[POLL] United States Presidential Elections 2016

[Pillo-san]

Because you have more homeless, and basically poor people than then.
And why do you even have poor people if you are basically the wealthies and most powerful country in the world.
I do not see that the homeless have 50k in their pockets.

basically every country can show graphs where bnp/per capica increases. That has nothing to do how the wealth is divided in the country.

I still stand by that all you pretty much have to do is redirecting some of the funds from military/deafens to the public system. There is nothing that forbids you to do that in your laws or goes against any principles that you find so dear to you.

So Go Bearnie
If not, you can always elect Truman, like I have said before, whole world would be following your politics on daily basis like in a reality show. He probably would have cameras following him every day, would be fun when he shouts, you are fired and pushes the nuke button

 

[squadops]

I have a few ideas why we think it's better to send food to Africa than help our own homeless. I do not disagree with you and we are missing the boat somehow. I'm always for a hand up rather than a hand out but I think we are discouraging a portion of our population unnecessarily.

It kind of goes back to what I was saying about the right wing monopolizing and the left wing robbing Peter to pay Paul if you know what I mean. Neither of those two things are a good idea and we can fix that. Mainly by stopping all the judgement and rules imo.

A very simplistic post, you can fill in the blanks as you see fit. We need to give space before grace.

 

[CodeRedR51]

It's not how much money you have but what you do with it that makes you great IMO.

 

[Danoff]

Because you have more homeless, and basically poor people than then.
And why do you even have poor people if you are basically the wealthies and most powerful country in the world.
I do not see that the homeless have 50k in their pockets.

basically every country can show graphs where bnp/per capica increases. That has nothing to do how the wealth is divided in the country.

I still stand by that all you pretty much have to do is redirecting some of the funds from military/deafens to the public system. There is nothing that forbids you to do that in your laws or goes against any principles that you find so dear to you.

So Go Bearnie
If not, you can always elect Truman, like I have said before, whole world would be following your politics on daily basis like in a reality show. He probably would have cameras following him every day, would be fun when he shouts, you are fired and pushes the nuke button

I don't know who this is directed to because you didn't tag anyone, but I'll assume it's me.

In the US, homelessness is effectively eradicated. We have housing, shelters, food, and even medical assistance for people who refuse or are unable to work. There's a nice little chart about the Philidelphia area especially that shows how real take-home value never drops much below 50k, so it's fairly ironic that you would pick that number. As your income goes below, your benefits rise to compensate, keeping you fairly stable at about 50k.

The reason you see homeless in the US is because they either are unaware of the benefits offered them, they don't want them, they're mentally handicapped, or they're panhandlers. Usually the latter, but for the mentally challenged it's often as a result of drugs but sometimes they were just born that way.

So don't bother throwing stones at the US for homelessness. It would be a better stone to throw to say that we don't take care of our mentally challenged the way we should.

Anyway, show me a chart that shows an increase in the number of people in poverty since the 70s, and make sure that the poverty line isn't adjusted to maintain a percentage of the population (which is what they usually do - simply define poverty as the lowest X percent).

 

[squadops]

It would be a better stone to throw to say that we don't take care of our mentally challenged the way we should.

Very much this 👍

 

[BobK]

Because you have more homeless, and basically poor people than then.

You have numbers to back this up of course, right?

Right?

 

[squadops]

You have numbers to back this up of course, right?

Right?

Poor is a relative term, we were all poor in the 30's

 

[BobK]

Poor is a relative term, we were all poor in the 30's

Actually a lot of us weren't but that's okay. Many were.

 

[squadops]

IMO a socialist, and I have to consider @Pillo-san one, must always create, exaggerate, and exploit any and everything they can get their hands on to show us just how much we need their wisdom and overbearing government systems. And if there is no problem, don't worry, they will create one through manipulation to fix.

 

[Pillo-san]

When I do not quote anybody it is an post meant for everybody that sees the post I am answering to.

We all know that homeless and poor have increased especially after the last economic crash. The crash in 2008 affected us here as well naturally. I lost my job and a relationship. But, even though I lost my job I could go to school without paying or getting a loan for the education.

What would happen in USA? Would I have to pay for my new education even though I did not have money saved at the time? which would result in trying to find a job where there where none? When I got a new job and although I complained for a sec when I saw 1/3 of mine income get deducted from the total sum. Overall I gladly pay because I know that others definitely are in a similar distressed situation as I was. Everyone of us even you in USA pay to be able to live in a society but not every one can at some given point. Do not know why some people are against this. How can you climb up again if you are forcibly put in a situation you did not desire in a society that have no compassion to those in need.

And Like I have said many many many times, it is your sys that exploit people, and you have less freedom that we have, and still our system is in fairness very similar. You are stuck and just repeat yourself like a broken record at the word socialism when it is used in conjunction with describing a person that is simply a socialist democrat. It seem you(@squadops) don't know the difference.

