This woman had no problem taking welfare to get back on her feet. To be honest very rarely do see a real conservative who actually pulled themselves up by their boot straps. It's extremely rare, they all have had some form of help on their way up. She is a hypocrite.
i would be for charity tax credits in place of wellfare. Im left leaning but i can say that wellfare does make people more dependent. I know people who dont want to get a full time job because they are scared of losing their check. Now the Retirement and minimum wage issue i totally disagree. social security has actually been pretty successful for retirees and without a minimum wage, the compitition for work would cause wages to plummit and i doubt we'd see much change in prices.
I was right there with her until all of that "instill a moral compass through religion". Yeah, we don't need that garbage. Social engineering through faith-based initiatives is as bad as social engineering through bureaucracy.
My Blog has everything you need to get started making money online... Links, instructions, and all questions answered. Also the top 3 most reliable GPT sites on the web! (from my own personal experiences over 3 years). I avg about 200-300 dollars a month from #1 and about 25$ each on method # 2,3 but only because I have basically just started. Now enjoy and stick with it is my best advice! If your from US you can profite a ton due to so many offers available to you! Check my first vid too!
poverty is caused by poeple making horrible life management decisions, such as having more children than they can afford to support. public policy cant change that. the rich do not cause poverty, taxing them will not cure poverty. personal responsibility is the answer.
yes cause what ever the government sets out to do works so flawlessly. war on drugs, war on terrorism, no child left behind, lets make some more poor people now
The welfare rolls dropped three years BEFORE welfare reform:
Clinton, who urged companies to hire welfare recipients, said there has been a decline of almost 3.4 million recipients between January 1993 through May 1997. Its a 24 percent drop, the largest decrease inwelfare rolls in history and results in the lowest percentage of the population on welfare since 1970.
She is talking about the old AFDC program that didn't allow a recipient to work or go to school without threatening to cut their checks. TANF has a work requirement.
I think its sad reading a comment saying we must "consistently provide" rather than help temporarily to get a person or their families economic position advance to a independent role. Then we wonder why people on government welfare are stuck in it.
How are religious organizations going to consistently feed, house and clothe and give medical care to children? Do families have to go from church to church to beg for dinner? Welfare currently makes able bodied parents work.
It takes courage to go against the grain and political expectations of black Americans.
Black Americans who do not recite leftist positions are called race traitors and other terrible things. The war on poverty did not work. We need to EMPOWER people.
ITS REPARATION WUT WHITE CRACKAZ DID US WIT SLAVERY!!!!
DAMN WHITE CRACKA FUCKS OWE US DAT MOENY!
NOW THEY TRYNA BRING US BLAX DOWN?!!
OH, SO WE CANT LIVE HIGH OFF THA HOG CUZ WE BLACK?
FUCK YOU PRICKS, I HOPE SUM CRAZYAZZ NIGGAZ SHOOTS YALL DEAD, STUPIT PUNKAZZ!!
ITS MI RITE NOT TO WORK, MY RITE DO DOPE, ITS MI RITE TO GET MY EBT, NO WHITE RACISTS TELL ME WUT TO DO, YU GO GIT A DAMN JOB AN PAY ME TRAZ, DAT WUT OBAMA PROMISE US, SEE NUKK??
My mom worked her way out of eastern Kentucky Appalachain poverty, and she has always said a lot of the things this lady is saying. Welfare just allows people to wallow in poverty at the whim of the state, and regulation and taxation keeps them down. I disagree with this lady's emphasis on religion though.
Local schools, reduced taxes that allow people to help people. Let the 'Church' do it's mandate; to help the poor, the widows and orphans. As Star said it was public(political) policy that ruined the family for the poor; better to have her unmarried and poor than married to someone trying to make his children's life better than his (or hers).
I commend Star Parker for speaking out on this issue. As a young adult in the mid-90's, I thought the welfare "system" helped people down on their luck and brought them into the working world in a couple years- Until I read a book entitled "The Tyranny of Kindness" by Theresa Funiciello. I would encourage anyone interested in "helping people" through welfare read this book.
Excellent points, but her point at the 7:00 minute mark utterly fails.This is suppose to be ReasonTV folks, not FaithTV. Endorsing contradictory premises will NOT lead to freedom. But, Star Parker is focusing on individual responsibility, and voluntary consent, so she's tacitly recognizing that faith is superfluous, and that individual rationality in this world is the only solution.
@treadwithcaution Finding a "better, cleaner source" is the most unviable, unworkable solution to that problem that anyone could come up with. How do 6 million people find a "better, cleaner source?"
@treadwithcaution "nobody is putting dangerous chemicals into the water you drink."
Actually, lots of people put dangerous chemicals into my drinking water. Some of them did it for profit (for instance, to improve agricultural efficiency or from coal mining) and others out of laziness (dumping birth control pills into the toilet) or cheapness (avoiding paying hazardous waste removal costs by dumping it down a storm drain). And that is from the tap.
Socialism in some form may work in small nation states with its own language and identity keeping it homogeneous and separate from its neighbors. Comparing the US to such nations like comparing apples to oranges. The US needs to strip back big leviathan before liberty and true individual freedom is wiped from the face of the earth. Let the people educate themselves and dictate the free market. Get regulation and subsidy out of business. The nanny state is evil .
@bulbinking lol, NO. I'm not for banks mostly because of the Fed and how they manipulate the money supply. It's abhorrent and creates the distortion of the economy which makes things collapse on the middle class and the poor. But banks aren't the only source of money, are they?
I'm in the position of having no job experience, and only a G.E.D. been trying to get jobs around here but its a college town so the students usually get first pick. I'm going to be moving back in with my family soon and hopefully there will be more jobs an this area since it has a lower population saturation.
An educated black conservative woman. Man she must get threatened all the time. I just loved her! Have to keep my eyes open for more of her interviews.
@thedutchman01 Met meer vrije markt zouden we het nog een stuk beter doen. De vrije markt is wat ons land economisch het sterkste land van de wereld maakte in de Gouden Eeuw. Het is waar het Britse rijk in de 19de eeuw zijn erg goede economische beleid op baseerde. De overheid bemoeit zich op dit moment te veel met ons. Mensen kunnen geen baan krijgen door domme regels zoals dat bedrijven een tijdelijke werker na 2 jaar permanent moeten aannemen of ontslaan(dat wordt meestal dus ontslaan).
Oh and you saying people not being able to find a job. Well.... That's just nonsense.
Theres plenty of jobs out there. It might mean you have to do a job below your pay grade and/or education level though. Don't blame the government for that though.
Also on a public forum where everyone is talking english it is polite to talk back in english so that others can understand aswell, no matter if we are both dutch. The vid is english.
@thedutchman01 The free market didn't fail, the reason it isn't around anymore is because politically connected people profit immensely from preventing or making it harder for competition to come about.
@thedutchman01 No itdidn't. This is factual, even in business magazines at the time before the final days of free markets people were clamoring for less competition. Not because the consumer was being hurt, it was because there's huge profit potential in cartelizing markets. The only viable way to cartelize a free market is for it not be free anymore.
The prison system in the US is not a free market and private doesn't equal free market.
@treadwithcaution #3 The Koch Brothers can, of course, purchase all the water in my area should "ownership" of water become the law of the land. I can't hope to outbid them for water. Which doesn't mean that my biological need for drinking water suddenly goes away. Its 100% against my own self-interest to let the wealthy few take a public good and destroy it for profit. And the self-interest of 99% of the population.
I believe in voluntary charity. i believe people sympathize with people who are struggling. Society is improving constantly because of improvements in technology and increases in productivity brought about by the new technology in the private sector. Government programs are not the best way to help the poor but they are seductive to the uninformed who don't understand the harm which they really create.
@treadwithcaution #2 Every month, I pay a co-op fee to my co-op, who then uses a portion of that to pay a water bill to DC Water. In addition, I pay income and local sales taxes, parts of which are used to filter water from the Potomac (which is "owned" by DC and Maryland) and from a few publicly owned and operated reservoirs. The water is then delivered to my home via pipes which my taxes again pay to maintain. "My" drinking water.
@treadwithcaution #1 If I am drinking a glass of water, and you ask me "whose glass of water is this?" it is proper to respond "Its MY glass of water" regardless of who owns either the glass or the water. The owner relationship between the subject and object is standard English grammar. You have to be a true ideologue to believe grammar should be rewritten to reflect titled ownership. The water we all drink is "our" drinking water.
