Go look at the actual statistics. Most people who are "on the plantation" of government assistance are working folks. They are mostly white too, so that is why you are being called a racist. You purposely use a metaphor that includes a history of a race being held in bondage to describe a situation that mostly afflicts members not of that race.
Your average person on this plantation will be back at work soon, that is what the T in TANF stands for. The rest of them are working and getting assistance since the powerful job creators did not create them enough salary to make ends meet. Walmart already teaches their employees to sign up for social welfare programs.
Instead of spouting BS which is consistent with your ideology, go READ A FUCKING BOOK.
Failed in the first sentence. That is pretty impressive. Not all liberal schools of thought follow that mantra, nor do all schools of thought that follow that mantra believe in police states. Go get a polisci text book.
I agree. To me the worst of it is that pretty much everyone saying these things needs a polisci class before they speak about politics again. The slashdot libertarian, a quite different beast than real life ones, is generally the worst at this. They lack any information about even the school of thought their ideology comes from. For fun mention anarcho-socialism or left libertarianism to them. You can almost hear their heads explode.
Again, that is not going to convince anyone. A totally pointless comment. I could just as easily say "Very few conservatives would not like to see a police state" and it would be equally stupid.
Why are children even being asked? They are not capable of consent for sex, so this should be a decision their parents make. I would think children should technically be a special kind of property like livestock. They can make no legal decisions or consent, but they are protected from abuse by the law.
Mine you would know for sure. It only has this one purpose. This is for two separate conditions. The third medicine you would figure out based on the first.
That is a different problem, that should be solved.
Odds are we are arresting folks for stuff they are going to be released on their own recognizance the next morning. Instead we should just give them a ticket to appear before the court in the morning if the crime is that minor.
I don't see the difference between this and finger printing. If you are going to do either and the person is not found guilty that stuff should all be tossed out.
How many fisheries are actually run with catch limits low enough to maintain them?
It seems every fish that is popular on a world wide scale is likely over fished. We cannot even get the japanese to give the bluefin a rest. I wonder if there culture just does not value having these species or something.
The company would sue you/fine you? The end user did not pay, so he has no one to sue/fine. I would assume you would have in your contract that the company cannot hold your responsible. Companies are generally responsible for the actions of their employees.
Not at all. The clear implication is that the freedom they are voting for is the freedom to starve. This is not an emotional argument, it is simple factual one. You can either vote for the safety net you may never need or use, or not. I never stated no one starves, stop making arguments up in your head.
I am not sure what you mean. Please elaborate. Welfare, AKA TANF is not a program you can stay on indefinitely. I highly doubt you know that much about this topic. By the way most people receiving some form of assistance are employed.
African Americans are not the majority of TANF recipients. The entire idea of that is something racists cooked up. White folks in trailers are really the poster child.
When faced with a choice between a party offering assistance and one who espouses letting you starve I think I can see the attraction.
Slashdot Mirror
So stop speaking about it then.
If you don't even know the basics about a topic, you should not discuss it in public.
That would give you one of them, yeah.
Assuming I was not lying at the time.
Wow, that is some powerful derp.
Go look at the actual statistics. Most people who are "on the plantation" of government assistance are working folks. They are mostly white too, so that is why you are being called a racist. You purposely use a metaphor that includes a history of a race being held in bondage to describe a situation that mostly afflicts members not of that race.
Your average person on this plantation will be back at work soon, that is what the T in TANF stands for. The rest of them are working and getting assistance since the powerful job creators did not create them enough salary to make ends meet. Walmart already teaches their employees to sign up for social welfare programs.
Instead of spouting BS which is consistent with your ideology, go READ A FUCKING BOOK.
There are entire schools of liberal thought that espouse there being no government at all.
The dark side of your ignorance is you typing drivel like you just did. Go get a polsci textbook and read it before you spout anymore such silliness.
Failed in the first sentence.
That is pretty impressive. Not all liberal schools of thought follow that mantra, nor do all schools of thought that follow that mantra believe in police states. Go get a polisci text book.
I agree.
To me the worst of it is that pretty much everyone saying these things needs a polisci class before they speak about politics again. The slashdot libertarian, a quite different beast than real life ones, is generally the worst at this. They lack any information about even the school of thought their ideology comes from. For fun mention anarcho-socialism or left libertarianism to them. You can almost hear their heads explode.
Again, that is not going to convince anyone.
A totally pointless comment. I could just as easily say "Very few conservatives would not like to see a police state" and it would be equally stupid.
Why are children even being asked?
They are not capable of consent for sex, so this should be a decision their parents make. I would think children should technically be a special kind of property like livestock. They can make no legal decisions or consent, but they are protected from abuse by the law.
So there are no mistakes with vole relationships?
Mine you would know for sure. It only has this one purpose. This is for two separate conditions. The third medicine you would figure out based on the first.
That seems like a totally reasonable thing to do. Assuming they did not make copies.
Using this sort of logic is not getting you any converts.
Very few liberals believe that and you know it. Such arguments are just driving people away from every agreeing with you.
There is no such thing in the USA. Our justice system does not make any such attempt at it. People would oppose that as being soft on crime.
That is a different problem, that should be solved.
Odds are we are arresting folks for stuff they are going to be released on their own recognizance the next morning. Instead we should just give them a ticket to appear before the court in the morning if the crime is that minor.
My medical condition is not visually apparent, but once you see my list of medicine you would know what it was
I am sure it is not, but that does not mean it should be that way.
That is a separate problem all together.
I would think a strip search might show much of that. Heck, to survive a few days in jail I would have to divulge a bunch just to get my meds.
I would hope they are not allowed to share that data with private companies. I am sure insurers are now trying to figure out how to get it.
Kids who are suspects in a crime. Not everyone under 18 is some angel.
I don't see the difference between this and finger printing. If you are going to do either and the person is not found guilty that stuff should all be tossed out.
How many fisheries are actually run with catch limits low enough to maintain them?
It seems every fish that is popular on a world wide scale is likely over fished. We cannot even get the japanese to give the bluefin a rest. I wonder if there culture just does not value having these species or something.
So then my killing you or taking your property does not infringe on your liberty?
With no laws, bands/tribes of folks will be doing just that. History proves this.
The company would sue you/fine you?
The end user did not pay, so he has no one to sue/fine. I would assume you would have in your contract that the company cannot hold your responsible. Companies are generally responsible for the actions of their employees.
Not at all.
The clear implication is that the freedom they are voting for is the freedom to starve. This is not an emotional argument, it is simple factual one. You can either vote for the safety net you may never need or use, or not. I never stated no one starves, stop making arguments up in your head.
I am not sure what you mean.
Please elaborate. Welfare, AKA TANF is not a program you can stay on indefinitely. I highly doubt you know that much about this topic. By the way most people receiving some form of assistance are employed.
African Americans are not the majority of TANF recipients. The entire idea of that is something racists cooked up. White folks in trailers are really the poster child.
When faced with a choice between a party offering assistance and one who espouses letting you starve I think I can see the attraction.
http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/05/19/mississippi-2/
Care to apologize?