+- Twitist Forums (http://twitist.com)
+-- Forum: General Social Media & Marketing Forums (/forum-8.html)
+--- Forum: Social Marketing (/forum-10.html)
+--- Thread: Have you noticed that republicans are against all social programs until they need to use it themselves? (/thread-8320.html)
Pages: 1 2
- mhp_wizo_93_418 - 10-13-2012 09:00 AM
with the exceptions of those programs that have collected money from those that use it. ie: social security and medicare. all of those that are drawing it have been paying into the system all of their life. Additionally Unemployment Insurance is paid just as any insurance is paid. -... ....
- Bobbi - 10-13-2012 09:00 AM
Anyone who pays a phone bill / cell bill, helps fund free cell phones for the 'poor'. This program costs us this year a projected ONE BILLION DOLLARS. Advocates say a cell phone is a 'right'. The free phone is up to 250 minutes a month, from SafeLink. You even get text messaging. Now, I do not know how this is a 'need' or a 'right'. If you receive any government assistance from heating assistance to welfare, you qualify. I am against many social programs because the programs tend to be just a redistribution of wealth. Now, if you placed restrictions on benefits to encourage people to work I would be 100% for the programs. We bring in 1 million migrants + families to pick crops, plus pay for their basic health care. Yet, we have millions unemployed. and many felons unable to find work. Couldn't the farm jobs go to the unemployed? Nope. The unemployed would lose benefits, and possibly would come out worse working. That is the problem. Government entitlements encourage staying home, searching for a 'job'. Working even part-time, which the job market is desperately needing workers, can spell financial ruin. Until regulations for benefits change, social programs are nothing more than wealth redistribution.
- uncle meat - 10-13-2012 09:00 AM
Unemployment benefits are paid by an insurance fund made of premiums paid by employers & employees. It's not a social program.
Social Security is the same. It is not a tax, but an insurance fund that pays benefits...the issue with SSI is people collecting benefits who have not paid the premiuims & the issue of Congress stealing the money from the beneficiaries (while telling us the fund is broke)...if they put the money back. If that happened in an insurance fund in the free market, the fund managers would be prosecuted for fraud.
Conservatives are not against a safety net...they are totally against the abuses that run rampant throughout these programs. I personally know of 2 such abuse cases, but they are legal...a family that has 2 children in medicaid & are making payments on a boat...another family with 2 kids on Medicaid that have a "time share" in Florida.
We have 'professional' welfare recipients...they do it their whole lives, their parents did it & their kids will to...because that's what they will learn...it's supposed to be a safety net for an emergency...not a way of life.
- Patrick G - 10-13-2012 09:00 AM
Unemployment and social security are not a social programs you dolt.
I, as a conservative republican am not counting on even getting social security. I'm sure that you liberals will have spent it by then.
I have lost my job before, been without insurance and lost my first wife to breast cancer.... I never took unemployment, I didn't need to because like a responsible person I had savings to fall back on. I didn't start looking for the nearest government teat to suckle on.
Please tell my why I'm still an conservative. Seriously, you can not be this ignorant.
- NDMA - 10-13-2012 09:00 AM
I am a conservative, but most certainly not a Republican (Republicans are way too liberal in my opinion).
I am by no means against social programs. It is the right of the states to have as many social programs as they feel are necessary. I am opposed to the Federalization of Social Programs because those programs go beyond the enumerated powers of the Federal Government.
- Harold Balz - 10-13-2012 09:00 AM
you telling me that you are willing to pay into social security for 40-50 years and then refuse a chance to get back SOME of the money you put in?
Had you been able to keep and invest that same money, it would have been worth far more than most will ever recover.
Does your company pay unemployment insurance, because I always paid it on my employees, thus that is NOT a social program, it is paying out on an insurance policy.
You liberals are such idiots!
- America licious - 10-13-2012 09:00 AM
You've just cited two insurance programs we're forced to pay into. Better believe I will get my money back out as needed. If I pay for auto insurance, and a libby hits me while they toke-up, I'm getting that insurance program to pay too.
- LDNZ1014 - 10-13-2012 09:00 AM
First, Use of unemployment in an "as needed" basis is not only our right, but we DO PAY unemployment insurance through payroll so it's the government handing us free money - it's money we've paid into it. See how that works?
Here's a few quotes to help you understand where we come from:
"For society as a whole, nothing comes as a 'right' to which we are 'entitled'. Even bare subsistence has to be produced.... The only way anyone can have a right to something that has to be produced is to force someone else to produce it... The more things are provided as rights, the less the recipients have to work and the more the providers have to carry the load." Thomas Sowell, quoted in Forbes and Reader's Digest.
A politician cannot spend one dime on any spending project without first taking that dime from the person who earned it. So, when a politician votes for a spending bill he is saying that he believes the government should spend that particular dollar rather than the individual who worked for it." Neal Boortz.
"There is no such thing as government money - only taxpayer money." William Weld, quoted in Readers Digest.