 |
|
Getao321
|
|
hehe this'll be fun to watch (ignorance is bliss eh?)
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Rufus T. Firefly
|
 |
is one way of saying it, though I prefer "mensch"
Sep 2000
time: 07:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by donegeal
Rufus:
I knew that some was going to make that arguement. Now don't be silly. A non-english speaking slurpee server is not my idea anarchy. It is just an example of one of the rules and regulations that I think should be in place in order to ensure that anarchy doesn't ensue. |
But the rule isn't in place, and yet anarchy hasn't ensued. So who's being silly...or a least contradicting himself?  If you want such a law out of your own deep-seated nativism, then say so. But stop pretending we need it for a functioning society; we don't, and society itself is exhibit A.
quote:
Back to the welfare topic.
No, not so be it. Stop pushing to make everyone do what you think is right and go out there and actually help people. Stop saying "I support welfare." and thinking that you have done your good deed for the day and go help someone. In the case of the mothers that made bad choices, go help one (not just support their particular program). If they continue to make bad choices, then stop. If direct help isn't going to work, nothing will. The welfare program is an enabler and self-defeating. |
First of all, you have no idea what I did or didn't do as a volunteer when I lived in the US, so just drop that. The point -- and this is basic 17th & 18th century Enlighenment philosophy of the sort we founded the nation on -- is that we constitute a government to deal with those problems that are beyond volunteerism and individual initiative. Foreign invasion is such a problem; hence the military (who, btw, waste far more of my money than welfare recipients). Crime i such a problm; hence the police. And poverty is such a problem; hence welfare. If you think charity and volunteerism stand much of a chance against the systemic poverty created under industrial capitalism, I suggest you read a little more about Victorian society.
In fact, your logic can be turned neatly on its head: if you feel you've done your good deed for the day by helping one person, but you refuse to address the systemic/structural conditions that created her or his situation, then you've done too little.
Dr. Strangelove - thanks for the info on welfare eligibilty and addiction; I thought that was the case, but my too-quick web search didn't confirm it. I'm glad you could. 
|
|
| |
|
|
|
orange
|
 |
It doesn't matter what your name is!
Feb 2000
time: 00:25
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by donegeal
Now who said that I said anything about treating them differently? I know plenty of homosexuals (and probably more than I think) and I treat them no differently than anyone else. |
Who said you treat them differently? I was merely making a statement.
quote:
I never said I judge people as a group, I only agree that it is wrong to tell people they CAN'T do it when they should be told that they SHOULDN'T do it. |
The quote implies that you have or do harbour feelings against groups, and that no one should tell you it's wrong to do this. If it's not wrong for you to do this, than it's not wrong for me to call you a bigot. That was my point, and I stand by it.
quote:
Please now Orange, try to stay civil. I haven't said, nor agreed with anything that makes me a bigot. And I certianly haven't run off at the mouth calling all liberals by their more colorful names. Additionally, if you are trying to turn me over the light-side (as Rufus referenced), name calling certianly isn't the way to do it (you booger!  ) |
As I hope your smiley indicates, this part of the post was obviously tongue in cheek.
quote:
Disliking the diversity is part of the diversity. Telling someone to get out because of it conflicts directly with its princeable. |
If you don't like the diversity and want to leave, by all means leave. That's not being undiverse. We don't have to accomodate you, we just have to allow for you to exist within the system. Same with everyone else. Acceptance comes with time assimilation and education.
quote:
Give me more credit than that sir (although, being rather new to the OT forum, you would have no reason to do so). As for suffrage competency test, yes they were abolished long ago and I agree that that is a good thing,but I would most like to have them back IF there was a possible standard to go on. As that would be impossible (or nearly so) it will never happen. (yes, I expect heat from this one  ) |
I disagree...but since you don't really seem to support your own point, I won't digress further...
quote:
So America is all about competition and choice until someone has won the compitition? I don't know about you, but I got my entire computer system AND OS for just over $600. If he has such a monopoly on computers, why has the price gone down? |
I'm not saying he is upping the prices or that the apparent Microsoft monopoly is dangerous, I'm just saying that there are anti-trust laws and legislation for a reason - it is not always benefitial for one corporation to obtain such a strangle hold over a market. There is no competiton or choice, and this prohibits new business as well as inovation. Generally, competition lowers the price level.
quote:
Thanks for the comments Orange. I hope we can continue. |
Sure thing.
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:25.
Apolyton Time is 00:25. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
16-01-2003 08:03
ACK!
|
|