Liberals have this rosy idea about what living off the government means. I honestly believe they think welfare dependency is like living like your middle class but in reality it is a self-imposed prison for free people because a government cannot provide anything more than what they provide to prisoners, literally.
I am an old school, Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh conservative and I want to share with you a story Ronald Reagan shared on his radio show about this. Enjoy!
Peter Schiff supports Walmart sending all your jobs to sweat shop factories in Communist China and empowering them and then he wants to get rid of welfare, that's the only thing that stops people from starving because they can't get jobs because they've been sent to sweat shop factories in Communist China.
@BannedUfos You are a moron. There is nothing wrong with buying items that can be made cheaply and of decent quality by China, from China. Free trade makes us ALL more wealthy. I suggest that you watch some of Milton Friedman's lectures and read up on F.A. Hayek instead of listening to all that Keynesian crap that you apparently have been spoon fed. BTW, it isn't businesses' job to give you a job. You don't deserve a job. You earn your keep and you negotiate your own wage. It is that simple.
This woman needs to learn that religion is the opposite of morality. Blindly following what other people tell you based on faith is not a foundation of morality. Thinking of yourself and how you affect others, then realizing it is to your own benefit to be kind and fair to those around you is.
This is such a dumb and unproven (and/or disproven) talking point for economic and fiscal conservatives. Backed up by NO empirical evidence whatsoever, a lot of hearsay and individual "examples" that usually are few and far between. Anti-gov't types have nothing in the way of REAL evidence that the welfare state 'doesn't work', so they trot out rhetorical nonsense like talk of "dependency" supposedly created by these programs. If dependency DOES happen on any large scale, it's in Sweden.
Besides, isn't Star Parker one of those far-right morons who regularly goes to bullshit conventions like the Values Voter Summit?? WHY is Reason Tv interviewing HER of all people, esp. on such an important topic? You couldn't get ANY better guests? Maybe a SCHOLAR of the subject? Not some dumbass conservative commentator with a stupid-ass name.
"Star" Yeah, that's a REAL good first name. What ethnicity is that?? Stars belong in the sky and Hollywood.
@whoo689 what crawled up your ass and died? is nothing she said in this interview based in reality? I doubt it. You can study the OUTCOMES of past attempts to solve problems to recognize what is necessary to fix what is wrong. if it's broke fix it.
@whoo689 If you choose to deny a century of bad results, that's up to you. Go ahead, don't learn from the past and others' mistakes. The welfare system has been fueled by people voting in politicians who take on gov't debt to provide you with welfare programs and all on the guarantee that the next generation will repay the loan. Last I checked, when you take out a loan in someone else's name, that is fraud and theft. Worse than that, gov't debt is literal slavery. Keep liking your slavery.
LEAST generous welfare states?? I'm not sure welfare (in any form, whether TANF/AFDC, UI, etc.), unless you're in a wealthy area, I suppose, payments CAN be so generous in the U.S. that you could "become dependent." Besides, how is the "dependency" an indictment of the system? It was your OWN fault that you became lazy and complacent because of the 'free money'! Don't scapegoat.
Is it REALLY (or was, anyway) possible to be "on welfare" for 7 years straight?? All I hear about this to 'prove' it was even possible under federal and/or state rules for the programs themselves are hearsay and a few examples here and there like Star Parker. Wasn't unemployment insurance only allowed for about half a year before they extended it to 52 weeks during this recession and then 99 weeks?
7 years, gimme a break...
"Welfare dependency" Lol. Uh... doesn't America have one of the
Yea take away peoples social security benefits; that will make them less poor! What a crazy bitch! The only sane thing she had to say was about school choice.
@insdel2004 It will since people pay lot more than they ever receive from it and the majority of the money that goes into these programs end up as administrative costs i.e. not going to the people that it's supposed to go to.
Did she advocate private retirement savings accounts for the poor? I hope that she is just crazy, and not truly evil. Social Security must be there for all Americans -- ESPECIALLY those who are at the bottom. Anyone who disagrees has ZERO compassion (i.e. a psychopath).
@MortimerTheClueless "Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all...
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain." -Frederic Bastiat
@MortimerTheClueless We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain." -Frederic Bastiat
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
So whats the solution? We've shipped jobs overseas, destroyed public education, let public transportation fall by the wayside and have given the poor and especially the black far more chance to have a criminal record than anyone else. All of that makes it incredibly hard to hold a job. Do you people really believe some libertarian fairy is going to solve those preconditions if only Koch Industries was allowed to dump harmful toxins in our drinking water?
@mightisright Oh, beeeeeee-hayve!!! Just because I know you can't have A without B when it comes to libertarian beliefs doesn't make me a buffoon. I'd say it makes me a regular viewer of ReasonTV who knows that there is only one side to every issue; da gubmint be bad. Don't get mad at me if nuance and context are always ignored.
Are you fucking stupid? Of course PUBLIC transportation and PUBLIC education are controlled by the state. Are you really such an ideologue that you had to point THAT out? They're also controlled by the state in countries that have great PUBLIC transportation, like the thriving economy of South Korea.
@shamgar001 If you think pointing out that the government runs these public services is prima facie proof that anything govt run is always going to be dysfunctional, then it's not rhetoric you need, it's logic. The example I gave of South Korea being one of a hundred examples that prove your "point" false.
1. Minimum wages, taxes, and regulations are the forces for ship jobs over seas. (Gov knows better)
2. Public education is being funded at ever increasing rates with a decline in performance. (No individual choice)
3. No ethnicity is more supported and represented by Dems then blacks (other than American Indians) Yet conditions for them have deteriorated faster than any other group (other than Indians).
@jetrpg22 1. Minimum wages and regulations are the forces very few jobs over seas. The reason jobs go over seas is that it cost $0.50/hr for the same labor you get for $10/hr, way to few people get pay min wage for it to make a real difference. And most regulations that the government require for product and the same for products made over seas when they come to the US.
2. By most scales Public education performance has changed very little in the last 40 years, only some minor improvements.
4. Libertarians, in my experience, have a large range of views on pollution regs. Things like rivers and lakes polluted by one company/person/group is easy, but things like air pollution where a company can effect millions, but just a little bit, become far more difficult for the average Libertarian's view. There is no easy way to deal with it but regulation, which means bureaucracy, which most Libertarian's are nearly always against. What do you do about air pollution?
@jetrpg22 1. You only gain cheaper good if the good can be produced cheaper hear then in China, so you need up with wages that are $1/hr and the price of good don't change. Even at $5/hr working 40hrs a week, 52 weeks a year, you would only have $10,400 per year, which is not enough to live off in the US and it would still be too costly to manufacture goods in the US.
2. The score I was looking at way from the OECD, not the US standard testing. And we have been in the mid-teen for the last 30yr
And how can we stand to be near Germany in education... no wounder our economy is doing so poorly, if only we could educate like Japan or New Zealand or Canada, though kind of educational system that are driving force of the world... Unlike the Germany or the US ranking in the teens, who people could never drive the world economy, right?
Even more interesting is how the numbers are played with ... kinda.
See you'll see OECD-countries but many more take the test and out preform the US. In 09 5-6 more countries were in front of the US on top of the others in math (occurs for all the areas).
OECD PISA started in 2000 (99),
Reading is the only thing the US does well and is simply the least required of the the advanced jobs.
Regardless, I didn't connect the economy with education. Only that its state controlled.
1. "You only gain cheaper good if the good can be produced cheaper hear then in China, so you need up with wages that are $1/hr" ... etc. Doesn't mean anything itself. Its the cost of production/value that matters; of which labor is often 1/3-1/10th the cost. (high end is like McDonalds, etc). If it + other factors (productivity levels, value, shipping, regs., taxes, etc) make is cost effective in the US, that is where it will be done.
1. Just saw this this is only one small way it work ... almost every aspect of business in the US is limited in similar fashion.
youtube.com/watch?v=MD9vK5bCS7I
People just don't understand what regulations do, how protectionism is evil, etc. If you look at these types of reg.s the damage becomes far worse as result of them.
In the video it addresses how china itself has the same policy, which effect is to rise global price of the good from low to artificially high; harmful to all.
