Conquer Club

lgoasklucyl wrote:Laziness, pregnancy, and drug addiction may play a role, I'm not saying it doesn't. But there are FAR many overlying problems that greatly exceed the amount caused by sheer laziness.

Any able bodied person born in the USA can earn a decent living. That is a fact. I think you are just making excuses.

I haven't made any rash assertions with no substantiating evidence. So if you have a serious discussion to entertain about the respective merits of economic systems, fire away. However, I suspect all our time will be wasted by your continued shoving of grimly unfunny attempts at irony down our throats void of any rational argumentation so as to contradict the politics of anyone who doesn't conform to your pubescent leftism born of the hairy armpit of the 70s.

mpjh wrote: It is not likely that a landlord will rent to someone with $1000 in discretionary income each month.

Well no, and we have regulation-happy social democrats like you to thank for that who want to rig the market in favor of goons who can't pay rent because this will f*ck over big evil landlords, who are of course, all capitalist fat cats.

Napoleon Ier wrote:I haven't made any rash assertions with no substantiating evidence. So if you have a serious discussion to entertain about the respective merits of economic systems, fire away. However, I suspect all our time will be wasted by your continued shoving of grimly unfunny attempts at irony down our throats void of any rational argumentation so as to contradict the politics of anyone who doesn't conform to your pubescent leftism born of the hairy armpit of the 70s.

Where do you come up with this stuff, Nap?

luns101 wrote:

Napoleon Ier wrote:I haven't made any rash assertions with no substantiating evidence. So if you have a serious discussion to entertain about the respective merits of economic systems, fire away. However, I suspect all our time will be wasted by your continued shoving of grimly unfunny attempts at irony down our throats void of any rational argumentation so as to contradict the politics of anyone who doesn't conform to your pubescent leftism born of the hairy armpit of the 70s.

Where do you come up with this stuff, Nap?

I grew up Paris. That's a tough city for a right-wing kid.

There are no mud huts in Chicago, so that is not a choice. You seemed to have missed an important point. No landlord will rent a studio apartment to a family with annual income fo $16,000. I will not and does not happen. The choices are public housing (if you can get on a list), divorce and live separately with no child support to the children (most often the result), or street life. Today, the shelters are full and really are only a transition to divorce and street life for most people.

mpjh wrote:There are no mud huts in Chicago, so that is not a choice. You seemed to have missed an important point. No landlord will rent a studio apartment to a family with annual income fo $16,000. I will not and does not happen. The choices are public housing (if you can get on a list), divorce and live separately with no child support to the children (most often the result), or street life. Today, the shelters are full and really are only a transition to divorce and street life for most people.

Well, as we've just demonstrated, not only does someone with an annual income of $16.000 pa have enough to rent out a place in Chicago's West Side at $500 monthly (according to http://www.easyexpat.com/chicago_en/acc ... e-flat.htm) and so still have $10.000 left over, which is where I come from what someone might expect to make pa brut, but they are furthermore well below the US poverty line. Frankly, I don't see how you can complain.

If a landlord won't let them rent, clearly that's because he's terrified of the regulation on the market making it next to impossible for him to evict when the tenants don't pay, which is more likely of they earn less.

So, not only is you're original premise flawed, but furthermore, your remedy to your imaginary ailment would in fact exacerbate the problem.

If you could get the facts correct we could discuss them. You seem to be expert at making straw men to knock down. Fun sport, intellectually insignificant. Go back and read the post.

What's really sad is that in life expectancy (remember the graphic on page 1?) we (US) rank just below a country that recently went through three years of civil war and ethnic cleansing.

oaktown wrote:What's really sad is that in life expectancy (remember the graphic on page 1?) we (US) rank just below a country that recently went through three years of civil war and ethnic cleansing.

mpjh wrote:If you could get the facts correct we could discuss them.

I'm sorry... you were saying it's impossible to find a place in Chicago for less $2000 several years ago, inflation unadjusted?

You seem to be expert at making straw men to knock down. Fun sport, intellectually insignificant. Go back and read the post.

My retinas are actually burning from having to read this hypocrisy.

