Why do leftists always invoke 'starving children' when talking about welfare?

How much of a problem do you have with Hoover Dam or the Fed?

 

We can't "prove" something like that. We can only lack evidence that children have been starving. At present, there is a distinct lack of evidence of starvation occurring within the US at any point in its history. Have some people starved since the inception of our country? I'm sure SOME have, but the circumstances would have to be very extreme and infrequent. Instances of starvation due to public or private neglect, however, are basically nonexistent, unless, of course, you have some evidence to the contrary?

 

In my opinion, there is no Constitutional basis to deny or disparage our privileges and immunities if there is no real time of war as indicated by Tax rates on the wealthiest; therefore, any public policies should be required to achieve their intended effect through eminent domain.

 

In other words, in a city of millions, 20 people starved, and under what circumstances they starved, we have no idea. Hardly compelling evidence.

 

Hell no. There are tons of private charities that provide relief to all manner of unfortunates. I see bums in Chicago living off of the charity of complete strangers all the time. You literally don't have to do anything except ask for money in this country and you will get fed. You think I'm lying? Go to ANY big city in the country and ask for change. See if you can't eat three meals a day.

 

Permanent "demand side" economics is unsustainable. Eternal Public Works projects funded by the FRB's debt saddled loans and the Treasury Departments printing presses would ultimately eviscerate the purchasing power of our currency.

so, to provide a "national income" that Richard Cloward and Francis Fox Piven assert(ed) would "eliminate poverty", you're stuck with either state ownership over means of production,
or economic fascism ("centrally planned capitalism" / "corporatism")

you cannot support either, while at the same time claiming to support the US Constitution, or individual natural rights and liberty.

but you know that.

 

In my opinion, there is no basis to deny or disparage panhandling if simple poverty isn't eliminated through "eminent domain" by correcting for the inefficiency of a natural rate of unemployment under any form of capitalism.

 

Why do leftists always invoke 'starving children' when talking about welfare?

OK. Why do the Greedy Old Perverts always act in ways that harm families with children?

 

A thought that occured to me.

You conclusion is that because we have no starving children that food programs aren't necessary.

What is idiotic about that mindset is that those food programs may be the the reason that we don't have 'starving' children- though we still have hungry children.

- - - Updated - - -

A thought that occured to me.

You conclusion is that because we have no starving children that food programs aren't necessary.

What is idiotic about that mindset is that those food programs may be the the reason that we don't have 'starving' children- though we still have hungry children.

 

They use children for everything, its a mantra.

- - - Updated - - -

They use children for everything, its a mantra.

 

Around 16 million American children do not get enough food to eat.
Also America's present children will not live as long as their parents, because of food issues.

How can we make republican men care about hungry children, as much as they care about low tax rates for the rich, and as much as they care about ending regulations for large corporations?

 

Why does the Right lay any claim to morals if they are immoral enough to not have any anti-hypocrisy laws "lest hypocrites rule over us and ensnare us"?

 

Where are the parents of those children? How do you get Democrats to actually start talking about the root causes of these problems instead blindly tossing money around and making sure people get driven to the polls in Nov? What a novel concept....instead of having a culture of dependancy we actually solve problems instead of throwing out numbers so we can all feel good about ourselves.

As I said in another thread, Democrats are great for legislation that makes people feel wonderful but it does not do (*)(*)(*)(*) to solve the actual problems.

 

In my opinion, the root causes of our modern social dilemmas result from the "immorality" of bearing false witness to our own laws.

 

WTF? Anti-hypocrisy laws??? The current DC freak-show better hope there's never any hypocrisy laws. They'd all be in prison for life.

 

Would we be worse off, with "Under God" in our pledge?

 

You better look at the early years of the depression again, there was starvation and severe malnutrition . Many boys who had been children during that period were not fit for the draft (over 30%) when WWII broke out as a result.

 

I believe wartime tax rates on the wealthiest during real times of war is a simple metric in our objective and market based reality, for the electorate of the United States.

 

Its strange isn't it, to hear a liberal talk about starving children one begins to think if they entered a 'poor' neighborhood they would feel as if they were in 90's Somalia or something, oh wait, Obama's only had one term, perhaps they're just keying in for the future...

 

Wartime taxes on the wealthy only work if there is a draft. Its the compromise that works, the taxation is their sacrifice, the draft is the sacrifice for everyone else, crappy as it is, its quasi-fair...

 

In other words, it could be claimed that we are not in a real time of war if there is no wartime tax rates on the wealthiest or a draft; and therefore, don't need any legislation that denies or disparages our privileges and immunities due to only an allegation of war.

 

We aren't in any real wars, those only exist when Congress declares them. We never need legislation that limits our rights or in anyway ever diminishes what our Founders' envisioned for us. They gave us the apparatus to fix whatever errors they may have made and anything that limits us from their intentions should always be rectified by Constitutional amendments...

 

Sounds good to me, but I still prefer wartime tax rates as an objective and market based metric in our political-economy that is simple for the electorate of the United States to base "executive" decisions on.

 

I would need the formal declaration from Congress, then I'd agree that there is an implied consent in which the people must sacrifice for the war effort, but if there is no draft that taxation must be spread across the board to all Americans...