Reply With Quote
Boo is kind of cute. The forum loser railing against the machine and refusing to allow that personal responsibility might play a part in success.
Poor, poor, Bookaki.
Boo is kind of cute. The forum loser railing against the machine and refusing to allow that personal responsibility might play a part in success.
Poor, poor, Bookaki.
No, you asshole.Traslation:
"tappity tappity tappity"
Keep dancin'.
I set out specific criteria that you seem not to grasp.
You're showing yourself as an utter joke when you include situations that i don't count as meeting the criteria.
"personal responsibility" is how the Repugs/VRWC/ Cowboy trash the poor for not becoming wealthy, ignoring that being born poor, born brown or blac, growing up poor, in a ty neighborhood, with under-financed, ty schools isn't the same as being born non-poor, or middle class, or wealthy with all the advantages that come with that birth status.
upward socio/economic mobility, The American Dream, is a ing myth for the bottom of American society, and is has been, is now greater in western Europe than in USA.
"personal responsibility" failure is the bogus justification for the Repubs/VRWC/1% for cutting the safety net, to punish the seriously disadvantaged poor for being poor.
In other words...Boo has every excuse in the book for sucking.
got it. You suck and it's every one else's fault.
You Lie
I'm telling you the strategy of the wealthy class to the the poor class, and esp KEEP THEM S AND KNITTERS DOWN
Last edited by boutons_deux; 03-29-2016 at 11:13 AM.
Rich aren't evil.
Too much wealth concentration is a very suboptimal outcome.
(shrugs) Regarding multigenerational businesses... so what?
Some multigenerational businesses that "ride upon the accomplishments of successors" may exist. If they do, it would be in bent on them, if they were large enough to be subject to a tax, to do some decent planning for turning over the business to keep it in the family, if they really wanted to.
Again, so what? Why is such a thing pertinent? Should we then permit the harm of unfettered wealth concentration, because the good of keeping a few hypothetical businesses together outweighs it?
Is that what you are getting at? Flesh it out a bit.
That trend was happening long before "Berry" became president. You don't even know what "welfare" is, I would bet.
Define "welfare".
I grasp your edly simple plan well enough. You have no idea if the woman had the "economic" means when the child was concieved either.
How would you treat women on birth control in such a situation? Would you allow for exceptions when birth control fails?
To tell.
It's pretty easy to know if the man and woman were working or not, and their income. Or of they had a trust fund or something. No more difficult to have to provide such information like you provide current information when asking for the subsidies.
Birth control fails. It is not 100%.
Birth control fails. It is not 100%.
Birth control fails. It is not 100%.
This is a known fact. Now maybe you are one that would like to play Russian Roulette with a 100 chamber revolver. Just spin that thing every day, and see how long it takes...
No exception for failing birth control. Besides, some people use it in correctly anyway. I think of a crybaby that wants his money back after losing it in video lottery when you say such asinine things.
I can't believe you claim to understand my point, but act as if the parents are victims, and need to be paid off.
Stupid, immoral, and no common sense.
Gotcha.
Your policy solutions suck ass.
You expect people to be reimbursed for their gambling.
You simply shouldn't have sex if you cannot afford the possibilities of having a child. It is absolutely irresponsible. Birth control only reduces the chance of a pregnancy. It isn't 100% effective.
People like you who coddle those who are irresponsible are the reasons why this nation is falling apart.
Yeah, it's 99.9% effective.
We are talking past each other, which is understandable when WC turns a thread into a cluster .
I've already stated at least three times: tax it. I prefer to classify it as a capital gains tax, but whatever. There is an elemental push back to having something taken from you rather than you being able to give away as you wish. That should at least be acknowledged. Coupled with lazy statements like "parent lottery" winners with out a scrap of data as to how many and how much, much less the actual impact of said tax, is nothing more than repeating the dog whistle.
Btw, those hypothtical businesses are quite real. I grew up surrounded by them in the oil field.
Only when used properly and quality products are used.
Would you be in favor of a law that would require only anal sex for people living in poverty?
What's wrong with you idots?
It's like drinking and driving. You either are or are not being responsible.
I do not coddle irresponsible pieces of !
Because, my 10 year old can figure out why that is bull . He says "dad tell him that is bull ".
My 10 year old is more moral than you are. That is how easy this is to figure out.
"because she has friends and family that care for her and don't want her to die (because she can't afford money for machines to help her breathe"
Go ahead vy65, tell my 10 year old why your money is more important than the woman who will die without it.
did you... did you just respond to a post from 3 years ago?
how long was this bothering you while you were putting a response together tbh
Wow
Crofl
Wait, are you showing your 10 year old child my posts and asking for his feedback?
Likely to make a point about what type of people there are out there so he can be prepared for idiocy, Crayola.Wait, are you showing your 10 year old child my posts and asking for his feedback?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
