Marxism

I get lots in exchange.I get a safer society, knowing that my poor neighbors' basic needs are taken care of, so that they won't need to resort to stealing to survive.I get a healthier economy, because my poor neighbors are able to continue to contribute by buying goods and services, instead of being homeless on the street.I get a cleaner society, because my poor neighbors don't have to live on the street.I get the assurance that, if I stumble and fall like my poor neighbor did, I too will have the social safety net of welfare so that I can build myself back up and remain a productive member of society.And I get the moral satisfaction that I, even if only partially, am responsible for helping the most needy and desperate avoid the pain, despair, and humiliation of homelessness and ruin.Honestly, Faith, I get quite a bit out of welfare, even if I'm not the one getting the checks.

Sure you have, Faith. Repeatedly. This is you:

• Money that is taxed and used to pay the police is okay.
  ​
• Money that is taxed and used to pay the poor and indigent is stealing.

--PercyEdited by Percy, : Grammar.

That is not about HOW IT IS USED, it is about the fact that money that goes to PAY for something government does for the PAYER, is NOT STEALING.YOu are truly an idiot, Percy. All of you are.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

So now you're saying that what the money goes to pay for is not the same thing as how it is used?I think your problem is with simple English. We're just incredulously watching someone spontaneously self-destruct emotionally before our very eyes.--Percy

IF YOU PAY FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES YOU ARE PAYING FOR SOMETHING YOU GET, A GOVERNMENT AND ITS SERVICES. YOU KNOW, LIKE PAYING YOUR RENT. YOU PAY FOR THE RIGHT TO LIVE IN YOUR PLACE, OR BUYING A HOUSE -- YOU PAY FOR THE HOUSE.

​

PAYING FOR SOMETHING IS DIFFERENT FROM GIVING YOUR MONEY TO SOMEONE WHERE YOU DON'T EXPECT SOMETHING IN EXCHANGE.

​

STEALING IS WHERE SOMEONE TAKES YOUR MONEY FROM YOU AND GIVES YOU NOTHING IN EXCHANGE.

​

THAT IS WHAT THE GOVERNMENT IS DOING BY MEANS OF AN IMMORAL LAW BY TAXING US TO GIVE IT AWAY WITHOUT GIVING US ANYTHING BACK FOR IT.

​

YOU KNOW, LIKE WHEN YOU PAY FOR SOMETHING YOU GET. WE GET NOTHING BACK WHEN WE ARE TAXED FOR WELFARE

​

IN PRINCIPLE PAYING FOR THE RUNNING OF GOVERNMENT AND ITS SERVICES TO THE CITIZENS IS NOT STEALING BECAUSE IT'S PAYING FOR SOMETHING YOU GET, LIKE AN OPERATING GOVERNMENT AND A POLICE FORCE AND A MILITARY AND SO ONEdited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

I get lots in exchange.I get a safer society, knowing that my poor neighbors' basic needs are taken care of, so that they won't need to resort to stealing to survive.I get a healthier economy, because my poor neighbors are able to continue to contribute by buying goods and services, instead of being homeless on the street.I get a cleaner society, because my poor neighbors don't have to live on the street.I get the assurance that, if I stumble and fall like my poor neighbor did, I too will have the social safety net of welfare so that I can build myself back up and remain a productive member of society.And I get the moral satisfaction that I, even if only partially, am responsible for helping the most needy and desperate avoid the pain, despair, and humiliation of homelessness and ruin.Honestly, Faith, I get quite a bit out of welfare, even if I'm not the one getting the checks.

UTTERLY DIFFERENT CONCEPT. NOT THE SAME AS PAYING FOR GOVERNMENT SERVICES. IT'S STILL STEALING BECAUSE THERE IS NO DIRECT EXCHANGE YOU ARE PAYING FOR.

Not only are you a liar, but everyone reading this thread knows, for certain, without any doubt, that you are a liar.

But we do expect something in exchange for welfare:a. US citizen or legal resident w/ SSN
b. work requirements i.e. applying for jobs, etc (per state requirements)
c. educational requirements i.e. going to college, etc (per state requirements)etc.Do I think the welfare system get abused. Of course. But I look at the benefits (getting people to a point where they can sustain themselves) vs the costs (people abusing the system) and the benefits more times than naught outweighs the costs.BTW, TYPING IN BOLD AND ALL CAPITOL LETTERS DOES NOTHING TO GET YOUR POINT ACROSS, IT JUST MAKES YOU LOOK IMMATURE, IRRATIONAL AND HAVE NO CONTROL OVER YOUR EMOTIONS.Hope this helps.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.Edited by DevilsAdvocate, : No reason given.

---

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

So all these million dollars we pay to countries in Africa like Ugaunda to help reduce the number of people dying of AIDS and maltruition including tens of millions of children, according to your philosophy we should cut this monetary aid off since there is no direct exchange of services involved. Correct?Literaly, tens of millions of innocent children and adults will die as a result of your worldview.Thank God you don't run the country.

---

One of the saddest lessons of history is this: If we've been bamboozled long enough, we tend to reject any evidence of the bamboozle. We're no longer interested in finding out the truth. The bamboozle has captured us. It is simply too painful to acknowledge -- even to ourselves -- that we've been so credulous. - Carl Sagan, The Fine Art of Baloney Detection"You can't convince a believer of anything; for their belief is not based on evidence, it's based on a deep seated need to believe." - Carl Sagan"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring." - Carl Sagan, The Demon-Haunted World

What's the opposite of the idiom "speak for yourself"? You do get something. You get welfare.I don't.Yet you denounce it as theft, and I don't.

Well, no, I do not know that. I believe that Faith has been quite straightforward and honest in this thread.To me, a liar is somebody who intentionally makes false statement for the purpose of deceiving. And I do not believe that describes what Faith has been doing.I do see her posts as being confused and self-contradictory. But this is not deception, if she is simply presenting the confused and self-contradictory nature of her own thoughts.And a note to Faith: I am sure that I pay a lot more in taxes than you do. And sure, it hurts to pay those taxes. But I still consider that my civic duty, and not any form of stealing.It hurt a lot when I knew that those taxes were being used for an immoral unjust and unnecessary war in Iraq. However, if some of my taxes are now being used to provide you with some of the support you need, I am glad of that. It is far better to help those of our own citizens who are in need, than to use the tax money to kill innocent Iraqis.

See, another example of how everyone here thinks in terms of what the money is going for, and deciding that it can't be stealing because it's going for a good thing.This is what YOU all do. I have not defined stealing by what the money goes for.I've only said that it is to be distinguished from paying for something that is done for us.

No.It's not stealing because it's not unlawfully depriving someone of their property, which is what stealing means.

Really?I thought we were talking about welfare? That's what I was talking about. That was what you said you were talking about.What's the different concept? There's no direct exchange for police and fire protection, either.Didn't you say that the difference between moral theft (if not legal theft) and "legitimate" government services was when the government used public tax dollars to support an individual when that individual cannot support themselves, as opposed to using those tax dollars to benefit society as a whole?What I;m trying to point out to you, Faith, is that government assistance for the poor in the form of welfare does directly and significantly benefit society as a whole by helping the individuals. Edited by Rahvin, : No reason given.