Lifestyle > Train of Thought
Why would someone vote against Prop 23?
Russell Bell:
--- Quote from: virtuoso on November 04, 2010, 04:31:01 PM ---
Real unemployment levels are above 20% by the way, as horrifying as 12% is, it's nowhere near the full picture.
--- End quote ---
Yep. The number they give us doesn't include people who have given up looking for work but still need it, etc. We are truly fucked. And to be honest, if our environment gets fucked a little harder while our economy (hopefully, somehow, and very slowly) recovers, who gives a shit.
The David Arquette videos sum this issue up perfectly for me. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/10/19/david-arquette-prop-23-vi_n_768952.html
The general idea is that Big Oil is beating the shit out of California with its pollution, and in the video, David Arquette is taking punches from the Big Oil "thugs" and therefore represents the California citizen/environment, whatever. I find it hilarious that rich celebrities use these issues to vilify rich companies who lobby for their interests (and in this case, the working man's interest) when they do the exact same shit. I also find it funny that someone who doesn't need to look for work is so adamantly against this prop (coincidence?) and is convincing others who should be worried about working to vote against their own future.
Sikotic™:
The economy isn't everything. Some things are more important, one of which is the environment. That's why I voted no on 23.
Russell Bell:
--- Quote from: S.I.K. dontbuyalbums.com on November 04, 2010, 08:15:43 PM ---The economy isn't everything. Some things are more important, one of which is the environment. That's why I voted no on 23.
--- End quote ---
Thats another funny thing about this. Many people who supported this, would support expansion of welfare, entitlements, etc (aka social programs for poor people). But they turn around and support something that will kill jobs (at least in the short term) that will hurt the guy trying to improve his own situation and avoid leeching off the govt. Just an observation, not necessarily anyone in here.
I know a lot of people around where I live (mostly dumb college kids who hate anything associated with republicans, like 23) just looked at it as a partisan issue...."well oil companies suck, and they like, like to hurt people and the environment, and didn't Bush have something to do with oil? Yeah I'm voting against it". I respect that you actually have some convictions, even though I disagree big time.
Would you have the same opinion if you were working in a machine-heavy industry (Im assuming u dont), like construction or agriculture?
Sami:
See, this is where I have a fundamental difference with the modern GOP.
Not everyone who use social programs are 'leeches', or even most of them. There are truly sick and disabled and disadvantaged people who get left to die if we just tell them to fuck themselves...and a democracy cannot exist with large mobs of sick, disabled or poor people just staying in the street. They suffer, and it wounds society creating a festering sore which makes people angry and crazy, which you can see a bit of now with how many people are losing their homes and people get more and more bitter and our economy worsens. Imagine if we abolished Social Security tomorrow like the Rs want. There are so many people who have either lost everything or never had anything in the first place for whom $500 a month (SSI maximum payment) is their only resource at all.
And protecting the environment is more important than jobs. You're argument is basically one of the arguments for making all drugs legal as well, because all the various drug jobs are better than no jobs at all, right? But hard drugs (not weed) damage society because they are addictive and cause crime as people are essentially slaves to the high. In that same way we have to protect the environment because if sea levels rise and the climate changes severely it will affect food and water supplies for the entire world.
It's like that saying, "Don't shit where you eat."
Russell Bell:
--- Quote from: Sami on November 04, 2010, 09:07:50 PM ---See, this is where I have a fundamental difference with the modern GOP.
Not everyone who use social programs are 'leeches', or even most of them. There are truly sick and disabled and disadvantaged people who get left to die if we just tell them to fuck themselves...and a democracy cannot exist with large mobs of sick, disabled or poor people just staying in the street. They suffer, and it wounds society creating a festering sore which makes people angry and crazy, which you can see a bit of now with how many people are losing their homes and people get more and more bitter and our economy worsens. Imagine if we abolished Social Security tomorrow like the Rs want. There are so many people who have either lost everything or never had anything in the first place for whom $500 a month (SSI maximum payment) is their only resource at all.
And protecting the environment is more important than jobs. You're argument is basically one of the arguments for making all drugs legal as well, because all the various drug jobs are better than no jobs at all, right? But hard drugs (not weed) damage society because they are addictive and cause crime as people are essentially slaves to the high. In that same way we have to protect the environment because if sea levels rise and the climate changes severely it will affect food and water supplies for the entire world.
It's like saying don't shit where you eat."
--- End quote ---
Fact is, many people cheat the welfare system. Because we live in such a "PC" society when dealing with certain people/groups, a lot of times people are afraid to voice this and afraid to hear it cause it might sound bigoted to someone who doesnt know better. I am not saying that we shouldnt have some assistance or that all people on it are cheats. I know many people who survive off of govt assistance (family, friends who actually deserve it). But, think about how many people you know that would lie or cheat their way to get something they wanted if they thought it was possible they got away with it. This is human nature to do this. The people saying they "can't work" because of a technicality but really if they pushed themselves halfway they would be fine. Couples having multiple kids without thinking of the effect: child care paid for, needed medical services,etc. Look all I'm saying is that there are alotta cheats out there doing this because of the golden faucet being turned on in states like CA. Look at our state then look others: we are the biggest welfare state in the country, and cant provide our communities with simple services.
How does this tie into 23? Making more regulations on businesses in an especially tough time will probably lead to less hiring and more firing. We dont need to be hurting small business right now, we should help it so it can hire us. Less unemployment = less people on govt assistance. If we were able to give jobs to those who need them, then we could more afford to help those that really do need govt assistance.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version