|
Ask him to name names re: food stamp recipients who, while on food stamps, bought expensive toys.
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 16:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 19:58 |
|
|
This is totally petty and irrelevant of me, but wasn't his first response a question replying to your question? Maybe I'm missing his argument, but I want to savor the irony if that's the case. And I'm sure you're aware, but his "BEER is not a food group" is a strawman since you can't buy it with food stamps anyway. Along with all the other "misdirected" funds he's talking about. Now, if he's complaining that SNAP and TANF allow families to eke out a minimal existence while they're down, allowing them to spend a miniscule fraction of their income on things to distract them from their plight, then why doesn't take those complaints to beer companies and TV manufacturers and tattoo artists? He could make them give that money back... though he might have to chase down the paychecks of some of the employees too, plus the tax revenue it generated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 16:50
|
|
|
But if you get food stamps that frees up your other (assuming you have it) money to buy beer. Also, answering a question with a question is the appropriate response when there was something wrong with the first question.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 16:57
|
|
|
Shouldn't your argument basically boil down to that you think buying a beer once in a while and not having to sell your TV constitutes a minimum standard of living? I feel like red already has half articulated that he doesn't agree with this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:04
|
|
|
Its also nice how he goes from buying beer and cigs to a 42" TV. Where is he pulling that from?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:05
|
|
|
So I was looking for something I remembered "crazy gun-nut conspiracy theory guy from high school" had posted on Facebook which I wanted to share, but this latest one is far better:
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:07
|
|
|
What's so bad about cable TV. If you're paying $30 a month for it and it's your primary recreation then clearly you are being extremely thrifty. If they've bundled with an Internet subscription then they're doing even better, I have no idea how one finds work without Internet access. OAquinas posted:Its also nice how he goes from buying beer and cigs to a 42" TV. Where is he pulling that from? A low quality TV in that size range can go for around $300, even better if you take advantage of a sale. For a person who intends to use TV for practically all their entertainment, this is a great investment when you consider the lifespan of the TV. These poor people seem to be making some truly brilliant economic decisions. Dr. Arbitrary fucked around with this message at 17:20 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:10
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:Its also nice how he goes from buying beer and cigs to a 42" TV. Where is he pulling that from? Edit: I think that to have some clarity in your discussion you need to ask him what he thinks a minimum standard of living consists of, and elaborate yourself about what you think and why on the same subject. Zazzera fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:10
|
|
|
chaoticgeek posted:So I was looking for something I remembered "crazy gun-nut conspiracy theory guy from high school" had posted on Facebook which I wanted to share, but this latest one is far better: All ARE guns will be taken and we will all have mandatory gay marriages. WTF does this guy think happens to our military? Does he not understand that there is no UN military and the UN receives most of its funding from the US?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:11
|
|
|
Zazzera posted:Yeah, how does that work? I assume that if you have the disposable income to buy an expensive TV you would already be ineligible for US welfare? Also, having some amount of disposable income shouldn't be outside the minimum standard of living. Lets not forget when Fox News acted disgusted when they were talking about the poor having refrigerators.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:15
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Lets not forget when Fox News acted disgusted when they were talking about the poor having refrigerators. Wait, this actually happened?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:16
|
|
|
Mitchicon posted:Wait, this actually happened? Yes it did https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWpz9NQipp0
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:17
|
|
|
Obligatory Lucky Ducky
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
Zazzera posted:Yeah, how does that work? I assume that if you have the disposable income to buy an expensive TV you would already be ineligible for US welfare? Also, having some amount of disposable income shouldn't be outside the minimum standard of living. The thing is, 42" TVs aren't that expensive (or can be not expensive, rather). Sure, if you get a nice 42" 240Hz Samsung LED it's gonna cost you a pretty penny, but some crappy 42" Vizio TV can go for $400-450, which seems like a valid "once every several years" purchase to me. And that's just a shelf price at Walmart, you could probably find something cheaper on Craigslist if you had an internet connection available. Or maybe your extended family bought one for your family for Christmas one year. Or whatever. My point is that people are dumb and assume big flat screen TVs still cost thousands of dollars.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:22
|
|
|
Mitchicon posted:Wait, this actually happened? Well, yeah, theres a infamous screenshot for Fox News that states something like "Poors: 99,6% have refrigerators!" Thats news tough, and seems like something that can only be produced by someone not having anyone challenge them on any opinion. I think anyone personally holding this opinion would, when challenged, be hard pressed not to agree that a refrigerator constitutes minimum standard of living in one of the world's richest countries. There may be some who holds seriously the the opinion that there should be no minimum standard of living, thought. Edit: VVV I actually remembered the exact percentage right. I guess I've seen that screenshot to many times. Hopefully this will come up on a pub quiz sometime. Zazzera fucked around with this message at 17:25 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Mitchicon posted:Wait, this actually happened?  Notice how poor is in quotations. And those aren't emphasis quotes, to be sure.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:23
|
|
|
Countblanc posted:The thing is, 42" TVs aren't that expensive (or can be not expensive, rather). Sure, if you get a nice 42" 240Hz Samsung LED it's gonna cost you a pretty penny, but some crappy 42" Vizio TV can go for $400-450, which seems like a valid "once every several years" purchase to me. And that's just a shelf price at Walmart, you could probably find something cheaper on Craigslist if you had an internet connection available. Or maybe your extended family bought one for your family for Christmas one year. Or whatever. My point is that people are dumb and assume big flat screen TVs still cost thousands of dollars. People also fail to realize that we live in a country where people's self worth is based on your possessions. We value people on their material goods. With easy credit you can "feel good" and make yourself feel better temporarily. If you're faced with constant poverty, it is really easy to swipe your card in order to feel better about your lovely life.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:24
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:Hoo boy does this guy ever hate poor people. I'm blue, he's red. He sure does have a lot of free time to post his drivel from a thing called work.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:25
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:If they've bundled with an Internet subscription then they're doing even better, I have no idea how one finds work without Internet access. The library, of course. Meanwhile, why am I paying taxes for someone to get paid 80k to put books on shelves? I have a Kindle!
