Sorry, my hyperlexia is making me do it, but the word I think you mean is "reeks" meaning "smelling bad".  Also "kusu munnam" in Tamil and "kusai" in Japanese.
  
Alison (running to hide under the sofa)

this thread reeks of a lot of replys

You have a sleep schedule advantage, though.

this thread has bits of ideology that most people semi-familiar with history would not touch with a fiberglass pole.

Granted, I really should be sleeping.

LOL, sleep does a body good

and tomorrow is another day

Only way to stop the non wealthy from having children is to get rid of food stamps, section 8, WIC, etc that helps families. But the downside to that be families in need would suffer and would be forced to hand their kids to the state because they could no longer afford to care for them. *** happens in life like people lose their jobs, people get disabled so they end up being poor so they end up on GA. Plus more babies be abandoned or killed because no all people are smart when they have a baby. They don't know they can just drop the baby off at a police station or hospital and leave it there so they do something stupid such as murder them or abandoning them somewhere. More people may have abortions or handing their babies to the state after giving birth because they cannot afford it, more be put up for an adoption. There just be more unwanted kids and parents would be dropping their kids off at social services or something explaining to them how they have lost their jobs and now they can no longer afford to feed them and they don't know how long it be until they get a new job. More kids would probably be turned to foster care until their parents get back on their feet. More foster homes be over crowded.

Plus there be more people in the streets or more people living in other peoples housing renting a room because they cannot afford to live on their own due to no section 8 or food stamps. Plus more people would starve. More people would not get treatment due to no medicare.

It be going back in time before welfare was created and food stamps and social security. I am sure people back then dropped their kids off at orphanages when they could no longer care for them. I know people back then dropped their babies off they couldn't care for. Someone would have their baby and take it to the orphanage.


I also think maybe more would people get smart and use birth control because they be so afraid of getting pregnant since GA no longer exists. But just as long as there is GA, people don't really think. Even if no GA would change that, I bet there be more abortions and more babies being put up for an adoption or being left at hospitals or police stations. There be more babies in foster care.

This is exactly the problem with attacking the debt problem from an anti-welfare perspective.  Exactly those policies which have been hailed as preventions of fraud do nothing but keep people on welfare from ever getting off of it.  They punish saving, and the salary limit does not allow people to become independent, so they actually increase welfare spending.  

There are those who suggest that any case of unemployment is simple laziness.  That requires us to believe that everytime the economy goes downhill, there has been some sort of epidemic of laziness.  Caused by what?  Well, obviously it's the government's fault.  The government, afterall, is evil.  What other evidence do we need?

A nice description of the problem.  Even information has to come from somewhere, and in an economy like ours it is subject to artificial scarcity like everything else.  Somebody has to pay to provide that information.  We all know nobody wants to pay for anything.  We also know that some people simply don't have the money to pay for the functions of our government.  I don't just mean welfare and "handouts"--other expenses, bigger expenses in fact, include national defense and maintenance of our infrastructure.  As ironic as it may sound, we also have to pay to create currency.  Copper, steel, nickel, paper, ink, stamps all cost money.  Wars cost a *** ton of money.  

It doesn't come from no where.  

Unfortunately, people don't just "get smart."  Information doesn't come from no where any more than money does.  People don't just "figure out" what they have to do to get ahead, control their fertility, or even just barely manage to scrape by.  All human behaviors are learned behaviors.  People don't just suddenly become lazy, people aren't naturally hard-working, it is something that they learn.  And if we insist on taking the money it costs to provide this knowledge from places where there just is no extra money, then we end up in debt.

You are exactly correct. I have been stunned at how someone wouldn't know how to clean or do their laundry and I just thought it was all common sense. but no they need to be taught as kids. That is why kids have chores because it teaches them responsibility and to be independent when they grow up. I am sure lot of us remember being told to clean our rooms, bring down our dirty clothes, put them away, clear our spots, put our dishes in the dishwasher, set the table, and  how many of us were handed chores?

I have also heard of increase in helicopter parenting. Parents are now showing up at their adult children's interview or calling the boss for their child to see if they got the job or information about the job. But honestly, if parents do everything for their kids growing up, kids will grow up to be clueless adults not knowing what to do with themselves because their parents always did everything for them and handed them everything. Kids don't just figure it out when they are on their own all of a sudden.

Parents must let their kids make mistakes learn from them, try and have them do things on their own. They can help them but they must have them try on their own. That is also why parents ask their kids what they would like for breakfast or dinner or what clothes they like to wear because it teaches them some independence. Mom used to ask my brothers and I if we wanted hot cereal or cold cereal. If we went out to eat, she let us pick out own food. If kids make the poor choice in what outfit to wear, the parent then corrects the by telling them "It's too cold out for you to wear shorts, you need to pick out something warmer."

