10 key reasons why the Obama presidency continues to melt down - Polidicks

[QUOTE=GunFox;31618651]But who is abusing it? You hear about it all the time, and yet I never see anyone abusing the system.[/QUOTE] People that use unemployment to feed an illegal drug habit, for instance, could be considered abusers of the system. There's also the problem that unemployment benefits are so amazingly high that people are getting job offers that pay LESS. While it's convenient for the unemployed to have such high income security benefits, at the same time, it defeats any motivation to get back into the job market and damages our economy. In order to pay for these massive unemployment benefits, taxes need to be raised or money needs to be borrowed, which in turn burdens our economy and takes money out of the hands of employers and gives them lessened ability to hire.

[QUOTE=thisispain;31618759]what a stupid assumption to make, how do you know that's her very large television? there's no context and you're just taking an unlabeled picture as reasoning for "the system is being abused" which is pathetic.[/QUOTE] It's a fairly easy assumption to make, but I can see where you're coming from. However, why would she be there if it was not her house?

[QUOTE=Boba_Fett;31618796]It's a fairly easy assumption to make, but I can see where you're coming from. However, why would she be there if it was not her house?[/QUOTE] it's utterly irrelevant, the picture doesn't matter and doesn't count for anything.

I may be late as fuck but this is so fucking biased it's not worth laughing about.

I want to make it clear though, Social Security does not produce a debt or deficit, so I'm not in favor of cutting them if we can at all avoid it, however abusers of the system still need to be stopped.

[QUOTE=Ridge;31616036]Palin no. Perhaps Rand Paul. At least Ron and Rand stick to their guns and maintain their position on the topic. Ron Paul pushed for how many years to audit the Federal Reserve? And we finally do it this year and find that they secretely loaned out 16 TRILLION dollars to foreign banks and companies without Congressional approval??[/QUOTE] They also support legalizing marijuana and gay marriage and all those other social issues that you guys hate.

[QUOTE=Chilean;31618834]They also support legalizing marijuana and gay marriage and all those other social issues that you guys hate.[/QUOTE] Well actually, Ron Paul believes that the states should choose on legalization of those two issues, and personally opposes gay marriage.

[QUOTE=RichyZ;31618839][url]http://www.reuters.com/article/2011/05/31/us-florida-welfare-drugs-idUSTRE74U6W320110531[/url] if the rest of the states follow this, and raise minimum wage (because seriously, our dollar is fucking shit and the pay isn't even compensating for it these days) and it's practically fixed[/QUOTE] That's a good step in the right direction, but income security is still a HUGE part of our budget.

[QUOTE=Chilean;31618834]They also support legalizing marijuana and gay marriage and all those other social issues that you guys hate.[/QUOTE] I'm a Libertarian. If you want to marry 4 people while smoking pot and having sex with your lawn mower, be my guest. Just let me live my life how I want to.

This is probably the strangest thread I've ever debated in. I'm opposing the progressives and liberals on alot of things and backing up the conservatives and fiscal conservatives.

[QUOTE=Ridge;31615780] [B]5. A majority of Americans still reject Obamacare[/B] President Obama has stubbornly refused to back down over his hugely costly health care reform plans, commonly dubbed “Obamacare”, despite significant public opposition to them. In many ways, Obamacare is a political albatross around Obama’s neck as he heads towards 2012. [URL="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html"]TheRealClear Politics average[/URL] for May to July has 50.8 percent of Americans opposed to Obamacare, with just 38.6 percent in favour. Rasmussen, which tracks the issue closely, has the level of opposition to Obama’s health reforms running [URL="http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/healthcare/health_care_law"]currently at 55 percent[/URL]. CNN’s most recent polling in June placed [URL="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html"]public opposition at 56 percent[/URL]. Strikingly, out of 50 polls conducted on Obamacare since the start of 2011[URL="http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/other/obama_and_democrats_health_care_plan-1130.html"] and listed byRealClear Politics[/URL], only two (Rasmussen in January and Gallup in March), show more support than opposition for the president’s plan.[/QUOTE] Can we get a percentage on how many of those people actually know what the fucking plan is? I've heard it compared to "universal health care" so many times it's unbelievable.

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];31618913']This is probably the strangest thread I've ever debated in. I'm opposing the progressives and liberals on alot of things and backing up the conservatives and fiscal conservatives.[/QUOTE] JOIIINNN USSSSSS :tinfoil:

[QUOTE=McMissile;31618790]People that use unemployment to feed an illegal drug habit, for instance, could be considered abusers of the system. There's also the problem that unemployment benefits are so amazingly high that people are getting job offers that pay LESS. While it's convenient for the unemployed to have such high income security benefits, at the same time, it defeats any motivation to get back into the job market and damages our economy. In order to pay for these massive unemployment benefits, taxes need to be raised or money needs to be borrowed, which in turn burdens our economy and takes money out of the hands of employers and gives them lessened ability to hire.[/QUOTE] And what are they supposed to do? Turn themselves in? Our society criminalizes drug addiction. Government money may buy you a fix or two, but it won't buy rehab. They don't exactly have a lot of options.

