Posted on 11/08/2013 6:36:33 AM PST by Texas Eagle
Some rich brats at Salon were recently bitching about the “GOP-shredded safety net” they claim has forced moms into the workplace. In a typical example of bourgeois naiveté, they assume it’s the libertarian lack of government that’s keeping us poor and tearing apart families.
This is false for at least three reasons. One, the government can’t create wealth. It can only make people poorer. Two, the poorest we have are single moms,
Please share this article by using the link below. When you cut and paste an article, Taki's Magazine misses out on traffic, and our writers don't get paid for their work. Email editors@takimag.com to buy additional rights. http://takimag.com/article/the_myth_of_poverty_gavin_mcinnes/print#ixzz2k45FZMgx
(Excerpt) Read more at takimag.com ...
I thought moms were demanding to be in the work place so they could be “fulfilled” as if there is anything better than caring for one’s family
they also wanted birth control so they could run around same as men and thus be “sexually fulfilled” snort!
Third World poverty is often at least partially due to corrupt politicians.Take,for example,Hugo Chavez.When he came to power he didn't have two nickels to rub together but when he died (15 years later) he was a *billionaire*.OTOH,our "poverty" is also caused...largely,in fact...by political corruption.But that corruption is on the part of only *one* of our political parties.
The official motto of our Rat Party should,by all that's right,be "when robbing Peter to pay Paul one can always count on Paul's cooperation".
The Salon article says that women want to work, but eeeeevil conservatives want them to stay home. If working women is what we want, then stop welfare payments and tell single mothers to go to work.
Incredible - they’re saying it’s the “attack on the safety net” that’s tearing apart families,
when the truth of the matter is, it’s the safety net itself that’s causing that problem.
Welfare society and the lie of leftist feminism whose combination says “you don’t need a man, we’ll take care of you” appeals to the basest natural tendencies of the female person.
When I was a child in the 50’s, we did not have much money, but we were not “poor”. We just did not have a lot of extras, like going out to breakfast, lunch and dinner, new cars, going to the movies, or any of the have-to-have’s of these days.
But, we were a family. My dad worked. My mom stayed home. I went to school and worked hard to learn.
Then, in the 70’s, women were “allowed” to include their income to the family borrowing power. Quickly, people were buying newer, bigger homes and all of the “niceties of life”. The government pyramid scheme was well on its way.
Now, the family structure has been destroyed. The adults have to work to pay increasing bills, the children have no leadership, except their teachers and government, and people wonder where our “society” has gone.
Oh, yeah! I forgot about squeezing God out of this picture at the same time.
We are on our own, folks.
The One certainly doesn’t want them to work. In fact, he doesn’t want anyone to work. His ideal is having everyone on food stamps and totally dependent on him for their next meal.
You can't be serious.
So I'm incorrect?
Would this be the same "Safety Net" that allows people who do not work the ability to buy cigarettes, liquor, lottery tickets, crack cocaine, new cars, etc.?
Only one of our parties is party to the corruption?
Of our two main parties one is largely...if not almost entirely...responsible."War On Poverty" was when it started.Let's see if you can guess which of those two parties had a stranglehold grip on both the Executive *and* Legislative branches!
The only two parties, really, are US and THEM. Anything else is an illusion and a distraction. The only goal is to stay in power, savoring their milk and apples like the pigs on Animal Farm.
I am taking an online course from Hillsdale College and an interesting part of one of the lectures posed this question about poverty.
This question came after presenting data points about poverty throughout the world.
If I could place you in any country in the world, which country would you chose. There was one condition, you will be among the poorest in whichever country you select.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.