@jetrpg22 1. Minimum wages force jobs overseas? Really? So, if only Americans worked for a dollar a day, we'd have no unemployment? Fuck off with that stupid shit. The wages paid in China would be beyond unlivable in the US. 2. No choice? We don't have charter and private schools all over the country? Thats news to me. 3. Thanks for being a simpleton. 4. You mean they support private ownership of resources with the owners deciding how it gets used.
So, if only Americans worked for a dollar a day, we'd have no unemployment?
Yeah most likely. Well not a dollar a day.... whatever the job was worth. When a job is not productive it ceases to exist (some may call this shipping jobs off). I doubt anyone would work for a $1 hr, their labor is most likely worth more. However, all the regulations, red tape, taxes are added on top of that min. wage. So $7 hr is more like $11hr, etc.
@jetrpg22 "When a job is not productive it ceases to exist" Yeah, and guess what, when a job doesn't pay enough to live and eat on, people cease to work there. Like $1/day.
That's when the DNC and GOP brings Mexicans in to do those jobs and tax you to support their welfare, health care and health care benefits. You get f*cked twice. No jobs and you have to pay for social welfare benefits. At least, the GOP admits that they fucked you. But the DNC does not give a shit about you. It's the 1% that screwed you. Wrong, the government allowed the 1% to screw you.
@666sigma The DNC and GOP "bring in" Mexicans? Are you that fucking full of ignorant ideology. The DNC and GOP "bring in" immigrant workers? The fucking free market "brings in" immigrant workers, shit-for-brains. They go to where the jobs are and the corporate capitalists hire them for lower wages. Please, tell me you're not this stupid.
You are right the DNC and GOP doesn't bring them in, but the unholy alliance exists. The GOP wants the cheap labor and the DNC wants the voters. Illegal immigration is wealth redistribution at its finest. The business owners get the benefit of cheaper labor and depressed wages, the taxpayer pays for all of their social welfare benefits and the Democrats increase their voter base. In addition, the DNC knows that the welfare base will also be increased by the illegals.
Why do you think Rick Perry would give "in state" college tuition to illegal aliens? Why does he oppose a border fence? Do you really think that these are "compassionate" conservative positions? He could not get elected in Texas if he opposed, either. It is about the vote. Yes, there are plenty of illegals that can vote and they have plenty of somewhat more legal relatives that also vote.
The 14th amendment did not give citizenship to illegal babies born in this country.
"3. Thanks for being a simpleton" If a simpleton understand that, "3. No ethnicity is more supported and represented by Dems then blacks (other than American Indians) Yet conditions for them have deteriorated faster than any other group (other than Indians)." Why can't you?
Or at least attempt to refute it, which you can't. See the pattern; ps name calling is weak.
4. Yes, unless they negatively impact others, thats the libertarian view, and pollution does. So.... your point?
@jetrpg22 What the hell does "no ethnicity is more supported and represented by Dems than blacks." What on earth does that mean. How have blacks been "supported and represented by Dems?" And what on earth do you mean "conditions have deteriorated faster for blacks than any other group?" Under what rubric? Real income for blacks has grown faster than for the country as a whole since the 60s. Care to explain where you pulled that out of your ass from?
The black household 60s, in 2010 dollars, was $15,000 lower than whites. In 10 it was $15,500 lower (from the 50s-mid 70s blacks where closing this gap).
Unemployment is 2-4 times that of whites today (high-end if you count those who gave up looking for a job and on 'assistance').
Wanna start on marriage and child raising?
With the Civil rights Act and previous dev. black were on a positive track. Following Dem policies gets you Dammed results.
@jetrpg22 Okay, according to the census, black per capita income between 1967 and 2007 rose from 8,002 to 19,041 (in constant dollars), a growth of ~138%. White income, during the same period, rose from 14,863 to 29,785, a growth of ~100%. So, black income improved at a higher rate than white during that 40 year period. In roughly the same period of time, unemployment numbers for blacks have stayed fairly stable.
@eirefrance Well one you changed the metric, per capita is not household. Two Where did you get your numbers (becuase data set do not match yours)? [households median] (100% = equal) 2007- $33,916 Black , $54,920 White - 62% 1967- $23,475 Black, $40,432 White- 72% Growth - 44% Black HH, 36% White [Per capita median] 2007- W $31,051, B $18,428 - 69% 1997 -W $46,754, B $28,602 -63% 1967 -W $36,407, B $21,555 -69% Growth- W 28% , B 33% The gap in income for blacks is increasing (-xx%).
@jetrpg22 Of course Per Capita isn't Household, I used the numbers I found, not the ones I invented. Besides, household sizes change over time, so Per Capita is a better measure.
Still, though it seems to me Per Capita numbers are a better measurement of actual earnings by black individuals, lets assume we use your statistics instead of mine, where do the Dem policies come in? How have "Dem policies" affected this change? What "Dem policies" have affected this change?
Well there is no Proof, statistics is not much of a proof science.
Agree on per capita.
Because as Blacks moved into more Dem districts the coarse of closing the inequality gap slowed then reverse. The other linkage between Dem policy and correlations. Family structure, welfare, poverty, etc. Its not like it was one day you can point at its failed system that has developed over a period of time and is harmful.
That being said today a great many Rep.s support these bad policies.
@jetrpg22 Wait, you have to establish that these policies are bad, and we haven't established that. Might I suggest "When Work Disappears" by William Julius Wilson? He discusses the social ills that afflict black families and individuals in great length, and provides a more complicated answer than welfare policies. Barring that suggestion, you still haven't shown me that blacks are worse off today than they were 40 years ago and what Dem policies created this shift.
They are established , read a book Thomas sowell will work.
I would never say blacks are Worse off today than 40 years ago . NO AMERICAN IS, VERY FEW PEOPLE ANY WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE.
What is true is that Blacks were closing income gap in the 20th century up to the mid 70s. Oddly enough, shortly after they stopped.
Note i have read that book,, note earlier discussion on the minimum wage, note your now providing evidence for my position, note Sowell examines the issue better.
@jetrpg22 Now, having refuted your facts with sourced material, I have to ask what this has to with "Dem policies?" Why don't we start on marriage and child raising? Tell me how Democrats have killed the black family structure?
Because you refuted my facts with a statistical trick. One of which i cannot even find the census data set for...
Now that i have shown that yest blacks income as a % of their '67 does increase a tad more than whites '67. But the difference and % between black and white HH and per capita income is growing. What do you say. (If you look until 74ish blacks are closing this gap).
Your actions cannot hurt others by taking from their what is naturally theirs. I think mises institute has 1.5 hour lecture somewhere on its page that is quite good.
In this case Gov. steps in w/ laws/reg.s when the harm done is a common harm (to a large group of people) so water pollution. (The levels may not individually effect anyone but society as a whole, oh and possibility of harm must be proven). Individuals tort.
@jetrpg22 "In this case Gov. steps in w/ laws/reg.s when the harm done is a common harm (to a large group of people) so water pollution. (The levels may not individually effect anyone but society as a whole, oh and possibility of harm must be proven)."
How is this different than what we currently have with the EPA?
Cap and Trade, carbon trading, and a ton more of ineffective measures aimed at an unknown threat for the goal of an unknown outcome all w/o the consent of the people (no votes).
Secondhand tobacco smoke is a Group A Carcinogen; in other-words, something that science has found is twice as less harmful as the fluoride in our drinking water is causing cancer all over.
Hell, database errors in the EPA have cost millions (chemical A is rate 1, but is a 2 [10 year of litigation to fix])
Simply stated the EPA does what it wants without evidence, without concern how it violates individual freedom. You have to Prove issue or damage (ie it can and will occur) to met the libertarian criteria to sanction; the EPA sanctions and first asks questions later. It acts from political drive not a moral one.
As most agencies wrongfully do.
Government needs to prove its position before implementing it.
Maybe we should keep living the big gov fairy tail after all, "We've shipped jobs overseas, destroyed public education, let public transportation fall by the wayside and have given the poor and especially the black far more chance to have a criminal record than anyone else. All of that makes it incredibly hard to hold a job."
@eirefrance First, that central planning fails is a poor argument for more of it.
