Welfare for the Rich: Republican Style

You said you wanted to change the structure of society so that charity was redundant. So like...what's that? So it's totalitarian? So it's compulsory? Force people to be charitable with the threat of a fine or jail cell?

Redundant =/= compulsory, I'm surprised I have to explain that to you.
 
Redundant =/= compulsory, I'm surprised I have to explain that to you.

It's redundant because it's compulsory. I'm surprised I have to explain that to you.
 
Contrary to what Richard said, I already did address this. And the answer is, none of you are willing to be the one who foots the bill. Why don't YOU sell that useless computer and donate the proceeds to provide up-to-code housing for Haitians?? Selfish bastard. I know you won't do it. You'll be on that computer tomorrow, and the next day, and the next, always replying to my posts and talking a bunch of talk but not actually doing anything. During which time you'll be producing 20 milligrams of greenhouse gases per second while you read my posts and type stuff back at me.

Every day you keep using that computer--every time I see another post written by you--is another admission that I'm right. Your computer doesn't feed the hungry, it doesn't provide housing for the poor. It produces nothing. It allows you to play Call of Duty, and Supreme Commander, and Tetris.

Because I only make $10,000 a year, jackass.
 
Socialism is the anti-thesis of charity.
I thought that was "theft"? There's at least one term in that sense that you don't entirely understand.

And I realise that I've provided the perfect segue for a smug little "Ah-ha-ha!", so nobody bother. You'll just look silly.
 
Yeah, it's one of the pillars of Islam for sure.
 
Aren't there churches that make you give them a percentage of your income?

I dunno. My old church didn't and it was catholic.

Nobody is forced to go to church either.
 
Can you imagine living in Old Testament times, where activist judges legislated social justice from the city gate?
 
Haha! This. Possibly trillions of dollars have been given to the investment banks (and bailouts instead of bankruptcy restructuring are a massive giveaway to banks' shareholders who should be wiped out) after decades of changing laws and regulations so the rich and powerful can become even more rich and powerful.

And all the other programs that directly benefit the poor and working classes indirectly benefit the rich in one huge (but never spoken aloud!) way: they're revolution insurance.

Cleo

Perhaps a review of French History circa 1789 is in order, or maybe American History circa 1764-1784.

Or else the machine guns will leap from this thread to the streets of ...
 
You fundamentally fail to understand what socialism is, BK.
I'd say "don't make me laugh", but that would be a lie. I did. Because I'm damn near the only guy on this entire web site who does understand socialism. Socialism is public ownership of the means of production.

And, it's BC, not BK. Unless you meant BasketKase? :)

I remember watching Comic Relief a few years ago, and one of the pieces they showed as an elderly African man getting a concrete floor in his shack. It was the first real floor he'd ever had in his life, and he was overjoyed to get it.
Yippee, tears of indifference. Now let me tell you how my family did it. The house I would come to call home my entire life was a fixer-upper. When we moved in, it was kind of a mess. We poured our own concrete. We retiled the bathrooms. We redid the living room carpet. We did it, on our own nickel. And no, we were not rich.

Here's the problem with charity. You can give somebody a concrete floor or a new car or a new house or something, but who's going to maintain it? A concrete floor will probably last forever, as far as I know, but most other things don't. When you give free soup to the hungry, you feed them once. Once the soup is eaten, nothing improves--they are still homeless and eight hours later they'll be hungry again. What you need to do is get them employed, so they can provide food (and shelter) to themselves; then they no longer depend on the government for anything. That's how you improve the human condition: people have to produce stuff. Charity doesn't.


Because I only make $10,000 a year, jackass.
Bring it, Cheeseboy.

Ten grand a year? You think that absolves you?? You make FIVE TIMES AS MUCH as the average Joe in North Korea. Compared to them, you are RICH. And a number of your compatriots have said, in this thread, "it's all relative". If that's true (I don't think it is, but a bunch of your friends in this thread do), then you have a responsibility and you are neglecting it.

Of course, that's all assuming you actually make $10,000 a year. This is the Internet, and you could be Bernie Madoff for all I know (do they give you ethernet access in prison? :D )
 
BK, according to you you are the only person who understands anything. But reading your posts... maybe you should start a poll.
 
Top Bottom