billvon 2,436
.thumb.jpg.4bb795e2eaf21b8b300039a5e1ec7f92.jpg)
Recommended Posts
QuoteThose who play the race card are doing nothing more than trying to keep the door open for the illegal immigration of their own familys. Illegal is illegal
We have enough lazy mother fuckers in this country living off the govrenment tit. We don't need undocumented aliens doing it all so.
Point taken....But as my father worked ILLEGLLY here in the United States for 15 to 20 yrs with no return from the goverment(tax return)paying his tax's just like the AMERICANS but there's a catch..He never recieveds no tax return for all the hard work,As americans did! Question here is were is all that money the goverment NEVER returned????? And I know my father was not the only one working trying to make a future for his children.So where are those millions or billlons of dollars at?
Don't know. I' can't speak about that. I simply don't have any info but, I wouldn't lump your pops in the same group. As you said, he paid into the system there for he should receive the benifits just like every one else. I don' think it's fair that he never got any return, but again, I don't know any thing about how those rules are written.
I'm not saying that I think everyone needs to be a citizen. There are plenty of forigen nationals working here legelly and they contribute.
I think the best way to put it might be to draw a comparison.
If you go to some one elses house to stay for an extended period of time, would you expect that person to pay for all of your needs while you were there? Of course not. You would be a guest. The responsibilty should fall on you to contribute to the house hold as much as possible. Not bleed the poor fucker dry
I hope you don't take my position to be anti Mexican or Latino. It is not.
I guess I could have chosen some of my words better. I am pro American. Know this. I think you are a straight up, super cool motherfucker.
I have nothing against anyone seeking to gain entry to this country and improve their lot in life providing they do it legally and contribute to the system rather than place such a strain on it that it falls apart.
I anit no native American. My family came here over 150 years ago on a boat. Does that give me any more right to live here than you or your family? Fuck no. But the fact that I am contributing to the system gives me every right to fight to save that system upon which I so depend.
I guess I could have chosen some of my words better. I am pro American. Know this. I think you are a straight up, super cool motherfucker.
I have nothing against anyone seeking to gain entry to this country and improve their lot in life providing they do it legally and contribute to the system rather than place such a strain on it that it falls apart.
I anit no native American. My family came here over 150 years ago on a boat. Does that give me any more right to live here than you or your family? Fuck no. But the fact that I am contributing to the system gives me every right to fight to save that system upon which I so depend.
QuoteI'm on the same page as you are Rhino. The only problem I see with these volunteers is that they might not be well equipped or trained to deal with the smugglers. What I mean is that smuggling of illegals is a multi million dollar a year business. One of the main players in this area is the Mara Salvatrucha 13 a pretty nefarious gang. Here in LA they are known as the most vicious gang in the city. How are these volunteers going to deal with these smugglers w/o the proper training and equipment.
The Minute Men are stationed to watch, and must report what they see. I saw one of the briefings they received and they repeated that statement over and over again.
I think having that many people along the boarders will keep some people from crossing there. But once the Minute Men are gone, it will be business as usual.
May your trails be crooked, winding, lonesome, dangerous, leading to the most amazing view. May your mountains rise into and above the clouds. - Edward Abbey
Rick 67
QuoteWhy? People who cannot afford kids should not have them.
I have to agree with you on this one. It is about acting responsibly.
You can't be drunk all day if you don't start early!
Quote>>Perhaps your parents should have assessed their financial situation more
>>carefully and evaluated whether it was prudent to have children when
>>they clearly could not afford them
>This remark has to be the best example of poor taste I have ever seen . . .
Poor taste isn't really the issue (although I agree it was in very poor taste) but again, please discuss the issue and not the poster.
How can anyone argue for irresponsibility? Would you consider it to be in GOOD taste if I had suggested his parents should have had 10 children and then filed for more govt. support?
sabr190 0
QuoteQuote"Perhaps your parents should have assessed their financial situation more carefully and evaluated whether it was prudent to have children when they clearly could not afford them.
This remark has to be the best example of poor taste I have ever seen
Why? People who cannot afford kids should not have them.
I'm not dogging the validity of the statement, just the timing. JctRsp was just making a point that not all people abuse WIC, no matter how his parents got into the position they did.
"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, or the one" - rehmwa
sabr190 0
See post above
"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, or the one" - rehmwa
"The needs of the many out weigh the needs of the few, or the one" - rehmwa
QuoteQuoteQuote"Perhaps your parents should have assessed their financial situation more carefully and evaluated whether it was prudent to have children when they clearly could not afford them.