Second, there are lots of productive jobs that contribute to a thriving economy - just that Americans have grown too soft to do them: /watch?v=cQhqM_mvnQw
Third, you illustrate a common fallacy that comes from looking at only part of the Libertarian argument. Libertarians generally support property rights. If you poison someone else's water, you pay for damaging property, worse if someone got hurt.
Gee, I wonder why they brought in all this gubbmint welfare in the first place? Seems like the unemployed and indigent had it far better in the 19th century.
I wasn't talking about replacement simply about legal expectations. That was to highlight differences. Namely, private citizens can legally decide who needs a boost and who needs a kick in the pants more easily than government. Those who receive the kick in the pants may be mad, but they are less likely to feel legally entitled to those services as well. The point is that government welfare introduces problems. The good may outweigh the bad, but we should at least ask the question.
Serving in the Middle East, I was able to compare their poverty with America's. We have a lot of resources for the poor to access. Perhaps your location makes the commute hard but the 3rd worlders have no issue making feet bleed for a bowl of dry rice.
Ragged, owned nothing- not even a push cart & barely clothed. If you wear layers & shoes, you're well off.
Confusing. Didn't welfare help her get her own life back on track? Is her account implying that she would have been better off it she had denied the welfare assistance? That doesn't hold water IMO. She's obviously doing well, and welfare obviously helped her get there. If not, she should clearly vocalize that, and she didn't.
@zassounotsukushi I think the point is that she was able to get out *in spite* of the welfare system. Just because the system is intended to help doesn't mean it actually does help.
@zassounotsukushi she is working to provide an alternative to Welfare to help people in her own community ...she is sharing what she learned with other and helps to improve a broken system
The problem welfare people are the golem soulless corporations. They should be killed. No prob. They are nothing but welfare whore queens. Evil satanists.
I asked a real far left girl here at work what the point of welfare was once and she thought her best response was "to help people get by while they find a job" and I thought, what's the point of the job then?
The fact is if you ask any liberal if they think it's fair that a person pay back in taxes what they took out in the form of welfare once they find a job, they'll say NO. Why? "because then they'll never find a job" is what I hear as a response right away. Like DUH that's happening NOW
The difference between private charity and welfare is that people feel entitled to welfare and not to charity. The charity can always be refused to those who are deemed to undeserving. On the other hand, welfare is viewed as a right and is rarely refused to someone who would otherwise receive it.
This woman had no problem taking welfare to get back on her feet. To be honest very rarely do see a real conservative who actually pulled themselves up by their boot straps. It's extremely rare, they all have had some form of help on their way up. She is a hypocrite.
TheCaliCapitalist 3 weeks ago
i would be for charity tax credits in place of wellfare. Im left leaning but i can say that wellfare does make people more dependent. I know people who dont want to get a full time job because they are scared of losing their check. Now the Retirement and minimum wage issue i totally disagree. social security has actually been pretty successful for retirees and without a minimum wage, the compitition for work would cause wages to plummit and i doubt we'd see much change in prices.
cyborganic99 3 weeks ago
I was right there with her until all of that "instill a moral compass through religion". Yeah, we don't need that garbage. Social engineering through faith-based initiatives is as bad as social engineering through bureaucracy.
shade1978x 3 weeks ago in playlist More videos from ReasonTV
This has been flagged as spam show
My Blog has everything you need to get started making money online... Links, instructions, and all questions answered. Also the top 3 most reliable GPT sites on the web! (from my own personal experiences over 3 years). I avg about 200-300 dollars a month from #1 and about 25$ each on method # 2,3 but only because I have basically just started. Now enjoy and stick with it is my best advice! If your from US you can profite a ton due to so many offers available to you! Check my first vid too!
thudymat 1 month ago
poverty is caused by poeple making horrible life management decisions, such as having more children than they can afford to support. public policy cant change that. the rich do not cause poverty, taxing them will not cure poverty. personal responsibility is the answer.
carryclass 1 month ago 2
yes cause what ever the government sets out to do works so flawlessly. war on drugs, war on terrorism, no child left behind, lets make some more poor people now
managarm1349 2 months ago
I have 2 questions.
1) What were the changes to welfare in the 1990s?
2) What is the War on Poverty?
ilovetoread23 3 months ago
Comment removed
russelljfd 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@ilovetoread23 What a load of crap! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
If you don't want to be on welfare - DON'T SIGN UP! GET A JOB.
If you don't want to stay on welfare - QUIT! GET A JOB.
If you must be on welfare...
DON"T BE GREEDY - DON"T ABUSE THE SYSTEM-
BE APPRECIATIVE (Most countries don't have this luxury.)
And as soon as you get a job -
quit welfare -
so someone who NEEDS it can use it!
russelljfd 3 months ago
The welfare rolls dropped three years BEFORE welfare reform:
Clinton, who urged companies to hire welfare recipients, said there has been a decline of almost 3.4 million recipients between January 1993 through May 1997. Its a 24 percent drop, the largest decrease inwelfare rolls in history and results in the lowest percentage of the population on welfare since 1970.
jfsfrnd 3 months ago
She is talking about the old AFDC program that didn't allow a recipient to work or go to school without threatening to cut their checks. TANF has a work requirement.
jfsfrnd 3 months ago
I think its sad reading a comment saying we must "consistently provide" rather than help temporarily to get a person or their families economic position advance to a independent role. Then we wonder why people on government welfare are stuck in it.
Seiku 3 months ago
How are religious organizations going to consistently feed, house and clothe and give medical care to children? Do families have to go from church to church to beg for dinner? Welfare currently makes able bodied parents work.
jfsfrnd 3 months ago
Wow, everything that Ron Paul believes!! VOTE for PAUL 2012!
Be your state's delegate and get him the candidacy!
erikiia 3 months ago
If you like Star Parker, try picking up a copy of Larry Elder's book "Ten things you can't say in America", it's a classic.
Riclists 4 months ago
It takes courage to go against the grain and political expectations of black Americans.
Black Americans who do not recite leftist positions are called race traitors and other terrible things. The war on poverty did not work. We need to EMPOWER people.
AtibbsSPARTAN 4 months ago
Aunt Jamima spouting the Koch brothers Tea Party line!
reader1321 4 months ago
@reader1321 You are the worst person I've encountered today. Also, try spelling your racial epithets correctly.
blarg76 4 months ago 3
This has been flagged as spam show
@blarg76
HOW THA FUCK YU EXCPEX NIGGAZ LIVE WIDOUT EBT??
ITS REPARATION WUT WHITE CRACKAZ DID US WIT SLAVERY!!!!
DAMN WHITE CRACKA FUCKS OWE US DAT MOENY!
NOW THEY TRYNA BRING US BLAX DOWN?!!
OH, SO WE CANT LIVE HIGH OFF THA HOG CUZ WE BLACK?
FUCK YOU PRICKS, I HOPE SUM CRAZYAZZ NIGGAZ SHOOTS YALL DEAD, STUPIT PUNKAZZ!!
ITS MI RITE NOT TO WORK, MY RITE DO DOPE, ITS MI RITE TO GET MY EBT, NO WHITE RACISTS TELL ME WUT TO DO, YU GO GIT A DAMN JOB AN PAY ME TRAZ, DAT WUT OBAMA PROMISE US, SEE NUKK??
QueerNation2012 1 month ago
@reader1321
Ah racism.....
AtibbsSPARTAN 4 months ago
@reader1321 These anti-Tea-Partiers are so racist!
dnmehay 3 months ago
@reader1321 That was directed *at* you, not in support of your comments. (Just in case you missed it...and the implicit sarcasm mark-up.)
dnmehay 3 months ago
My mom worked her way out of eastern Kentucky Appalachain poverty, and she has always said a lot of the things this lady is saying. Welfare just allows people to wallow in poverty at the whim of the state, and regulation and taxation keeps them down. I disagree with this lady's emphasis on religion though.
Nonoyawns 4 months ago
Local schools, reduced taxes that allow people to help people. Let the 'Church' do it's mandate; to help the poor, the widows and orphans. As Star said it was public(political) policy that ruined the family for the poor; better to have her unmarried and poor than married to someone trying to make his children's life better than his (or hers).
NewFrambian 4 months ago
I commend Star Parker for speaking out on this issue. As a young adult in the mid-90's, I thought the welfare "system" helped people down on their luck and brought them into the working world in a couple years- Until I read a book entitled "The Tyranny of Kindness" by Theresa Funiciello. I would encourage anyone interested in "helping people" through welfare read this book.
