ELEPHANT-DONKEY.com

RUSH for 2012 said 11/22, 01:07 AM
Listen, there will always be those few acceptions that you look up to try to get everyone to "sob" themselves into the ranks of pro-welfare, but overall it is the hard taxpayers money that goes into paying welfare for the large masses who sit around collecting the check, and trading in their foodstamps to their friends for drugs. I believe whole heartedly that "idle hands are the devils workshop." Now in the case of the Katrina victims, if welfare did not exist then we could take care of their circumstances much more benificially, and on a case by case basis. The fact is, however, that our society would be strengthened by abolishing the welfare system. If you think about it, you take away the safety net, and those who are determined will forge ahead rather than taking the fall. Also, there would be much more money to invest in all of these other areas that everyone knows are more important, such as education, Americas military, infrastructure, etc. Cut the ambilical cord for those millions of Americans who desperately want to live lathargically under inside the governments womb. We all will be better off for it.

RUSH for 2012 said 11/22, 01:01 PM
That is alright Proud, it just means that your message is twice as clear. That is not, however, going to keep me from labeling your argument as one that is of the romantic "flower power," peace and happiness genre - unrealistic. In every great country, I think that we would both agree, there is going to be found suffering. There are just too many people to cover all bases justly, meaning that some people are going to get the short end of the stick. Now to answer your question, so that I don not make myself out to be a totally bad guy, there is evidence that many of the great countries have developed some kind of welfare. This dates back to the Romans. It is just human nature to want to take care of our own. Now the problem with our welfare system seems to be that it has become soft. The Beaureacrats have taken over, and many hard working families are not benefiting from the system, they are becoming dependent. I'll admit that Clinton did something good, when he reformed welfare in the 90's, but, and he would agree, more needs to be done to make welfare a work based system. And yes, we would have more money for Kat. victims on a case by case basis if we scaled back welfare.

RUSH for 2012 said 11/22, 04:09 PM
See, that is what I like about you Proud, you have a certain fiestiness to your argumentative prose. Now if everyone possessed that sort of spunk this nation would be better off, more tenatious in their efforts to help themselves and their families through hard work, and we might not even be discussing the abuses of welfare. But there again is a romantic ideal. You raise a certain important point when you bring children into the equation though. I cannot in good concience argue that a child must suffer through no fault of its own. But here is the problem. No one enforces whether or not the parents actually use the food stamps for their children. In fact I have a dear friend whos father used to trade the families food stamps to his friends for drugs. The tragety is that the system is broken. Allowing the irresponsible to take the handouts and then use them as they best see fit is ridiculous. The system needs to be, if not destroyed, extremely revamped. And those children who are living under the care of irresponsible parents, in my humble opinion, would be better off with good foster parents more capable of teaching solid priniciples, and therby breaking the vicous cycle.