Support NeoGAF

[RDreamer]

Right there with you.

I was on food stamps when they were on paper, and you were ashamed to ever admit it.

Grew up in a single parent household with my mother and older sis, and we would have been fucked without them.

Adding to the foodstamp topic:

I have never been on them nor has anyone in my family (that I know of), but they have helped immensely. How is that, you ask? Well, for a little while my wife had to work at a grocery store in a part of town that wasn't so great to begin with, but was hit hard again with the recession. The store could barely keep it together. Even though it was one of the few grocery stores that people around there could get to, it didn't make that much money. Every month when the food stamps were sent out the store would be flooded with people. I firmly believe that without those food stamps my wife wouldn't have had a job. That store wouldn't be there. It wouldn't have been worth it for them. So my wife, who was working her butt off would have been put on unemployment without foodstamps. It's not just her, either. That store did have a barebones staff for a store of its size, but it still employed a good amount of people just trying to get by and make it. It was a pretty nice employer for that area. Those were people working their butts off, too, to pull themselves up. Food stamps helped that. Not necessarily because they were specifically on them, but because people with them had to come in and spend them.

 

[Aylinato]

Nate Silver: Obama has a 50.9% to Romney's 48%

This is before this entire ordeal.

 

[Forever]

Nate Silver: Obama has a 50.9% to Romney's 48%

This is before this entire ordeal.

Lowest point in a while though. Bounce is coming back down to earth.

 

[Open Source]

I'm all for "safety net" programs. It's when they stop being a safety net that allows people to get back on their feet and start becoming a way of life that discourages people from trying to get back on their feet that they begin to have a negative effect on society.

In fact, although I offered no explicit opinion on SNAP and Medicaid above, I strongly implied that they were necessary. The only reason I bought them up, which some people apparently missed, is that someone wanted an actual number on how many people need government assistance to "get by" (and no, I am still not defining that).

 

[Baconsammy]

No group of people is more intolerant of those who don't agree with them than those who shout from on high about tolerance.

No one should be tolerant of women-hating, racist, homophobes. I know you Republicans wish we all were, but we're not. Thank god.

 

[Forever]

No group of people is more intolerant of those who don't agree with them than those who shout from on high about tolerance.

We must tolerate their intolerance.

 

[pigeon]

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2012/president/us/general_election_romney_vs_obama-1171.html

All the way down from 44.9 to 45.5

Well, that's just bad data sampling. There have only been four polls that began after 9/11 -- everything else is a mixture of data from before and after. And what days are leaving the sample over the course of this last week? The first few days of September -- also known as the dates of the Democratic Nation Convention. So a certain amount of regression should obviously be expected. More notable is the resilience of the Democratic position despite the most "bouncy" days leaving the sample -- you'd expect to see the numbers drop. But for some mysterious reason, something is keeping the Democrats engaged. I wonder what?

 

[ronito]

47% of people don't pay I income tax = outrageous free loaders!!

60% of corporations don't pay federal tax = well you really gotta understand sometimes business is cyclical and...

 

[Aylinato]

Lowest point in a while though. Bounce is coming back down to earth.

Since August 1st, but still higher than the entire rest of the year.



lol, o...I see what you are trying to say. Let me post the figures that will make you quiet.


72.9% Obama is going to win. 27.1% Romney.


Good day.

 

[Mollymauk]

I love you Daily News.

 

[gatti-man]

No group of people is more intolerant of those who don't agree with them than those who shout from on high about tolerance.

Nah.

 

[Open Source]

It's never been a mockery of their race or social class (especially since other poor, white, but better informed people use it too); it is a mockery of their stupidity and willingness to vote against their best interests. You talk about making molehills into mountains then you pull this "you are racist" shit? lol you're a big joke.

So who says "liberal" as "librul"? It has nothing to do with how someone pronounces the word "liberal" and is just a generic misspelling designed to mock the intelligence of conservatives, because they are known to misspell words (moran.jpg)?

P.S. It is quite possible that people who don't vote themselves money do so because they think that a country where everyone votes themselves money isn't going to work out long-term. But you're probably right, conservatives are just too stupid to vote themselves money. That takes a high level of intelligence they just don't possess.

 

[B-Dubs]

I love you Daily News.

Say what you want about the two NY tabloids, but they sure can write a headline.

 

[coldfoot]

No group of people is more intolerant of those who don't agree with them than those who shout from on high about tolerance.

Some people should just not be tolerated as history has taught us.

