Derby Trail Forums

Go Back   Derby Trail Forums > The Steve Dellinger Discourse Den
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 10-07-2010, 11:42 AM
Coach Pants
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dalakhani View Post
I think its a great topic Randall and I really don't have a position one way or the other although I think that government is opening up pandora's box when it goes this deeply into regulating what food stamps can buy. The items that are currently prohibited are clearly defined and really no logical debate can be made. But this soda thing? Where do you draw the line? Are sodas bad but fried chicken is okay?? What comes next?
Well they are regulating just about every profession known to man. But when the deadbeats and retards fall under regulation all of the weak-kneed liberals strongly object to it.

They should let all of the weak people starve to death. 41 million Americans on food stamps and the majority of them don't give a f.uck what's going on in this country. All they care about is getting that check at the first of the month and their god-damned food stamps. And they are out-breeding the middle-class and rich at an alarming rate. It's not sustainable.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 10-16-2010, 03:50 PM
SCUDSBROTHER's Avatar
SCUDSBROTHER SCUDSBROTHER is offline
Flemington
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: L.A.
Posts: 11,326
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Pants View Post
Well they are regulating just about every profession known to man. But when the deadbeats and retards fall under regulation all of the weak-kneed liberals strongly object to it.

They should let all of the weak people starve to death. 41 million Americans on food stamps and the majority of them don't give a f.uck what's going on in this country. All they care about is getting that check at the first of the month and their god-damned food stamps. And they are out-breeding the middle-class and rich at an alarming rate. It's not sustainable.
While I don't hate them, or want any human being to starve, I do think we should pay poor people to not have children. Right now, we pay them after they have children. Pretty stupid. I guess the problem would be people remaining poor so they could get paid to not have kids. That's still a much easier problem to manage than the one we have. See, I believe in Gov't actually trying to make a better society for all. Seems like most Liberals just want to give out money, and not make sure it's well managed (to obtain important favorable results.) I want to spend money in a way that results in us having to spend less money in the future. Don't get me wrong, nobody should be kept from having kids, but there should be incentives encouraging poor people to refrain from having kids they'll struggle to provide for. Lets say a poor woman has a kid (even though she would have been paid not do.) You know what happens next? She needs help. Where should that come from? Her sister's check (for not having babies while poor.) Watch this video. Keep track of the guy's constant message: 2 for 1..2 for 1..incentivize..incentivize....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VtYdDK1uTDI

Last edited by SCUDSBROTHER : 10-16-2010 at 04:08 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.