Come on. Make an effort. I've just explained to you why it is that capitalism, far from being to blame, is actually not allowed to take hold enough on the Chicago property market. Post a serious rebuttal, rather than directing me to reread the flatulent exercises in self-deprecation that are your posts in the vain hope of getting me to waste my time fine-combing your posts because you convinced me there may be trace amounts of actual argument in there that I didn't pick up on the first time.

Go easy Nap. He's retarded.

Yeah, I am just a retarded member. If that gets you through your day, more power to you.

By the way hap, you do know where flame wars are don't you?

Oh. Jeez. You almost had for real there Hap... I felt horribly guilty.

TheProwler wrote:

lgoasklucyl wrote:Laziness, pregnancy, and drug addiction may play a role, I'm not saying it doesn't. But there are FAR many overlying problems that greatly exceed the amount caused by sheer laziness.

Any able bodied person born in the USA can earn a decent living. That is a fact. I think you are just making excuses.

This comment proves your ignorance and that you simply make points based on bias and in no way on fact. If you had any idea what the hell you were talking about you would make no such statement that its 'fact'. Learn your shit, then come back and try to debate anything. The day you oppressive fuckers who're more than willing to blame every little problem on the individual crawls out of their own asses far enough to realize it's NOT always in their control is the day poverty can be remotely alleviated. Until then, continue to make excuses for the government. Continue to blame the individual. Whatever helps you and our domestic policy sleep at night.

lgoasklucyl wrote:

TheProwler wrote:

lgoasklucyl wrote:Laziness, pregnancy, and drug addiction may play a role, I'm not saying it doesn't. But there are FAR many overlying problems that greatly exceed the amount caused by sheer laziness.

Any able bodied person born in the USA can earn a decent living. That is a fact. I think you are just making excuses.

This comment proves your ignorance and that you simply make points based on bias and in no way on fact. If you had any idea what the hell you were talking about you would make no such statement that its 'fact'. Learn your shit, then come back and try to debate anything. The day you oppressive fuckers who're more than willing to blame every little problem on the individual crawls out of their own asses far enough to realize it's NOT always in their control is the day poverty can be remotely alleviated. Until then, continue to make excuses for the government. Continue to blame the individual. Whatever helps you and our domestic policy sleep at night.

The three homeless people I have had the pleasure of speaking to for longer than 20 minutes were all very articulate, intelligent, and claimed to hold college degrees (and made for great conversation! ) They were not malnourished or depressed, though they did all reek of alcohol and claimed to smoke and/or sell drugs and prescription meds.

That having been said, I've generally concluded that living homeless (in Berkeley at least) is largely a choice and a lifestyle. I've observed similar phenomena in places such as Waikiki, HI. In these areas it seems that it's a hippie-like mentality of freedom.

Am I saying it's always always the individual's fault for being homeless? Certainly not, I tend to avoid generalizations like that. What I do know is that in the poorer areas that I've travelled through and lived in, what we consider "poverty" is a lifestyle more than it is an economic condition. Such is certainly not the case in destitute foreign countries, but it is a common phenomenon in the United States.

Note that I'm speaking out of personal experience here, as I don't think there's any other way to judge the "causes" of people living in poverty. I live in a city with a HUGE concentration of homeless folks, and next to one with similar problems plus the issue of a massive crime rate (Oakland), and this is my experience coming out of there. I've spoken at length with these folks on three occasions and had shorter conversations several times. And as pleasant as these guys are and as much as I respect their choice of lifestyle, I am ADAMANTLY against taxpayer money going to support such a lifestyle.

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

lgoasklucyl wrote:

TheProwler wrote:

lgoasklucyl wrote:Laziness, pregnancy, and drug addiction may play a role, I'm not saying it doesn't. But there are FAR many overlying problems that greatly exceed the amount caused by sheer laziness.

Any able bodied person born in the USA can earn a decent living. That is a fact. I think you are just making excuses.

