I see. So there is a difference between 'poor' and 'poverty stricken'?

What is the yearly income that differentiates betwen the two?



At what point is one considered 'rich'?

Rebellion. You say neglecting the kids isn't you plan. And maybe it isn't, but you actually need to post what you'd like to see done. For now it looks like you figure the kids should just starve.

Sort of the same deal for Justabubba. If you aren't for just giving a straight up handout what preciesly are you for?

poor is a condition of not having any wealth, leverage, or power! And rich is what you would like to be one day, but most likely will not be!

Don't bother thankin me, I'm just glad I could help!

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.

Alright things are trickey with a fiat currency and I'm not an expert on the details. But simply lowering the value of the dollar doesn't necessarily help unless it was previously overvalued.

Put in more simple terms at a fundamental level you'd be competing with people in China (or other countries) who live in conditions far worse than our poverty. You don't want to try and get into a race to the bottom with these people. You will not "win".

If food prices go up Ethonol may go out of vogue. Though I'm not sure how much the Ethanol movement is based on the environment vs "We'd rather pay twice as much for fuel if the money is going to our people instead of Iran".


Improving the pay of jobs, I think, would require our country to try and take more of a lions share of more skills based and educated jobs. Of course we'll still have crap jobs. Burgers need to be flipped and such. But we won't solve things by simply adding more of them.

Education is key to that. Which again is why I like the probably too expensive boarding school option to try and break the cycle of underacheivement and underaged pregnancy.

Ah, so you really don't have anything to add to this conversation.


Got it.

should we attribute that to home schooling?

reb, like you, ignored the consequences of the children and indicated Jesus "would force them to work for their money. Just like occured when he walked the earth". that comment, expressing a willingness to neglect the least among us, caused me to recall the times i attended church amonst those who would profess to be Christian while in the presence of the congregation only to act inconsistent with the principles of their faith once they left the premises

__________________
i think sex is better than logic, but I can't prove it
"The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free and good men die like dogs every day.
And there's also a bad side."
-- Hunter S. Thompson

I already said they should work. If they are physically able and on welfare they should perform work for the government. That doesn't result in starving kids. I never said completely ditch welfare. It is necessary.

Buck...Jesus was a carpenter.

__________________
All you need to know about the energy crisis:
ANWR Exploration Republicans: 91% Supported. Democrats: 86% Opposed.
Coal-to-liquid R's: 90% YES. D's: 78% NO.
Oil Shale Exploration R's: 90% YES. D's: 86% NO.
Outer Continental Shelf Exploration R's: 81% YES. D's: 83% NO.
Increased Refinery Capacity R's: 97% YES. D's: 96% NO

SUMMARY: 91% of House Republicans have historically voted to increase the production of America’s own oil and gas. 86% of House Democrats have historically voted against.

Sounds like welfare under the guise of govt employment, almost new dealish. Hard working tax payers would still be footing the bill.

IMHO govt should get out of the business of welfare and leave it to private organizations who would probably receive greater donations if the taxes that subsidize welfare and other unnecessary govt functions we're removed.

__________________

I would rather see my money teaching these people that can work, and have a desire to better themselves a better skill so they can get out and be productive in society. A type of welfare is still needed. We do need to help out those that can not help themselves. But simply throwing money away on the lazy is about stupid.

I know that lazy people have kids, and cutting them off would put the kids at risk. So if you are a dead beat parent, then the kids would obviously be better off someplace else. But that too costs money.

__________________
Someone hijacked my sig again.

Sad a man with skills living off of women?

__________________
There are only two things wrong with this great nation of ours, democrats and republicans!

Not necessarily in that order.