It’s hypocritical at best, a sign the members of the movement do not have a grasp on what they’re saying. Personally, I think campaigns like this are designed to destroy a person’s sense of personal responsibility. Clearing the debt won’t change the bad credit score and debts for pennies on the dollar have been written off as unrecoverable.
Those people getting “bailed out” will just get indebted again. It’s like hiding a drug addict’s drug (in a minuscule scale, they’re talking about $50k-1 million worth of debt), the addict will just find a way to get some more.
If you have a student loan, no one held a gun to your head and made you sign those papers. It is no one’s responsibility other than your own, if you didn’t know what you were doing. If you regret your choices and you want others to take responsibility for them, whether it’s OWS or the government, anyone, you don’t understand what it means to be free.
@emilianate Hasn’t the utter lie of the “You didn’t build that” Ruepublican propaganda been made clear enough that even those of the far-right fringe know they are lying when they use it as you do? Or do you just not care. Are you as callous to truth as the spin masters of the old Soviet Union’s Pravda?
Someone commented on a post I created about this: ”Yes, what a wonderful way to teach people they don’t have to take care of their obligations.”
To which I replied:
“That’s not always the case…
Pay has not kept up with inflation, so the cost of living far exceeds what most people earn—and that’s even if everyone in the family is in good health.
“I am a prime example. I have a Master’s degree and work in health care, but on my own could not afford a home (even to rent) for my son and myself in a neighborhood where we would be relatively safe.
“The credit system is a complete scam designed to keep people in debt so they will pay interest and fees to the banks. My fiancé was declined a car loan even though he’s an executive who has been at his job for almost 20 years because he’s paid cash for everything for about 10 years. What’s more responsible than only buying what you have cash to pay for? But he hasn’t played their game – they haven’t made money off of him – so he has no ‘score’.
“The banks made poor choices and the housing market lured people into buying more than they could reasonably afford. The global economy has stumbled and the bubble burst. Taxpayers bailed out the unethical businesses, but the middle class people are still left holding the bill.
“This program is random – there is no way to play favorites or put someone in a position of deciding who is worthy. It simply takes interest income out of the hands of the greedy, and lifts the burden off the (presumably) needy.”
@emilianate When a voyager has no access to instruments of navigation, they depend on what is commonly known among sailors as Dead Reckoning (Deduced Reckoning). It is a way obtaining an objective, in this case a geographical point on a chart, through calculations of time and distance, and of such variables as estimated speed, estimated current direction and speed, estimated wind changes and, most importantly, estimated point of origin. Like life itself, it is rife with cumulative calculation errors whereas logic and sailing experience play the most important part in obtaining success. Nothing is simple about Dead Reckoning, and like life, it is complicated and, when one is offshore and there are no landmarks to refer to and certain signs are ignored, one’s original estimated point of origin can be wrong leading to an often disastrous outcome. One fails to make the objective because their original premise is wrong even if all their other estimations are right.
You mendaciously parrot a willfully ignorant interpretation of an Obama speech where he is explaining the positive influence of societal responsibility on individuals – a responsibility of which our individual freedoms are dependent. It is obvious, if you read the text of the whole speech that by saying, “You didn’t build that,” he explains that nobody in this society, including yourself, got to where they are without parents, and/or teachers, policemen, medical care personnel, mentors, student loans, business loans, etc., etc., all the way down to the mundane infrastructures of a decent power and communications grid, highways, sewers, etc., etc, built and maintained by a society through both taxes and private money. It becomes obvious that what he meant was “You didn’t build that alone.”
Since the origin of the latest tax rebellion, which in my estimation began with Proposition 13 originating out of Orange County, California (promoted by a core group of wealthy men who later became known as the Neo-Conservatives) under Governor Reagan in 1976, there has been a movement to no longer pay taxes to support our infrastructure, our pension programs, and our aid to the poor of our society. As a result, California’s status as the 5th most wealthiest country in the world (per capita GNP 1973) within eight years of the inauguration of this policy dropped to number 27. Governor Reagan took his friends’ trickle down economy idea to the Whitehouse in 1980 and it was instituted nationally by successive administrations of both parties. As a result, today we have an infrastructure that both major parties in congress agree is in dire need of repair after decades of maintenance starvation and an unprecedented 1 in 50 of our children are homeless.
No, they didn’t build it alone. Nor do they maintain it alone. Some of the largest oil companies in the world, our oil companies, pay no net taxes yet receive billions in tax-based government funding. Same with our largest sugar producers—the very largest which are family owned. Farmers all around the US receive tax-based government funding in order to keep our independent food supply alive. Our automobile industry, so slow to adapt to market pressures, wouldn’t have survived without the repeated bailouts of the 1970s and early 2000s. Without the government funded dam projects in the western US, such economic powerhouses as LA, would still be medium-sized city and Las Vegas a desert watering hole with slot machines – to say nothing of the area’s economic boost and second chances those jobs produced during the depression of the ‘30s. And California’s vast government funded aqueduct and irrigation system which helped it become one of the richest pieces of property in the world. Even this form of communication, the internet, began as a government funded program under the DOD (The economic ramifications of a sudden and permanent shutdown of this government invention is incalculable as is the cost of protecting it).
