Certainly that would have little to do with the fact that I had already acknowledged that, right? Might kill you to read my posts instead of skimming them, eh slick? Hahaha.
The main problem I have with Chaos's argument is that he keeps referring to how poor these people are relatively to the middle class. Relative to the middle class - the poor are ALWAYS going to be poor - that's what social classes due, they seperate classes by income. Luckily, in America the middle class is so well off, that though the poor might seem to be in relatively bad conditions, they are not. The poor in this country get to eat and have shelter - the 2 basic needs of man. Poor people in other countries would grovel for these needs. As long as a person has those 2 needs met, which I think IS something America should do, thats the most the government should do. From there, it's up to the individual to change their life. Many of these people don't want to change or are unable to due to their own choice of drug-use.
That's exactly what I've been trying to point out to GMAN. Where's the problem? As you can see, I've touched on this idea already... I have never insinuated that they need to be given anything outside of this, despite the conjecture of some individuals.
I might be wrong, but I got the feeling that you felt not enough was being done for the poor. That our poor are so bad off that they need more help... Is that incorrect? I know you've touched on it, that's why I thought it was odd that your other arguments didn't appear to be in sync with it. Refer to the above. Perhaps I was misinterpreting you. When people on welfare drive nice new vehicles... it is providing far more than the 2 basic necessities. If you think that is all the government should provide, then you would think that welfare should be given to less people & in lesser amounts. Your arguments here don't seem to represent that.
I think he's a liberal disguised as a libertarian! I'm very suspicious of this person after our discussions JMHO
How exactly do we go about reforming education? Currently we have a glut of students that don't give a **** about school. They'd rather have sex, get drunk, get high, sling dope, and do whatever else than succeed academically. We have 50% of our public school students now failing the standardized tests.
No, I do not believe that I ever insinuated that. I'm sorry if you got that impression. My only contention here is that the poor need help, not more help. Some of my opponets want to eliminate it altogether because some take advantage of it, others want to eliminate it because they're being 'forced' to contribute. The topic of discussion, to the best of my recollection, has never been about the amount of welfare given out to people. So if my arguments don't represent that, it's because it's been a relative non-issue. Just because I think that some government assistance is necessary to help a percentage of the population does not mean that I support the idea of more liberal spending. I believe the only statement I made at all in that regard was that I fully support the idea, set forth by the Libertarian party, of welfare as a temporary benefit, which would imply a more conservative approach. I'd like someone to show me exactly where I argued the contrary.
I never sayed you argued it, just that I got the impression. Well I don't think that martin or anyone else is arguing that the truley poor don't need help. martin might argue that he shouldn't be forced to help & others that too much help is being given to too many undeserving people, but I don't think anyone wants all the poor people to just die. Thus, you arguing their points came across to me as you thinking we should be forced to help them & as many as are necessary, regardless of the leeches.
Let's not forget that we also have a problem with the schools themselves. Can't most of us agree there is a problem here with not giving out grades or failing kids. They now spend less time on the basics and have classes on sensitivity. ----------Political Correctness now rules the world!-------------- http://catallarchy.net/blog/archives/2004/10/31/new-twist-on pc /http://www.politicaltracker.com/archives/2004/09/23/public-schools-no-place-for-teachers-kids http://www.mackinac.org/article.asp?ID=6460 quote: On almost any subject, relating to today’s world, the texts … are misleading and inaccurate. She refers to a "systematic breakdown of our ability to educate the next generation … about important issues in the world." http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=38304 http://www.washingtontimes.com/national/20040922-122847-5968r.htm
Education reform is an entirely different animal itself. There are a plethora of other socio-economic factors that contribute to the ineffectiveness of our public education system.
