UnOriginalNuttah wrote:
lowing wrote:
Sorry I got you confused with Marconious, same form of basic govt though, so the rest stands. Except, I think the US has a good balance of socialism and capitalism. We have a ton of programs aimed at helping others less fortunate. Grants and loans for college etc..... The only thing that you and I seem to disagree on is how it is distributed. I say free hand outs should not happen. I say our taxes SHOULD only go to those willing to help themselves. You seem to think that everyone deserves a free ride.
the fact that people are having to take two jobs, has nothing to do with personal financial responsibility does it?? Or is it the govts. job to plan your finances as well?
Asa matter of fact I DO LOOK OUT FOR NUMBER 1, MY FAMILY!!. I do not support a system where I have more rights than someone else. I don't even know where you got that idea. We all have the same opportunities. Are you going to deny that some people are more ambitious than others?? Maybe those that work for it should get what ever their efforts allow. Why should they have to share with those that have not done a thing for themselves?? I just got caught up in lay-offs from my airline, because of my professionalism and work ethic I had another job ( yes at less pay for now ) in short enough time as to not feel the financial pressure and headache of being furloughed. Who do I owe for that. I will take credit for making myself marketable.
Bottom line. I am more than willing to help anyone that helps themselves.No free handouts to those who do not work for it in some sort of measure.
No actually, very rarely do I get upset on here. I find this kinda entertaining, and enlightening at times. sad though it may be.
I do not whine on here, I make observations that it is stupid to bite the hand that feeds you.
The fact is that some people won't be able to get a job, and will need help. There is only so much to go around, and due to the capitalist system of private individuals owning the means of production, more and more often labour is sourced out to wherever it is cheapest. I'm not going to deny that some people work harder than others, but let's just think about the larger picture:
Take your industry, for example. Planes are very mobile, and require regular maintenance. Maintenance performed in the USA is more expensive than it would be overseas. As more and more companies make massive savings by getting the maintenance done overseas those who take a more ethical stance will be unable to compete, and will have to do likewise or lose market share due to higher prices. Eventually there will be so few jobs that you will be faced with a choice: relocate your family or retrain in another field. Some people will be unable to afford to do either. Should they get help or not? I think that they are a victim of capitalism, and it's only fair that some of the taxes on the profits of the company they worked for should go towards helping them survive. Remember it's not even income tax that goes towards helping these people, the entire income tax collected in the states is just used to pay off the
interest on the loans the government took out to create more economic growth... growth which competition forces overseas in all but name (e.g. the companies stay registered in the states, but most of the workforce is overseas).
And there aren't really any 'handouts' over here in the UK:
-You can get Disability Living Allowance if you are physically or mentally unable to work.
-Unemployed? To claim jobseekers allowance you need to be actively looking for work and improving your chances. Even if you are you won't get the money unless you need it to survive.
-Perhaps by handouts you mean supporting people who have fallen victim to drug addiction? That's a illness which requires treating as far as I'm concerned, just like alcoholism. It would come under a disability and if they want to claim money they should be forced to attend programs to treat their addiction. Quite simple. That's why we pay National Insurance, so if we get ill we get treatment. Although recently the quality of treatment is declining at quite a rate, due to various factors.
-As for convicted criminals, contributing towards rehabilitation is going to benefit everyone in the long run. Training schemes in prison and a decent minimum wage are worth it, given that if they can earn a decent living they are less likely to reoffend.
-Single mothers? They are going to need support because even if they work, the childcare will cost more per hour than most of them will ever earn. I don't begrudge giving their children a chance to be well fed and housed enough to get a chance of doing well in the education I don't begrudge being provided for them.
-Victims of crime and asylum seekers? Some people are irreversibly damaged by conflicts which they are fleeing and probably lost much of their family in. Some people are victims of criminals or suffer great abuse. They are the exception to the rule, and I believe there is a duty of care, be it to the international community or closer to home.
I don't think our views are much different really, because I don't think people should be given money unless they really need it. People can choose to be homeless or whatever... but there should help available with the problems which caused them to lose faith in themselves to get them back on their feet. How little does it cost for such basic requirements really? People are more than welcome to drop out, but if they want shelter, food and help to get back on top then if companies have to pay a bit more tax to support this then I won't lose any sleep about it. It's easy to forget how little is required to sustain life in this world of inflated property prices and overpriced luxury food. If one click on this website (
http://www.thehungersite.com) can provide 1.1 cups of staple food for the less fortunate, then why is it unreasonable to expect these most basic of requirements to be met?
It might be stupid to bite the hand that feeds you, but asking the entity attached to the hand to give more consideration to the some of the other people who need help is a sign of a social conscience.
Needing two jobs simply to afford to be alive is a sign that the minimum wage has not risen in line with the cost of living, and should be increased. In that respect it
is the job of the government to "plan your finances".
alpinestar wrote:
Ok I will restate it again, All the plots uncovered right ?
Well where the fuck is the suspects & evidence ?
I doubt we'll find out for months. Things like this usually take years in the UK. If it isn't quietly swept under the carpet, that is.