Teabaggers on social secuirty whining about food stamp recipients

ginjawarrior said:

Lying comes easy to you doesn't it?

http://www.nationalreview.com/nrd/article/?q=Mjk1YmRjNzIxNmUwMTI0ZWYxZWU4OWU2MzFiOWJmNDE=

Click to expand...

and one silly sign from one silly dingbbat means the grand copnspiracy of wicked tax protestors came together to choose their name and the form of their protest's gimmick based on the fake "sexual act" created by the dumbshits on urban dictionary dot com?

and thus im a liar for rightly and correctly stating that rachel maddow and her team of failed comedy writers who couldnt make the cut on the daily show came up with their seminal cumbubble of cleverness in equating tea bags with "teabagging" when in fact they simply stole it from this one jackhole's sign, because secretly he is the multibillionaire doctor evil of the teaparty protestors...

man you really love to reach too far for so little.

FlyLikeAnEagle said:

Looks like I touched a nerve with a teabagger nut job.

Click to expand...

nope, i just despise bigots and slanderers regardless of the color of the flag they wrap themselves in.

truth is you dont even rate this response. this is what we call charity.

now that your personal self worth has been elevated by this response you may feel free to enjoy your slide back into obscurity.

lol there are so many bigger issues anyhow.

.......................

canndo said:

I surely do. I even paid taxes during the 10 years I didn't pay what I said I owed. The point was to balance everything so that they could not or would not attempt to collect and in so doing, reset the clock. I pay what I owe now and am unwilling to go through what I did in order to not pay - but again, I never went to jail and in the end I didn't have to pay a single cent of that money

Click to expand...

Before you can "owe" something wouldn't it be a good thing to understand how a personal debt is incurred? Should a debt be payment within a mutually agreed to scenario or should it be imposed upon a person mafia style, where the nonpayment involves the threat of force?

Also who can give your consent for payment of a debt? Can I ? Can any other person or group of persons ?

FlyLikeAnEagle said:

Teabaggers are to stupid to realize social security comes from the govt.

Click to expand...

NOT QUITE. Actually the "government" doesn't provide social security funds. They merely take the money from the players and re-deal the cards. When they run out of money, they get out the crayons and "make" more of it and then hand you a bill. All "government" programs use the same business model.

canndo said:

I did refuse to pay, I did not come out and openly say that but I did not seek an offer in compromise, I did not throw myself upon the mercy of the IRS, I simply abided by IRS rules, in short, I made an extreme effort to avoid doing anything that would reset that CSD clock.

Click to expand...

Mr Neutron said:

So you didn't pay them what they said you owed?

Click to expand...

Bumpity bump bump

lmao @ dude with the sign, "dont steal my medicare to support socialized medicine" lmao considering how similar the two are..

canndo said:

Here is the thing, many on the right are all for the notion of consequences. They wish to rain consequences down upon those who didn't plan for the future, who acted irresponsibly, who they feel, ultimatly deserve the plight they fall into by their own hand.

Click to expand...

They do deserve the plight they fall into by their own hand, because when you make someone else responsible for that plight, you're just a hypocrite.

canndo said:

But those same people don't acknowlege that there are societal consequences as well and that they themselves are forced to deal with the consequences of government's failure to act on behalf of all. The refuse to understand that societal consequences produce individual consequences. They fail to grasp that they are affected by government's failure to provide.

Click to expand...

Those same people I stated above, don't acknowledge that there are also societal consequences as well, and that they are forced to deal with the consequences of the government's willingness to act on behalf of all. They refuse to understand that individual consequences produce societal consequences. They fail to grasp that they are affected by the government's willingness to provide.

canndo said:

No it wouldn't. You are under the impression that each person is prudent with their money, that each person has at least the same ability, at least the same income, at least the same fiscal situation througout their lives. Some people are incapable of planning for their future for any number of reasons.

Click to expand...

No one is under the impression that everyone is prudent with their money. In fact, most aren't. Each person doesn't have the same ability either, nor the same income, as most are aware.

And yes, while these many are incapable of planning for their future for any number of reasons, including those above, why should the government enable this conduct off the backs of everyone, including those who are fiscally responsible? Simple fact, is the government should not enable these irresponsible types.

The same way the government misappropriates funds into systems like this, without current or past consequences, is the same reason people misappropriate their own personal funds, without current or past consequences. As the saying goes - "If it's not my money, fuck it". This is how the government operates, and enables behavior such as theirs through providing to it's recipients. It's a serious problem, even if you choose not to agree, it very well is the truth.

The government and the people who rely on it's monetary support, will soon find themselves up shit's creek, as this malignant problem worsens throughout time, and then becomes terminal. In fact, it's already terminal, we just haven't seen the entire scope of repercussions, inevitably bound to occur.

canndo said:

Look, for example at the numbers of people who see tax refunds as a windfall? Had they managed to work their situations out, they would have had their money all allong and earned more with it. This doesn't happen and it is up to government to ensure that these people are taken care of.

Click to expand...

No, it's up to people to make sure they take care of themselves. Not to make sure they use others in taking care of themselves, by brokering the extortionistic deal of usery through government.