Schmauey 4 months ago 8
This has been flagged as spam show
FUCK RON PAUL 2012!
liza4u77 4 months ago
This women is amazing
hunt1516 4 months ago
Excellent points, but her point at the 7:00 minute mark utterly fails.This is suppose to be ReasonTV folks, not FaithTV. Endorsing contradictory premises will NOT lead to freedom. But, Star Parker is focusing on individual responsibility, and voluntary consent, so she's tacitly recognizing that faith is superfluous, and that individual rationality in this world is the only solution.
Intellisecular 4 months ago
@treadwithcaution How effective do you think filtering water is? Like most things, prevention is far easier than reaction.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@treadwithcaution Finding a "better, cleaner source" is the most unviable, unworkable solution to that problem that anyone could come up with. How do 6 million people find a "better, cleaner source?"
eirefrance 4 months ago
@treadwithcaution "nobody is putting dangerous chemicals into the water you drink."
Actually, lots of people put dangerous chemicals into my drinking water. Some of them did it for profit (for instance, to improve agricultural efficiency or from coal mining) and others out of laziness (dumping birth control pills into the toilet) or cheapness (avoiding paying hazardous waste removal costs by dumping it down a storm drain). And that is from the tap.
eirefrance 4 months ago
Socialism in some form may work in small nation states with its own language and identity keeping it homogeneous and separate from its neighbors. Comparing the US to such nations like comparing apples to oranges. The US needs to strip back big leviathan before liberty and true individual freedom is wiped from the face of the earth. Let the people educate themselves and dictate the free market. Get regulation and subsidy out of business. The nanny state is evil .
dd00hli 4 months ago
She has some very ambitious and admirable goals, but religion is not necessary to overcome. Religion is just another handicap.
AeroJimE27 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
You do not need religion to have a moral compass.
squirreljester2 4 months ago
This lady is on it. 100 percent right.
sonnybrown 4 months ago
Listen lady, I would LOVE a job. Do you know somebody who will give me one???
bulbinking 4 months ago
@bulbinking go make one
sonnybrown 4 months ago
@sonnybrown
Oh, okay. Great idea! Let me just go get a loa.. ohh, I get it. You're in with the banks, aren't you?
bulbinking 4 months ago
@bulbinking lol, NO. I'm not for banks mostly because of the Fed and how they manipulate the money supply. It's abhorrent and creates the distortion of the economy which makes things collapse on the middle class and the poor. But banks aren't the only source of money, are they?
sonnybrown 4 months ago
@sonnybrown
I'm in the position of having no job experience, and only a G.E.D. been trying to get jobs around here but its a college town so the students usually get first pick. I'm going to be moving back in with my family soon and hopefully there will be more jobs an this area since it has a lower population saturation.
bulbinking 4 months ago
You are a STAR Star Parker
mudvillehustler 4 months ago
An educated black conservative woman. Man she must get threatened all the time. I just loved her! Have to keep my eyes open for more of her interviews.
g00se99 4 months ago
Hmm, I live in one of those socialist countries with a big goverment.
And I can say that privatising healthcare was one of the worst ideas we ever implemented.
We are not suffering under a socialist yolk.
We are still a strong economy and we are doing rather well. Considering the current economic problems anyway.
thedutchman01 4 months ago
@thedutchman01 Met meer vrije markt zouden we het nog een stuk beter doen. De vrije markt is wat ons land economisch het sterkste land van de wereld maakte in de Gouden Eeuw. Het is waar het Britse rijk in de 19de eeuw zijn erg goede economische beleid op baseerde. De overheid bemoeit zich op dit moment te veel met ons. Mensen kunnen geen baan krijgen door domme regels zoals dat bedrijven een tijdelijke werker na 2 jaar permanent moeten aannemen of ontslaan(dat wordt meestal dus ontslaan).
doom032 4 months ago
@doom032
There is a reason the totally free market failed.
Oh and you saying people not being able to find a job. Well.... That's just nonsense.
Theres plenty of jobs out there. It might mean you have to do a job below your pay grade and/or education level though. Don't blame the government for that though.
Also on a public forum where everyone is talking english it is polite to talk back in english so that others can understand aswell, no matter if we are both dutch. The vid is english.
thedutchman01 3 months ago
@thedutchman01 The free market didn't fail, the reason it isn't around anymore is because politically connected people profit immensely from preventing or making it harder for competition to come about.
crazypants88 3 months ago
@crazypants88
No. The free market really did fail. Back during the idustrial revolution. In Europe we noticed, total free markets benefit the rich too much.
That is why governments started regulating it.
Socialism is nothing more then the recognistion that free markets cannot do eveything. And that some things should be done by the government.
Perfect example. Prisons. In the US those are private organisations that make a profit. In Europe we find that idea abhorrent.
thedutchman01 3 months ago
@thedutchman01 No itdidn't. This is factual, even in business magazines at the time before the final days of free markets people were clamoring for less competition. Not because the consumer was being hurt, it was because there's huge profit potential in cartelizing markets. The only viable way to cartelize a free market is for it not be free anymore.
The prison system in the US is not a free market and private doesn't equal free market.
crazypants88 3 months ago
@treadwithcaution #3 The Koch Brothers can, of course, purchase all the water in my area should "ownership" of water become the law of the land. I can't hope to outbid them for water. Which doesn't mean that my biological need for drinking water suddenly goes away. Its 100% against my own self-interest to let the wealthy few take a public good and destroy it for profit. And the self-interest of 99% of the population.
eirefrance 4 months ago
I believe in voluntary charity. i believe people sympathize with people who are struggling. Society is improving constantly because of improvements in technology and increases in productivity brought about by the new technology in the private sector. Government programs are not the best way to help the poor but they are seductive to the uninformed who don't understand the harm which they really create.
lexrex3 4 months ago
@treadwithcaution #2 Every month, I pay a co-op fee to my co-op, who then uses a portion of that to pay a water bill to DC Water. In addition, I pay income and local sales taxes, parts of which are used to filter water from the Potomac (which is "owned" by DC and Maryland) and from a few publicly owned and operated reservoirs. The water is then delivered to my home via pipes which my taxes again pay to maintain. "My" drinking water.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@treadwithcaution #1 If I am drinking a glass of water, and you ask me "whose glass of water is this?" it is proper to respond "Its MY glass of water" regardless of who owns either the glass or the water. The owner relationship between the subject and object is standard English grammar. You have to be a true ideologue to believe grammar should be rewritten to reflect titled ownership. The water we all drink is "our" drinking water.
eirefrance 4 months ago
Liberals have this rosy idea about what living off the government means. I honestly believe they think welfare dependency is like living like your middle class but in reality it is a self-imposed prison for free people because a government cannot provide anything more than what they provide to prisoners, literally.
I am an old school, Ronald Reagan, Rush Limbaugh conservative and I want to share with you a story Ronald Reagan shared on his radio show about this. Enjoy!
watch?v=8gIxuOabGBE
MrConservative608 4 months ago
Peter Schiff supports Walmart sending all your jobs to sweat shop factories in Communist China and empowering them and then he wants to get rid of welfare, that's the only thing that stops people from starving because they can't get jobs because they've been sent to sweat shop factories in Communist China.
BannedUfos 4 months ago
@BannedUfos You are a moron. There is nothing wrong with buying items that can be made cheaply and of decent quality by China, from China. Free trade makes us ALL more wealthy. I suggest that you watch some of Milton Friedman's lectures and read up on F.A. Hayek instead of listening to all that Keynesian crap that you apparently have been spoon fed. BTW, it isn't businesses' job to give you a job. You don't deserve a job. You earn your keep and you negotiate your own wage. It is that simple.
dlstb 4 months ago
This woman needs to learn that religion is the opposite of morality. Blindly following what other people tell you based on faith is not a foundation of morality. Thinking of yourself and how you affect others, then realizing it is to your own benefit to be kind and fair to those around you is.
