It appears the tax cuts aren't paying for themselves
Comments
-
See?BennyBeaver said:
No. Invalid question. Axe a better question and you might get an answer.RaceBannon said:
Answer the questionBennyBeaver said:
Why are you quoting me in your point when SFGbob is the one looking for someone to encourage people to live a certain way, and I'm just axing him how he proposes to do that?RaceBannon said:BennyBeaver said:
Assuming this is a valid solution to poverty (it's not) how do you implement your freedom loving strategy?SFGbob said:
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
Why do you assume it takes the government to teach people that if they are responsible they won't be living in poverty? It doesn't2001400ex said:
Instead of government intervention in welfare. You want government intervention in marriage and family values. To have all of America align their values with yours. Makes sense.SFGbob said:A government program has to be the absolute worst way to try and eliminate poverty.
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
Poverty in America today is almost solely a function of personal behavior and most social programs act as vehicles that keep people in poverty.
El oh El. -
Knocked you out of the debate. Now let's see what Bob has to offer in ideas to encourage people to live a certain way. Bob's way?RaceBannon said:
See?BennyBeaver said:
No. Invalid question. Axe a better question and you might get an answer.RaceBannon said:
Answer the questionBennyBeaver said:
Why are you quoting me in your point when SFGbob is the one looking for someone to encourage people to live a certain way, and I'm just axing him how he proposes to do that?RaceBannon said:BennyBeaver said:
Assuming this is a valid solution to poverty (it's not) how do you implement your freedom loving strategy?SFGbob said:
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
Why do you assume it takes the government to teach people that if they are responsible they won't be living in poverty? It doesn't2001400ex said:
Instead of government intervention in welfare. You want government intervention in marriage and family values. To have all of America align their values with yours. Makes sense.SFGbob said:A government program has to be the absolute worst way to try and eliminate poverty.
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
Poverty in America today is almost solely a function of personal behavior and most social programs act as vehicles that keep people in poverty.
El oh El. -
Actually I did. How do we encourage people to stop smoking? If I were to go have a beer after work and light up a cig at the bar I'd have five people in my face telling me to put it out. There is a social stigma against smoking and engaging in that behavior is greatly discouraged by society. We should do the same with out of wedlock births. The stigma against out of wedlock births existed for a reason. Do you have kids? Do you encourage them to have kids without getting married?BennyBeaver said:
1, 3, 5 are all valid ways to stay out of poverty. Agreed. But you only made point 2 in the post to which I replied. I'm sensing a little bit of a moving target.SFGbob said:
First of all tell me why it's not a valid solution to deal with poverty? Take a look at the numbers.BennyBeaver said:
Assuming this is a valid solution to poverty (it's not) how do you implement your freedom loving strategy?SFGbob said:
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
If want to ensure that people in America today don't end up living in poverty you would encourage them to do 4 simple things.
1) Don't drop out of high school.
2) Don't have kids until you're married and once you get married stay married.
3) Get a job, any fucking job and keep it and do not quit that job until you've lined up a better or equal job.
4) Don't abuse drugs and don't abuse alcohol.
Do all of these things and the odds that either you or your kids will be living in poverty are extremely fucking low.
For 2, you might as well say: don't have kids. Period. The little bloodsuckers are a drain on a wallet, married or not.
I don't doubt that there's a high number of poor, unwed mothers out here. Causation or correlation?!
But you haven't answered my question. How do you do this "encouragement" you want to do? -
You just replied with a bunch of nonsense to my answer in another post.BennyBeaver said:
Knocked you out of the debate. Now let's see what Bob has to offer in ideas to encourage people to live a certain way. Bob's way?RaceBannon said:
See?BennyBeaver said:
No. Invalid question. Axe a better question and you might get an answer.RaceBannon said:
Answer the questionBennyBeaver said:
Why are you quoting me in your point when SFGbob is the one looking for someone to encourage people to live a certain way, and I'm just axing him how he proposes to do that?RaceBannon said:BennyBeaver said:
Assuming this is a valid solution to poverty (it's not) how do you implement your freedom loving strategy?SFGbob said:
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
Why do you assume it takes the government to teach people that if they are responsible they won't be living in poverty? It doesn't2001400ex said:
Instead of government intervention in welfare. You want government intervention in marriage and family values. To have all of America align their values with yours. Makes sense.SFGbob said:A government program has to be the absolute worst way to try and eliminate poverty.
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
Poverty in America today is almost solely a function of personal behavior and most social programs act as vehicles that keep people in poverty.
El oh El.
You have nothing other than the government has to do it if there is something done.