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:31
|
|
|
Regarding the whole food stamps thing, I haven't had a chance to read it all, but I'm waiting expectantly for when he tries to explain why a man in his late 60's, who served in the Army at the Battle of Hue in 1968, got several tattoos and took up smoking during his two tours in Vietnam, and then spent the next 4 decades working low wage jobs due to his PTSD, doesn't deserve help buying food because he likes to unwind by drinking a beer and watching Fox News.Mitchicon posted:Wait, this actually happened? Oh yes, it did. And it was glorious. Wait, no, that's not right... is there a word for "inducing a blinding rage"? DarkHorse posted:And I'm sure you're aware, but his "BEER is not a food group" is a strawman since you can't buy it with food stamps anyway. Along with all the other "misdirected" funds he's talking about. Now, if he's complaining that SNAP and TANF allow families to eke out a minimal existence while they're down, allowing them to spend a miniscule fraction of their income on things to distract them from their plight, then why doesn't take those complaints to beer companies and TV manufacturers and tattoo artists? He could make them give that money back... though he might have to chase down the paychecks of some of the employees too, plus the tax revenue it generated. The thing is, that's why Food Stamps are so important, and useful (something I know you're not arguing against). Every person, every family is different. Hell, even different time periods require different things to get by: no one needed their own car 100 years ago, or a cell phone 30 years ago. But most people can forget about getting and keeping a job without one now. But the one thing we all have in common, across every corner of the country, every different family make up, even throughout time, is that we all need to eat. When you help people buy food, it frees up other money to be spent on things that they specifically need. For one family it might be winter clothes for their children; for another it might be insulin for their spouse. The importance of freeing up that money for other things can't be understated. OAquinas posted:Its also nice how he goes from buying beer and cigs to a 42" TV. Where is he pulling that from? You know how no one, ever, has purchased something like a 42" TV or an iPhone and then lost their job? That's what he's getting at. If you own it now, and you're on Food Stamps now, clearly you bought it while on Food Stamps! Mo_Steel posted:I'm stealing the poo poo out of this because it's great and suitably uncrazy. I totally missed this, thanks to vyelkin for reposting it. It's really great, I love the picture you used for the background.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:35
|
|
|
vyelkin posted:
There's roughly 50 million people in poverty. That means there are 200,000 without a refrigerator, the most important of all appliances. 400,000 do not have a microwave. Over a million have neither a truck nor car. They likely spend a huge chunk of their day trying to get around using public transit. Getting groceries is a huge deal when you don't have a car. A Million lack air conditioning in their home. In some areas this isn't a big deal, in Phoenix it can be a matter of life and death. Source: The Heritage Foundation
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:36
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:Hoo boy does this guy ever hate poor people. I'm blue, he's red. I changed my mind, this image should be replaced with this:  I mean if we're going to get upset about people getting help who don't REALLY need it, I think the other side of the coin is fair. You don't need the EITC or any tax credits, there are a lot of starving people out there, quit being such a selfish prick already. vyelkin posted:
The two videos that goes with this: http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---warren-buffett-vs--wealthy-conservatives http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/thu-august-18-2011/world-of-class-warfare---the-poor-s-free-ride-is-over 
Mo_Steel fucked around with this message at 17:52 on Oct 22, 2012 |
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:There's roughly 50 million people in poverty. gently caress you got mine - Republican Party
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Sarion posted:You know how no one, ever, has purchased something like a 42" TV or an iPhone and then lost their job? That's what he's getting at. If you own it now, and you're on Food Stamps now, clearly you bought it while on Food Stamps! I think the more common belief is that you should sell everything and live in a empty cave, before considering applying for foodstamps.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
I'm still drafting my reply and hoping to include a lot of ideas from here. One thing about this guy, he's a huge Ron Paul follower despite conceding that Paul's economic ideas are terrible "but at least you can talk to him about them". He's also Canadian who crosses the border each day to work in Michigan.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:41
|
|
|
Also, if you're getting on the topic of what is considered appropriate standard of living, there's a useful section from The Wealth of Nations that covers it. It not only makes a good point, but conservatives tend to hold Adam Smith in high regard, so it's doubly useful!Wealth of Nations, p.715-716 posted:Consumable commodities are either necessaries or luxuries.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:48
|
|
|
