General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsWords are failing. . .
This showed up on my facebook page. It's probably one of the most inane things I've ever had the misfortune to read. That said, how do I possibly respond to it in a fashion that's comprehensible to the person who posted the thing? Ye gods.
-
Honeycombe8
(37,648 posts)Turbineguy
(37,324 posts)they will learn to love it!
Tuesday Afternoon
(56,912 posts)poverty created welfare NOT the other way around.
what a piss poor load of crap.
liberal N proud
(60,334 posts)They get pissed off that someone is getting something.
Enrique
(27,461 posts)more than 10 years after it was mostly eliminated.
rustydog
(9,186 posts)They get billions in incentives and they rspond to those by attacking the poor.
Tsiyu
(18,186 posts)"Cut taxes for the wealthy, so they can hoard more cash and send us further into the poverty hole...I mean...so that they'll create jobs. Yeah. That's it!"
jtuck004
(15,882 posts)hay rick
(7,611 posts)Worst-case scenario: you learn something about the power of prayer.
HughBeaumont
(24,461 posts). . . . the only people who can make rhyme or reason out of the assertion that the working/unemployed poor will be "motivated by lower wages to work harder and harder and maybe get a second job so they can get out of their bad situation", while at the same time stating "If you raised taxes on the rich, why should they be motivated to reinvest in their businesses and create more jobs if the gubmint's just going to take their hard-earned wealth!?".
RedStateLiberal
(1,374 posts)If you pay people to stay rich,
then more people will stay poor.
Corporations are people who respond to incentives.
And that's why corporate welfare increases affluence -
it literally pays people to stay above the middle class.
SHARE if you think we should focus on
growing the middle class and not just
making affluence more "comfortable".