# Political view point



## nephilim (Jan 20, 2014)

I have been on this site for a little while now (lurking for much much longer) and it seems there is a split in peoples political views.

I come from what many US people would call a "Socialist" country, in that we give financial aid in untold amounts of formats and have "socialist healthcare". Now here is my question for you.

What are your views on the following:
Handouts for the genuinely needy (such as a subsidy for actually searching for work, totally not more than $10/£10 a day)
Assistance for paying rent/mortgages (such as a housing subsidy for only when you are out of work, totalling not more than $100/£100 a month)
Healthcare paid for out of your wage (totalling not more than 10% of your wage AFTER the income tax threshold, and free for children)

Also for personal issues what are your political views on the following:

Fiscal responsibility and benefits - If you save a certain amount per year (say for example $6000/£6000) you get tax relief on it, as you will likely NOT need to draw on the above listed handouts for a while.
Free education - Free education up to the age of 19, and reduced cost up to the age of 21 for university (to a cost of no more than $6000/£6000 per year)

I am genuinely interested in your views, and if you are for/against and how you go about implementation of said views.


----------



## slewfoot (Nov 6, 2013)

nephilim said:


> I have been on this site for a little while now (lurking for much much longer) and it seems there is a split in peoples political views.
> 
> I come from what many US people would call a "Socialist" country, in that we give financial aid in untold amounts of formats and have "socialist healthcare". Now here is my question for you.
> 
> ...


Just my humble opinion


----------



## slewfoot (Nov 6, 2013)

ignore the above post tried to delete.


----------



## luckyduck2 (Mar 31, 2014)

nephilim said:


> I have been on this site for a little while now (lurking for much much longer) and it seems there is a split in peoples political views.
> 
> I come from what many US people would call a "Socialist" country, in that we give financial aid in untold amounts of formats and have "socialist healthcare". Now here is my question for you.
> 
> ...


 We would have more money for aid for our citizens if we were not giving so much to other nations. We support the united nations and most of those guys don't even like us.

As far as saving 6000.00 American dollars to get eaten up with inflation every year. With the working class shrinking or middleclass along with the dollar. People don't have any extra money at the end of the month. With Co-pays for the kids doctors,tolls on hwy, emission inspection on your older car says you have to get a tuneup or pay a monthly fine. In Short what working class person can save 6000.00 yet alone 600.00 while rasing a family a year.


----------



## nephilim (Jan 20, 2014)

luckyduck2 said:


> We would have more money for aid for our citizens if we were not giving so much to other nations. We support the united nations and most of those guys don't even like us.
> 
> As far as saving 6000.00 American dollars to get eaten up with inflation every year. With the working class shrinking or middleclass along with the dollar. People don't have any extra money at the end of the month. With Co-pays for the kids doctors,tolls on hwy, emission inspection on your older car says you have to get a tuneup or pay a monthly fine. In Short what working class person can save 6000.00 yet alone 600.00 while rasing a family a year.


Sorry to sound dumb...what are Co-Pays?


----------



## Casie (Feb 26, 2014)

Government STEALING from producers to redistribute to others is theft.

Charity is giving freely to those who YOU wish to help.

This is what volunteer organizations and churches were for. We used to meet each week in church or each month in clubs. We used to form volunteer organizations to tackle any problems that cropped up. Neighbors would check in on elderly. Church members would make sure families were fed. Handyman jobs were given to unemployed fathers. Widows were looked after. By lifting up our neighbors, we lifted up our entire community. How many of your grandfathers were members of a Lion's Club or something similar? 

Government doesn't want to help people. It only wants to fuel itself. They need people to be dependent on them. Today it is illegal for women's groups to feed the hungry. It was illegal for regular citizens to bring canned goods and water to help victims of Hurricane Sandy. 

Do you think Obamacare is really going to help more sick children than the Shriners or St. Judes? 

Communities, churches, and volunteer organizations do good works.

Government organizations are always corrupt, self serving, schemes.

Imagine how generous you could be to Wounded Warriors, Animal Shelters, Children's Hospitals and Food Pantries, if only you weren't so heavily burdened paying the bill for abortions, acorn, solar subsidies, cash for clunkers, bailouts, IRS parties in Vegas.....


----------



## PalmettoTree (Jun 8, 2013)

nephilim said:


> Sorry to sound dumb...what are Co-Pays?


If you go to the doctor and he charges £120. You are charged a co-pay of £20 for each visit and the government or insurance pays the rest.


----------



## dwight55 (Nov 9, 2012)

nephilim said:


> I have been on this site for a little while now (lurking for much much longer) and it seems there is a split in peoples political views.
> 
> I come from what many US people would call a "Socialist" country, in that we give financial aid in untold amounts of formats and have "socialist healthcare". Now here is my question for you.
> 
> ...


Genuinely needy people need help: they need a job. They need temporary housing, . . . help in understanding how to care for themselves, . . . and a job. A combination of communal living (barracks style) or small, fully supplied apartments should be available.

