Politics US Edition (2021!)

[Guest]

Just now, Gfted1 said:

Bummer! Im poor too but somehow Im on my third house ownership, and I plan to leave it to my kid when I retire to Mexico.

Yep. Some people make it out via a combination of luck and hard work. Kudos to you

[Guard Dog]

1 minute ago, Achilles said:

Yep. Some people make it out via a combination of luck and hard work. Kudos to you

That is about the size of it. But I do think the people who succeeded do not owe apologies to the ones who didn’t.

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

I believe snap allows $20 per day. I know EBT does but I don’t know what the limit is

https://firstquarterfinance.com/ebt-cash-back-rules/

Not sure how credible the source is, but it was the top search result when I looked

[Amentep]

7 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

I believe snap allows $20 per day. I know EBT does but I don’t know what the limit is

I'm pretty sure Achilles is right, that you can only get cash back if you are eligible for cash back through your assistance qualification.  As I understand this, this is a transformation of a program called the 'Cash Assistance program', which used to send a check to the recipient.  Now the EBT card can have SNAP benifits (only accessed by retailers who take SNAP and for products SNAP allows) or they can have the Cash Assistance program (or both) in which case they can get Cash Back or use the ATMs from their 'Cash Assistance program' money.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, Guard Dog said:

That is about the size of it. But I do think the people who succeeded do not owe apologies to the ones who didn’t.

I don't think those that get lucky owe apologies to those that don't either.

I do think there's a case to be made that those who do make it out *should* have enough self-awareness not to **** on those that don't and, when able, probably have some sort of obligation to help those that weren't as lucky as they were.

Kant and Rawls probably have words worth reading the subject

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

I don't think people who don't succeed owe any apology or consideration for doing whatever they need to do to survive or thrive.

[Guard Dog]

3 minutes ago, Achilles said:

I don't think those that get lucky owe apologies to those that don't either.

I do think there's a case to be made that those who do make it out *should* have enough self-awareness not to **** on those that don't and, when able, probably have some sort of obligation to help those that weren't as lucky as they were.

Kant and Rawls probably have words worth reading the subject

Oh I certainly agree with that. There are a number of charities I’m very fond of that I support regularly with a pretty decent amount of my present income. And of course I pay the taxes that fund the programs that supposed to help these people in need. How will they do that and whether or not they could be done better is certainly open for discussion. But there’s absolutely no virtue in paying taxes it’s something you have to do. Virtue comes from doing the things you don’t have to do like charity work.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, KaineParker said:

I don't think people who don't succeed owe any apology or consideration for doing whatever they need to do to survive or thrive.

Agreed. It's easy to judge if you've never been there.

[Guard Dog]

2 minutes ago, KaineParker said:

I don't think people who don't succeed owe any apology or consideration for doing whatever they need to do to survive or thrive.

I would agree with that too. Only I would draw the line at killing people and stealing things.

[Hurlshort]

1 hour ago, Darkpriest said:

Stop helping people to make irresponsible decisions. Eventually people will learn not to make irresponsible decisions if there is a high risk of high personal cost and loss. 

 

What in human history makes you think large groups of humans will make responsible decisions? 

[213374U]

52 minutes ago, Darkpriest said:

There is no easy and fast solution. 

One thing is sure, the more people rely on handouts and the longer they are, the harder it gets to get rid of underlying issues, as you will get generations knowing life on handouts as an intrinsic part of their life. This unfortunately will perpetuate and expand the problem. 

Once you keep people on handouts, if the population of such grows and a small percent gets activated economically, then you get more homeless, which in turn require even more resources to take care of, etc. At some point, things spiral out to a point of no return, and the only thing resulting from that will be more conflict and more brutal conflict. 

The expansion in technology won't cover for all resource related issues. 

Doesn't explain why communities with little to no social protection networks and endemic hunger problems often have high birth rates. People aren't that dumb -- they know that if they barely have food to cover their own needs, having children is going to make matters worse. It still happens, regardless.

Yes, it's a Complex Problem(tm), and so, suggesting that cutting aid is somehow going to teach financial and family planning to poverty-stricken communities is, at best, a gross oversimplification. It's not like food stamps are an incentive for women to push out more babies.

In short, it's a nice theory, but that's all it is. You may have a case regarding something like UBI, but even with that, evidence is limited.

And while we're at it, I'd like to see evidence that giving food to wild animals removes their ability to find their own food. Feral dogs seem to do fine, and they were domesticated at some point.

[Gfted1]

10 minutes ago, Achilles said:

...obligation to help those that weren't as lucky as they were.

*squints* Seriously?

[Guest]

5 minutes ago, Guard Dog said:

I would agree with that too. Only I would draw the line at killing people and stealing things.

 

[Guest]

2 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

*squints* Seriously?

You left out the "when able" part, but yes.

Obviously if you're still scrapping along to get by, then you're in no position to help others. The best thing you can do is not be a drain on limited aid resources by continuing to provide for yourself.

[PK htiw klaw eriF]

13 minutes ago, Achilles said:

Agreed. It's easy to judge if you've never been there.

It's also easy to judge if you've been there and got out. In my experience survivor bias can be even worse than complete removal.

12 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

What in human history makes you think large groups of humans will make responsible decisions? 

If my obsidianstalking.txt is accurate, he's some kind of banker or financial type. Keep that in mind if you choose to engage.

[Guest]

1 minute ago, KaineParker said:

It's also easy to judge if you've been there and got out. In my experience survivor bias can be even worse than complete removal.

That's fair. To be honest I probably spent some time in that headspace too.

[BruceVC]

23 minutes ago, KaineParker said:

I don't think people who don't succeed owe any apology or consideration for doing whatever they need to do to survive or thrive.

Im not sure what you mean by that KP....but it sounds ominous 

[Darkpriest]

49 minutes ago, Achilles said:

 Ah. Another sad case of someone coming from generational wealth who truly has no idea how the other half live. Makes sense.

Funny, but I saw to that, as I was not a burden on my father and had to pay for it to him, while I let him live there so he can enjoy his retirement and only pays for amenities, lije electricity

Edited January 21, 2021 by Darkpriest

[Gfted1]

You know what would fix everyone's money and guilt conscience () problems and usher in a utopian society? UBI. 

[Guest]

 

[Darkpriest]

45 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

What in human history makes you think large groups of humans will make responsible decisions? 

We survived, evolved and built civilization and we were driven for a majority of our existence by various survival tactics? 

Do you know when was the last recorded large 'starvation'/'hunger' event? 

When did the population started to boom? When you look regionally, what actions led to boom and were the actions to deal with various crisises devloped within the population of the region or outside of it? 

Edited January 21, 2021 by Darkpriest

[Gfted1]

Seems like Christians should be following the good book instead of standing around with their pockets turned out:

You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

Luckily Im not religious so I want my bag.

[Guard Dog]

49 minutes ago, Hurlshot said:

What in human history makes you think large groups of humans will make responsible decisions? 

Yep. All the more reason to change public assistance. Rather than give them money give them the material goods they need. If it IS cheaper to do that 

[Guard Dog]

Just now, Gfted1 said:

Seems like Christians should be following the good book instead of standing around with their pockets turned out:

You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

Luckily Im not religious so I want my bag.

I better not catch you anywhere near my donkeys and servants

[Malcador]

2 minutes ago, Gfted1 said:

Seems like Christians should be following the good book instead of standing around with their pockets turned out:

You shall not covet your neighbor's house. You shall not covet your neighbor's wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.

Luckily Im not religious so I want my bag.

Also the line about the camel and the eye of a needle.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Malcador