How do you motivate anyone to do anything? Its hardly a big secret. -
You can't smoke in a bar because of government intervention. Go to a tribal casino, you see a social stigma there?SFGbob said:
Actually I did. How do we encourage people to stop smoking? If I were to go have a beer after work and light up a cig at the bar I'd have five people in my face telling me to put it out. There is a social stigma against smoking and engaging in that behavior is greatly discouraged by society. We should do the same with out of wedlock births. The stigma against out of wedlock births existed for a reason. Do you have kids? Do you encourage them to have kids without getting married?BennyBeaver said:
1, 3, 5 are all valid ways to stay out of poverty. Agreed. But you only made point 2 in the post to which I replied. I'm sensing a little bit of a moving target.SFGbob said:
First of all tell me why it's not a valid solution to deal with poverty? Take a look at the numbers.BennyBeaver said:
Assuming this is a valid solution to poverty (it's not) how do you implement your freedom loving strategy?SFGbob said:
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
If want to ensure that people in America today don't end up living in poverty you would encourage them to do 4 simple things.
1) Don't drop out of high school.
2) Don't have kids until you're married and once you get married stay married.
3) Get a job, any fucking job and keep it and do not quit that job until you've lined up a better or equal job.
4) Don't abuse drugs and don't abuse alcohol.
Do all of these things and the odds that either you or your kids will be living in poverty are extremely fucking low.
For 2, you might as well say: don't have kids. Period. The little bloodsuckers are a drain on a wallet, married or not.
I don't doubt that there's a high number of poor, unwed mothers out here. Causation or correlation?!
But you haven't answered my question. How do you do this "encouragement" you want to do? -
Btw, the target wasn't moving and if you only did the one about getting married before having kids you'd still reduce the odds of you and your kids living in poverty. But that list of actions has been part of my pet issues for 25 years.BennyBeaver said:
1, 3, 5 are all valid ways to stay out of poverty. Agreed. But you only made point 2 in the post to which I replied. I'm sensing a little bit of a moving target.SFGbob said:
First of all tell me why it's not a valid solution to deal with poverty? Take a look at the numbers.BennyBeaver said:
Assuming this is a valid solution to poverty (it's not) how do you implement your freedom loving strategy?SFGbob said:
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
If want to ensure that people in America today don't end up living in poverty you would encourage them to do 4 simple things.
1) Don't drop out of high school.
2) Don't have kids until you're married and once you get married stay married.
3) Get a job, any fucking job and keep it and do not quit that job until you've lined up a better or equal job.
4) Don't abuse drugs and don't abuse alcohol.
Do all of these things and the odds that either you or your kids will be living in poverty are extremely fucking low.
For 2, you might as well say: don't have kids. Period. The little bloodsuckers are a drain on a wallet, married or not.
I don't doubt that there's a high number of poor, unwed mothers out here. Causation or correlation?!
But you haven't answered my question. How do you do this "encouragement" you want to do? -
Another way that you could discourage out of wedlock births is to stop subsidizing them.
-
You still don't have an answer how to promote marriage and out of wedlock births without government intervention.SFGbob said:Another way that you could discourage out of wedlock births is to stop subsidizing them.
-
Please produce the proof about your second sentence and I'll leave HH forever.RaceBannon said:
You just replied with a bunch of nonsense to my answer in another post.BennyBeaver said:
Knocked you out of the debate. Now let's see what Bob has to offer in ideas to encourage people to live a certain way. Bob's way?RaceBannon said:
See?BennyBeaver said:
No. Invalid question. Axe a better question and you might get an answer.RaceBannon said:
Answer the questionBennyBeaver said:
Why are you quoting me in your point when SFGbob is the one looking for someone to encourage people to live a certain way, and I'm just axing him how he proposes to do that?RaceBannon said:BennyBeaver said:
Assuming this is a valid solution to poverty (it's not) how do you implement your freedom loving strategy?SFGbob said:
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
Why do you assume it takes the government to teach people that if they are responsible they won't be living in poverty? It doesn't2001400ex said:
Instead of government intervention in welfare. You want government intervention in marriage and family values. To have all of America align their values with yours. Makes sense.SFGbob said:A government program has to be the absolute worst way to try and eliminate poverty.
If you really want to do something that will keep people from living in poverty in America today, you'd encourage people to get married before they have kids and then after they are married stay married.
Poverty in America today is almost solely a function of personal behavior and most social programs act as vehicles that keep people in poverty.
El oh El.
You have nothing other than the government has to do it if there is something done.
How do you motivate anyone to do anything? Its hardly a big secret.