I am basically against unemployment compensation beyond a basic 4 to 6 weeks. Make it the full amount the person used to earn before losing his/her job, . . . when the 4 to 6 weeks is done, . . . they are done, . . . they are on their own or go to temporary housing.

I am not for any kind of income tax. Change it to a sales tax, . . . everyone pays 5% on every purchase except for food. That includes stocks, bonds, and all other investments.

Free education is just another name for state controlled education. Work it out in the free market place, . . . it becomes a much better product. The only products perfected by politicians are war and graft and corruption. Hands off on all the rest.

I am a 100% proponent of "he who will not work, shall not eat". It requires a full work ethic of everyone, . . . and the world is absolutely full of parasite scumbags who want only to take someone else's effort and use it for their own personal agenda.

As for your question, co-pays are an amount the individual pays to a doctor or hospital, in addition to the insurance, to help with the bill supposedly, . . . but in reality, it is designed to stem the "every day" trek to the hospital or dr's office. Tomorrow I go see my skin specialist, . . . I will cough up $30 for the privilege of being there, . . . if I go back the next day, it is another $30.

After my open heart surgery several years ago, I was told to go to physical therapy 3 days a week. They were going to charge me $40 for each visit. I declined the PT, . . . and am doing fine, . . .

May God bless,
Dwight


----------



## Notsoyoung (Dec 2, 2013)

Personally I do not have a problem with helping those truly in need. The problem is that too many people are more then willing to let the government take care of them. It's a conundrum that is difficult to answer. Are you really helping someone if you take care of them so that they no longer even try to help themselves. It seems to me that it would a terrible life if you had to depend on someone else to take care of you, especially if there wasn't anything wrong with you that would prevent you from taking care of yourself. On the other hand there are people who are handicapped in one way or another, or are elderly with no means of support. One kind of society would you have if you just let them starve? It's a difficult line to walk.


----------



## Casie (Feb 26, 2014)

It's kind of a moot point, really. How much longer do you think producers can carry this load? Atlas Shrugs in 3....2....















(Some picky-peter will get all bent out of shape about the retirement graphic. No, I'm not saying retirees are anything like welfare recipients. They paid and paid and paid! But we all know that money is long gone. The political-criminals raided that lockbox years ago. But the bill still needs to be paid.)


----------



## Moonshinedave (Mar 28, 2013)

I have no problem helping the needy, nor my government helping people iWHO ARE TRYING TO HELP THEMSELVES, however the problem arises when trying to do so, because what the government creates is a culture of people who no longer has the desire to earn a living, but rather wait for handouts. The burden then should be on the government to regulate who is truly in need or who is happy living off the system, a job the government can't or won't do.
Not only has this government created non-working class which is burden on the people who do work, but I believe when people no longer contribute to society, they lose their self respect, if one no longer respect him/herself, they have no respect for their fellow mankind, which I believe leads many into crime. 
Government needs to get out of healthcare, and stay out period. No one in need of medical treatment could be refused treatment when going to the emergency room, that was true many many years before Obama care, and it was how it should be now.
I hope this answers some of the questions on how I feel about things.


----------



## pastornator (Apr 5, 2013)

The misnomer in the socialist agenda is that the government GIVES something to the people. That is NEVER true, and Margaret Thatcher said it most elequoently of all: "The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other peoples' money." The government HAS no money that the people were not first coerced to give it via taxation.

Want medical coverage paid when you visit the doctor? Fine, but realize that whether or not you like it, the money is FIRST going to come from your payroll, and that even if you do not use the medical service.

Want social welfare? Fine, but again, someone WILL pay for it first whether or not they make use of the program themselves. In fact, socialism COUNTS on people paying for things that they will never access to make it possible to pay for those who will use the system, and who also will not likely pay themselves because they are more than likely not productive citizens who earn a paycheck.

OPM... Sooner or later it runs out and it becomes YOUR MONEY they want.


----------



## Denton (Sep 18, 2012)

"Welfare" should be handled within the community, where people know who is the bum and who is the truly needy. The community is where the family is. Family first, and that means that the family aides those in need, first.
Faceless agencies handing out other people's money to those who show up and fill out forms is not the way to do it.

As far as my country is concerned, we need to get back to the way things were meant to be. The federal government should operate strictly within the confines of the constitution, should disband all agencies that clearly overstep constitutional boundaries, do away with the Fed as well as the IRS, collect taxes through import, export and excise taxes and allow Americans the opportunity to thrive, rather than regulating the individuals to death and controlling the states like children.


----------



## Slippy (Nov 14, 2013)

This says it all...
Wow: 32 year old welfare recipient on why she sits at home and takes welfare, rather than work | ViralConservative


----------



## pastornator (Apr 5, 2013)

Denton said:


> "Welfare" should be handled within the community, where people know who is the bum and who is the truly needy. The community is where the family is. Family first, and that means that the family aides those in need, first.
> Faceless agencies handing out other people's money to those who show up and fill out forms is not the way to do it.
> 
> As far as my country is concerned, we need to get back to the way things were meant to be. The federal government should operate strictly within the confines of the constitution, should disband all agencies that clearly overstep constitutional boundaries, do away with the Fed as well as the IRS, collect taxes through import, export and excise taxes and allow Americans the opportunity to thrive, rather than regulating the individuals to death and controlling the states like children.


