Youtube: "Gang-bangin, Kansas City Style"

[Maitre D]

unless we are now shifting this discussion to abolishing taxes completely, i think it's fair to call the funds "govt funds."  if saying "taxpayer funds" makes you happy, then that's fine.  i have no problem earmarking a small portion of my income to go to people who need help, even if that means an even smaller portion is being channeled to people who are irresponsible. 

And there is nothing wrong with thinking that way.  I just take umbrage with the notion that it's 'govt funds' when it is anything but. 

Like you, I am willing to subsidize certain things, albeit far fewer than you obviously.  All I ask for is a commitment in exchange for it.  If you give your kid a new car, you expect he won't get DUI's or smash it.  Right?

[Mhudson]

I'm not going to get into the deep conversation, but what bugs me most is when people say "a gangsta from Kansas", making fun of them.  When you really think about it, for the most part any major city is in a reasonably unexciting state.  You can make the same argument about "Illinois gangstas" living in Chicago.  The truth is, any urban area is going to have "real gangsters", despite what state or location its in.

[KCMax]

And there is nothing wrong with thinking that way.  I just take umbrage with the notion that it's 'govt funds' when it is anything but. 

Like you, I am willing to subsidize certain things, albeit far fewer than you obviously.  All I ask for is a commitment in exchange for it.  If you give your kid a new car, you expect he won't get DUI's or smash it.  Right?

I have no problem asking more out of our welfare recipients, and I think a majority of Americans would probably agree with me. But I think they would also agree with me that sterilization is beyond the pale.

[KC0KEK]

Why not just kill everyone on welfare? Wouldn't that solve Nota/KCOKEK problems with everyone stealing their money?

Makes more sense than sterilization and really solves the problem. If they have kids, we should kill them too - lest they go KCOKEK's precious money.

You're the one proposing that extreme, not us. And remember, you can always give more of your money.

[chrizow]

Like you, I am willing to subsidize certain things, albeit far fewer than you obviously.  All I ask for is a commitment in exchange for it.  If you give your kid a new car, you expect he won't get DUI's or smash it.  Right?

absolutely.  as i've repeatedly stated, i support limitations on assistance that requires people to find work (if they are able to), go to substance abuse counseling, go to school, etc.  those are entirely reasonable.  what isn't reasonable is sterilizing people.

i'm sure some or all of the nitwits in that YouTube video (a) are the product of irresponsible couplings, and (b) engage in such couplings themselves.  rather than sterilizing those people, why don't we attempt to address why they see no other option but to sell drugs on the street?  obviously that's an incredibly complex question with no perfect answer, but mandatory sterilization for people is some apocalyptic shit.

as a single person with a substantial income, i pay a shitload in taxes.  i accept the need for taxes and, like most people, i want the govt to spend it as efficiently as a massive bureaucracy ever could.  helping people through hard times is, to me, exactly the sort of thing i want my taxes to go to.  sure, inefficiencies in the system result in abuses, and we should address those, but if we started sterilizing people in the interest of "responsibility" and "fiscal health" then that's when i know america is doomed.

[nota]

poor people, criminals, irresponsible people, stupid people, mentally ill people, etc. have been part of every society and always will be.  we need to be able to deal with these people compassionately and not with the iron fist of fascism.  no amount of fiscal savings is worth invading people's bodies in such an invasive way.  hell, why don't we just execute people who go on welfare, that would be a lot easier and less costly?

you think the us government destroying their reproductive organs is going to make them "carry their weight?"

I don't have time right now, but you are wiggin' out over things you imagine I've said.

One more time-If you are on welfare for whatever reason, the only way you will get that second baby paid for is sterilization.

I'm not talking about the general run of the mill welfare people.

Let's keep the discussion on track. Ronald Reagan's term is waaaay in the past. What's the point of throwing that out?

That said, what effective solutions do you have?

[LenexatoKCMO]

unless we are now shifting this discussion to abolishing taxes completely,

Hallelujah!

[Maitre D]

as a single person with a substantial income, i pay a shitload in taxes. 

I did read your post, but I just saw this and wanted to ask you what your income is?

[KC0KEK]

why don't we attempt to address why they see no other option but to sell drugs on the street? 

We've been "attempting" for decades now. The You Tube video shows some of the results.

[chrizow]

That said, what effective solutions do you have?

shoot me in the face. 

Hallelujah!

indeed.  we're taking up collections to build roads, fund a military, educate children, etc. at the door.  please give what you can!

I did read your post, but I just saw this and wanted to ask you what your income is?

do you really think i'm going to publish my income on this board? 

[nota]

  i find it pretty amazing that the answer to our burgeoning lower class is to make their situations even MORE shitty.     

So, what would you suggest as a solution?

[LenexatoKCMO]

indeed.  we're taking up collections to build roads, fund a military, educate children, etc. at the door.  please give what you can!

A libertarian's utopian paradise - toll roads, private schools, and no more wars for oil - The good live, if you will.   Sign me up!

