150 Million Americans That's HALF Are Struggling With Poverty Yet Republicans Won't Spend Domestically.

Who's stealing what? Money is paper, it only has the value you give it. You are getting robbed regardless of who is in charge when the federal reserve prints money. What do we do with the poor? The poor won't go away, they won't just dig their own grave and sit in it until they finally die. They will fight back like a cornered animal and when that happens the society around you will descend into chaos.

When did I say that? That we should just dig a grave for em? We all as citizens should help those less fortunate than ourselves. But not at the barrel of a gun from uncle sam.

We have been throwing money at the poverty problem for what..40 years?

How has that worked out?

Are you your brother's keeper?

That is indeed the question, in fact one of the most important political questions of all, of one the most important differences between republicans and democrats. And I think everyone has their own answer to that question.

Personally, I feel the answer is yes, the government should be able to take from one group to spend on the other, if the other needs it more than the first group. In a perfect world, no one should have their hard earned money taken away from them fr someone else, but in a perfect world, no one would be in poverty and need to take it from someone else. The fact of the matter is, we don't live in a prefect world, and it is unfortunately neccessary for some to give up part of what they have so that others can at least have the basics as well.

I also think it comes down to a basic matter if human compassion to help those less fortunate. I know many do not understand the reality of poor folks, and many think that the poor are simply lazy or fraudulently accept more money than they need, but I have to say, inky personal experience, I have seen several families accept government money that they don't need (fraud), but for the most i have seen that most poor people do need the money, and are also not lazy, but rather hardworking and simply unable to get ahead.

It has worked out pretty well, our society is still functional. Take away "entitlements" and the poor will be out on the streets in greater numbers begging, hustling, stealing, and doing whatever it takes to make a living. The prison industry will boom with all your hard earned tax dollars to keep these new criminals locked up.

Well that just proves you're an idiot

I like to step back and observe how being "hardworking" is touted as the ultimate moral value for middle and lower class people. For upper class who were born into money it's just the opposite. It's virtuous and morally proper for them in their eyes to not work at all.

Well that just proves you're an idiot

I dont understand why the "poor" attempt to use this logic as a way to justify sitting on their asses. People who inherit wealth dont have to work. If you dont already have wealth you have to work to survive. Its that simple. Life isnt fair. Deal with it. Just because the wealthy have the means to sit on their asses does not mean its justifiable for the poor to sit on their asses and leech off of others. The wealthy earned their money. There is a difference between earning something and leeching it. Inherited wealth was still earned even if it wasnt earned by the person who inherited.

The question becomes is it up to the government to take from one group of people so the can spend on another? Perhaps that is the cause of America's current situation. The country seems to have been better off BEFORE the explosion of social programs.

Look bud, I was born poor (holes in shoes and pants). I bought my first car after I got away from the town that Rush Limbaugh comes from.
That town and it's ilk will sink into the earth one day.
Yes "they" will try to keep you down. I succeeded in spite of those folks. I still believe in a hand up not a hand out.
You folks are talking anarchy here. If you think that society will work itself out without a government then you have seen a place without a government. I have

That is indeed the question, in fact one of the most important political questions of all, of one the most important differences between republicans and democrats. And I think everyone has their own answer to that question.

Personally, I feel the answer is yes, the government should be able to take from one group to spend on the other, if the other needs it more than the first group. In a perfect world, no one should have their hard earned money taken away from them fr someone else, but in a perfect world, no one would be in poverty and need to take it from someone else. The fact of the matter is, we don't live in a prefect world, and it is unfortunately neccessary for some to give up part of what they have so that others can at least have the basics as well.

I also think it comes down to a basic matter if human compassion to help those less fortunate. I know many do not understand the reality of poor folks, and many think that the poor are simply lazy or fraudulently accept more money than they need, but I have to say, inky personal experience, I have seen several families accept government money that they don't need (fraud), but for the most i have seen that most poor people do need the money, and are also not lazy, but rather hardworking and simply unable to get ahead.

That's theft and it's bullshit and it's certainly not what his country was founded on. Nobody owes anybody else a damned thing. People need to grow the fuck up and take responsibility for themselves. Can't find a job? Then create your own. Sitting around waiting for someone to hand you a job is childish. People need to start making their own way instead of sitting around waiting for someone to hand them something.

If you are worried about the poor then YOU support them out of your OWN PRIVATE funds. It is not your place to dictate that others have their property stolen so it can be redistributed.

Its easy to say cut spending when you have money, but what the Republicans are overlooking is a potential split in America that can have dire consequences.

Half of Americans are poor or facing becoming poor. While publicly people are running around thinking that the OTHER guy is the burden on society, they are going home and facing being two pay checks away from eviction, going hungry in a nice house, or going on Food Stamps and Section8 to keep a rook over their heads and food.

Americans are starting to see who these Republicans and Tea Partyers work for and are waking up. Unfortunately not fast enough though.

How many of you who are "making it" are willing to admit that you got a leg up as a result of your social connections and/or family members?

I will.

I could have easily ended up on welfare if it had not been for "nepotism" in the workplace. As a result of a friend getting me a job that I wasn't qualified for! This was at a time when I was grossly underemployed.

Yes, I had to do the work once I got my foot in the door, but if it hadn't been for that God knows what would have happened to me.

Most people who are successful got their opportunity from a social network, someone "got them in" and most of you won't admit it!