Isn't it ironic that those who had no welfare system, no socialism, no regulation of work hours, etc., BUILT the America that we now take for granted. They built the roads, the cities, the rural farmlands, and the pride that IS America, and they did it by working out problems, difficulties, finances, and all the hurt and pain that comes along with getting ahead in life. Today, we are just coasting on their efforts until it is all used up and burned to the ground and we're told that "if we just cared everything could be better." The word "care" equals GIVE MORE TAX DOLLARS and the word "better" equals THE SAME AS OUR POOR NEIGHBOR WHO HAS NOTHING EITHER. Yet, the PARTY MEMBERS who promulgate this leftist way of life have ALL their needs met on the backs of the people. Sort of reminds me of the places we used to call "red" this or that.


----------



## paraquack (Mar 1, 2013)

I don't know about your country, but it seems that back in 1964 (I think) when the "Great Society" came to be, the poor found it was so much easier to be poor and take the handouts from the government. Then they read the book "How to raise children for fun and profit". As a paramedic working in the hospital in Waukegan, IL (in training) I saw an infant (4 months old, I believe) brought in by her mother and the boyfriend. The child had obvious chemical burns around it's mouth. It turned out to be that the child ingested formula with sodium hydroxide, or caustic soda in it. As soon as the media heard about it, they were interviewing the parents, who were screaming how they were going to sue the formula manufacturer. Since the doctor knew the formula would have been curdled in the can and wouldn't go through a nipple, the police investigated and picked up up the remainder of the formula can from the family's apartment, there was no sodium hydroxide in it. The parents mixed the stuff in the bottle with the formula and gave it to their 4 month old daughter so they could sue the manufacturer and make tons of bucks (money). The child's esophagus was destroyed, the sodium hydroxide got into the chest and abdomen. She had 21 surgeries over 2 years but died anyway. The other 9 children (all with different last names) were removed from the family. So It seems to me that in our country people know how to play the system.


----------



## retired guard (Mar 7, 2013)

Personally I see it as a problem of who is getting and doing. During the Great Depression we had a people with a far more solid work ethic. We had Presidential over reach countered by Congress (You will not get six more Supremes FDR!) We truly invested in infrastructure Hoover Dam, Public buildings from post offices to prisons and we still reap benefits from those investments today. In the sixties we had the Great Society. We increased both benefits and the number receiving benefits to people who did not work for generations. We truly had a hand out not a hand up. We built welfare housing that became cesspools of drug abuse and gang warfare. We still reap the repercussions of this today. I will leave it to your powers of observation to determine which model is being followed today. This is not political all of these administrations were/are Democrat. Another example could have been Eisenhower and the interstate highway initiative to throw a Republican in as another successful model. Caliber of leadership does count. Caliber of people counts more.


----------



## PalmettoTree (Jun 8, 2013)

Retired Guard, you are correct. Assuming Obama was going to spend money borrowed from the future, we have nothing to show for it. Even where he approved some actual brick and mortar project it has been a demonstration of incompetence. The reason being he appointed people that have never worked and accomplished anything.

No matter what you teach (except lying) can be transferred to reality without experience. There is no substitution for experience solving problem through people. There is no better example than Obamacare. The entire thing has been a classic example if malfeasance and incompetence.


----------



## pastornator (Apr 5, 2013)

I do not find the current administration's plan malfeasance or incompetence. They insist that "everything is going according to their plan..." and I must take them at their word. But, what that means is that there is an EFFECTIVE COUP of America underway! It is THAT that we fail to notice or realize as we buy into the common press notion that it is merely incompetence at work. It is not incompetence, it is radical redirection of an entire nation while the people sit around and cry about how bad things are!


----------



## PalmettoTree (Jun 8, 2013)

pastornator said:


> I do not find the current administration's plan malfeasance or incompetence. They insist that "everything is going according to their plan..." and I must take them at their word. But, what that means is that there is an EFFECTIVE COUP of America underway! It is THAT that we fail to notice or realize as we buy into the common press notion that it is merely incompetence at work. It is not incompetence, it is radical redirection of an entire nation while the people sit around and cry about how bad things are!


Occam's razor


----------



## StarPD45 (Nov 13, 2012)

pastornator said:


> I do not find the current administration's plan malfeasance or incompetence. They insist that "everything is going according to their plan..." and I must take them at their word. But, what that means is that there is an EFFECTIVE COUP of America underway! It is THAT that we fail to notice or realize as we buy into the common press notion that it is merely incompetence at work. It is not incompetence, it is radical redirection of an entire nation while the people sit around and cry about how bad things are!


Didn't he say he would fundamentally change America? 
Welcome to the new Amerika.


----------