In light of this, your assertion that it is irresponsible to aid the poor of our country, whether by government means or private, is both hypocritical and extremely parsimonious. Your economic philosophy doesn’t work very well because the basic premise is bad. Our greatest resource is our people and to ignore investing in them, to not give them new life blood in this time of need and abuse, is irresponsible. Interestingly, but not surprisingly, nine of the top ten states with the greatest percentage of citizens who are unable to pay taxes due primarily to poverty are solidly Republican, what are referred to as Red States. All of them, except NM, were solidly Republican (Red States) in three of the last four elections. These same states are also among the highest in teen pregnancy and lowest in education.
Here’s the list, with the percentage of non-taxpayers.
This economic philosophy is not a philosophy at all. It is a personality disorder based on willfully ignoring data in order to reach an unreal objective; an obsession. And as in Dead Reckoning, your basic premise, your point of origin, your assumptions about the poor in this country, are in glaring error and if you continue on this course, you and your ilk will remain lost to reality. But the real tragedy is that so many are at risk of drowning with you because of the insane policies you promote.
California’s prosperity has very little to do with roads, pension plans, and helping the poor. California’s prosperity came when regulations, taxes, and unions were of low volume. As regulations, taxes, and unsustainable union demands grew, you went into a decline. For years, California has been ranked the worst state to do business . You’re now ranked as the state with the highest poverty rate in the country. You’re over burdened with union demands which force you to choose between cutting schools funding instead of teacher funding (shows unions don’t care about children). You’ve the most amounts of regulations and one of highest taxes than any other state. Your cost of living is the highest of any other state which means your overly compensated salaries are meaningless. The problem for the larger more established businesses in your state is to decide whether it is cheaper to close shop and move out or take the abuse for high taxes, regulations. That is the only reason why they’re still there, but they wont expand.
Roads? The government isn’t doing me a favor by building roads. I pay taxes which fund government workers to build roads.
Pension program? That is a classic example of the encouragement and degeneration of the people. Grown men and women don’t know a basic, common sense concept on how to deduct a small portion of their income to put away in a vault for savings/investing.
Poor? The bottom 5% of our poor are richer than 68% of the world’s inhabitants. I was born in poverty. I have been working since my early teens. When I graduated high school, I was working 3 minimum wage jobs (a 110–120 per hour work week) to pay for a private university without having to go into debt. I would have started even earlier, but by law, schooling is required for teens. I took no government benefits, no loans, no federal aids, no section 8 housings, no Medicaid, no food stamps, no nothing. Just work. What exactly is a poor person’s excuse for not working? The real geniuses in this country were always the working poor. They make enough of an income to have an income, but low enough of an income to qualify for welfare. When you do the math, they achieve the same and even greater result as a person who earns $60k before taxes. Suckers like me have to work 3 jobs to get out poverty, while others embrace it my expense. The poor have existed since man has existed. They have been poor in economic booms and busts. What is their excuse for not working?
Kids in poverty? Well maybe if government didn’t allow poor people to reproduce while collecting welfare, we wouldn’t have this problem. This isn’t news to anyone. Children are the best excuse to qualify for welfare. The more children one has the more welfare required.
I’ll do you one better though. Instead of playing a blame game back and fourth with you, why not submit to the obvious truth which is that blame is irrelevant since there are ample amounts of people who succeed from the ground up within any type of environment. You want to blame the systems, the policies, but you cannot explain why there are still so many successful people with this supposedly “unjust”, “bad policy” system? If there was any truth to your arguments, I would have remained poor. It’s like the debate on our educational system. You have a bunch of people who blame the teachers, the lack of money in our education system for why students are performing poorly and then you have a bunch of people blaming the students and parents since there are plenty of students who want to learn, who do learn, and do succeed in this supposedly “bad education system”.
Your arguments cannot account for all the success. The success refutes your arguments.
All evidence points to a people problem, not a system/policy problem.
Also, new analysis on an individual level finds that it is the low-income Democrat voters who are dragging down the Red State average, while high-income Republicans in Blue States raise their average.Are Welfare Recipients mostly Republican?
I also found this detailed site. Shows the poverty rate by race of each state. Every state has a disproportionate large amount of blacks and hispanics in poverty. Considering Obama got 80% of the hispanic vote nationwide, and over 90% of the black vote, it obviously shows the poor vote democrat.
Race doesn’t matter. The point is the poor vote democrat, but I can tell you the exact numbers since you brought it up. United States population in 2011 was 311,591,917. (63.4%) or 198 million are white people. Of those, 13% are in poverty which is about 26 million.
Black population in America is 13.1% or 41 million. 35% or 14 million are in poverty.
Hispanic population in America is 16.7% or 52 million. 33% or 17 million.
Out of the 72% white electorate vote, Obama only won 39% of it
@emilianate Only RepugniCons say the poor vote “democrat” [sic]. If you insist on such slurs, I don’t care to discuss anything with you, as your position will be so firm facts are irrelevant. Drop that talking point, and I will be happy to address the accurate facts you cite, and take issue with any that I feel are off base, citing reasons I think that’s so.