Quote Originally Posted by slavetopot
Why is it that we always attach the least powerful in the world, while we praise the rich and powerful, who are the one's that are getting free handouts left and right.
I assume you are truly referring to AIG? What was the alternative?

As the U.S. Congress debated welfare policy, the media spotlight focused on the need to cut spending to the poorest people in the nation. At the same time, there was no or minimal coverage of policies that send billions of government dollars to corporate interests from oil companies to agribusiness to firms producing arms.
Not that i am agreeing, but who has taken the biggest hit in wealth/assets? It definitily was not someone relying on government assistance.

We need to stop the welfare for the very rich before you start cutting out the very little money that people receive on welfare.
But what if that lead to the loss in middle income employment? That is the end result is it not; so do we punish the middle class while trying to "do what is right"?


They are not the ones getting the free and easy ride
Are you saying businesses and highly productive individuals do not provide the majority of the tax dollars necessary to finance the welfare state? If not, then do explain.

, some of these very rich get more money off the government in tax cuts in one week than some get their entire life.
But that was their earnings. How can they get money off the government when it was theirs to begin with?

But no one says a thing about that, we tuck our tail between our legs and go and attach people that have no power and barely enough to eat. Very sad indeed.
"The real difficulty is with the vast wealth and power in the hands of the few....It is a government of the people, by the people, and for the people no longer. It is a government of corporations, by corporations, and for corporations."
But the people, not the corporations, elected Barack Obama. I know of very little individuals who are truly wealthy and supported this guy. Even the savior himself knows this is not a zero sum game, that cannot be improved by taking away someone's property to give it to another person who is less productive.

There is a reason we bailed out the banking system and AIG. The alternative would have been total chaos and complete breakdown (WWIII)....
GoldenBoy812 Reviewed by GoldenBoy812 on . States Consider Drug Tests for Welfare Recipients Agree or disagree? Personally I think they should test for everything including weed and if you test positive, revoke the benefits. The way I see it, if you are collecting tax payer money to live, you can't afford $25-100 a quarter. The only exception being if you live in a state that has legalized medical use and have a prescription. Drugs are a luxury and should be used by those who can afford them. From FoxNews.com: Rating: 5