JaySee5 4 months ago
I can tell right from wrong and I don't subscribe to any religion.
baihbalm 4 months ago
This is such a dumb and unproven (and/or disproven) talking point for economic and fiscal conservatives. Backed up by NO empirical evidence whatsoever, a lot of hearsay and individual "examples" that usually are few and far between. Anti-gov't types have nothing in the way of REAL evidence that the welfare state 'doesn't work', so they trot out rhetorical nonsense like talk of "dependency" supposedly created by these programs. If dependency DOES happen on any large scale, it's in Sweden.
whoo689 4 months ago
Besides, isn't Star Parker one of those far-right morons who regularly goes to bullshit conventions like the Values Voter Summit?? WHY is Reason Tv interviewing HER of all people, esp. on such an important topic? You couldn't get ANY better guests? Maybe a SCHOLAR of the subject? Not some dumbass conservative commentator with a stupid-ass name.
"Star" Yeah, that's a REAL good first name. What ethnicity is that?? Stars belong in the sky and Hollywood.
whoo689 4 months ago
@whoo689 what crawled up your ass and died? is nothing she said in this interview based in reality? I doubt it. You can study the OUTCOMES of past attempts to solve problems to recognize what is necessary to fix what is wrong. if it's broke fix it.
Ravengaurd6 4 months ago
@whoo689 If you choose to deny a century of bad results, that's up to you. Go ahead, don't learn from the past and others' mistakes. The welfare system has been fueled by people voting in politicians who take on gov't debt to provide you with welfare programs and all on the guarantee that the next generation will repay the loan. Last I checked, when you take out a loan in someone else's name, that is fraud and theft. Worse than that, gov't debt is literal slavery. Keep liking your slavery.
dlstb 4 months ago
LEAST generous welfare states?? I'm not sure welfare (in any form, whether TANF/AFDC, UI, etc.), unless you're in a wealthy area, I suppose, payments CAN be so generous in the U.S. that you could "become dependent." Besides, how is the "dependency" an indictment of the system? It was your OWN fault that you became lazy and complacent because of the 'free money'! Don't scapegoat.
whoo689 4 months ago
Is it REALLY (or was, anyway) possible to be "on welfare" for 7 years straight?? All I hear about this to 'prove' it was even possible under federal and/or state rules for the programs themselves are hearsay and a few examples here and there like Star Parker. Wasn't unemployment insurance only allowed for about half a year before they extended it to 52 weeks during this recession and then 99 weeks?
7 years, gimme a break...
"Welfare dependency" Lol. Uh... doesn't America have one of the
whoo689 4 months ago
@bluepurplegreen758 excuse me, in my mind i wrote the name "Star" in that comment
desirefirst 4 months ago
WOW! Thank HEAVEN for Star Parker! THANK YOU, Reason TV for this WONDERFUL post!
ThLuckyOne 4 months ago
Yea take away peoples social security benefits; that will make them less poor! What a crazy bitch! The only sane thing she had to say was about school choice.
insdel2004 4 months ago
@insdel2004 name calling does not prove your point.
nildeen 4 months ago
@insdel2004 It will since people pay lot more than they ever receive from it and the majority of the money that goes into these programs end up as administrative costs i.e. not going to the people that it's supposed to go to.
crazypants88 4 months ago
"I know firsthand about welfare and welfare dependency because of my own life, living seven years in and out," says Star Parker
What a fucking hypocrite!
insdel2004 4 months ago
@insdel2004 huh? So if you've been-there-done-that you don't know better after doing it? I disagree.
nildeen 4 months ago
@nildeen It still makes her a hypocrite!
insdel2004 4 months ago
I agree with Star. Get government out of Welfare now, and while they're at it, get the hell out of business loans and subsidies too.
blogegog 4 months ago
Did she advocate private retirement savings accounts for the poor? I hope that she is just crazy, and not truly evil. Social Security must be there for all Americans -- ESPECIALLY those who are at the bottom. Anyone who disagrees has ZERO compassion (i.e. a psychopath).
MortimerTheClueless 4 months ago
@MortimerTheClueless "Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all...
ecuadmail 4 months ago
We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain." -Frederic Bastiat
ecuadmail 4 months ago 10
@ecuadmail crap
derstahlmann 4 months ago
@MortimerTheClueless We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain." -Frederic Bastiat
Cleopas82 4 months ago
Ron Paul 2012!
I live in motherfucking socialist republic of Ireland and I see this nanny state shit every day and everywhere. This lady is a legend! Bravo!
Fuck the state, fuck EU, fuck Obama!
johammbass 4 months ago 45
@johammbass i always thought ireland was exceptionally free economically.
tfarley1990 4 months ago
@johammbass Huh...you'd think, given that, Ireland would have a more onerous corporate tax rate.
But foreign business LUUUUUVS Ireland!
(btw, I agree. Ron Paul 2012!!!)
QuartuvLarry 4 months ago
@johammbass
how did this comment get such a high rating?
socialist republic of ireland?
lol ireland and most of Europe are neoliberal
joey3469 4 months ago
@joey3469 - socialism = liberalism, they go hand in hand, they both strive to have gov't control all and that includes the people
daGOONKiE 4 months ago
This woman gets it., the world needs more Star Parkers. Thanks for another great interview Reason.tv
jrikus 4 months ago 3
Every word with public in it front of it sucks. School,defender,restroom, transportation
nomyaw 4 months ago 32
@nomyaw ...toilets
independence4wales 4 months ago
@nomyaw
Just like the netherla-oh wait...
bulbinking 4 months ago
Seriously Reason...this chick is a hardcore neo-con. I'm sure there are better people to talk about welfare for a libertarian magazine.
jppuertorico85 4 months ago
@jppuertorico85 Doesn't mean what she has to say on this issue is wrong.
beigelycheenut 4 months ago 6
@jppuertorico85 Star Parker is being interviewd by Reason, not representing them. There is a difference.
ZombiedustXXX 4 months ago
amen sister get the government out of charity!
ABGAN100 4 months ago 2
@treadwithcaution how do you figure that it belongs to you?
I drink it, don't I?
eirefrance 4 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
So whats the solution? We've shipped jobs overseas, destroyed public education, let public transportation fall by the wayside and have given the poor and especially the black far more chance to have a criminal record than anyone else. All of that makes it incredibly hard to hold a job. Do you people really believe some libertarian fairy is going to solve those preconditions if only Koch Industries was allowed to dump harmful toxins in our drinking water?
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance
Reread your last sentence. I'll wait.
It's a non-sequitur. Don't make yourself out to be a buffoon, even if you are one.
mightisright 4 months ago
@mightisright Oh, beeeeeee-hayve!!! Just because I know you can't have A without B when it comes to libertarian beliefs doesn't make me a buffoon. I'd say it makes me a regular viewer of ReasonTV who knows that there is only one side to every issue; da gubmint be bad. Don't get mad at me if nuance and context are always ignored.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance I'm going to second mightisright's comment, but I'll humor you.
Outsourcing: The state has made employment too expensive.
Education: Controlled by the state
Transportation: Controlled by the state
The Poor: That's the point of this video. It's the state.
Also, the poor can't start their own businesses: The state
The drug war destroys poor neighborhoods: The state
Less government meddling = better opportunities for the poor to improve their own lives.
shamgar001 4 months ago
@shamgar001
Transportation: Controlled by the state
Education: Controlled by the state
Are you fucking stupid? Of course PUBLIC transportation and PUBLIC education are controlled by the state. Are you really such an ideologue that you had to point THAT out? They're also controlled by the state in countries that have great PUBLIC transportation, like the thriving economy of South Korea.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance I pointed it out because it reinforces my main point. Perhaps you need to study rhetoric before trying to argue with people.
shamgar001 4 months ago
@shamgar001 If you think pointing out that the government runs these public services is prima facie proof that anything govt run is always going to be dysfunctional, then it's not rhetoric you need, it's logic. The example I gave of South Korea being one of a hundred examples that prove your "point" false.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance
Your totally uneducated about the issue.
1. Minimum wages, taxes, and regulations are the forces for ship jobs over seas. (Gov knows better)
2. Public education is being funded at ever increasing rates with a decline in performance. (No individual choice)
3. No ethnicity is more supported and represented by Dems then blacks (other than American Indians) Yet conditions for them have deteriorated faster than any other group (other than Indians).
4. Libertarians support pollution regs.
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@jetrpg22 1. Minimum wages and regulations are the forces very few jobs over seas. The reason jobs go over seas is that it cost $0.50/hr for the same labor you get for $10/hr, way to few people get pay min wage for it to make a real difference. And most regulations that the government require for product and the same for products made over seas when they come to the US.