This comment proves your ignorance and that you simply make points based on bias and in no way on fact. If you had any idea what the hell you were talking about you would make no such statement that its 'fact'. Learn your shit, then come back and try to debate anything. The day you oppressive fuckers who're more than willing to blame every little problem on the individual crawls out of their own asses far enough to realize it's NOT always in their control is the day poverty can be remotely alleviated. Until then, continue to make excuses for the government. Continue to blame the individual. Whatever helps you and our domestic policy sleep at night.

The three homeless people I have had the pleasure of speaking to for longer than 20 minutes were all very articulate, intelligent, and claimed to hold college degrees (and made for great conversation! ) They were not malnourished or depressed, though they did all reek of alcohol and claimed to smoke and/or sell drugs and prescription meds.

That having been said, I've generally concluded that living homeless (in Berkeley at least) is largely a choice and a lifestyle. I've observed similar phenomena in places such as Waikiki, HI. In these areas it seems that it's a hippie-like mentality of freedom.

Am I saying it's always always the individual's fault for being homeless? Certainly not, I tend to avoid generalizations like that. What I do know is that in the poorer areas that I've travelled through and lived in, what we consider "poverty" is a lifestyle more than it is an economic condition. Such is certainly not the case in destitute foreign countries, but it is a common phenomenon in the United States.

Note that I'm speaking out of personal experience here, as I don't think there's any other way to judge the "causes" of people living in poverty. I live in a city with a HUGE concentration of homeless folks, and next to one with similar problems plus the issue of a massive crime rate (Oakland), and this is my experience coming out of there. I've spoken at length with these folks on three occasions and had shorter conversations several times. And as pleasant as these guys are and as much as I respect their choice of lifestyle, I am ADAMANTLY against taxpayer money going to support such a lifestyle.

I have had similar discussions with inactive marines in bars. Unfortunately, my tax dollars are used to support their drinking lifestyle.

mpjh wrote:

OnlyAmbrose wrote:

lgoasklucyl wrote:

TheProwler wrote:

lgoasklucyl wrote:Laziness, pregnancy, and drug addiction may play a role, I'm not saying it doesn't. But there are FAR many overlying problems that greatly exceed the amount caused by sheer laziness.

Any able bodied person born in the USA can earn a decent living. That is a fact. I think you are just making excuses.

This comment proves your ignorance and that you simply make points based on bias and in no way on fact. If you had any idea what the hell you were talking about you would make no such statement that its 'fact'. Learn your shit, then come back and try to debate anything. The day you oppressive fuckers who're more than willing to blame every little problem on the individual crawls out of their own asses far enough to realize it's NOT always in their control is the day poverty can be remotely alleviated. Until then, continue to make excuses for the government. Continue to blame the individual. Whatever helps you and our domestic policy sleep at night.

The three homeless people I have had the pleasure of speaking to for longer than 20 minutes were all very articulate, intelligent, and claimed to hold college degrees (and made for great conversation! ) They were not malnourished or depressed, though they did all reek of alcohol and claimed to smoke and/or sell drugs and prescription meds.

That having been said, I've generally concluded that living homeless (in Berkeley at least) is largely a choice and a lifestyle. I've observed similar phenomena in places such as Waikiki, HI. In these areas it seems that it's a hippie-like mentality of freedom.

Am I saying it's always always the individual's fault for being homeless? Certainly not, I tend to avoid generalizations like that. What I do know is that in the poorer areas that I've travelled through and lived in, what we consider "poverty" is a lifestyle more than it is an economic condition. Such is certainly not the case in destitute foreign countries, but it is a common phenomenon in the United States.

Note that I'm speaking out of personal experience here, as I don't think there's any other way to judge the "causes" of people living in poverty. I live in a city with a HUGE concentration of homeless folks, and next to one with similar problems plus the issue of a massive crime rate (Oakland), and this is my experience coming out of there. I've spoken at length with these folks on three occasions and had shorter conversations several times. And as pleasant as these guys are and as much as I respect their choice of lifestyle, I am ADAMANTLY against taxpayer money going to support such a lifestyle.

I have had similar discussions with inactive marines in bars. Unfortunately, my tax dollars are used to support their drinking lifestyle.

What a pathetic troll-esque attempt at an argument.

1) Your tax dollars go to the Marines' paychecks which they are free to do what they wish with.

