Put me in charge the one plan that makes sense

Free Fall
Auctions

Specials
Auctions

QuickBuy
Auctions

Newly Added
Auctions

Ending Soon
Auctions

Welcome Guest

Forum Terms & Conditions | My Topics

SamWidge
Connoisseur Topic Starter

13 years ago

PUT ME IN CHARGE . . .

Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no
cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice
and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul
away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women
Norplant birth control implants or tubal legations. Then, we'll test
recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce
or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.

Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military
barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of
repair. "Your home" will be subject to inspections anytime and
possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360,
then get a job and your own place.

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each
week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the
roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we
find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires
and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the
"common good.."

Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that
all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules.
Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self
esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone
else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered
self esteem.

If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at
least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current
system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes,
that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You
will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving
a Gov't welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job.

Wanna join the discussion?! Login to your CigarBid Forums forum account or Register a new forum account

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

🤔 🤔

what kind of cheese..?? 😕

havana1
Connoisseur

13 years ago

In a perfect world.

However, these people living off of you and me have been doing it for so long they now feel
entitled to it.

But don't worry.....Obama is gonna fix all that!

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

I see no mention of Obamaphones & Obamanet.... 😟

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

Not to pooh-pooh your plan...

But what happens when individuals decide for themselves that they don't like your rules (because odds are these are not people well adapted or inclined to follow rules) and decide to leave your assistance program. Instead they sleep in private charity supported shelters (run by churches) or on the street and commit petty crime or panhandle on the street for money?

I'd rather not have an increase in dirty vagrants lying on the street where I have to smell them.
Hell, there's now three that have taken to hanging out all day in the coffee shop I get my morning latte at. Dirty smelly vagrants.

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

what have you done to help them..??

bloody spaniard
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

Hear hear, my good man, I say pip pip, jolly good job and all that rot. Don't forget to add that one must be a land owner in order to vote!

Now I'm sure it was an accidental oversight, old bean, but who's supposed to take care of my bitches and bas tards. Surely not ME??? 🤐

Edited by user 13 years ago | Reason: Not specified

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

what have you done to help them..??

DrafterX wrote:

Why would I help them. They are consuming oxygen I'm sure I could find a use for.

DrMaddVibe
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

victor809 wrote:

We could unleash the Kraken or put the Droogs out on the street...:-" in the rain...just :-" in the rain...is that okay?

BUTTT...if'n days be a queen for a day...oh the hugh manatees!

Edited by user 13 years ago | Reason: Not specified

DrafterX
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#10

🤔 I wonder who leashed and put away the Kraken in the first place..... 🤔

SamWidge
Connoisseur Topic Starter

13 years ago

#11

Don't forget to add that one must be a land owner in order to vote... ...but who's supposed to take care of my bitches and bas tards. Surely not ME??? [-(

bloody spaniard wrote:

...i'm genuinely confused, aren't the answers self evident?

Why should they vote if they have no personal, tangible, physical, vested interest? This is why I have no vote at Facebooks POS annual meeting - I have no vested material interest in their organization.

Who shall take care of the little Spaniards? - please see paragraph 4 of the plan.

Really Spaniard, these questions are beneath you.

Brewha
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#12

...i'm genuinely confused, aren't the answers self evident?

SamWidge wrote:

The burning accuracy of this statement illuminates the entire post.
And to the second statement – apparently not.

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#13

SamWidge wrote:

Unless your intent is to only grant citizenship to land-owners, one would argue that owning land in the US is not the definition of having a vested interest in the organization.

What about individuals who choose to get rid of homes and move into apartments for ease of maintenance?
One could legitimately run an entire business out of rented space, employ 1000's of people without being a property owner of the business or their own personal property. (Yes this does happen, one of our facilities has been operated out of rented space for over a decade, with a few millions of dollars of sunk upgrades just in the past 3 years)

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#14

U
One could legitimately run an entire business out of rented space, employ 1000's of people without being a property owner of the business or their own personal property. (Yes this does happen, one of our facilities has been operated out of rented space for over a decade, with a few millions of dollars of sunk upgrades just in the past 3 years)

victor809 wrote:

Since when do businesses vote?

teedubbya
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#15

poor people suck

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#16

Since when do businesses vote?

HockeyDad wrote:

Business owners vote.
Business owners (job creators) could theoretically run an entire business without owning any physical land in the US. His plan would not allow these individuals to vote... just pointing out a hole.

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#17

Maybe the business owner should buy a house.

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#18

Maybe the business owner should buy a house.

HockeyDad wrote:

Why would he be required to?
If he has sufficient income that paying rent is convenient and not a financial issue, why not rent? I know individuals who found that property ownership isn't something they want to do. Hell, I don't know what I will do when I sell my condo, but I sure as hell wouldn't like the idea that my voting rights would be tied to whether I purchased more property.

HockeyDad
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#19

victor809 wrote:

He would be required to if he wanted to vote. I understand you wouldn't like that requirement for yourself but who cares what you want. Our government could care less what you want and its not about to start caring now. You should be happy you even get one vote right now and that Pfizer and United Health don't get a million votes each.

victor809
Herf-A-Holic

13 years ago

#20

HockeyDad wrote:

While I have no problem with the idea that the gov't doesn't care what I want, I'd like to point out that it really doesn't care what Sam wants either. I'm just pointing out holes in his plan (that the government didn't ask him for).

Hell, we can go one step further, if property ownership were to be a requirement, you know that an enterprising individual would buy a huge tract of land in the middle of nowhere and start re-selling 1sq ft parcels for a profit to people interested in gaining voting rights cheaply. This of course would cause Sam to have a fit and require voting rights be tied to the amount of property owned.... next thing you know, ranchers and farmers have 90% of the voting rights... this probably wouldn't be good for our economy.

Users browsing this topic

Important Information: