Originally posted by Nellinator
Look at BC. They were a economicly successful province that contributed to equalization payments. Just four years with an NDP government and now has to receive payments. The only place they have been successful is Saskatchewan. And the provincial NDP in Saskatchewan are far different from the national NDP party, much like the Alberta and British Columbian Liberal party is far different from the national Liberal party. In fact it is the British Columbian Liberal party (it is really a conservative government) has turned British Columbia around and put them back on track. Guess how he managed to do that? He cut taxes by 25%. I suggest you read this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gordon_Campbell
Notice how successful he was with his reforms that were "right-wing" solutions and notice how the quality of life has dramatically increased in BC after the near collapse because of the NDP. Do you see more doctors, over 300 000 more jobs and whatnot by DECREASING taxes. Also notice that he is the first BC premier in 25 years to be re-elected because it works.
Originally posted by BackFire
Perhaps they think it's in their best interest not to have their money stolen.
And by helping the poor, they reduce the crime rate and lessen the chances of that happening.
And guys, just because the title of the thread has Canada in it, in no way prevents you from discussing the issue as it relates to the world over.
They're still maintaining their wealth because they are able to run a wealthy business properly or do whatever job they do well. Their upbringing has no effect on their ability. But as said, it doesn't matter.
It's still their money. They can give it to the poor, or they can horde it and laugh while the poor starve. Their decision.
Originally posted by Starhawk
Actually, they do, not only from the fact that they don't have to work as hard, that there parents cover their tuition, that they tend to get jobs easier due to family connections but I also laid out the impacts in my first post on how poverty effects education.
Well, that's a load of utter rubbish, you my friend, have been watching too many teen movies. In the real world the percentage of people who get good jobs, because of family, is absolutely tiny.
Actually it's not, As I said I myself am in a fairly high tax bracket and allot of my friends got their jobs due to family connections. Also BF, if they take the second option, then crime increases and they take the risk of someday one of those poor people they laughed at sticking a gun in their face demanding their money.
The fact is, you live in a society, you have a responsibility to help those incapable of doing it themselves.
What about the many many many many many poor people who aren't in their position because they are incapable, but because they are simply lazy or stupid? Do we have a "responsibility" to them?
And wonderful, now that poor person who is robbing the rich person is showing that not only don't they deserve any money, they are bad people and deserve to be where they're at.
Besides, there is no such responsibility. The government has that responsibility if one exists, it's not the responsibility of random citizens to piggy back those who ****ed their lives up.
Originally posted by Starhawk
Actually it's not, As I said I myself am in a fairly high tax bracket and allot of my friends got their jobs due to family connections. Also BF, if they take the second option, then crime increases and they take the risk of someday one of those poor people they laughed at sticking a gun in their face demanding their money.The fact is, you live in a society, you have a responsibility to help those incapable of doing it themselves.
Your mates are not evidence. My mate ate his own foot, believe me? Thought not.
Originally posted by BackFire
What about the many many many many many poor people who aren't in their position because they are incapable, but because they are simply lazy or stupid? Do we have a "responsibility" to them?And wonderful, now that poor person who is robbing the rich person is showing that not only don't they deserve any money, they are bad people and deserve to be where they're at.
Besides, there is no such responsibility. The government has that responsibility if one exists, it's not the responsibility of random citizens to piggy back those who ****ed their lives up.
First off, there is a staggering amount of poor looking for work, the unemployment office in my city is over booked due to it. They aren't lazy or stupid, in my city 2 factories closed down and those people are now out of a job, they did nothing wrong and now they are in that poor bracket.
And while I do not condone crime, they aren't all bad people, some are driven to desperation by their circumstances.
And that sucks.
Doesn't answer my question, though. What of the poor people who ARE stupid and lazy. They do exist. Should rich people hand money to them?
They are bad people, because they're doing bad things. Desperation is no excuse. They have other options, like waiting and doing things besides crime.
They do exist, but not in the numbers you claim. The government can't pick and choose who it gives assistance to, due to discrimination laws.
And I never said it was an excuse, it is a reason. I still believe they should go to jail for it absolutely. But poverty is one of the leading causes of crime.