So this is 51% of our country, how sad
Find a Conversation
So this is 51% of our country, how sad
| Tue, 11-11-2008 - 10:16am |
A video showing just what we've been saying.
| Tue, 11-11-2008 - 10:16am |
A video showing just what we've been saying.
Pages
if 20 people on aid could cut out $20/month from waste, (non-essentials), that is almost $5000 (/year)
Well imo, you're giving a lecture then, not a participating in a debate.
I dissagree
how are the 2 mutually exclusive?
why would we HAVE to talk about corporate abuse when we talk about individual abuse?
I was proposing changes i feel need to be made on the individual level.....not corporate level....switching to corporate level would take away from the discussion i was having about induviduals.
if you were talking about the gas economy of a sedan vs another seday, and i come in saying no way, scooters are teh best....and you might say..ok...but this 2 door sedan is still better than this 4 door sedan..and you continue talking about the sedans....
how can i say you are Anti-Scooters.....you just may not know enough about the gas economy of scooters.
-Kristen
Where I fail to see your point is how do you know that any person is spending $20-$30/month on "luxuries"?
imo, what happnened was i didn't get distracted from the topic at hand.
If you consider discussing new angles of a topic to be getting "distracted from the topic at hand," can you explain how we even go to the topic of welfare abuse when the original point of this thread was about Obama supporters supposedly wanting everything for free? What does welfare abuse have to do with the original video posted in this thread?
There are over 600 posts in this thread. We have surely changed the angle of the debate a few times. Talking about corporate fraud, in the context of fraud in general, is not at all a distraction from the original topic.
<>
part of what i was saying is that often people don't realize they are wasting money, or how to put thier money to the best use....
on that thought, they as individuals armed with better financial planning tools would be able to determine where there is waste in thier own budget.
on the other hand.....i think we can all agree that cable TV is non-essential to the Majority of people....so maybe there could be a restriction on the amount of money spent on such luxuries before more money is give to that individual.
<
-Kristen
<>
That is a statement I can totally agree with.
I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure
why would we HAVE to talk about corporate abuse when we talk about individual abuse?
Because, as it's been pointed out, it's individuals in these corporations that are doing the cheating. How is an individual in a corporation that is cheating tax payers different than an individual on welfare cheating the tax payers? The only difference is the amount of money that each of these individuals is responsible for cheating us out of.
<individuals in these corporations that are doing the cheating. How is an individual in a corporation that is cheating tax payers different than an individual on welfare cheating the tax payers? The only difference is the amount of money that each of these individuals is responsible for cheating us out of.>>
Well, that,
I disagree with you, but I'm pretty sure
As another poster has already pointed out, this thread has had a variety of angles and it is quite possible to discuss welfare fraud/waste at the same time as corporate fraud/waste. And remember, you did choose to talk about corporations (you said that
Chrissy
mom to Aidan 8/21/03
Grayson Blaine 12/30/07
<
on the other hand.....i think we can all agree that cable TV is non-essential to the Majority of people....so maybe there could be a restriction on the amount of money spent on such luxuries before more money is give to that individual.>>
-i consider cable to be a waste, as i dont really watch tv...however to the cable providers, cable is certainly not a waste...
...so that is another issue...cutting waste in one place, is going to affect another somewhere else
Pages