Sarion posted:Also, if you're getting on the topic of what is considered appropriate standard of living, there's a useful section from The Wealth of Nations that covers it. It not only makes a good point, but conservatives tend to hold Adam Smith in high regard, so it's doubly useful! Adam Smith also wrote that "No society can surely be flourishing and happy, of which the far greater part of the members are poor and miserable" and that "To feel much for others and little for ourselves; to restrain our selfishness and exercise our benevolent affections, constitute the perfection of human nature" (don't know the source, both quoted in another work). He wasn't actually such a bad guy. Unfortunately he's sort of become Free Market Jesus, in that people will pick and choose what he says to fit their ideology rather than looking at it holistically.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 17:53
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:gently caress you got mine - Republican Party gently caress you, Give me yours, It was mine all along.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:06
|
|
|
He was also cognizant of how necessary regulation was, that without some regulation a "free" market would turn into a monopoly and have other deleterious effects.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:08
|
|
|
Smith was writing against mercantilism, which was the dominant and profoundly wrongheaded economic doctrine of the time. People appropriate his arguments against mercantilism and re-purpose them as arguments against government controls in mixed-market systems. They don't make a lot of sense or do Smith justice. Smith actually wrote quite a bit about market failures and the necessity of government stepping in to maintain fair markets. That old gem of a quote about no two businessmen being able to have a friendly meeting without colluding against the public is Smith too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:10
|
|
|
There's also a short section in favour of progressive taxation, which is always fun to bring out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:16
|
|
|
You guys make it sound like if someone actually read and understood and agreed with Smith; they'd end up to the left of most Democrats.  Seriously, I knew he was often taken by Tea-Partier types as being far more FREE MARKET EVERYTHING than he really is; but I've never read much of what he wrote, except for maybe some choice sections years ago in school. His stuff has always been on my list of books that I want to one day read, but probably won't ever find time for; I suppose I should bump him up a few places.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 18:26
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:Hoo boy does this guy ever hate poor people. I'm blue, he's red. My draft reply. Anyone have anything I should add? quote:When I lived in Fooland, I passed a tattoo shop daily advertising name tats for $25, IIRC.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 20:56
|
|
|
Nth Doctor posted:My draft reply. Anyone have anything I should add? Anecdotal, but a few months to a year ago, my parents each got one of the older iPhone models they were trying to get rid of for less than five dollars each. Maybe you could link a place with a similar deal in your area? However, the main problem isn't facts, it's that it's easy to resent the poor.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 21:04
|
|
|
OAquinas posted:"How does he get away with this two elections in a row. There is a whole article about it but these three graphs say it all." Quoting this too because what source is this from?
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 21:12
|
|
|
For your beer example you need to use a much friendlier beer. A 24 pack of Bud Light is maybe 15 bucks. That'll last a month if you have a beer after every workday. Are you really going to cry that someone working a crappy job at minimum wage wants to have a beer when they get home. For the TV, it's definitely a good economic decision. 42 inches is a bit big but studies show that people on food stamps are much better at taking advantage of coupons and sales than the rest of the population, it's not unreasonable to assume that they could find a good deal. If this family has children then TV is the least expensive form of entertainment available.
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 21:13
|
|
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:For your beer example you need to use a much friendlier beer. Why are those kids not working? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 21:17
|
|
|
LP97S posted:Quoting this too because what source is this from? Good point; he just said there was "an entire article" behind it; doing some cursory google searches just reveals the usual suspects (daily caller, breitbart, examiner, townhall)
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 21:38
|
|
|
LP97S posted:
Numbers are sourced from the Government Accountability Institute, of which Peter Schweizer is President (He is the author of books such as Do as I Say (Not as I Do): Profiles in Liberal Hypocrisy, Reagan's War: The Epic Story of His Forty Year Struggle and Final Triumph Over Communism and Makers and Takers: Why conservatives work harder, feel happier, have closer families, take fewer drugs, give more generously, value honesty more, are less materialistic and envious, whine less … and even hug their children more than liberals , and Yes, that is the full title)
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 21:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 19:58 |
|
|
Or just tell him the government doesn't have the right to tell people what to do with the money they have, and if they believe that the government SHOULD have that right, tell them to find a political party that's left of the Socialist Party here in America (there isn't one).
|
|
#
?
Oct 22, 2012 21:40
|
|
