|
Post by GamerMan on Mar 26, 2005 21:29:01 GMT -5
i know you do quotes differently here, I just am gonna stick with the Heavengame way of doing it, if thats alright with you (or even if it isn't)
|
|
|
Post by Azan on Mar 26, 2005 23:45:46 GMT -5
yes I agree, this works all he needs to show is that whats in that area is a quote and placing quote does the job.
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 27, 2005 20:04:25 GMT -5
just letting him know...
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Mar 27, 2005 20:58:18 GMT -5
Gamerman, your post is incredibly long.
I guess you and I seem to disagree on everything to do with homeless/welfare. I have no clue what you meant by the mosquito analogy, I must have missed the point. But I do know that the govt. should not fund any major welfare programs at all. I think only a small govt. funded program is necesary, supplemented by the communities themselves if it's that important to them. Let's say we have a program that all the taxpayers pay for, but it is a weak program itself and would not support anyone alone. Then any communities with homeless issues, do-gooders, and private organizations can add their own support to the small government program. This way people who don't care much for the well-being of others (like me! ;D) only pay a small, unnoticeable amount of money every year via taxes to fund the homeless, and yet the homeless can be helped by those who wish to help them.
|
|
|
Post by GamerMan on Mar 29, 2005 0:10:44 GMT -5
the point of the mosquito thing is that enough people may want welfare for the homeless, but those who do may just not contribute money while still getting the services, then if enough of those people arise, you may see a service lost that a majority of people want and are willing to pay for.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Mar 29, 2005 13:33:45 GMT -5
but why would I even care that some people want a service that I don't? Who cares if the homeless are homeless? Not me. And that is why I don't want to have to pay for the welfare that I don't care if homeless people recieve.
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 29, 2005 14:15:18 GMT -5
i agree. if someone else is getting something that I don't want to give them, why should I pay for it? that's someone elses job, someone else that cares.
|
|
|
Post by Niccolo on Mar 29, 2005 22:45:56 GMT -5
You people are the reason I'm running to Canada.
Oh, Canada, our home and native land All patriot's love to thee is at thy son's command. With glowing hearts we see the rise, the true north strong and free. Oh Canada! Oh Cananda! We pledge our guard to thee.
|
|
|
Post by GamerMan on Mar 30, 2005 0:19:15 GMT -5
I dont care about national defence, should i, or the millions of others that don't, have to pay for it. I dont like the FBI, I dont wanna pay bush's salarie, nor chenies, nor those who work in the IRS. and im sure there are many others who agree with this, and if you start doing that, the gov doesn't have money, and thus we have no gov.
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 30, 2005 16:45:02 GMT -5
what we need is a government that has less involvment and makes it easier for people to do what they want, such as start a business, or other things like that.
|
|
|
Post by Azan on Mar 30, 2005 17:02:43 GMT -5
Like hong cong, we should invest in military bbut have them act as a continuos policing force (except in times of war) we still have cops (but the cops will respond to disturbances/arrests, military just continuosly paces through populated areas) but if we had military walking everywhere our crime rate would go down and also if any1 ever needed anything ie directions or help getting accross the street the military could help (and its been proven that this works), and it would combat terrorism much better as its proven the conventional warfare cannot impede unconventional warfare but lets say terrorists entered a building military would already be on the scene, well thats just a thought anyway
|
|
|
Post by Umbrafire on Mar 30, 2005 17:38:46 GMT -5
so true. I agree, increased military activity would definitely be a good thing for multiple reasons
|
|
|
Post by GamerMan on Mar 31, 2005 16:43:23 GMT -5
the US needs to ease up on economic controls, though sometimes it is needed to prevent unfair bussiness practices. But they also need to cut back on military spending, to stop enforcing their moral views onto others, and to stop running at a huge deficit.
And military control, in the streets, BAD IDEA. Ohh ya lets give the military tons of power, and then if the person running the military doesn't like an idea, he has a large force to make sure that idea doesn't get heard by the public, its Nazi Germany all over again!
And terrorism isn't such a huge idea to be needed to be held back with military, notice, we have had a VERY limited amount of terrorist activity in the US. and if there really was these terror cells in the US, and terrorist everywhere in and around the US, then there is MANY easy ways thye could be harming us right now (AK-47 killing, car bomb, ect.), but they arn't...and thats because there arn't the terrorist roaming free to do it.
|
|
|
Post by Azan on Mar 31, 2005 16:52:10 GMT -5
im merely saying that if we are gonna spend money on the military we might as well use them to not only defend our nation but help prevent crime, im not saying the military should walk around with rifles, just pistols, and I doupt the military would start killing everybody as no one man controls the military, we have laws preventing things like that from happening.
|
|
|
Post by Lobstrosity on Apr 1, 2005 20:24:55 GMT -5
You all bring up such good points for me to laugh at. I agree with the thing Gamerman said about the things he doesn't want to pay for, but the difference is that me not paying for the homeless doesn't get anyone killed except possibly the homeless. But You not wanting to pay for the military defense budget, well, that affects everyone. Don't try to say it isn't necesary, because there are millions of people out there that would love to hurt any Americans they could find. In case you haven't noticed, most people hate us right about now.
As for Brian, yeah the military is a good thing. I don't know about flooding the streets with armed forces, but we definitely need the military. Brian and Jiub were both right about the Hong Kong thing. All of our rules we set up to try to make things better for everyone really just end up causing more problems than they solve. Every little rule and regulation we have brings us closer and closer to a Communist or Socialistic society that WILL NOT WORK! Feel free to argue your points on this one Gamerman and Jiub, the liberals. The rules give more power to the government, which is power the government can't hanldle. They simply don't have the manpower to keep track of all the regulations we have. If we cut back on regulations, enforce only the vague laws and have fewer specific ones, increase our military, defense, law enforcement, education, and international relations budgets, decrease our welfare and petty business law budgets, then we can sit back and let people work for themselves. And if they fail, then they fail. Better luck next time, losers! Not to be mean or anything, but as I always say, "You take the cards life deals you, and if you don't like them, stand aside and let the rest of us have our chance." --Lobstrosity
|
|