Michigan voters ban affirmative action

[shinerbock]

It is idealism. It is nationalism. However, striving towards something we'll never get to, doesn't mean it wouldnt bring improvement. Also, I'm not trying to convince you of anything, I don't expect such people to be persuaded to a view like mine. I value things a lot differently than you, I would suspect.

"If it's about the people then, based on the logic I'm reading from your posts, self-serving citizens who want to succeed while other hardworking Americans fail should be considered unAmerican."



-Contradictory,how so? I think you'll have to come up with something interesting to make that one stick. I do think its somewhat un-American to serve only yourself. Granted, thats simply an opinion, I'm not qualified to determine who is American and who isn't...If you'll note, I'm not against helping people, I've said this numerous times, I'm against people demanding to be helped. I'm also against people being forced to help, especially when the system providing the aid is such an utter failure. Forced giving just doesn't hold the value that true giving does...it doesn't hold as much significance with the people receiving or to the person giving. Also, I'm not against some sort of government aid, safety net if you will, but I've yet to see it work.

Back to my idealism, I think that if government left us the responsibility, we'd have no choice to act. I truly believe the American people would respond, we generally do. But then, I still place some faith in this country.

However, when the majority of people think government is what makes this country great, then we've already lost. Pack it up folks, its over.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Our country is not our government, if thats how you think, then wow, we're worse off than I thought. America's strength is its people, always has been, always will be.

Now I'll get into the real idealism, but our country certainly is our government, or more to the point our government is our people. That's the essense of representative democracy. The people, through their elected representatives, govern themselves. If those elected representatives are not doing the will of those who elected them, then the electorate should elect someone else.

Sometimes I think the biggest crisis facing this country is that we have bought into the mindset that we are governed by others rather than accepting the responsibility of governing ourselves.

[/idealism]

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

It is idealism. It is nationalism. However, striving towards something we'll never get to, doesn't mean it wouldnt bring improvement.

I do think its somewhat un-American to serve only yourself.

Once again, you're supporting why AA and social welfare programs are both feasible and necessary.

Semantics leads you to debate the whole "demanding to be helped" and "forced to help" thing. That's a neither here nor there debate because most people in need aren't so much demanding it based on their inadequacies but expecting it based on the idealism and nationalism that you typed about. "Forced to help" is like saying we're forced to do most things in this country through taxes and laws. If you want an anarchy or complete free will then leave America and find a tiny island off the coast.

[shinerbock]

DS, no, I think its equally unAmerican to force people to help others. Is that what we've resorted to? AA isn't a helping hand, its a good idea which has spiraled into overt discrimination. Welfare is a completely failed policy which does little to further people's success. Let the people keep more of their money, and allow them to help who they can. I imagine discriminating citizens are much better at spotting true need and geniune effort. The government has proven itself to be completely inept in this area, turning those who can give away from giving and continuing to appease those who refuse to help themselves.

Mystic, I agree with you. But go to small town America, and ask them what this country is, what the backbone is. Its not giving money to Darfur or affirmative action or a seat on the UN security council, its giving your neighbor a job when he's been laid off, even though you can't really afford to. Its the community taking up a collection to pay for the rehab of a local kid hurt in a car accident. Yeah, I've got a baseball and apple pie and waving to every person you pass on a rural road mindset, but I guess thats just what I prefer America to be. Sure, it can be whatever yall want it to be as well, but I don't have to be happy about it.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

Mystic, I agree with you. But go to small town America, and ask them what this country is, what the backbone is. Its not giving money to Darfur or affirmative action or a seat on the UN security council, its giving your neighbor a job when he's been laid off, even though you can't really afford to. Its the community taking up a collection to pay for the rehab of a local kid hurt in a car accident.

In other words -- it's "taking care of our own."

I've got that same small-town background and mindset -- I even wave to everyone, too -- but I really don't see what that has to do with it. I don't see it as that far of a jump from taking care of our own in "this town" to taking care of our own in "this country." Not that I would for a second deny that the welfare system in this country is far from perfect. It's not even close. Nor would I deny the philosophical distinctions between voluntary aid and involuntary (through taxes) aid. But is that an argument about which way is more "American" or about which way is more effective? The latter, I think, which is why the "that's not what America is about" argument doesn't fly with this small-town boy.