[chrizow]

So, what would you suggest as a solution?

to recap what i've said repeatedly in this thread:  continue providing government assistance to families who need it, with reasonable limitations and progress requirements. 

beyond that, make the education system the best it can, get mental health and substance abuse counseling to those who need it, shore up the foster care/adoption system, address institutionalized inequalities based on class/race/etc., legalize drugs to eradicate the illegal drug trade that has resulted in millions of gratuitous incarcerations, etc. etc. etc.

[KCMax]

We could enforce the law we currently have. If KCE0K is right, and only 19% of Missouri welfare recipients are working or looking for work, then that's a violation of the federal law and they're in jeopardy of losing federal funding.

[KC0KEK]

We could enforce the law we currently have. If KCE0K is right, and only 19% of Missouri welfare recipients are working or looking for work, then that's a violation of the federal law and they're in jeopardy of losing federal funding.

The 19% figure was pretty widely reported a few months ago, when the report came out. Here's one source: http://www.newstribune.com/articles/200 ... elfare.txt.

[bahua]

How is it ethical and humane to allow this situation to persist

I absolutely agree that it's not humane to allow the situation to persist, but it isn't clear that removing people's reproductive capabilities will eliminate, or even reduce the situation. Seems to me that all it could cause is revolution.

[nota]

shoot me in the face.   :lol:

So you have no alternative solution, but you think this is a joking matter?

[KC0KEK]

If they cannot reproduce, they literally cannot add to this problem.

[chrizow]

So you have no alternative solution, but you think this is a joking matter?

have you literally not read my response to your request for alternative solutions?  i've been stating ideas throughout this entire discussion.  then you come back and ask "so do you have a better idea?"  this exchange is why i want to be shot in the face.  it's like you keep going back in time.  my "solution" is to keep paying money to people who need it while simultaneously trying to reduce the ability for people to abuse the system.  i also advocate expanding programs for education, mental health, substance abuse, and other issues that get at the root cause of abject poverty and bad choices.  not a perfect solution, but more compassionate.

to recap what i've said repeatedly in this thread:  continue providing government assistance to families who need it, with reasonable limitations and progress requirements. 

beyond that, make the education system the best it can, get mental health and substance abuse counseling to those who need it, shore up the foster care/adoption system, address institutionalized inequalities based on class/race/etc., legalize drugs to eradicate the illegal drug trade that has resulted in millions of gratuitous incarcerations, etc. etc. etc.

absolutely.  as i've repeatedly stated, i support limitations on assistance that requires people to find work (if they are able to), go to substance abuse counseling, go to school, etc.  those are entirely reasonable.  what isn't reasonable is sterilizing people.

i'm sure some or all of the nitwits in that YouTube video (a) are the product of irresponsible couplings, and (b) engage in such couplings themselves.  rather than sterilizing those people, why don't we attempt to address why they see no other option but to sell drugs on the street?  obviously that's an incredibly complex question with no perfect answer...

i have no problem earmarking a small portion of my income to go to people who need help, even if that means an even smaller portion is being channeled to people who are irresponsible.  i don't come from anything near poverty but my parents do/did and i think it's great that my mom and other responsible people who fall in hard times have access to funds to help get them back on their feet. 

money and fiscal efficiency is important, but it's not worth sacrificing our basic humanity.  as i've repeatedly said, let's try to fix the system, but for the government to perform involuntary surgery on american citizens is remarkably fucked up - way more fucked up than an abused welfare system.

discussion?  how about the rest of my posts?  can you read? 

the alternative is to somehow weed out the folks who abuse and milk the system from the good people who honestly need assistance from time to time.  i'm not a public policy expert so i don't know how to do that.  however, i am perfectly willing to accept the downsides of  "subsidize the irresponsible" if it means millions of honest people can provide for their families.  it will never be a perfect system. 
....
i'm with you on fixing the system.  i just think sterilizing people is an abominable, unconstitutional, cruel way to go about it, particularly since lots of these people are totally fine. 

temporarily meaning a few months or a few years while someone tries to improve their situation, like my mother.

i agree that we need to wring out all abuses and inefficiencies in our bureaucracy.  that is reasonable and a far cry from sterilizing people.  there are lots of good, responsible people out there who go on govt assistance for some period of time, and to punish them in such a cruel and severe manner due to the abuses of others is the epitome of heartless. 

i don't doubt that family assistance payouts are frequently "subsidizing the irresponsible," but i think you need to acknowledge that a lot of "responsible" folks need that assistance from time to time.  if we're going to pursue an economic system that necessarily churns people out and creates monumental disparities in wealth, we need to be able to accept the fact that some of the fallout of that system will result in spending some of the fruits of that prosperity for hard working good folks who need a break. 

[nota]

have you literally not read my response to your request for alternative solutions?  i've been stating ideas throughout this entire discussion.  then you come back and ask "so do you have a better idea?"  this exchange is why i want to be shot in the face.  it's like you keep going back in time. 

Yeah, I've read all your standard stuff. But if we keep doing things the way we always have done, we're going to get the same old results we always have gotten. Which is nothing except to escalate the problems.