• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Unemployment below 6%

ChrisL68 said:
Based on what? The evidence I have seen indicates that proverty levels have been reduced.
Click to expand...

I thought we had agreed marriage is a desirable and healthy institution for raising children. Those numbers don't look very good lately.
 
jhmd2000 said:
I thought we had agreed marriage is a desirable and healthy institution for raising children. Those numbers don't look very good lately.
Click to expand...

So is having food to eat and running water and electricity. And again, marriage rates are down among all income and ethnic classifications.
 
ChrisL68 said:
So is having food to eat and running water and electricity. And again, marriage rates are down among all income and ethnic classifications.
Click to expand...

And the effects of that decline are felt hardest by __________________.
 
I'm trying to figure out how government policy doesn't encourage marriage. The financial benefits of marriage are obvious. It's just not as easy to get married as jhmd believes.
 
PhDeac said:
I'm trying to figure out how government policy doesn't encourage marriage. The financial benefits of marriage are obvious. It's just not as easy to get married as jhmd believes.
Click to expand...

Seeing as how marriage is pretty much just a financial arrangement, I'm trying to figure out why we don't encourage households with more than 3 parents. I'm only somewhat jokingly following the logic.
 
Last edited:
PhDeac said:
I'm trying to figure out how government policy doesn't encourage marriage. The financial benefits of marriage are obvious. It's just not as easy to get married as jhmd believes.
Click to expand...

#highexpectations
 
Whenever jhmd starts this line of reasoning I think of this line from Caddyshack.

Judge Smails: I've sentenced boys younger than you to the gas chamber. Didn't want to do it. I felt I owed it to them.
 
You all must remember that the policies jhmd opposes were dreamed up, implemented, and supported by liberals. These are the representatives of the poor who are damaged by the false incentives, the free money to not get married or try hard. On local, state, and national levels- black white and Hispanic representatives support these programs for their neighborhoods, friends, and families. Why? Are they stupid idiots who cannot see the facts before them that are so plain to jhmd and Paul Ryan and Ayn rand? Are they arrogant assholes who believe their own people are too stupid and untrainable to hold jobs or use birth control? Or are they all part of a nefarious scheme to ensnare these people into perpetual dependency and therefore a reliable voting bloc with which to hold power? Jhmd is on record believing the latter. Ask him about his position on voter id and shortening voting periods.
 
I haven't heard JHMD's policies on how to actually increase marriage rates (regardless of any consensus on whether or not getting married is actually one of the major things we want to spend time and policymaking on). I think "just get married" is really kind of more of an end result than the actual policy.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I haven't heard JHMD's policies on how to actually increase marriage rates (regardless of any consensus on whether or not getting married is actually one of the major things we want to spend time and policymaking on). I think "just get married" is really kind of more of an end result than the actual policy.
Click to expand...

Yes you have. He believes that welfare benefits discourage marriage. His policy is to cut welfare.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
I haven't heard JHMD's policies on how to actually increase marriage rates (regardless of any consensus on whether or not getting married is actually one of the major things we want to spend time and policymaking on). I think "just get married" is really kind of more of an end result than the actual policy.
Click to expand...

First, I'm going to start by fixing the name of all professional football teams that offend me. You gotta work big to small.

Once that's done, perhaps we can close Gtmo, and then finally we can get around to start examining the unintended consequences of subsistence dependency programs and instead re-engineer them such that the financial incentives work towards healthy behaviors and away from destructive choices. If we can figure out how to incentivize unhealthy behaviors (and I won't make you say it, because when the pride is so big there's no use in trying to swallow it, but just quietly nod at your desk in the privacy of your office....but does anyone seriously doubt that we have? Look around.), surely we can reverse the process. We've got the coin, we just have to muster the desire. I harbor the heresy in my bundle of beliefs that the people on the other side of the system you have created are rational actors who are capable of making their own choices, if given better options. The current system doesn't give them many options. Instead of job training, we just keep blindly sending checks, each one bigger than the last after each additional increment of self-destruction is unlocked. Instead of some meaningful say in the schools their children attend, they are sentenced to the closest failing school or put on a bus and shipped across town, and then promptly re-divided into tracks. But it looks nice on paper and feels good. The problem is, it isn't working. This isn't a mystery. Watch how you raise your own kids, and do that for the children of other people. Expectations, support, opportunity. Feel free to talk about bootstraps and other ad hominem rejoinders that you throw out whenever you get queasy about expectations. I read you loud and clear. But that would be my plan.

What's yours?

eta: And I've said before that any able bodied person receiving a government check should have that check conditioned on some form of community and/or public service. Community gardens, homeless shelters, things that would assist in meeting manifest needs. Meeting the need is important, but the skills and the expectations are equally so.
 
Last edited:
Watch how you raise your own kids, and do that for the children of other people.
Click to expand...

You want the federal government to step in and raise children for people if you disagree with how they're raising their children?
 
BeachBumDeac said:
You want the federal government to step in and raise children for people if you disagree with how they're raising their children?
Click to expand...

Yes, CLEARLY that is what I said. :rulz: It would have nothing to do with setting up a system that represent the values that we can all agree are healthy and productive and trusting people to raise their own children (or even be allowed to pick their own schools). No, not that. What you said, instead.

Thanks for not reading!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top