 

[cousins]

Someone beat you to it, but you get extra points for mocking conservative rednecks. With all this talk of civility and racial healing and such going on the past four years, it's good to see someone stand up and put those uneducated, poor, dirty morons in their place. Go harvest my corn, you hicks! I mean, anyone who is party to destroying our country by not voting themselves money deserves to be racially stereotyped.

Keep your guns close and your religion closer

 

[Volimar]

Right there with you.

I was on food stamps when they were on paper, and you were ashamed to ever admit it.

Grew up in a single parent household with my mother and older sis, and we would have been fucked without them.

Man they were so humiliating. I remember having to go to the store with that little booklet to get milk and bread as a kid. Back then it seemed like for every part of government assistance, there was a corresponding way to ridicule and embarrass you.

 

[Open Source]

Well, that's just bad data sampling. There have only been four polls that began after 9/11 -- everything else is a mixture of data from before and after. And what days are leaving the sample over the course of this last week? The first few days of September -- also known as the dates of the Democratic Nation Convention. So a certain amount of regression should obviously be expected. More notable is the resilience of the Democratic position despite the most "bouncy" days leaving the sample -- you'd expect to see the numbers drop. But for some mysterious reason, something is keeping the Democrats engaged. I wonder what?

Nate Silver has Romney popular vote up from 47.6 to 48.0.

Go tell him he fucked up.

 

[Aylinato]

No group of people is more intolerant of those who don't agree with them than those who shout from on high about tolerance.

I see you are still trying to say liberals are as bad as tea-party. I thought more of you Kosmo. I really did.

We must tolerate their intolerance.

He's quite a bad troll, and your ignorance is damning to any argument you will make(if based on anything other than talking points).

 

[RDreamer]

I'm all for "safety net" programs. It's when they stop being a safety net that allows people to get back on their feet and start becoming a way of life that discourages people from trying to get back on their feet that they begin to have a negative effect on society.

In fact, although I offered no explicit opinion on SNAP and Medicaid above, I strongly implied that they were necessary. The only reason I bought them up, which some people apparently missed, is that someone wanted an actual number on how many people need government assistance to "get by" (and no, I am still not defining that).

So where is this magical jobs tree that people can just go pick some jobs from that they're not doing right now? This safety net becoming a way of life shit is just asinine, especially at this time.

Once again, I'll demonstrate the dog and bones problem. If you bury 9 bones and send 10 dogs out to go bone hunting you know one dog will come back with nothing. That's a fact. You can teach that dog all sorts of tricks and techniques. You can make it become the best goddamned dog it can possibly be, but you won't change one simple fact: If you bury 9 bones and send out 10 dogs to go bone hunting one will come back without a bone.

The safety net is there for that person that comes back without a job, and we have a moral obligation to make sure that there's a net there when that happens, because we know it'll happen. The economy crashed a few years ago, and it's still on a recovery. You simply cannot sit here and say the safety net is lulling people into a lifestyle. You can't. If you think for a moment even most of those people want to be there, then you're simply a callous asshole and don't know what you're talking about. If the life living off the teat of the government is so awesome why aren't you doing it right now?

 

[coldfoot]

P.S. It is quite possible that people who don't vote themselves money do so because they think that a country where everyone votes themselves money isn't going to work out long-term. But you're probably right, conservatives are just too stupid to vote themselves money. That takes a high level of intelligence they just don't possess.

They are too stupid to realize that lobbyists and corporations have been voting themselves money all these years and their only chance of fighting back is to vote against them. There is less corporate lobbying on the Obama campaign going by the average donation amount.

 

[Trent Strong]

Remind me again what method the USA uses to elect presidents. Oh right, THE ELECTORAL COLLEGE. In the weeks since Romney's disastrous convention, he's lost 80+ points to Obama. Gaffe after gaffe and the ineptitude of telling people you have plans but you just dont want to share them yet is killing him. And it's a blast to watch. It's way more fun watching republicans try to dance around the facts.



Ahh, the incredibly stupid CNN-esque practice of treating both parties the same when one is clearly more awful than the other. Sorry, but I'm not inclined to treat a bunch of racist, anti-gay morons the same as I do poor people that aren't racist and homophobic.

I never said we should treat both parties the same. I don't know where you got that. I'm saying that as liberals, we shouldn't be using the same bad kinds of arguments that Republicans use. We should be above those kinds of things.

 

[Aylinato]

Nate Silver has Romney popular vote up from 47.6 to 48.0.

Go tell him he fucked up.

Just went to Gallup to see the overall trend by looking at the data day by day. The average is going to have Obama going up, as Romney apparently has done so bad that Obama's disapproval is going down week by week. This is since the RNC.

 

[Open Source]

Sorry, but I'm not inclined to treat a bunch of racist, anti-gay morons the same as I do poor people that aren't racist and homophobic.

I know quite a few poor people around here who will only vote for someone of their race, who are openly suspicious of people of other races, and who are virulently anti-gay, helping pass Prop 8 in California banning gay marriage.

Spoiler

They're black, and I'm in Oakland, CA

 

[Aylinato]

I know quite a few poor people around here who will only vote for someone of their race, who are openly suspicious of people of other races, and who are virulently anti-gay, helping pass Prop 8 in California banning gay marriage.

Spoiler

They're black, and I'm in Oakland, CA

Did you really just say that all black people only vote one way because they are black?




really??

 

[pigeon]

Nate Silver has Romney popular vote up from 47.6 to 48.0.

Go tell him he fucked up.

As Nate noted a couple of days ago, that's primarily on the strength of the economy -- we had a lousy manufacturing report, and the model is also undervaluing Obama's polls temporarily due to the bounce assumptions. Do you actually read these sources, or do you just look for numbers you like?

I know quite a few poor people around here who will only vote for someone of their race, who are openly suspicious of people of other races, and who are virulently anti-gay, helping pass Prop 8 in California banning gay marriage.

Spoiler

They're black, and I'm in Oakland, CA

A black person in Oakland who favors black people isn't a racist, they're a survivor responding to adverse conditions. Context matters. (I live in Oakland too.)

 

[commedieu]

No one should be tolerant of women-hating, racist, homophobes. I know you Republicans wish we all were, but we're not. Thank god.

Right. I'm sorry Kosmo, but you cant support intolerance, and demand respect for it from the modern world.

 

[Trent Strong]

Did you really just say that all black people only vote one way because they are black?




really??

No. He didn't say that. Obviously.

 

[The Technomancer]

So who says "liberal" as "librul"? It has nothing to do with how someone pronounces the word "liberal" and is just a generic misspelling designed to mock the intelligence of conservatives, because they are known to misspell words (moran.jpg)?

P.S. It is quite possible that people who don't vote themselves money do so because they think that a country where everyone votes themselves money isn't going to work out long-term. But you're probably right, conservatives are just too stupid to vote themselves money. That takes a high level of intelligence they just don't possess.

The best interest thing isn't necessarily about about voting for more money, its about voting to keep the benefits that many people use and yet somehow don't think that they use (and perhaps expand those benefits to others who also need them). People who are well off enough and stable enough to not be currently receiving any government assistance aren't "voting against their best interests", (well, okay they kind of are in the big "we are all interdependent way") its a phrase specifically used against people who vote for cuts in the systems that they use.

 

[ultim8p00]

So who says "liberal" as "librul"? It has nothing to do with how someone pronounces the word "liberal" and is just a generic misspelling designed to mock the intelligence of conservatives, because they are known to misspell words (moran.jpg)?

P.S. It is quite possible that people who don't vote themselves money do so because they think that a country where everyone votes themselves money isn't going to work out long-term. But you're probably right, conservatives are just too stupid to vote themselves money. That takes a high level of intelligence they just don't possess.

So you are basically agreeing with me that it is not a racist term, but a mockery of stupid things they say. Ok cool. Glad we got that one sorted out. Jesus.

Your second point is a complete bastardization. Are you really equating social safety-nets to "voting yourself money?" Do you really thinks that's how it works? Also do you think people not voting for Romney do so because they want to "vote themselves money?" It's saying things like that that make conservatives sound like cold-hearted bastards.

 

[beelzebozo]

I know quite a few poor people around here who will only vote for someone of their race, who are openly suspicious of people of other races, and who are virulently anti-gay, helping pass Prop 8 in California banning gay marriage.

Spoiler

They're black, and I'm in Oakland, CA

quoted for fuck

 

[cousins]

quoted for fuck

yeah, saw that too.

 

[Open Source]

So where is this magical jobs tree that people can just go pick some jobs from that they're not doing right now? This safety net becoming a way of life shit is just asinine, especially at this time.

Once again, I'll demonstrate the dog and bones problem. If you bury 9 bones and send 10 dogs out to go bone hunting you know one dog will come back with nothing. That's a fact. You can teach that dog all sorts of tricks and techniques. You can make it become the best goddamned dog it can possibly be, but you won't change one simple fact: If you bury 9 bones and send out 10 dogs to go bone hunting one will come back without a bone.

The safety net is there for that person that comes back without a job, and we have a moral obligation to make sure that there's a net there when that happens, because we know it'll happen. The economy crashed a few years ago, and it's still on a recovery. You simply cannot sit here and say the safety net is lulling people into a lifestyle. You can't. If you think for a moment even most of those people want to be there, then you're simply a callous asshole and don't know what you're talking about. If the life living off the teat of the government is so awesome why aren't you doing it right now?

I think you misinterpreted what I said. I never said remove the net when the tightrope gets slippery for a long time.

On the other hand, yes, I know quite a few people who use the system to different degrees, not so much because they need it, because they don't have an incentive not to.

"Awesome" is different for different people. Some don't need nice things, but they like being able to kick back every day instead of working some shitty low wage job that isn't going to pay them much more than they are already getting. Others want to wait for the perfect job offer, and they can afford to with unemployment, so why not?

I know people on disability for minor shit, people making big money selling weed and then grocery shopping with their EBT card, selling their EBT benefits to other people....

Again, I don't blame the people themselves - they're just taking what the system gives them. The system itself is imperfect - certainly better than nothing or too little, but it can be improved such that it does more to get people working again.

 

[Open Source]

Did you really just say that all black people only vote one way because they are black?




really??

No, sir.

Please read again until you comprehend.

 

[Baconsammy]

I know quite a few poor people around here who will only vote for someone of their race, who are openly suspicious of people of other races, and who are virulently anti-gay, helping pass Prop 8 in California banning gay marriage.

Spoiler

They're black, and I'm in Oakland, CA

Do those people celebrate anti-gay Chik-fil-A day? Do they push for the exclusion of poor/elderly minority voters? No. The republican party has become repugnant. Absolutely fucking disgusting. They claim to epitomize what it means to be a patriot and a christian, yet they act nothing like either. Let white people vote only for white people. I don't care. But when you compound that stupidity with all the dirty shit they do and say, then there's a huge difference between the parties and it deserves to be exposed day-in and day-out.

 

[Deified Data]

They are too stupid to realize that lobbyists and corporations have been voting themselves money all these years and their only chance of fighting back is to vote against them. There is less corporate lobbying on the Obama campaign going by the average donation amount.

The Democrats may accept less corporate funding, but voting for the lesser of two evils is hardly "fighting back" against the corporate-owned duopoly.

Regardless of how you feel about third parties, a vote for one of them is the only meaningful statement you can make against the culture of lobbying and special interests. The concepts of "reject corporate control" and "vote Obama" needn't be uttered in the same sentence.

 

[commedieu]

No, sir.

Please read again until you comprehend.

If he isn't saying that, then you're saying you know a handful of people... isn't that stating the obvious? People are racist, of all colors. Did he really need to clarify that he wasn't speaking about

every

single

person...

on earth...

with his statement?

tldr..

"I know a guy that is the opposite of what you're saying, so my experience outweighs everything else, and is the status-quo."

That argument?

 

[Open Source]

As Nate noted a couple of days ago, that's primarily on the strength of the economy -- we had a lousy manufacturing report, and the model is also undervaluing Obama's polls temporarily due to the bounce assumptions. Do you actually read these sources, or do you just look for numbers you like?

I was just responding to the "Romney polls are way down because of Egypt gaffe" assertion. Obviously, they are not. The thread goes back a ways.

A black person in Oakland who favors black people isn't a racist, they're a survivor responding to adverse conditions. Context matters. (I live in Oakland too.)

Ahhh. What about a black person in Hollywood? And hello, neighbor.

 

[Jimothy]

I think you misinterpreted what I said. I never said remove the net when the tightrope gets slippery for a long time.

On the other hand, yes, I know quite a few people who use the system to different degrees, not so much because they need it, because they don't have an incentive not to.

"Awesome" is different for different people. Some don't need nice things, but they like being able to kick back every day instead of working some shitty low wage job that isn't going to pay them much more than they are already getting. Others want to wait for the perfect job offer, and they can afford to with unemployment, so why not?

I know people on disability for minor shit, people making big money selling weed and then grocery shopping with their EBT card, selling their EBT benefits to other people....

Again, I don't blame the people themselves - they're just taking what the system gives them. The system itself is imperfect - certainly better than nothing or too little, but it can be improved such that it does more to get people working again.

Ah, anecdotal evidence. The life blood of the conservative movement.

 

[beelzebozo]

i know of unemployed people who have sexually abused children. are we just going to keep calling these amazing emotionally provocative anecdotes coincidences?

 

[ronito]

I knew two unemployed guys named Dennis. Dennises must be really lazy

 

[Open Source]

Ah, anecdotal evidence. The life blood of the conservative movement.

Alright, let's see your non-anecdotal evidence that abuse does not exist.

And while the anecdotal evidence I offer doesn't indicate how many people are taking advantage of holes in the system, it does serve to point out that those holes exist.

 

[MorisUkunRasik]

This thread man, this thread.

 

[RDreamer]

I think you misinterpreted what I said. I never said remove the net when the tightrope gets slippery for a long time.

On the other hand, yes, I know quite a few people who use the system to different degrees, not so much because they need it, because they don't have an incentive not to.

"Awesome" is different for different people. Some don't need nice things, but they like being able to kick back every day instead of working some shitty low wage job that isn't going to pay them much more than they are already getting. Others want to wait for the perfect job offer, and they can afford to with unemployment, so why not?

I know people on disability for minor shit, people making big money selling weed and then grocery shopping with their EBT card, selling their EBT benefits to other people....

Again, I don't blame the people themselves - they're just taking what the system gives them. The system itself is imperfect - certainly better than nothing or too little, but it can be improved such that it does more to get people working again.

You sure do know a lot of people. I personally don't know anyone that's been on government benefits longer than like... a month or two.

Anyway, yeah, I realize that there will be cheaters out there, and I'd like to reform things where we can. At that same time, I think we need to be careful about our reforms. I would much rather my money pay for 10 cheaters if it meant one legitimate person didn't slip through. I also think we need to be careful about how we characterize those people, because I do firmly believe that most of the people taking these things in legitimately does want to get off them and on their own. We can't be demonizing people who've fallen into hard luck. That's the last thing they need. They need motivation and increased opportunity, not chastisement and skepticism.

 

[MorisUkunRasik]

I knew two unemployed guys named Dennis. Dennises must be really lazy

"10 percent of Americans may or may not be named Dennis, what does Obama plan to do about this Dennis problem?"

 

[The Technomancer]

Alright, let's see your non-anecdotal evidence that abuse does not exist.

And while the anecdotal evidence I offer doesn't indicate how many people are taking advantage of holes in the system, it does serve to point out that those holes exist.

Who said it doesn't exist? Of course it exists. The question is and always has been "do proposed reform techniques cause little enough damage to genuine recipients to make the reductions in abuse 'worth it'".
This is always going to be difficult because of the relatively low number of abusers: large reforms are likely to have collateral damage. For the simplest type of reform, cutting funding, I would hope the answer thats obvious to everyone is "no". How would it?

 

[commedieu]

Alright, let's see your non-anecdotal evidence that abuse does not exist.

And while the anecdotal evidence I offer doesn't indicate how many people are taking advantage of holes in the system, it does serve to point out that those holes exist.

Which gaf member are you responding to that doesn't know that there are holes in the system, as well as any system?

You go and make a post about how you know blacks who are poor and racist... now you're enlightening everyone about the way life works.

Who are you educating?

You made a foolish post, and are now trying to incorporate other arguments that no one made. Nothing wrong with saying you made a mistake, it happens. But your anecdotes serve 0 purpose in this discussion.

 

[Open Source]

You sure do know a lot of people. I personally don't know anyone that's been on government benefits longer than like... a month or two.

Anyway, yeah, I realize that there will be cheaters out there, and I'd like to reform things where we can. At that same time, I think we need to be careful about our reforms. I would much rather my money pay for 10 cheaters if it meant one legitimate person didn't slip through. I also think we need to be careful about how we characterize those people, because I do firmly believe that most of the people taking these things in legitimately does want to get off them and on their own. We can't be demonizing people who've fallen into hard luck. That's the last thing they need. They need motivation and increased opportunity, not chastisement and skepticism.

Yeah, exactly. That's why I said I don't blame the people, just the system, when it encourages non-productive behavior. And also why I said it's better than doing too little.

And yeah, I know a lot of people!

 

[The Technomancer]

Yeah, exactly. That's why I said I don't blame the people, just the system, when it encourages non-productive behavior. And also why I said it's better than doing too little.

And yeah, I know a lot of people!

I'm not convinced that the system creates people who are unproductive who would normally not be. At least not in appreciable amounts.

 

[Open Source]

Which gaf member are you responding to that doesn't know that there are holes in the system, as well as any system?

You go and make a post about how you know blacks who are poor and racist... now you're enlightening everyone about the way life works.

Who are you educating?

That post you refer to was a response to (paraphrasing) "I only demonize/insult/belittle anti-gay racists". It was intended to show that stereotyping such a person by mocking their accent would be completely unacceptable for other targets who fit his criteria.

 

[Cloudy]

LMAO, why didn't they just roll out Joe the Plumber again? Mitt is getting desperate