2. By most scales Public education performance has changed very little in the last 40 years, only some minor improvements.
Loathomar 4 months ago
4. Libertarians, in my experience, have a large range of views on pollution regs. Things like rivers and lakes polluted by one company/person/group is easy, but things like air pollution where a company can effect millions, but just a little bit, become far more difficult for the average Libertarian's view. There is no easy way to deal with it but regulation, which means bureaucracy, which most Libertarian's are nearly always against. What do you do about air pollution?
Loathomar 4 months ago
@Loathomar
They are quite clear on it read more.
Air pollution , is what per say?
But they favor gov. action one the impact or generation is spread out beyond specific interest.
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@Loathomar
1. The while you gain tons of cheaper goods.
groups.csail.mit.edu/mac/users/rauch/worktime/
Jobs leave becuase of the stated reasons almost w/o exception. (min. wage = rip)
2. We used to be in the top five, the the ton ten, now we are are in the top twenty cheer.
Because we normalize the test scores to last year (2 years) performance very little change is seen.
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@jetrpg22 1. You only gain cheaper good if the good can be produced cheaper hear then in China, so you need up with wages that are $1/hr and the price of good don't change. Even at $5/hr working 40hrs a week, 52 weeks a year, you would only have $10,400 per year, which is not enough to live off in the US and it would still be too costly to manufacture goods in the US.
2. The score I was looking at way from the OECD, not the US standard testing. And we have been in the mid-teen for the last 30yr
Loathomar 4 months ago
And how can we stand to be near Germany in education... no wounder our economy is doing so poorly, if only we could educate like Japan or New Zealand or Canada, though kind of educational system that are driving force of the world... Unlike the Germany or the US ranking in the teens, who people could never drive the world economy, right?
Loathomar 4 months ago
@Loathomar
Even more interesting is how the numbers are played with ... kinda.
See you'll see OECD-countries but many more take the test and out preform the US. In 09 5-6 more countries were in front of the US on top of the others in math (occurs for all the areas).
OECD PISA started in 2000 (99),
Reading is the only thing the US does well and is simply the least required of the the advanced jobs.
Regardless, I didn't connect the economy with education. Only that its state controlled.
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@Loathomar
1. "You only gain cheaper good if the good can be produced cheaper hear then in China, so you need up with wages that are $1/hr" ... etc. Doesn't mean anything itself. Its the cost of production/value that matters; of which labor is often 1/3-1/10th the cost. (high end is like McDonalds, etc). If it + other factors (productivity levels, value, shipping, regs., taxes, etc) make is cost effective in the US, that is where it will be done.
2.OECD has the US 24th in 03, 27th in 06, etc.
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@Loathomar
1. Just saw this this is only one small way it work ... almost every aspect of business in the US is limited in similar fashion.
youtube.com/watch?v=MD9vK5bCS7I
People just don't understand what regulations do, how protectionism is evil, etc. If you look at these types of reg.s the damage becomes far worse as result of them.
In the video it addresses how china itself has the same policy, which effect is to rise global price of the good from low to artificially high; harmful to all.
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@jetrpg22 1. Minimum wages force jobs overseas? Really? So, if only Americans worked for a dollar a day, we'd have no unemployment? Fuck off with that stupid shit. The wages paid in China would be beyond unlivable in the US. 2. No choice? We don't have charter and private schools all over the country? Thats news to me. 3. Thanks for being a simpleton. 4. You mean they support private ownership of resources with the owners deciding how it gets used.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance
So, if only Americans worked for a dollar a day, we'd have no unemployment?
Yeah most likely. Well not a dollar a day.... whatever the job was worth. When a job is not productive it ceases to exist (some may call this shipping jobs off). I doubt anyone would work for a $1 hr, their labor is most likely worth more. However, all the regulations, red tape, taxes are added on top of that min. wage. So $7 hr is more like $11hr, etc.
89% in public schools , 3% home schools.
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@jetrpg22 "When a job is not productive it ceases to exist" Yeah, and guess what, when a job doesn't pay enough to live and eat on, people cease to work there. Like $1/day.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance
That's when the DNC and GOP brings Mexicans in to do those jobs and tax you to support their welfare, health care and health care benefits. You get f*cked twice. No jobs and you have to pay for social welfare benefits. At least, the GOP admits that they fucked you. But the DNC does not give a shit about you. It's the 1% that screwed you. Wrong, the government allowed the 1% to screw you.
666sigma 4 months ago
@666sigma The DNC and GOP "bring in" Mexicans? Are you that fucking full of ignorant ideology. The DNC and GOP "bring in" immigrant workers? The fucking free market "brings in" immigrant workers, shit-for-brains. They go to where the jobs are and the corporate capitalists hire them for lower wages. Please, tell me you're not this stupid.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance
You are right the DNC and GOP doesn't bring them in, but the unholy alliance exists. The GOP wants the cheap labor and the DNC wants the voters. Illegal immigration is wealth redistribution at its finest. The business owners get the benefit of cheaper labor and depressed wages, the taxpayer pays for all of their social welfare benefits and the Democrats increase their voter base. In addition, the DNC knows that the welfare base will also be increased by the illegals.
666sigma 4 months ago
@666sigma The DNC wants the voters? The hordes of illegals who come out to vote in the magical fairy land called Beckitopia? Ha!
eirefrance 3 months ago
@eirefrance
Why do you think Rick Perry would give "in state" college tuition to illegal aliens? Why does he oppose a border fence? Do you really think that these are "compassionate" conservative positions? He could not get elected in Texas if he opposed, either. It is about the vote. Yes, there are plenty of illegals that can vote and they have plenty of somewhat more legal relatives that also vote.
The 14th amendment did not give citizenship to illegal babies born in this country.
666sigma 3 months ago
@eirefrance
"3. Thanks for being a simpleton" If a simpleton understand that, "3. No ethnicity is more supported and represented by Dems then blacks (other than American Indians) Yet conditions for them have deteriorated faster than any other group (other than Indians)." Why can't you?
Or at least attempt to refute it, which you can't. See the pattern; ps name calling is weak.
4. Yes, unless they negatively impact others, thats the libertarian view, and pollution does. So.... your point?
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@jetrpg22 What the hell does "no ethnicity is more supported and represented by Dems than blacks." What on earth does that mean. How have blacks been "supported and represented by Dems?" And what on earth do you mean "conditions have deteriorated faster for blacks than any other group?" Under what rubric? Real income for blacks has grown faster than for the country as a whole since the 60s. Care to explain where you pulled that out of your ass from?
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance
It means what it says.
The black household 60s, in 2010 dollars, was $15,000 lower than whites. In 10 it was $15,500 lower (from the 50s-mid 70s blacks where closing this gap).
Unemployment is 2-4 times that of whites today (high-end if you count those who gave up looking for a job and on 'assistance').
Wanna start on marriage and child raising?
With the Civil rights Act and previous dev. black were on a positive track. Following Dem policies gets you Dammed results.
Enough said?
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@jetrpg22 Okay, according to the census, black per capita income between 1967 and 2007 rose from 8,002 to 19,041 (in constant dollars), a growth of ~138%. White income, during the same period, rose from 14,863 to 29,785, a growth of ~100%. So, black income improved at a higher rate than white during that 40 year period. In roughly the same period of time, unemployment numbers for blacks have stayed fairly stable.
eirefrance 3 months ago
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@jetrpg22 Of course Per Capita isn't Household, I used the numbers I found, not the ones I invented. Besides, household sizes change over time, so Per Capita is a better measure.
Still, though it seems to me Per Capita numbers are a better measurement of actual earnings by black individuals, lets assume we use your statistics instead of mine, where do the Dem policies come in? How have "Dem policies" affected this change? What "Dem policies" have affected this change?
eirefrance 3 months ago
@eirefrance
Well there is no Proof, statistics is not much of a proof science.
Agree on per capita.
Because as Blacks moved into more Dem districts the coarse of closing the inequality gap slowed then reverse. The other linkage between Dem policy and correlations. Family structure, welfare, poverty, etc. Its not like it was one day you can point at its failed system that has developed over a period of time and is harmful.
That being said today a great many Rep.s support these bad policies.