[QUOTE=Chilean;31618921]Can we get a percentage on how many of those people actually know what the fucking plan is? I've heard it compared to "universal health care" so many times it's unbelievable.[/QUOTE] If only it was anywhere close. The right attacks it like it's some terrible European communist-style health care law when it's barely anything like that.

[QUOTE=GunFox;31618941]And what are they supposed to do? Turn themselves in? Our society criminalizes drug addiction. Government money may buy you a fix or two, but it won't buy rehab. They don't exactly have a lot of options.[/QUOTE] Someone above suggested that drug tests should be mandatory for welfare recipients.. That way, if someone wants to continue their illegal drug habit, they can, but they won't be doing it with welfare.

[QUOTE=Ridge;31618900]I'm a Libertarian. If you want to marry 4 people while smoking pot and having sex with your lawn mower, be my guest. Just let me live my life how I want to.[/QUOTE] you're a libertarian in the same way glenn beck is

[QUOTE=McMissile;31618973]Someone above suggested that drug tests should be mandatory for welfare recipients.. That way, if someone wants to continue their illegal drug habit, they can, but they won't be doing it with welfare.[/QUOTE] So the people who need the most help, get the least. Great plan!

[QUOTE=McMissile;31618973]Someone above suggested that drug tests should be mandatory for welfare recipients.. That way, if someone wants to continue their illegal drug habit, they can, but they won't be doing it with welfare.[/QUOTE] Honestly that's an unnecessary violation of their rights and makes the assumption that people who need welfare are prone to doing drugs.

[QUOTE=Ridge;31618900]I'm a Libertarian. If you want to marry 4 people while smoking pot and having sex with your lawn mower, be my guest. Just let me live my life how I want to.[/QUOTE] apathy is different from social liberalism and if this was true libertarians would love the ACLU

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31619008]Honestly that's an unnecessary violation of their rights and makes the assumption that people who need welfare are prone to doing drugs.[/QUOTE] Why should it matter if you're drug free? Plenty of jobs require drug tests as a part of policy. If someone is so against it, they don't need to accept welfare. [QUOTE=GunFox;31619007]So the people who need the most help, get the least. Great plan![/QUOTE] I would hardly call funding a drug habbit "help"

[QUOTE=McMissile;31619025]If someone is so against it, they don't need to accept welfare.[/QUOTE] As if they have any choice.

[QUOTE=McMissile;31618973]Someone above suggested that drug tests should be mandatory for welfare recipients.. That way, if someone wants to continue their illegal drug habit, they can, but they won't be doing it with welfare.[/QUOTE] I'm strongly opposed to that, on an ideological and practicality basis. Ideologically in that we shouldn't be punishing people for drug use unless it affects their job performance or involuntarily involves other people. Practicality on that it would not only fuck people over who need welfare to live who don't abuse it, yet use drugs, and fuck over their families and ruin them financially for life. There's alot more complexity to that issue, but I'm off on a tangent.

[QUOTE=McMissile;31619025]I would hardly call funding a drug habbit "help"[/QUOTE] I have no problem drug testing people, but denying them funds that they need to survive as a result is ridiculous. If they test positive for addictive substances, they should be placed in a state funded rehab center so that they can actually get help. Once they get out, then they can collect aid money. But no, lets do it your way and just let them die or turn to even more illegal activity in order to fund their addiction.

[QUOTE=McMissile;31619025]Why should it matter if you're drug free? Plenty of jobs require drug tests as a part of policy. If someone is so against it, they don't need to accept welfare. I would hardly call funding a drug habbit "help"[/QUOTE] Gunfox is saying that addicts, who need help financially and for treatment, would then get none.

Welfare money is money for them to spend to keep themselves alive. If they don't buy food and necessary shit with it, they're kind of fucking themselves over more than fucking the state over aren't they?

[QUOTE=Megafanx13;31619050]As if they have any choice.[/QUOTE] Then they should stop using drugs, and take the welfare...

[QUOTE=McMissile;31619079]Then they should stop using drugs, and take the welfare...[/QUOTE] it's called addiction

[QUOTE='[Seed Eater];31618824']I want to make it clear though, Social Security does not produce a debt or deficit[/QUOTE] [quote]In 2010, total income was $781.1 billion and expenditures were $712.5 billion, which meant a total net increase in assets of $68.6 billion. Assets in 2010 were $2.6 trillion, an amount that is expected to be adequate to cover the next 10 years. In 2023, total income and interest earned on assets are projected to no longer cover expenditures for Social Security, as demographic shifts burden the system. By 2035, the ratio of potential retirees to working age persons will be 37% — there will be less than three potential income earners for every retiree in the population. [B]The trust fund would then be exhausted by 2036 without legislative action[/B][/quote]

[QUOTE=McMissile;31619079]Then they should stop using drugs, and take the welfare...[/QUOTE] You can't simply just quite an addiction. And it is possible to recreationally use drugs without using welfare money, or abusing welfare.

[QUOTE=GunFox;31619069]I have no problem drug testing people, but denying them funds that they need to survive as a result is ridiculous. If they test positive for addictive substances, they should be placed in a state funded rehab center so that they can actually get help. Once they get out, then they can collect aid money. [/QUOTE] Drug testing would either be utterly ineffective, or so expensive that it's cheaper to just subsidize their habit.