Someone give me a plausible reason to vote Democrat

sturg33 said:
This Republican mayor has an incredibly simple idea to help the homeless. And it seems to be working.
Click to expand...
" In partnership with a local nonprofit that serves the homeless population, a van is dispatched around the city to pick up panhandlers who are interested in working. The job pays $9 an hour, which is above minimum wage, and provides a lunch. At the end of the shift, the participants are offered overnight shelter as needed."
...

Taxpayer funds paying that $9 an hour,providing tools and administration?
What "local non profit"?

It is wonderful this city caring for the homeless and this program is to be commended
But I would like to point out
If this was the case in Detroit or Chicago or East LA "we" would be having a fit

Thinking the applicable phrase in the above cases "#free stuff"
 
57Brave said:
" In partnership with a local nonprofit that serves the homeless population, a van is dispatched around the city to pick up panhandlers who are interested in working. The job pays $9 an hour, which is above minimum wage, and provides a lunch. At the end of the shift, the participants are offered overnight shelter as needed."
...

Taxpayer funds paying that $9 an hour,providing tools and administration?
What "local non profit"?

It is wonderful this city caring for the homeless and this program is to be commended
But I would like to point out
If this was the case in Detroit or Chicago or East LA "we" would be having a fit

Thinking the applicable phrase in the above cases "#free stuff"
Click to expand...

Right on cue!
 
Yah, like I said if this was Chicago or Detroit or Philadelphia you would refer to it as "free stuff" and bemoan taxpayer money being spent

But hey, it is a (R) mayor and more than likely white recipients
so, it gets your approval ?
Time will tell how many sides of your mouth there are

Never learned who the "local non profit" was and what people work there
Because even though it is a non profit, someone has to sweep the floors and balance the books.
Guessing here it wasn't ACORN

One more question before you have to run to learn who the non profit was,
is this "plausible reason... " to not vote (D) or vote (R) - the placement of the issue is confusing
What is your point ?
 
57Brave said:
Yah, like I said if this was Chicago or Detroit or Philadelphia you would refer to it as "free stuff" and bemoan taxpayer money being spent

But hey, it is a (R) mayor and more than likely white recipients
so, it gets your approval ?
Time will tell how many sides of your mouth there are

Never learned who the "local non profit" was and what people work there
Because even though it is a non profit, someone has to sweep the floors and balance the books.
Guessing here it wasn't ACORN

One more question before you have to run to learn who the non profit was,
is this "plausible reason... " to not vote (D) or vote (R) - the placement of the issue is confusing
What is your point ?
Click to expand...

LOL... I love it. People getting helped from the government and you don't like it bc it was a R idea.

Do I approve of tax money subsidy? Of course not. But I like it a whole lot more than simple welfare. These people are working for their money. And many of them are getting hired. Good for them.

Better than the leeches.
 
It is the tax payer subsidy that is at the base of this program - you approve of tax payer subsidy when it is PR friendly to (R)
Gotch ya

Judging by your writings over the years, you care no more about the homeless in Albuquerque than whether it snows on Jupiter in June.

Tax payer subsidies are taxpayer subsidies -- you have steadfastly railed against them for years - as in Ron Paul holding back funds for hurricane relief in the House district in Galveston Tex.

But, today a (R) mayor , which was the first sentence to your post, has a PR sucess and ...
Like I said, time will tell how many sides there are to your mouth
 
57Brave said:
It is the tax payer subsidy that is at the base of this program - you approve of tax payer subsidy when it is PR friendly to (R)
Gotch ya

Judging by your writings over the years, you care no more about the homeless in Albuquerque than whether it snows on Jupiter in June.

Tax payer subsidies are taxpayer subsidies -- you have steadfastly railed against them for years - as in Ron Paul holding back funds for hurricane relief in the House district in Galveston Tex.

But, today a (R) mayor , which was the first sentence to your post, has a PR sucess and ...
Like I said, time will tell how many sides there are to your mouth
Click to expand...

I guess you didn't read what I said.

I am against tax subsidy.

I prefer working for the subsidy than being handed it. Makes sense? I'm sure it doesn't to you

It's just like any other government job.

Sorry your mad that a R did something well. You're a sad dude
 
57Brave said:
Judging by your writings over the years, you care no more about the homeless in Albuquerque than whether it snows on Jupiter in June.
Click to expand...

Only when the judge can only see things through a leftist lens.

Quite frankly, your support for a $20 min wage (or $20something) makes me think you're the one who doesn't care for the homeless/poor.
 
sturg33 said:
I guess you didn't read what I said.

I am against tax subsidy.

I prefer working for the subsidy than being handed it. Makes sense? I'm sure it doesn't to you

It's just like any other government job.

Sorry your mad that a R did something well. You're a sad dude
Click to expand...

