Anonymous wrote:Anyone who is currently on Medicare, Medicaid and/or Social Security is in the 47%. If you have a parent who died and you received SSDI, you were in the 47%. If you are deployed military in theatre or in rehab at Walter Reed, etc, you are in the 47%. If you have a special needs adult child with health coverage under Medicaid, you are n the 47%. If you are a family of five with household income less than 50%, you are in the 47%.

The vast majority of folks in the 47% are hard working white folks, some still working, others retired. Many will still vote for Romney, not realizing that Ryan is salivating at the prospects of ripping away their hard earned benefits as quickly as he can. Alas, people can be working two jobs in this country, paying their local/state taxes as well as payroll taxes, but still, according to the GOP, not have "skin in the game."

If a person works 35 years and pays into Social Security the entire time (because required to do so), then receives a monthly pension from Social Security, how has that person not paid taxes? That's quite different from qualifying to receive assistance through Medicaid.

Anonymous wrote:Social darwinism is not a bad thing. Funny how you won't apply your science to life.

Um, social Darwinism isn't science, moron. It's a group of discredited sociological concepts that rests on major distortions of evolutionary theory.

Also? Generally regarded as a bad thing, since it's the ideological basis for eugenics and the Holocaust and such.

Anonymous wrote:Social darwinism is not a bad thing. Funny how you won't apply your science to life.

I will
we are all equal but some are more equal than others

If this includes folks who get money back at tax time because their deductions, exemptions, etc erase tax liability, then my family is in this category.

My wife claims our two children, mortgage, and various other exemptions, so she gets a HUGE return.

Now, if the Repubs would just recognize my legal same-sex marriage, our joint income would have us paying more taxes, which I'd be happy to do. See Conservatives? It's good for the economy!u

Anonymous wrote:17:40, please explain how that is Obama's fault.

I don't think I ever implied it is Obama's fault. I do think that our tax laws are messed up. I don't think her husband should be allowed to claim her since she makes well over six figures tax free.

On a different note: I do think that too many people take advantage of the system. If you're not disabled or elderly, you should not be on welfare for more than 2 years. I once knew a single mom living in public housing, getting food stamps - but made over 80k under the table as a bartender.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Your lack of planning is not my fault

Well, we all hope you remember that one day when you are disabled on the job or in a horrific dibilitating car crash, and your lifetime limits on your health insurance run out, and you have no income anymore, and need help. Hopefully your church or parents will be there to pay for your lifelong care. Jerkoff.

Omg, 47% of america is either disabled from working or car crashes? We better tell everyone to stop working and driving.

Again you liberals think any tiny exception should be wide open for abuse and the rule of law. Private charities could handle the far off exceptions like real disabilities and injuries.

Watch daytime tv and notice all the disabled people on judge judy and all of the scumbag lawyer / structured settlement ads.

You clearly watch too much daytime tv and it has addled your brain, as evidenced by your obvious lack of critical thinking skills. No one is saying 47% of america is disabled. That 47% number refers to people who pay no federal income tax. A huge portion of that 47% is people who have full time jobs who learn very little (and therefore are below the threshold for paying taxes). If someone is working 60 hours a week but only making minimum wage, and pays payroll taxes to boot, are they moochers? No. Are our enlisted service men and women, many of whom fall into this 47%, moochers? No. Another large portion of those 47% are retired people living on social security--the very social security system they paid into their entire working careers. They EARNED these benefits because they paid into the system.

Again you prove the point that Rick Santorum made that the GOP will never attract the smart people...

17:40, please explain how that is Obama's fault.

17:36, seriously? That's your answer - a life insurance policy? I bet your like the bro-in-law of a PP - contributing no more than $250 to his church, nada to any other charitable org, then expecting manna from heaven to feed folks hit by financial crisis.

No surprise everyone follows obama and blames everyone else for their mistakes. It's bush fault.

Anonymous wrote:FYI, world bank/IMF employees who are us citizens do pay taxes, and in fact have to pay self-employment tax. It's just organized differently.

I know someone who works at an internatlonal bank in DC, has lived in US approximately 11 years - been married to a U. S. citizen for 7 of those years - has no intention of getting citizenship because can work tax free here. Husband also gets to claim her. The have a house over 1M.

Social darwinism is not a bad thing. Funny how you won't apply your science to life.

Anonymous wrote:16:59, sh*t happens. Forget that PP had a lousy husband. Let's just say husband died and family incurred $20K in medical bills. Is that bad planning? That's what really gets me. Family of five - mom and dad both work in manufacturing but at different plants. One gets laid off, then the other three months later. Folks start carping, "well, maybe you shouldn't have had so many kids. or bought your house. Or whatever." Seriously? That's what we want as a country - single men and women, no families, so folks don't have to avail themselves of government assistance temporarily - that's what we want?

A 20k life insurance policy is pretty affordable these days

16:59, sh*t happens. Forget that PP had a lousy husband. Let's just say husband died and family incurred $20K in medical bills. Is that bad planning? That's what really gets me. Family of five - mom and dad both work in manufacturing but at different plants. One gets laid off, then the other three months later. Folks start carping, "well, maybe you shouldn't have had so many kids. or bought your house. Or whatever." Seriously? That's what we want as a country - single men and women, no families, so folks don't have to avail themselves of government assistance temporarily - that's what we want?

We're not, but I know people who are, and hard work is not the problem. They are busting their asses for less than they really need to live on, which means THEY are subsidizing the rest of us.

Some people can't do the math. Not everyone is smart enough to get a well-paying job. We starve public education, so many can't compensate with desirable skills. Getting in the door for job training can be an issue. And those in physical and service jobs are more at risk for accidents and injuries that destroy their ability to work effectively.

Anonymous wrote:Your lack of planning is not my fault

Can you please shut up?
United states has the highest number of children living in poverty of all the industialized nations.