 

[Danoff]

When I do not quote anybody it is an post meant for everybody that sees the post I am answering to.

The person making the post you're answering to doesn't know that it was responded to.

We all know that homeless and poor have increased especially after the last economic crash. The crash in 2008 affected us here as well naturally. I lost my job and a relationship. But, even though I lost my job I could go to school without paying or getting a loan for the education.

No we don't, and that's not what you claimed. You claimed since the 70s.

What would happen in USA? Would I have to pay for my new education even though I did not have money saved at the time? which would result in trying to find a job where there where none?

I don't know your particular situation well enough to know what would have happened in the US. A lot of people here take out loans for college, but i paid for mine on minimum wage (still lots of people hiring).

How can you climb up again if you are forcibly put in a situation you did not desire in a society that have no compassion to those in need.

Charity is compassion. Taxes are not.

And Like I have said many many many times, it is your sys that exploit people, and you have less freedom that we have, and still our system is in fairness very similar.

You've already been taken to task over your "freedom is when people have no freedom to opt out of providing me with freedom" line. Explain how the US system exploits people.

 

[squadops]

Homeless and poor have to increase in numbers as population increases, that is pretty simple math.

How can you climb up again if you are forcibly put in a situation you did not desire in a society that have no compassion to those in need.

We don't throw people to the dogs silly, plenty of programs at their disposal as @Danoff already pointed out and you conveniently ignored. My take on that is one of friends, family and charity, why should the government have a monopoly on helping the poor? Well because they make it there business by regulation and taxation, that is why. Bunch of puffed up idiots who believe we need them.

I'm not going into that freedom bit again, you are so far from freedom you don't even know what the word means.

Well I'll be damned, I was tree'd in a sense

 

[Pillo-san]

No we don't, and that's not what you claimed. You claimed since the 70s.

hehe, no I did not, it was @squadops.

How could I find work if there basically where none, people are fired not hired in a situation of crisis. If I would be lucky enough to get a job it would take time away from my studies. A loan is possible, sure if it is not a bank loan in a time of crisis. I have heard that your school loans are hard to get paid of.

We are not free do to as we please, we are not in a forest/wilderness in stone age where you could do anything you wanted, we are living in a modern society and there are rules and regulations to follow, just like in USA. We simply can do more stuff freely here than in because of the higher taxations. that is the truth. Everyone pays a bit then every one are allowed to wander of where ever they please basically.

 

[FoolKiller]

How can you climb up again if you are forcibly put in a situation you did not desire in a society that have no compassion to those in need.

Who is asking for a society with no compassion?

You can have a compassionate and caring society without taking the resources from people by force.

I personally bring in about $10,000 in charity every year, and the only reason why it isn't more is because I lack the energy to do more due to health issues. I despise social programs and find the notion of making others pay for causes I support to be immoral, but I am very compassionate to the needs of my fellow humans.

And while anecdotal, I can say that with my causes the least generous donors are those who loudly promote social programs. I hope that's just because the liberals in my life are selfish with their take-home and is not an example of the rest of society.

 

[squadops]

hehe, no I did not, it was @squadops.

Say what now?

We've been on a downward trend since the 70's. And if someone like Trump becomes president, we're done for.

Thanks but no thanks

 

[Pillo-san]

@squadops mentioned the decline of your country since the 70s. I did not, I said that USA have to change so a nice step in right direction is Bernie or Trump if you want some drama And as I am telling you all and all over again, it does not automatically that it would result in higher taxes if he would cut down the funding to the military and other agencies that get to much of your "cake".

hell, just elect me. I would promise you that I would not take a single dime from any corporation or similar. No wars/no poor/good schools and health to all. And basic income of 55k/year would suffice if I could live in the white house.

USA would be best place to live in with least amount of crime as no one need to steal/kill just to try to get by or chase dreams.. V

 

[squadops]

WTF?

Anyway, why in the world would we cut funding for our federal governments main function? You are making no sense at all.

 

[Danoff]

hehe, no I did not, it was @squadops.

As @squadops point out, it was a different case of mistaken identity. The wrong person attributed the post attributed the post to the wrong person. Oh well, I got the wrong person.

 

[Joel]

In the US, homelessness is effectively eradicated.

Wow. Something something temporarily embarrassed millionaires something something bootstraps!

 

[FoolKiller]

And as I am telling you all and all over again, it deos not automatically that it would result in higher taxes if he would cut down the funding to the military and other agencies that get to much of your "cake".

What if some of us want cuts in military and entitlement spending? I know American politics looks like a team sport, but there are more than two sides in this conversation.

Cutting the budget in other places does not change my view that entitlement programs are immoral.

 

[squadops]

@Noob616

You didn't read all that he said, or you are cherry picking. We have several programs and housing and etc to take care of them, some do not want help and as he said, some have mental health issues. That is one thing we are failing to address properly in this country, there is a stigma, if they had cancer we'd fix em. We've talked about it before.