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@jetrpg22 Wait, you have to establish that these policies are bad, and we haven't established that. Might I suggest "When Work Disappears" by William Julius Wilson? He discusses the social ills that afflict black families and individuals in great length, and provides a more complicated answer than welfare policies. Barring that suggestion, you still haven't shown me that blacks are worse off today than they were 40 years ago and what Dem policies created this shift.
eirefrance 3 months ago
@eirefrance
They are established , read a book Thomas sowell will work.
I would never say blacks are Worse off today than 40 years ago . NO AMERICAN IS, VERY FEW PEOPLE ANY WHERE IN THE WORLD ARE.
What is true is that Blacks were closing income gap in the 20th century up to the mid 70s. Oddly enough, shortly after they stopped.
Note i have read that book,, note earlier discussion on the minimum wage, note your now providing evidence for my position, note Sowell examines the issue better.
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@jetrpg22 Oh, where did I get my numbers? Census data. Where did you get yours?
eirefrance 3 months ago
@eirefrance
Census data:
census gov/prod/2008pubs/p60-235 pdf -(2007 Report)
census gov/prod/3/98pubs/p60-203 pdf -(1997 Report)
census gov/main/ [\/\/\/\/\/\/ ] /access html -tools (data sets)
Also gonna be done with this it was fun but i feel that i have clearly outlined the at face value issues and some data that does indicate issue.
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@jetrpg22 Now, having refuted your facts with sourced material, I have to ask what this has to with "Dem policies?" Why don't we start on marriage and child raising? Tell me how Democrats have killed the black family structure?
eirefrance 3 months ago
@eirefrance
Because you refuted my facts with a statistical trick. One of which i cannot even find the census data set for...
Now that i have shown that yest blacks income as a % of their '67 does increase a tad more than whites '67. But the difference and % between black and white HH and per capita income is growing. What do you say. (If you look until 74ish blacks are closing this gap).
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@jetrpg22 4. Explain to me how "negatively impacting others" is decided in the libertarian world.
eirefrance 4 months ago
@eirefrance
georgeoughttohelp com
Look up negative rights/freedom/liberty.
Your actions cannot hurt others by taking from their what is naturally theirs. I think mises institute has 1.5 hour lecture somewhere on its page that is quite good.
In this case Gov. steps in w/ laws/reg.s when the harm done is a common harm (to a large group of people) so water pollution. (The levels may not individually effect anyone but society as a whole, oh and possibility of harm must be proven). Individuals tort.
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@jetrpg22 "In this case Gov. steps in w/ laws/reg.s when the harm done is a common harm (to a large group of people) so water pollution. (The levels may not individually effect anyone but society as a whole, oh and possibility of harm must be proven)."
How is this different than what we currently have with the EPA?
eirefrance 3 months ago
@eirefrance
Cap and Trade, carbon trading, and a ton more of ineffective measures aimed at an unknown threat for the goal of an unknown outcome all w/o the consent of the people (no votes).
Secondhand tobacco smoke is a Group A Carcinogen; in other-words, something that science has found is twice as less harmful as the fluoride in our drinking water is causing cancer all over.
Hell, database errors in the EPA have cost millions (chemical A is rate 1, but is a 2 [10 year of litigation to fix])
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@eirefrance
Continuing from last post-
Simply stated the EPA does what it wants without evidence, without concern how it violates individual freedom. You have to Prove issue or damage (ie it can and will occur) to met the libertarian criteria to sanction; the EPA sanctions and first asks questions later. It acts from political drive not a moral one.
As most agencies wrongfully do.
Government needs to prove its position before implementing it.
Osha ex.
cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb105-36.html
jetrpg22 3 months ago
@jetrpg22
Just a side note -
washingtonpost com/national/health-science/epa-needed-more-data-before-ruling-on-greenhouse-gas-emissions-report-says/2011/09/28/gIQABs2X5K_story.html
jetrpg22 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@eirefrance
Maybe we should keep living the big gov fairy tail after all, "We've shipped jobs overseas, destroyed public education, let public transportation fall by the wayside and have given the poor and especially the black far more chance to have a criminal record than anyone else. All of that makes it incredibly hard to hold a job."
Enough said?
jetrpg22 4 months ago
@eirefrance First, that central planning fails is a poor argument for more of it.
Second, there are lots of productive jobs that contribute to a thriving economy - just that Americans have grown too soft to do them: /watch?v=cQhqM_mvnQw
Third, you illustrate a common fallacy that comes from looking at only part of the Libertarian argument. Libertarians generally support property rights. If you poison someone else's water, you pay for damaging property, worse if someone got hurt.
Shanockdotcom 4 months ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Star Parker is a neocon religious right nut.
boredmonkey29 4 months ago
Comment removed
TommyTurntables1 4 months ago
Gee, I wonder why they brought in all this gubbmint welfare in the first place? Seems like the unemployed and indigent had it far better in the 19th century.
draoi99 4 months ago
@draoi99 Is your implication that they're only better off now due to welfare? If so, prove it.
Moragauth 4 months ago
Amen
Lacocacolaman 4 months ago
LOL she said religion is a moral compass. Everything else she said was decent though.
Berelore 4 months ago
the title reminded me of ron paul :)
WhatAxBrit 4 months ago
if she was on welfare...and shes successful now...how is that a negative for welfare? lol
qualityrkc 4 months ago
I wasn't talking about replacement simply about legal expectations. That was to highlight differences. Namely, private citizens can legally decide who needs a boost and who needs a kick in the pants more easily than government. Those who receive the kick in the pants may be mad, but they are less likely to feel legally entitled to those services as well. The point is that government welfare introduces problems. The good may outweigh the bad, but we should at least ask the question.
crusky 4 months ago
Serving in the Middle East, I was able to compare their poverty with America's. We have a lot of resources for the poor to access. Perhaps your location makes the commute hard but the 3rd worlders have no issue making feet bleed for a bowl of dry rice.
Ragged, owned nothing- not even a push cart & barely clothed. If you wear layers & shoes, you're well off.
JackNeet 4 months ago
wow, this woman's whole face lights up when she smiles, beautiful
desirefirst 4 months ago
Does reasontv work for rockefeller werewolf?
Licmycat 4 months ago
Confusing. Didn't welfare help her get her own life back on track? Is her account implying that she would have been better off it she had denied the welfare assistance? That doesn't hold water IMO. She's obviously doing well, and welfare obviously helped her get there. If not, she should clearly vocalize that, and she didn't.
zassounotsukushi 4 months ago
@zassounotsukushi I think the point is that she was able to get out *in spite* of the welfare system. Just because the system is intended to help doesn't mean it actually does help.
shamgar001 4 months ago
@zassounotsukushi she is working to provide an alternative to Welfare to help people in her own community ...she is sharing what she learned with other and helps to improve a broken system
LeGioNoFZioN 4 months ago
The problem welfare people are the golem soulless corporations. They should be killed. No prob. They are nothing but welfare whore queens. Evil satanists.
Licmycat 4 months ago
I asked a real far left girl here at work what the point of welfare was once and she thought her best response was "to help people get by while they find a job" and I thought, what's the point of the job then?
The fact is if you ask any liberal if they think it's fair that a person pay back in taxes what they took out in the form of welfare once they find a job, they'll say NO. Why? "because then they'll never find a job" is what I hear as a response right away. Like DUH that's happening NOW
chronDiggity 4 months ago
GOOD JOB STAR DONT BE CORRUPTED
jnixongo00 4 months ago
she doesn't understand what black people go through each day.
oh wait
chronDiggity 4 months ago
@chronDiggity ARE YOU HIGH YOU SEE HE ALL IN THE HOODZ
jnixongo00 4 months ago
Comment removed
LeGioNoFZioN 4 months ago
Comment removed
chronDiggity 4 months ago
@chronDiggity I didn't read the sarcasm, my bad ....
LeGioNoFZioN 4 months ago
@LeGioNoFZioN
all good!
chronDiggity 4 months ago
Wellfare reform is long over due...... along with many other things!
psurge38 4 months ago
The difference between private charity and welfare is that people feel entitled to welfare and not to charity. The charity can always be refused to those who are deemed to undeserving. On the other hand, welfare is viewed as a right and is rarely refused to someone who would otherwise receive it.
crusky 4 months ago