Combat Ranting (formerly known as Famicom Mini)

[A Black Falcon]

I would think that if someone made exaggerated claims while using Census Bureau information as a source, certainly someone would have noticed. You're making the judgement that the article is totally false, you claim it's all lies.

Prove it. And I don't want to hear excuses. It makes perfect sense and you claim it's malarkey. So I want you to show me proof that poor people are significantly worse off than this study says, as that is what you are claiming. Don't disappoint me please, you always choke when I make a challenge like this to you, because it seems like there is never any proof to substantiate your claims.

I doubt that they're making up the numbers... they're just only using the ones that most suit their case and ignoring a lot of important points. Like the one I mentioned -- relative wealth. In this case how the average CEO of an American company makes $10 million dollars. $10 million. That is a little bit more than the $28,000 of a poverty-line worker. That comparison is unprecidented in world history. If you look at the $10 million on top, the definition of 'poor' based soley on income becomes more interesting... like, would $50,000 even be considered middle class on that scale? Probably not. And we are giving those people who make $10 million massive tax cuts while increasing (or not changing) taxes on the lower end of the ladder!

Also, the definition of 'liberal' and 'conservative' has always been the same. The issues they have stood for are what has changed.

Same thing. What they stand for has changed a lot, so so has the definition of the terms. Especially liberals -- 19th century 'liberals' were dramatically different from modern ones.

As for whether they'd understand the concept, you'd have to put it to them in terms they'd understand; "Do you support the concept of using large amounts of tax revenue to give free money to poor people, requiring little or nothing in return from them".

Maybe they would if you used terms that actually explained the concept... though of course they would hardly agree given how the Framers are a mix across the spectrum. :)

First, what program are you talking about? SSI is for everybody, not just poor people. Poor people get a lot less of it actually since they put less in. Medicare? Yes, that is. Medicade? That's for old people in general... food stamps? That's not free money, that's helping these people survive when otherwise they well might starve or become homeless... free lunches in schools?

SSI is easy. "Do you support taking part of everyone's paychecks to fund a fund that pays people money after they retire?", more or less... not sure about the others offhand. But if you explain first the fact of modern life that you need insurance for health care, and that it costs a lot and often comes from your employer, and about perscription drugs and how high the prices for those are in this country... they well might understand how important better health care for all is.

I defintely think they'd agree with public education, though, and how imporant it is to have a good system.