At least we don't slam em in asylums anymore.

 

[Pillo-san]

@Danoff, but he did mention a decline that began in the 70s from his standpoint, mine view is that USA always have been exploiting and using people for the good of some.

 

[squadops]

WTF??!!

Just stop it already, if I said what you are claiming please provide the quote.

I'm waiting, show it or redact it ffs. I'm not going to drop it or go away.

 

[Pillo-san]

We've been on a downward trend since the 70's. And if someone like Trump becomes president, we're done for.

Ah, no sorry it was not you, that stated that USA was in decline since the 70s, It was R1600Turbo when he quated you : "All empires fall, I have this sickening feeling that some wish for it, that is why I said what I did."


I see you pointed this out already... hmm let me have some time to write, dammit

 

[ryzno]

How could I find work if there basically where none, people are fired not hired in a situation of crisis. If I would be lucky enough to get a job it would take time away from my studies. A loan is possible, sure if it is not a bank loan in a time of crisis. I have heard that your school loans are hard to get paid of.

There are plenty of jobs around. A lot of people have to much "pride" for certain jobs. Ironically enough, some of those "below me" jobs pay more than they could fathom. I make $550 a week delivering newspapers 3 days a week now. So there are really no excuse for failure. *insert fight for $15 protestor here*

Did you know that some schools actually pay you to go there. I received $1800 per quarter on top of my tuition and what I made working. Also due to the economy our school was part time but we still received full time credits if we completed the course. So really there is no excuse for failure. I was homeless after getting out of prison. So don't tell me anybody can't succeed in the US. Just have to earn/do it...

 

[Pillo-san]

Sure, we all need to earn what we have. There is no difference here, and I have being telling you all that our systems are not that all different. We are getting more and more like you and we do notice how much worse it is for a citizen. Companies are taxing less and less, the unions are more in favour of the companies than the workers letting new agreements take away certain freedoms every time they are procured(hope this is the right word) in the name of international open market. Deducting taxes from when you did a renovation on your house or even homework for your kid if you have hired a home teacher are totally capitalistic and free market way of doing things. But yeah, everything to pay less tax so the system eventually fails. Power gets centralized and your party is always hindered/restricted by the other party's exactly like it is in USA.

The only thing we have that is a bit socialist is the dwindling safety net like I have described in my situation. Because you are using the word socialism with our society you think we lack freedom when we are as I pointed out before more free than citizens in USA. Paying tax is not, giving your freedom away. If that was the case then how come i am talking about it to you right now. there is a middle way and it is just a way for USA to find it. we are going backwards but I hope you can go forward, be it by choosing Trump or Bernie or me but do not think for a single moment that we lack freedom or that Bernie is going to restrict your freedom. I think it would be the opposite.

 

[squadops]

What happened, did you join the EU or something?

 

[FoolKiller]

Sure, we all need to earn what we have. There is no difference here, and I have being telling you all that our systems are not that all different. We are getting more and more like you and we do notice how much worse it is for a citizen.

Have you tried replacing the lost resources with charitable resources?

Companies are taxing less and less,

Do you mean the companies are being taxed less?

the unions are more in favour of the companies than the workers

Is it that or the unions need to give in more in trade negotiations due to economic factors in order to save jobs? If they are faced with layoffs/closed facilities or less benefits then they are saving jobs.

letting new agreements take away certain freedoms every time they are procured(hope this is the right word) in the name of international open market.

No. Freedom is not the right word. Those would be benefits.

Deducting taxes from when you did a renovation on your house or even homework for your kid if you have hired a home teacher are totally capitalistic and free market way of doing things.

That's not capitalistic. That's cronyism. The government should not give benefits for personal life choices. They should be involved in our personal lives as little as possible. That would represent capitalism.

Government showing favoritism toward businesses, giving them benefits and picking winners and losers is not capitalism. From your statements I think you understand capitalism as well as you say we understand socialism.

 

[Pillo-san]

@squadops, Basically
@FoolKiller, my understanding of The American way of conducting its capitalism/free market is that companies and people should earn us much as possible and pay as little as possible back to the country it operates in. Paying as little in wages as possible and not give them as many rights that could result in money spent on the worker instead of going to the profit of the company. The profit should every quarter be higher and higher than the last, if it goes down just so slightly then cut in the workforce is made just so the owners/directors of the company do not earning a dime less then before even though they do earn multiple/200x or more times the worker.

simply put Americas open market is straight up a way to exploit its workforce.

I do promote free and capitalistic system, do not get me wrong. but a company should pay/provide as much as an individual. They are after all using all the benefits in that country they operate.

 

[Danoff]

Paying as little in wages as possible and not give them as many rights

simply put Americas open market is straight up a way to exploit its workforce.

First of all, America is not a free market, it's a socialist nation. Second of all, in a free market with human rights it isn't possible to exploit anyone. Everything is voluntary.