smokeyone - Viewing Profile: Posts - SECTalk.com

Jump to content

Welcome to SECTalk.com

Welcome to SECTalk.com -- The Home of 6 Straight National Titles!

You are currently accessing our site as a guest which means you can't access all of our features such as social groups, sports betting, and many more. By joining our free community you will have access to all of these great features as well as to participating in our forums, contacting other members, and much more. Registration only takes a minute and SECTalk.com is absolutely free, so please join today!

If you have any problems registering or signing in, please contact us.

Latest Topics


Latest News


Top High Fived

online poker canada
online poker


smokeyone

smokeyone

Member Since 11 Jul 2010
Online Last Active 5 minutes ago

In Topic: Lazy Welfare Parasites...

3 minutes ago

View PostNextYearIsHere, on 25 May 2013 - 12:51 AM, said:

Glad to see you both are as willing to spin the numbers as your party.


The real truth of the  matter is you can only say that "half of Americans" are on government assistance if you include things like Medicare and Social Security, programs that both require people to pay into and programs that are very popular on both sides of the aisle.  With 44 million and 55 million people in each, that is the only way you can make such a bullshit claim. Mark Sanford did so last fall and Fact Checkers had a field day with this lie.

The real numbers are this. When you look at people that are really "taking" without putting their fair share back into it.


47.7 million Americans were receiving on average $134.29 per month in food assistance in 2012.

That's the real number, you lying sacks of crap. Almost 48 out of 314 million. That's not half or anywhere close to half. Even in red states like Mississippi that have the highest number of people receiving aid, it still only gets as bad as 1 in 5. And at the end of the day, that's still less than $150 bucks a month to spend on food.

And there you have it. Some people would lie and say that half the country is "takers", but in order to even come close to that you'd have to include programs that everyone on here pays into and many love. Sorry, but someone on Social Security or someone getting a Federal Loan is not a "taker" or a parasite. You're full of it and you know it, but I'm glad you attempted the same thing that Mitt and Sanford tried and failed to pull off.

http://www.factcheck...endency-claims/

Why are you not counting social security and medicare/cade? Both are forms of government assistance. Both put out individual benefits in excess of what they take from an individual. Maybe you should look up cherry picking and spinning of stats because you accuse us of doing it then actually do it. Does this mean you dont understand the terms? Or as usual for liberals you just like the conjured images words are supposed to invoke and use them incorrectly as part of a standard statement?

By the way how miserable must your life suck to do a drunken rant about politics at 3 in the morning on a saturday? Shouldnt you be trying to build up immunity to STDs with one of your underage students at that time?

In Topic: The Daily Show: USA priorities hammers Obama

Yesterday, 03:44 PM

Jon is as ass. no amount of pandering will change that.

In Topic: Lazy Welfare Parasites...

Yesterday, 02:51 PM

View Postrwspear, on 24 May 2013 - 11:55 AM, said:

people also need to remember spending less on the military does not mean a less effective or less capable military.

the military is bloated and inefficient just like the rest of the federal govt. they could trim the fat and save a lot of money without sacrificing one inch of national security.

And defense is the one thing that generates a product for export. R and D from defense makes it worth it. That doesnt mean money cant be refocused away from waste to worthy defense projects.

In Topic: Lazy Welfare Parasites...

Yesterday, 05:34 AM

View PostForwardRebels, on 23 May 2013 - 10:09 PM, said:

And national defense is not immune to being cut either. If we're all tightening up our britches and trudging on with full austerity, national defense will also take a cut, along with everyone and everything else.

No exceptions. No special treatment. Equal treatment to all.

Sorry but I disagree. National defense is the absolute last thing cut. 90% of what the federal government does is actually the states role and usually duplicating or redistributing collected state money and really not needed. The biggest exception is matters of national defense. Not all government programs are created equal and as such should not be treated equal.

In Topic: Lazy Welfare Parasites...

23 May 2013 - 10:00 PM

View PostForwardRebels, on 23 May 2013 - 09:49 PM, said:

And with the Republicans, what you get is the opposite of what the Dems employ, obviously.

Whereas the Dems want redistribution from the top to the bottom and want to :lanekiffin: over successful people, the Repubs want to, and have successfully redistributed cash from the middle to the top and have been quite successful in :lanekiffin: ing over what was once a decent middle class .

Both want Big Gov't Abroad (foreign policy). To hell with that shite.

Pre Obama both parties wanted the best for the country but had different views on getting there. The Dems want to work from the bottom up while Republicans want to work from the top down. Republicans want folks to move up via their own means and Dems think people are incapable of moving up without outside help. Now its about getting votes for Dems with no other goal beyond power. The republican party is splintered between those that want to work top down and those that just want votes.

And I hate to break this to you but foreign policy and national defense are 2 of the 3 reasons the Federal Government exists. So yes federal level politics is going to need a big foreign policy component.