2) The Marines have a job and worked hard to get it. And they work hard to earn that money.

3) Without the military there would be no government to begin with.

4) If you have a problem with the military's existence and the money that goes towards it by all means write your congressman and ask him to support legislation to dissolve it. I highly doubt he'd see things your way, but hey, it's worth a shot right? My paycheck is at the mercy of Congress.

I am a vet. I have first hand knowledge as to what a military person does. It is nothing special. I know grandmothers that sacrifice more for their grandchildren than Marines that make real sacrifice for their country.

mpjh wrote:I am a vet. I have first hand knowledge as to what a military person does. It is nothing special. I know grandmothers that sacrifice more for their grandchildren than Marines that make real sacrifice for their country.

You are absolutely right.

Most people in the military don't do anything particularly special. They have desk jobs, 9 - 5. Others provide manual labor or act as mechanics. Some have it really easy and do it in the States. Other make certain quiet sacrifices such as raising a family overseas, moving constantly. But you are certainly right that there are a substantial number of men and women in the military who never risk their lives.

Does that mean their jobs aren't vital or that they shouldn't be paid? Ummmm... no.

So back to your point about how you disagree with how some Marines spend their paychecks? And your ridiculous comparison of someone working in the military to someone on welfare because he enjoys the homeless lifestyle? And your implied notion that you'd rather we didn't have a military? (I'm telling you, if you think we get paid too much let your congressman know).

See, I can't have discussions with individuals who believe people 'choose' to be homeless and enjoy a life of poverty, hunger, and sickness.

lgoasklucyl wrote:See, I can't have discussions with individuals who believe people 'choose' to be homeless and enjoy a life of poverty, hunger, and sickness.

Well trust me, I live in a city where people DO choose homelessness. How's about you come down here, buy two cups of coffee, give one to a bum and chat with him for an hour or so? I think you'll come to the same conclusion.

I've yet to see a malnourished bum here. One of them has a cell phone. A cell phone! There's a few who are former PROFESSORS at the university!

Ok, so you are the first to get at least half the point. Military people don't make sacrifices that ordinary people make for the most part. The other half is that ordinary people do give their very lives for others on a regular basis, as great as the sacrifice of any marine. In particular, grandmothers are among those i notice endure enormous sacrifice for their family.

Now to you point of the paycheck of marines. My post was in response to someone denigrating the poor. I am glad you persist in this, because it give me a chance to point out what was behind my comment. Many, if not most, of the homeless are veterans. The person denigrating those homeless people is attacking people that sacrificed much for their country. The absolute lack of compassion on that person's part is outrageous, because, as I point out, everyday people make significant sacrifices for their own and they should not be kicked when they are down. However, the wound is doubly obvious with the person down is a veteran.

The marines I talked with in bars were homeless.

mpjh wrote:Ok, so you are the first to get at least half the point. Military people don't make sacrifices that ordinary people make for the most part. The other half is that ordinary people do give their very lives for others on a regular basis, as great as the sacrifice of any marine. In particular, grandmothers are among those i notice endure enormous sacrifice for their family.

Now to you point of the paycheck of marines. My post was in response to someone denigrating the poor. I am glad you persist in this, because it give me a chance to point out what was behind my comment. Many, if not most, of the homeless are veterans. The person denigrating those homeless people is attacking people that sacrificed much for their country. The absolute lack of compassion on that person's part is outrageous, because, as I point out, everyday people make significant sacrifices for their own and they should not be kicked when they are down. However, the wound is doubly obvious with the person down is a veteran.

The marines I talked with in bars were homeless.

I know, there are quite a few Vietnam vets here as well. Hell, there are even a few Iraq vets. Is the solution to veteran-related issues welfare? No, it's better reintigration and veteran's programs.

Where was I ever "denigrating" the poor?

I don't disagree with your little discourse on sacrifice, how could anyone? Furthermore, what's your point and how is that relevant to what we're talking about?

You were not doing the denigration. Others before you in this thread were asserting that homelessness is a person's personal choice, that poverty is a personal choice. That is what I was attacking with my posts.