NYC mayor proposes wealth redistribution

[sid]

"There's plenty of money in the world but it's in the wrong hands." Sound familiar?

Check it out:

https://insider.foxnews.com/2019/01/11/outnumbered-new-york-city-mayor-bill-de-blasios-liberal-policies-progressive-push

[S.A. Boggs]

Maybe he should set a good example.
Sam

[Vern Humphrey]

I've noticed something: Those who complain about the way wealth is distributed never redistribute their own wealth. And those who complain there are too many people on this planet never schedule themselves for early departure.

[Roadkingtrax]

I've noticed something: Those who complain about the way wealth is distributed never redistribute their own wealth. And those who complain there are too many people on this planet never schedule themselves for early departure.

I'd sign up the opioid addicts to go first.

[S.A. Boggs]

I'd sign up the opioid addicts to go first.

Why?
Sam

[togor]

I've noticed something: Those who complain about the way wealth is distributed never redistribute their own wealth. And those who complain there are too many people on this planet never schedule themselves for early departure.

Allen has complained about the population level in this country, and CH has pointed out (rightly, in my opinion) that human encroachment is having a devastating effect on the wildlife that needs largely undisturbed habitat. Many here have commented on pension fund raids and corporate takeovers/plant shutdowns that left working men holding the [empty] bag. If you're going to use indirect fire to deliver your arguments, remember to check your azimuth from time to time.

[dogtag]

He can send me some. A large amount preferably.
A very large amount actually.

[Allen]

And those who complain there are too many people on this planet never schedule themselves for early departure.

Guilty as charged. My complaint is though that people who can not afford themselves have kid after kid after kid for those of us who can afford ourselves to have to pay for their irresponsibility. The obvious ones are those on welfare. I've know many of these and the welfare doesn't end with one generation. They are taught the democrat "freebies" and take full abuse of it. Of course welfare, like no borders, are created by the democrats to develop a society so great that there will never be another Republican or Independent president again and we are paying them to do it.

Then there are foreign countries, all of whom overpopulate, drain all their resources and simply pour into other countries for a better life (for them). When this country was first developed the Chinese came in droves almost to the point of taking it over. The government had to step in with new and strong immigration laws to curb them. Then there is Japan who will not let anyone move to their country and become a citizen. While they give the excuse that they want to keep their country pure they have no problem dumping their multitude upon the rest of the world.

Now we have the war invasion at the Southern border. Why? Overpopulation. I don't feel we should give countries foreign aid who are not trying to remedy their own problems themselves. Curbing their population would be a good start for the whole world and I'm sure America would be glad to foot the bill on sex education, pills and condoms. Instead, the more they grow, the more they grow.

As far as early departure goes, I live in a resort area. Everyone wants to live here but those that move in contribute nothing especially the doctors, they really suck big time as well as the doctor controlled hospitals, so my departure will be soon enough but due to my faith and my family that isn't going to happen on purpose. I'm the only one in my family to carry our name into another generation. Our family is shrinking and family reunions are a thing of the past. My sister never married. My brother married but they never had children. My adult son has not married. My daughter is married but has no children. Much is the case with my other realitives both close and distant. So, a little different from those who have so many kids that come Christmas time they draw names and don't know who their fathers are.

As I always say "if you can't feed them don't breed them". The world is not getting any bigger and the "have nots" are overwhelming the "haves". That's why such a push on socialism.

[Vern Humphrey]

Guilty as charged. My complaint is though that people who can not afford themselves have kid after kid after kid for those of us who can afford ourselves to have to pay for they irresponsibility. The obvious ones are those on welfare. I've know many of these and the welfare doesn't end with one generation. They are taught the democrat "freebies" and take full abuse of it. Of course welfare, like no borders, are created by the democrats to develop a society so great that there will never be another Republican or Independent president again and we are paying them to do it.

We're comparing apples and oranges here -- the people who complain there are too many people are, by and large, NOT the people who want to restrict illegal immigration. Nor are they the ones who favor programs to get people OFF welfare.

After all, restricting immigration and getting people off welfare doesn't reduce the population. "Population reduction" is code for forced abortion.

[dogtag]

I'm not too bothered by people on welfare - those who are citizens or here legally.
Although it shouldn't just be in lieu of a job.
I AM bothered however by Illegals receiving welfare.

[Vern Humphrey]

I'm not too bothered by people on welfare - those who are citizens or here legally.
Although it shouldn't just be in lieu of a job.
I AM bothered however by Illegals receiving welfare.

There are two concepts here, Charity and Social Justice.

Charity can be considered as the Corporal Works of Mercy -- feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, sheltering the homeless, and so on. The problem with charity is it doesn't solve the long range proble.

Social Justice is arranging things so there aren't so many hungry, naked and homeless people. We should consider charity as a stop gap, not as an end in itself, and work to eliminate poverty. But as Bpb Bechtel said, "Poverty programs aren't intended to end poverty, just to make people more comfortable in their poverty."

[dogtag]

There are two concepts here, Charity and Social Justice.

Charity can be considered as the Corporal Works of Mercy -- feeding the hungry, clothing the naked, sheltering the homeless, and so on. The problem with charity is it doesn't solve the long range proble.

Social Justice is arranging things so there aren't so many hungry, naked and homeless people. We should consider charity as a stop gap, not as an end in itself, and work to eliminate poverty. But as Bpb Bechtel said, "Poverty programs aren't intended to end poverty, just to make people more comfortable in their poverty."

No. Poverty programs are designed to make the organizers of the programs rich.

[Vern Humphrey]

No. Poverty programs are designed to make the organizers of the programs rich.

Exactly right.

And that explains a glaring management fiasco -- Every department of government, EVERY DEPARTMENT, has at least one "poverty program." So who's in charge? Who's producing an overall anti-poverty strategy? Who coordinates these dozens and dozens of "poverty programs?"

[dryheat]

I'd sign up the opioid addicts to go first.

That's not very nice. Might be hope for you yet.