Let me put it this way.
There is an old joke Winston Churchill told
at a party once he asked a woman if she'd be willing to
"compromise her virtue for x million pounds".
she said " yes "
he said what about 1 pound ?
she reponds " what do you think I am ??"
he said,
"we've already established what you are, now we are just bartering the price"

Kind of like you and tax subsidies.
I don't see the difference between Ron Paul's response to Hurricane relief in Galveston and this
you obviously do
I don't see the difference between this and using tax payer money to rebuild the water pipes in Michigan
I paraphrase "now that we have established you are in favor of using tax subsidies ... "

can you help a brother out ?
 
57Brave said:
Let me put it this way.
There is an old joke Winston Churchill told
at a party once he asked a woman if she'd be willing to
"compromise her virtue for x million pounds".
she said " yes "
he said what about 1 pound ?
she reponds " what do you think I am ??"
he said,
"we've already established what you are, now we are just bartering the price"

Kind of like you and tax subsidies.
I don't see the difference between Ron Paul's response to Hurricane relief in Galveston and this
you obviously do
I don't see the difference between this and using tax payer money to rebuild the water pipes in Michigan
I paraphrase "now that we have established you are in favor of using tax subsidies ... "

can you help a brother out ?
Click to expand...

But... you are wrong.

I don't favor using tax subsidies.

So... we'll move on.
 
In this case you are , you've said as much.
Why else would you promote an article touting the virtues of a subsidized functioning government program

You really need to think this over.
You are in favor of things you rail against and don't even realize it
Maybe take a little time, read and reflect ...
I'm here for ya

Then, back to Dr Paul ...
 
57Brave said:
In this case you are , you've said as much.
Why else would you promote an article touting the virtues of a subsidized functioning government program

You really need to think this over.
You are in favor of things you rail against and don't even realize it
Maybe take a little time, read and reflect ...
I'm here for ya

Then, back to Dr Paul ...
Click to expand...

Reading this legit made me LOL

I support requiring welfare recipients to work for their money, rather than being given it.

In my ideal world, there would be no welfare.

Baby steps.

I've always said, if you're gonna have welfare... make the recipients complete community service in order to receive it.

Apparently - that is a radical view.

I applaud this mayor for making positive change in the right direction.

I recognize that you don't.
 
oh but I do. An prime example of public service

wonder why after seeing this example you wouldn't be receptive to government funding of re piping Flint, Mich. Or the debated funding for Galveston Hurricane clean up.

Both meet your requirements.

Tax subsidies go to so much more than welfare. But like you say, you are opposed to tax subsidies.

At least now that I know what you sre, we can barter the price
 
57Brave said:
wonder why after seeing this example you wouldn't be receptive to government funding of re piping Flint, Mich. Or the debated funding for Galveston Hurricane clean up.
Click to expand...

Maybe because there isn't any remote comparison to be made between the situation sturg exampled and the ones you listed?
 
Sturg has been black and white anti tax subsidy until today.

" now that we know ... "

You know the rest
 
I just spent 10 minutes scrolling through the occupy democrats Facebook page.

Now I realize how 57 has become such a joke
 
Oklahomahawk said:
I could be wrong, but I think he's likely talking about how the thread has "evolved" since your original post.
Click to expand...

You mean this thread having Sturg beating the tar out of Steak Sauce. It has been amusing. What I did like was Jersey's post and as a black female she knew where I was heading with this and can she what I really want and never get from the Dems or Republicans, it is respect. Dems do not respect blacks who are too uppity for them because they would have no control. The welfare carrot will be slapped away and they don't want that vote to leave. While the Repubs, the somewhat racist party, wants to keep blacks down so they can say they are smarter, more trendsetting and things like that, but when blacks surpass their masters, like me for an example, that is when you get/earn your respect. Some blacks who rather stay on the welfare side would call me an Uncle Tom, Carlton Banks, et al, because I somehow kissed ass or brown nosed for my position, but they are so far from the truth it saddens me.
 
Republicans in North Carolina are pulling out all the stops to suppress the state’s reliably Democratic black vote. After the 4th Circuit reinstated a week of early voting, GOP-controlled county elections boards are now trying to cut early voting hours across the state. By virtue of holding the Governor’s office, Republicans control a majority of votes on all county election boards and yesterday they voted to cut 238 hours of early voting in Charlotte’s Mecklenburg County, the largest in the state. “I’m not a big fan of early voting,” said GOP board chair Mary Potter Summa, brazenly disregarding the 4th Circuit’s opinion. “The more (early voting) sites we have, the more opportunities exist for violations.”

https://www.thenation.com/article/north-carolina-wont-stop-suppressing-the-vote/
 
sturg33 said:
But... you are wrong.

I don't favor using tax subsidies.

So... we'll move on.
Click to expand...
At the risk of crossing threads and for the sake of consistency ...

Unless of course if those tax subsidies go to business' that don't pay their employees a living wage.
Then ...

Favor or not -- you adhere to business models that require tax subsidies.
In the real world that is "favor"ing

Feel free to cherry pick what you "favor" and don't
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top