We could round the perpetual able bodied recipients of welfare and host what I would call “Monday Night Gladiators”. This would be where teams would battle for our tax dollars. The winners would stay on welfare and the losers would go into forced labor. What do you think any ideas, ways to make it better?
2007-08-17 05:34:53 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Come on this is a great idea, we can have teams for different cities any everything!
2007-08-17 05:41:29 · update #1
The Los Angeles "Work" dodgers.
2007-08-17 05:43:02 · update #2
First of all, could we make it Tuesday Night Gladiators? Because football season starts in a few weeks and my Saints are playing in TWO Monday night games.
IT doesn't make sense for the weaker of the two to have to work, and the stronger one gets the extra vacation time...you have to figure out a way for the winner to have to work, but somehow motivate him to still try hard to win. Oh wait....that's the problem we're having now....
2007-08-17 06:28:02 · answer #1 · answered by smellyfoot ™ 7 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Please come into the present. The "perpetual able bodied recipients of welfare" you speak of are a thing of the past. Welfare has been reformed greatly in the past 25 years or so.
I'd support this concept for members of congress. Survivors get their programs passed. Since Ted Stevens would be toast in the first round, no more Alaskan bridges to nowhere. On the other hand, I don't think they'd be willing to put their lives on the line for their beloved pork.
2007-08-17 12:43:25 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
They might get hurt ,those gladiators night get killed,.this country needs minority's.if we didn't have minority's then we would have to fire half the police force and close jails and it would take away jobs from morticians taking care of murder victims.My God man this country would fall a part without minority's on welfare. what about crime.if crime was cut .since minority's on welfare were to be cut back by gladiator deaths.we would slowly turn to having freedoms.again to walk the street safely and many taxi caps company's would go out of business. that would be terrible for the economy. what or you thinking?
2007-08-17 12:43:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
What tax dollars? Yours?
Most tax dollars are being spent to pay the interest on the money we've borrowed from China.
Do you know anything about money? Anything?
What welfare are you so disturbed about?
Maybe you would like the returning war vets
to be "gladiators" because many of them can't get their old jobs back, or get adequate health care, because the BUSH
ADMINISTRATION keeps giving tax cuts to the filthy rich and doesn't support the failing VA.
I doubt you are in that class of the filthy rich.
I doubt you even know whether you got a real tax cut or not.
I bet you don't even know that you are probably liable for AMT this year.
I bet you watch Fox TV and get all your information from those bozos who make zillions on people like you.
2007-08-17 12:58:14 · answer #4 · answered by kia 3 · 0⤊ 2⤋
(a) I would not support it ever and
(b) Even if you do support it, you cannot fund it with a graduated income tax with high rates because that prevents the growth of the class that has to pay for it.
This is no longer debatable - we tried to fund one that way from the 1930s on and the result was the runaway inflation and runaway unemployment of the 1970s. The notion that without Reagan's policy shifts, especially on taxes, we would / could have just kept the Great Society going is ludicrous. We were creating more poor people who needed welfare or would potentially need welfare and preventing creation of rich people without whom you can't pay for it - it had all fallen apart. It was unworkable. From a political perspective it made sense - everyone gets one vote and so the clients and employees of the welfare state voted to keep it going - - but by preventing the growth of the class of people who are affluent enough to fund it, the system ultimately ate itself.
2007-08-17 12:38:40 · answer #5 · answered by truthisback 3 · 7⤊ 2⤋
We could put the "Gladiators" on the border and make a tv show of the gladiators chasing immigrants across the border.
2007-08-17 12:55:14 · answer #6 · answered by sesaltwater 2 · 3⤊ 0⤋
well that's one way, and better than what the gov't seems to be doing about it. I know of people having more babies just so they can get more welfare. somehow, this has got to stop. how 'bout, for each additional child you have, your welfare goes down? maybe birth control would make a big comeback!
2007-08-17 12:42:11 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Gladiators are the perfect analogy, given the decline in the US may resemble that of Rome, albeit, over a much shorter timespan.
2007-08-17 12:40:59 · answer #8 · answered by outcrop 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I support Charity NOT Welfare.
2007-08-17 12:40:53 · answer #9 · answered by phillipk_1959 6 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I support welfare for children. I agree adults who can work, should. I know many take advantage of the system and that's wrong. But don't blame children for adult mistakes.
2007-08-17 13:13:46 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