It was a fortunate I learned to clean on my own so it had shocked me that some people wouldn't know how to clean so they let their home get dirtier and dirtier. I still don't understand. How hard is it to vacuum or sweep and pick up dirt or to even toss in some dirty clothes or even fold them or hang them up to try or toss in the dryer for them to dry? How hard is it to spray the toilet with cleaning stuff and wipe it with a cloth? How hard is it to grab a mop and get it wet and wash the floor with it? If I am not sure how to clean something, I ask. That's all people need to do if they don't know how to clean something. I don't get it. I didn't need a parent to teach me all these things. I wonder if it had to do with seeing my own mother clean? I grew up in a clean home so I would see her sweep and vacuum, wash counter tops, do the dishes, washing the floors and doing laundry. But my mother in law cleans but my sister in law won't clean her home so that doesn't solve the mystery of why I knew how to clean and she doesn't. So I think she is just lazy. My mother in law told me she just doesn't like to clean. Ever since my in laws had moved back in with her, her home has been a lot cleaner ever since because my mother in law cleans it. I suppose parents can teach their kids how to clean all they want and handing them tasks and chores and they can still grow up and not want to ever clean their homes because they don't like to clean.

Another thing that sucks about GA stuff is you are not allowed to save. If you have more than a certain amount in your bank and it doesn't matter if you had been saving it for emergencies or for a house or for car maintenance, etc. they deny you or take away your GA. So I can understand why people would lie about how much money they have in their home or in their safety deposit box. So people are to stay poor and stay on GA and then be broke if something happens or rely on their friends or family if they let a medical bill or need their car to be fixed. It's like they want people to stay poor and keep asking for money from other people when they need it. My husband figures they expect you to live off your savings and then go back to them when you are broke. If you start saving while on GA, no no you can't do that. You must ask other people for their money so you can have your car get fixed or if any emergency happens. That's how I interpret their system.

Britain had quite a bit more than light bombing.

Stalin was no better than that german fellow. He was a land grabber and probably killed more of his own people, than anyone else ever alive.

The soviet army committed so many rapes and other atrocities they should be damned also.

We helped the soviets, because they were the enemy of our enemy. It was good strategy at the time.

I didn't mean to belittle the death and destruction that British civilians faced but it was considerably less than many other countries in WW2.  Stalin is just an individual too often people think one individual is an entire country.  Did some Soviet soldiers commit rape or war crimes sure but the Germans did one hundred times more.  This whole Soviet troops are a bunch of rapists thing, and ridiculous claim that Stalin was as bad as Hitler always seemed like a smokescreen for Nazi sympathetic feelings.  I'm not saying you have those feelings but I bet the guy who invented those memes did.  One thing thats not emphasized much in American or probably British history books as well is just how much Hitler and the Nazis hated Communism and everything they chose to label as communism, this is what really led to their hatred of Jews, a lot of Communists including Karl Marx himself were of Jewish descent.  This is uncomfortable because America and Britain have such strong Anti Communist propaganda beaten into us.

*chortle*


"In America, woman can vote but horse can not! It is the other way around in my country."

Why, again, did Communism lose the cold war???

Nonsense, poopy pants!

Hah!  We even have idiots who say that Hitler was a communist or some far-left personality of another flavor.  There's a whole book on the matter, which Glenn Beck promotes from time to time, called "Liberal Fascism."  From what I gather it's mostly just nonsense about how he was a vegetarian and forbade Jewish people to own guns.  

We have a certain segment of our population which wants to re-write history in an anti-liberal light.  They get the most fanatic when talking about what they call "left wing" re-thinking of history, mainly in light of new archaeological discoveries.  Then when they attempt to cover up the secular nature of our early government and the paucity of Christian fanaticism, the actual words of our founding fathers, and the actual physical evidence uncovered by scientific investigation are commie lies.  No wonder the right wing hates the department of education so much.

This post was last modified: 02-19-2012 03:56 AM by Lang.

Hitler was a monster. Same with Idi Amin and Pol Pot and Caligula and many others throughout history. What made Stalin special was the sheer number of his own people that he butchered. Tens of millions. That is why he rates as the most evil man in history by most objective measures.

Like many psychopaths, Stalin was extremely paranoid. He conducted so many purges of the leadership of Soviet armed forces that nobody in their right mind wanted any sort of leadership role. This was one reason why soviet forces took such a horrendous beating early in WWII.

One thing that Stalin was famous for was the extended applause when he finished his speeches. Communist groups in Australia would read translations of his speeches at their meetings and then stand and applaud for half an hour afterwards, in echo of their comrades in Soviet Russia. The truth, of course, was that in Soviet Russia the applause would go on indefinitely because of the unpleasant consequences of being the first audience member to stop applauding and sit down.

It really is frightening when you consider that some actually people take FOX News seriously. A frightening number in the US apparently.

You're from Texas? Or... ?

Right-wing doesn't give a *** about education except spending so much time, energy, money and children's futures on it with so little results. It is natural to question its use when blowing so much money  away on it -and people have been doing so since the time of "Peyton Place".

Yet, the teacher's union asks for more and more money and (IIRC) tenure has been granted to some of the sexually predatory teachers recently discovered. Also, the thing about teachers indoctinating students on public school budgets.

So either you generalize right-wing with "Republican", or... you like egging people you don't agree with. Don't worry, right-wingers aren't going to take that right from you any time soon.

On many of the less-than-well-performing school districts, it amounts to babysitting average and below average minds.

The catastrophic failure of public school in America in the 21st century is something many of my fellow atheists turn a blind eye to, but I remind them nevertheless.

Mmm... what's even more frightening is the number of people that take "alphabet cable news" stations seriously