Combat Ranting (formerly known as Famicom Mini)

[Weltall]

And that's not even touching on the fact that SSI doesn't just benefit the person who is getting your money now, it'll benefit you a lot when you get older too...

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Yeah, right. If SSI is still around when I turn 65 (or whatever retirement age ends up being) I will personally give you my first check.

And it's a proven fact that even people who know better are not moneywise. Look at the insane number of people in the US who have credit card debt and that point is proven. So most people, if they had that extra money, would be liable to waste it... I think that the government should step in and do things to help people. It's pretty sad that people like you (Weltall, GR, DJ, etc) would rather let them suffer.

I find it personally sad that I have to handle my own finances in addition to those of people who are too capricious or stupid to do it themselves. That offends me. When the Founding Fathers drew up the Constitution, I think the idea was that people should be self-sufficient, not that the Government should protect you from your own stupidity. In fact, I have a hunch that they wanted exactly to avoid that from happening.

Better than ever before, but still not in good shape, especially when you look at the standards of modern society. But you clearly think that it's good enough as it is and doing things that would actually help people improve further and maybe get out of the trap of poverty are bad.

I don't think it's 'good enough'. I just have very different ideas on how the situation can improve itself.

I know you'll say 'pessimism', but look. It is proven throughout history that virtually no poor people make it! Yes, once in a while one does... but the number that make it compared to the number that don't? Its infantessimal! That is why governments help the poor. They know that they cannot do enough to help themselves. Not when they must spend most of their time working just so they can pay the bills and put food on the table, for sure! I don't know where you get these delusions of poor people with lots of free time and zero interest of moving up, but I bet that in most cases that is just not true... they just do not have the opportunities... "go to college"? You can't do that if your family needs you to work at least one full time job just so you can keep your apartment and feed everyone!

I wonder, you always say the poor can never 'make it'. Define 'making it'. There are many people who don't have much money or possessions, but have enough to live pretty comfortably and safely.

Again, I stress to you that in our 'modern society', the standards of being poor equate to the standards of excess wealth in about 90% of the rest of the world. Do poor people in India or Africa own televisions and at least one car? Do they ever suffer from obesity, the so-called 'disease of the poor' in America? No. They completely lack education, they often don't eat enough food to stay alive, and they make less money in a year than the average 'poor' American makes in a week. They have no chance whatsoever of raising thier quality of life because they are trapped in a world where the very concept of advancement doesn't exist. There are no facilities for it.

By those standards, our poor people have absolutely nothing to bitch about, and I find it hard to feel too sorry for them, and in that same respect I find it very hard to fault our 'modern society' because our modern society has the richest damn poor people in the history of poor people.

Condaleeza Rice and Colin Powell both made fools of themselves and really degraded their worth in my eyes and in many others when they defended the administration's rush to war. I thought Powell was the more reasoned one in this administration, and then like a idiot he goes off spouting administration lies... and as for Rice, she's just a lapdog really, saying whatever the people really in charge tell her.

Okay.

Oh, and all these right wing conspiracies about how everything is a way to get Hillary into the White House are amusing. First she was going to run for this election, then she was going to be a suprise late entry into the race, and then she is going to run in '08 using Clark as a stepping stone... sure, I'll give you the fact that she's a top contender for Democrats running for the White House in the future, but the conspiracy stories? Crazy.

Oh, and I'd say the Clintonites like Clark because he's by far the most viable moderate in the race, nothing more.

I never believed for a moment Hillary would run this year. Bush is far too tough an opponent, and staging a campaign would be a waste of time, much like Gore's. 2008 will unfortunately be different. I hope the Republicans shore up a worthy opponent.

The Clintonites like Clark because he's an idiot who is easily manipulated. He's so spineless that his position on the war changes depending on the temperature outside. He has no platform, nor does he have a goal. He's a joke of a candidate and his only purpose is to check Dean. Because, while the former Deciever-In-Chief played the centrist to get the sheeple to vote him in, Hillary Clinton is as dangerously liberal as one can get, she doesn't play the centrist nearly as well, and it's HER campaign being prepared.

The nice thing, though, is watching the Democrats destroy themselves with all this infighting. It would be funny if... well, it is funny. I can only hope the damage will be long in repairing. :)

Have you ever disagreed with Weltall?

Didn't think so.

Of course not. I'm always right. :kiss: