We need them. Specifically, we need them to apply "means testing" prior to handing out 'government benefits' to the moocher class.
Click here, look at the photo, and come back for my commentary.
I have a TV half that size. I got it third-hand and the $6 universal remote put the total outlay for the set up to $16. This woman probably bought it new, and is probably not watching VHS tapes on it, either. If you have a $50/month phone bill, a $90/month cable package, smoke a $5 pack of cigarrettes every two days, and are whinging about how hard it is to get the State to pay to heat the home in which you OBVIOUSLY CAN live with only one heated room, tough cookies. Get over yourself, and out of my pocketbook, freeloader.
Means testing: a good idea until we can get both that AND a law prohibiting voting in the same 12 month period as the receipt of any government aid.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
I don't want to be disagreeable, but in this case I find I have to be because I do disagree with you. I don't think we need more people administering charity that the government shouldn't be doling out anyway. Government does not belong in the business of charity. All they do is muck it up. When charity was left in the hands of the private sector in was handed out with an eye toward discouraging bad behavior. The current government system of charity not only encourages bad behavior, it absolutely discourages good behavior and self-reliance. Which is how we have the photograph you pointed out, and a homeless man who made the news because he is so busy advocating to his 4,000 Facebook followers about the need for more services that he hasn't time to work, and the woman who went on welfare as an unwed teenage mother, went through law school on the public and now uses her degree to advocate for more services. Some of which she still uses as the advocacy work is pro bono, therefore she can't afford her lifestyle without public assistance.
Katia
Well, gee, don't you know that folks can't live without a humongous television that pipes in drool-inducing, brain-rotting programming twenty-four hours?
(Says the person with a 19" CRT which, despite taking up more space than a new set, was paid for several years ago and still works just fine.)
K, you and I do not disagree. It is an unfortunate political reality that we will be unable to shed the current parasite class from the government's teat any time soon. If we can't shake them loose to depend on private charity (or nothing), at least let's have SOME controls over who "needs" our money.
By the way, as we have kicked God out of our government schools, it would surprise me a little if private charity would pick up the slack if Uncle Sam stopped doling out welfare checks.
sarahandmom, I used to have a 19" CRT . . . I got it from someone else's trash and repaired it. I upgraded to a 21" that cost $5 and then to a free 17" LCD (to save desk space thereby pleasing my Darling Wife). That poor, cold lady's TV well might be third-hand and barely-functional . . . and maybe they use the X-Box for watching old DVDs. And maybe the sun didn't rise today, but I doubt it.
Post a Comment