If you think that people survived during the Great Depression mainly because they were simply voluntarily helped out by their fellow man, then I think you're taking a very selective view of things. The Great Depression is pretty much the origin of the welfare system that we have inherited (not to mention Social Security), and I would suggest that much of the trouble in overhauling the welfare system (and Social Security, for that matter) has historically come from collective memories of the Great Depression. Being one generation removed from the Great Depression, that's certainly how it looks to me.

Your argument seems to pretty much boil down to "taxes = bad" (unless, I suppose, they're taxes that pay for the things you think they they ought to be paying for). That's a perfectly acceptable philosophical argument, but not one in which one side or other can be characterized as the "American" way with any credibility. Our history has been much too complex for that kind of simplistic suggestion.

[DSTCHAOS]

MysticCat for President.

Not to mention that "social welfare programs" includes but is certainly not limited to AFDC.

"Social welfare programs" is not just about foodstamps and welfare-to-work programs.

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

MysticCat for President.

LOL!!!

Only if you'll be my VP.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by MysticCat

LOL!!!

Only if you'll be my VP.

Will I have to worry about assassination attempts?

[shinerbock]

I'll be on a knoll somewhere.

Mystic, as I said, I'm not really calling anyone/thing unAmerican, I'm simply responding to what I don't think is a core value of America. Our government isn't unAmerican, its just not what I think makes this country better than all the rest.

All social welfare isn't bad. To be frank, I'm not that upset with how it is now, I'm simply against the mindset that to improve, we need more of it. If I were in charge, I wouldn't go slashing all social welfare programs, I just think people place too much faith in government to solve the problems that we as citizens should be working on. Now, as for taxes, I think its absurd.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by shinerbock

All social welfare isn't bad. To be frank, I'm not that upset with how it is now, I'm simply against the mindset that to improve, we need more of it. If I were in charge, I wouldn't go slashing all social welfare programs, I just think people place too much faith in government to solve the problems that we as citizens should be working on.

Hello, Frank.

I think we agree on this point. "Too much faith" is different than "it isn't the government's role."

[shinerbock]

I don't know that we agree. I don't think its the government's responsibility. Now, if we can do effective things through the government, lets do it, but I'm just tired of the "the government owes me" attitude. If anything, you owe the country, we all do.

[madmax]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

Hello, Frank.

I think we agree on this point. "Too much faith" is different than "it isn't the government's role."

Whose job is it to take care of your kids? That is the real problem and money isn't going to fix it.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by madmax

Whose job is it to take care of your kids? That is the real problem and money isn't going to fix it.

LOL--are you talking about the welfare mother's 100 kids or the illegal immigrant's 1000 kids?

Since we're talking about the norm and not whatever outliers make up the exceptions to the norm, the working poor and those actively seeking employment know that it's their responsibility to take care of their families and be hardworking, taxpaying citizens.

Now, onto finding another real problem. LOL.

[madmax]

Originally Posted by DSTCHAOS

LOL--are you talking about the welfare mother's 100 kids or the illegal immigrant's 1000 kids?

Since we're talking about the norm and not whatever outliers make up the exceptions to the norm, the working poor and those actively seeking employment know that it's their responsibility to take care of their families and be hardworking, taxpaying citizens.

Now, onto finding another real problem. LOL.

Actually the working poor don't know it is their responsibility to take care of their families. Why do you think MOST of the kids that are poor are from single parent households? It is kind of tough to take care of kids that you don't even know.

[DSTCHAOS]

Originally Posted by madmax

Actually the working poor don't know it is their responsibility to take care of their families. Why do you think MOST of the kids that are poor are from single parent households? It is kind of tough to take care of kids that you don't even know.

Uh...let's break your post down into topics.

Topic 1: The working poor and their sense of family responsibility. They have a strong sense of hard work and family responsibility. Being poor and having to depend on AFDC in any way has huge psychological implications and research indicates this.
Topic 2: Single parent families--especially common with the urban poor--disproportionately black and Hispanic. Yeah, we know this, so.....
Topic 3: Even with the prevalence of dead beat fathers in certain communities, the single mothers who are capable of doing so work damn hard to take care of their families. Therefore, the working poor know that it is their responsibility to take care of their families.