This remark has to be the best example of poor taste I have ever seen
Why? People who cannot afford kids should not have them.
I'm not dogging the validity of the statement, just the timing. JctRsp was just making a point that not all people abuse WIC, no matter how his parent got into the position they did.
I was not suggesting his parents abused WIC. I was only suggesting it is irresponsible for anybody to have children when they cannot afford them. I did not mean to insult anyone personally, but I just call them as I see them.
billvon 2,436
>Would you consider it to be in GOOD taste . . .
It doesn't matter. You can't attack someone personally here.
Take the opposite case. Say someday you accidentally cut someone off and cause them to be injured. If someone posted "Gee, it's too bad your parents didn't use birth control nine months before you were born; that guy wouldn't have gotten hurt if they did" that may be true. It would also be a personal attack and thus not allowed here.
It doesn't matter. You can't attack someone personally here.
Take the opposite case. Say someday you accidentally cut someone off and cause them to be injured. If someone posted "Gee, it's too bad your parents didn't use birth control nine months before you were born; that guy wouldn't have gotten hurt if they did" that may be true. It would also be a personal attack and thus not allowed here.
JctRsp 0
Well, I think I'm a biased source here, but I'll post anyways.
If you think only people that can afford kids should have them, then the only people having kids will be rich (from their parents' money) or in their 30's. A normal, young family is in a lot of debt in their early to mid 20's. They're paying off college loans, trying to buy a house, getting a car that's safe for their family, etc..... It's simply illogical to believe that everyone should be rich if they want to have kids.
Also, I'm pretty happy that my parents had me, and I think I have been and will be a value to society and will easily pay off the couple hundred dollars the government spent helping buy me diapers.
Lets see, I was the president of numerous clubs in HS, including the National Honor Society, have had a job ever since 2 weeks after I turned 16 (earlier if you count working in the cotton fields), was a Texas State Champion for high school track, and am about to graduate from West Point and get my commission in the US Army on May 28th.
So yes, my parents were poor and needed some government help (just WIC, not food stamps, welfare, etc.), but should that mean that they never should have had me? I think I've already paid off those couple hundred dollars in WIC and will do even more in my life....So according to a cost-benefit analysis it's highly overcritical and illogical to say if you're not rich you shouldn't have kids (no you didntt specifically say this, but it's the only way a 22 year old could really afford to provide for kids well).
So I respectfully disagree.
-Jonathan
If you think only people that can afford kids should have them, then the only people having kids will be rich (from their parents' money) or in their 30's. A normal, young family is in a lot of debt in their early to mid 20's. They're paying off college loans, trying to buy a house, getting a car that's safe for their family, etc..... It's simply illogical to believe that everyone should be rich if they want to have kids.
Also, I'm pretty happy that my parents had me, and I think I have been and will be a value to society and will easily pay off the couple hundred dollars the government spent helping buy me diapers.
Lets see, I was the president of numerous clubs in HS, including the National Honor Society, have had a job ever since 2 weeks after I turned 16 (earlier if you count working in the cotton fields), was a Texas State Champion for high school track, and am about to graduate from West Point and get my commission in the US Army on May 28th.
So yes, my parents were poor and needed some government help (just WIC, not food stamps, welfare, etc.), but should that mean that they never should have had me? I think I've already paid off those couple hundred dollars in WIC and will do even more in my life....So according to a cost-benefit analysis it's highly overcritical and illogical to say if you're not rich you shouldn't have kids (no you didntt specifically say this, but it's the only way a 22 year old could really afford to provide for kids well).
So I respectfully disagree.
-Jonathan
Lets get away from your personal situation here because I don't want to be accused of personal attacks when that is not my intention.
First off, nowhere did I say only rich people should have children. I view this as a very weak debate tactic because it involves taking an extreme position and then trying to justify it by pointing out the exception.
I'm also very happy when I hear people have done well in life and been a contributing member of society, but how would that have changed by any couple waiting until they could afford children? Do you mean that waiting to have children means they children would not have done well? See they illogic?
Suggesting it is OK for someone to have children they cannot afford is also an illogical statement. If it's OK to have children you can't afford, then is it also OK to purchase a home you cannot afford and then ask for govt. assistance with the mortgage because you have children? How about purchasing an automobile you cannot afford? Where do you draw the line? When does personal responsibility enter?
I would also disagree that govt assistance is the only way a 22 Year old can have children. If someone can't afford them at 22, then wait until they are 24, 26, or 30. Hell, my dad was 30 y.o. when I was born because he couldn't afford to have children fresh out of college either. He was too proud to ask anyone to pay for his desires.
I doubt if many people who want to have children they can't afford, would walk down the street and knock on their neighbors door and ask for the neighbors to give them money so they could afford to have children, but somehow it's OK as long as the govt. does it for them.
First off, nowhere did I say only rich people should have children. I view this as a very weak debate tactic because it involves taking an extreme position and then trying to justify it by pointing out the exception.
I'm also very happy when I hear people have done well in life and been a contributing member of society, but how would that have changed by any couple waiting until they could afford children? Do you mean that waiting to have children means they children would not have done well? See they illogic?
Suggesting it is OK for someone to have children they cannot afford is also an illogical statement. If it's OK to have children you can't afford, then is it also OK to purchase a home you cannot afford and then ask for govt. assistance with the mortgage because you have children? How about purchasing an automobile you cannot afford? Where do you draw the line? When does personal responsibility enter?
I would also disagree that govt assistance is the only way a 22 Year old can have children. If someone can't afford them at 22, then wait until they are 24, 26, or 30. Hell, my dad was 30 y.o. when I was born because he couldn't afford to have children fresh out of college either. He was too proud to ask anyone to pay for his desires.
I doubt if many people who want to have children they can't afford, would walk down the street and knock on their neighbors door and ask for the neighbors to give them money so they could afford to have children, but somehow it's OK as long as the govt. does it for them.
mccurley 0
Quotein Canada, I would have never gotten billed for that surgery. It would have gotten it for free.
Not neccesarily correct
In Ontario (and i think its similar in most provences) the gov,t takes a fee from your pay in the form of OHIP Premiums, that's the Ontario Hospitaliztion insurance preium.
It may not cover everybody's hospital bill, with the rest coming from other taxes, but every body working contributes to the system.
Not perfect, but not bad, and I believe an overall good system.
Worked for me when I was laid up in intensive care, and when my wife was giving birth to our kids.
Watch my video Fat Women
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRWkEky8GoI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eRWkEky8GoI
Ron 7
QuoteI think that to tell someone that his parents should not have conceived him is very poor taste. I, personally, would take offense at that.
If you take it personally....Anything can piss you off
But the concept of not having kids if you can't afford them is VERY sound.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
Ron 7
QuoteIf you think only people that can afford kids should have them, then the only people having kids will be rich (from their parents' money) or in their 30's
Whats wrong with that?
QuoteA normal, young family is in a lot of debt in their early to mid 20's.
OK but if they are working, paying the bills and want childern thats one thing. Having children while on welfare is another. Very few people are debt free. But most pay their bills.
If you can't afford to pay your bills, you should not have kids.
QuoteIt's simply illogical to believe that everyone should be rich if they want to have kids
Nobody said they had to be rich. They said you should be able to afford them. Most people don't have 200,000 for a house, but they can still afford one.
QuoteI was the president of numerous clubs in HS, including the National Honor Society
No offense, that does nothing for society.
Quotewas a Texas State Champion for high school track
Again NOTHING for society.
Quotehave had a job ever since 2 weeks after I turned 16 , and am about to graduate from West Point and get my commission in the US Army on May 28th.
THOSE do contribute..Thanks.
QuoteSo yes, my parents were poor and needed some government help (just WIC, not food stamps, welfare, etc.), but should that mean that they never should have had me? I think I've already paid off those couple hundred dollars in WIC and will do even more in my life....So according to a cost-benefit analysis it's highly overcritical and illogical to say if you're not rich you shouldn't have kids (no you didntt specifically say this, but it's the only way a 22 year old could really afford to provide for kids well).
Thats you, and your case....think there are a few that have kids that are on welfare, and those kids grow up to be on welfare?
Again your parents did right. they needed some help and they got it. But plenty of parents pop out kids and let the Government take care of them....Thats wrong.
If you can't afford them, don't have them.
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, 334
>>carefully and evaluated whether it was prudent to have children when
>>they clearly could not afford them
>This remark has to be the best example of poor taste I have ever seen . . .
Poor taste isn't really the issue (although I agree it was in very poor taste) but again, please discuss the issue and not the poster.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites