Republican Ideology and the Poor

Sheriff Joe showed that you could house prisoners for pennies on the dollar.

On top of that we are ignoring the free labor force prisoners can provide which would more than pay for their keep.

We do not need to provide them cable and aftershave, only bread and a pickaxe.

 

I'm happy to hear that you're against taxation to provide "charity" to the poor.

 

Cool. So let's get him a pickaxe and put him to work, being a criminal and all.

 

Exactly.

They will finally have full-time employment that pays for their housing.

Its a win-win for everyone.

 

Sheriff Joe ended up in jail himself

 

No, he ended up a free man.

 

That's still three hots and a cot.

It shouldn't be up to the state to provide for criminals. We either give them a slap on the wrist and hope they don't do it again, or execute them if they do.

Honestly, this prison crap is just not working. I'm not willing to have criminals living on my hard earned money.

 

Only because of a political pardon.

He still broke the law...but that's fine by you

 

You'd love living in Saudi Arabia or Iran

 

Well @ImNotOliver , you live about an hour from me, and you seem to think that near to how I think too. History shows that Republicans more prefer to take from the poor and give to the rich than the Democrats do, but both are bad in the final analysis. For example, right now the Republicans, while they hold power in all 3 branches, are pushing austerity with cut, cut, cut while give, give, give to the rich. And some Democrats are objecting. But both are bad.

We even see on this forum a repetition of righties calling for harm to the homeless, to Social Security, to SNAP, to students, and to everyone and their medical needs. They call for charity to be individual, which gives them the ability to opt-out anonymously. Meanwhile we see the lefties calling for better organized supports by society for those who need it and paying for it with higher taxes on the rich who can afford it without it harming them.

So we all know the truth that lies beyond the smoke and mirrors. We know who has compassion for fellow man and who lack natural human compassion. We know. No one needs to tell us. We know.

 

there's good and bad in every place, so the idea is to adopt the good and get rid of the bad.

Taxpayers paying for criminals to live is bad.

 

Be an awesome person on your own dime, and you might have something. Until then, you're just virtue signaling on my dime.

 

To live in society, be part of society. Mutual benefit is what society is for. And helping those who need it is what it is for too. Love it or leave it.

 

.
If your OP is an attempt to educate conservatives, you are wasting your time. The GOP spent decades hammering into the heads of their base that the poor and homeless choose their torturous lifestyles.

It is the general belief among most conservatives that the handicapped and disabled are malingerers and the impoverished, whether employed or not, are lazy. And, don't forget, conservatives see Social Security and Medicare as entitlement programs, which is the reason they so strongly support the Republicans' plans to take that "tax money" away from the elderly and disabled to provide tax cuts and subsidies for the fat cats.

There is no changing this hardheaded mindset in the vast majority of conservatives, only a few come to realize the truth, and that only occurs when those conservatives learn the hard way, and are thrust into a situation beyond their control, where they must rely on government safety net programs, which for years they opposed and condemned the "lazy" recipients.

Even as recipients, most who are conservative see the help they receive from safety net programs as something they deserve, but all those "lazy" people receiving benefits under false pretenses, should be put to work.

It you will notice, conservatism has many double standards, where their philosophy is "Do as I say, not as I do." This includes nearly all their political leaders and most political issues.

The dictionary has a word for this: Hypocrisy".


.

 

Or be forced by society to comply and if compliance isn't forthcoming they may face the very thing they agitate for.

"But I am innocent! I only ever wanted this horrible treatment for people who aren't innocent!"

Aww, isn't that cute. You don't get to decide who's innocent.

 

If these people are so mentally handicapped that they didn't choose it then they shouldn't be on the streets.

They can't be trusted to help themselves which means providing help is pointless since they don't posses the means to take advantage of it.

The best thing we can do for them is to remove them from society and provide mental help in a controlled facility.

 

The way that I see it, the base problem is that both you and the conservatives are right, and wrong, at the same time. What conservatives wish to practice, could be called: tough love. That philosophy says that: if a person is left to fend for himself, he will do so. Then, he will learn that he can do so.

There are ONLY two problems with that, mostly accurate, approach. The first is that there are some who can never be competent enough to provide for themselves. Those we must provide for. The second is that there are those competent persons who don't support themselves. Of these, we must try to rehabilitate as many as we can.

What we have to do, is find some way to separate those who can, from those who can't. From my experience, most of those who can, but don't, are in that category because they have learned flawed lessons.

 

Really. How can you be so smart and yet be so dumb? FAW took you to task quite well, but I'll add that, generally speaking, Republicans are in favor of having states and localities deal with poverty programs, and that opposition to federal welfare programs doesn't mean they want people to starve, go homeless, or die.

The thing I don't get being a former Baptist is why do-gooders like yourself aren't satisfied with doing good using your own money and your own effort, you have to force everyone else to do good with their money and effort. Why does your guilt cost me money?

I finished my standardized tests before any of my classmates, too, but they weren't surprised in the least because I did it all the time. I would finish chemistry tests in about 20 minutes, math tests in 10. We had 50 minutes to do them.

 

He actually believes every word of his commentary. I know. I used to be just that same way.

Democrats feel. Feel operates as were it FACT. Which FEEL is faith. It is not thinking. It is feeling. This god awful belief you are the care giver to others. But Democrats do not practice it. Notice the rich are greedy in his narrative. He ignores a lot of the rich are also Democrats.

Why would the rich be greedy? They are defined as rich. Rich people really can afford their life plus much more. They have no NEED to be greedy. When I caught on, I quit the Democratic party and became a Republican.

 

That's because, as so many on the left, you fail to understand conservatives. There are actually far MORE economic conservatives than there are social conservatives. Poor and middle class people vote Republican for the same reason the wealthy do: freedom. Freedom from onerous taxes, freedom from onerous regulations, freedom from repressive and regressive fees and fines, freedom to engage in business without government breathing down their necks. The taxes that fall heaviest on the poor tend to be state taxes and fees, encouraging them to vote Republican, and the taxes that fall heaviest on the middle class tend to be SS and Medicare taxes, encouraging them to vote Republican. High end income taxes only fall heaviest on the top end people, and curiously enough, they tend to vote Democrat. If you drew an income distribution, only the top and bottom ends would show up as Democrat while the vast middle votes Republican.

 

I notice this shift a lot; very few go the other way. Former spy Whittaker Chambers wrote about going from Communist to capitalist even though he still believed Communism was going to win. Do you have a theory to explain it? Growing up? Becoming responsible? Becoming a parent? Overcoming hormones? Why do Democrats become Republicans (Reagan included) but Republicans almost never become Democrats?

 

When I converted to being a republican, I partly based it on the extremely great book ... A time for Truth, author is William E. Simon. He shined the spotlight on Government and what it is vs what it is not, how it works vs how we laymen assume it works. He told the truth. So shocked was i that I next read what was written by Thomas Payne. Why him is asked but he really laid out the case to Free America. He lit the flames of Freedom. Then of course I also dug deeper into the founders. Anyway, when it was over, I voted for Reagan and since then shun Democrats. They preach a false doctrine.

 

Compassion for one's fellow man would also include not taking his property by force, no?

 

We measure that usefulness in dollars. People who are useful to society are rewarded for their usefulness, and those who are useless find themselves sleeping on sidewalks.

 

So your solution to those unable to help themselves, which by the way is well less than one percent of the population Is to put them out of sight and out of mind no matter the expense. You're not interested in helping them just keeping them out of sight. How compassionate. Warehousing the poor, however genteelly, doesn't help them it cripples them. Much of the problem with the ghetto or the 'Hood if you prefer (and it doesn't matter a damn the skin tone of the 'hood in question) is the easily predictable outcome of LBJ's war on poverty programs.