TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- Who should pay more tax?
Pages (4): « 1 2 3 [4]

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka Divorce is unfortunate, and I feel for the kids and the single mothers that usually result, but god damn if it's got to be society's responsiblity that 2 adults can't sort their shit out and become a drain on the rest of us. People that can't afford to raise children should not be having children. It's a sad fact, but it is true. Divorce is a serious problem in American society. I find it extremely sad that one out of every two couples ends in divorce.

I do agree divorce/estrangement is a major problem, but I think that there are certain instances where it is necessary.

There are different reasons for leaving a marriage, but domestic violence is a significant factor in cases where welfare is used, which makes sense to me, since a woman and her children need to get out of the situation ASAP:

quote:

Domestic violence may affect a woman's ability to financially support herself and her children. past and current victims of domestic violence are over-represented in the welfare population. the majority of welfare recipients have experienced domestic abuse in their adult lives, and a high percentage are currently abused. Raphael & Tolman, Trapped by Poverty, Trapped by Abuse: New Evidence Documenting the Relationship Between Domestic Violence and Welfare , p. 20 (1997). abused (past or current) welfare recipients experience higher levels of health or mental health problems such as a physical disability, or serious or acute depression. Raphael & Tolman, Trapped by Poverty, Trapped by Abuse: New Evidence Documenting the Relationship Between Domestic Violence and Welfare, p. 21 (1997). 15 - 50% of abused women report interference from their partner with education, training or work. Raphael & Tolman, Trapped by Poverty, Trapped by Abuse: New Evidence Documenting the Relationship Between Domestic Violence and Welfare, p. 22 (1997). welfare studies show that abused women do seek employment, but are unable to maintain it. it is possible that domestic violence presents a barrier to sustained labor market participation. Raphael & Tolman, Trapped by Poverty, Trapped by Abuse: New Evidence Documenting the Relationship Between Domestic Violence and Welfare, p. 22 (1997). examples of abusers' sabotage of their victims' attempts to work include: calling her employer and ordering the victim to quit; making allegations requiring the victim to appear before the police, court or social services; threatening to kill the victim; committing suicide in front of the victim; sabotaging the victim's car; beating her up on the way to an interview; stealing her work uniforms; starting fights each day before school or work; breaking the victim's writing arm repeatedly; manipulating her schedule by demanding visitation with the children; stalking; starting fights or threatening abuse which affects her ability to concentrate at work; or encouraging continued drug addition. Raphael & Tolman, Trapped by Poverty, Trapped by Abuse: New Evidence Documenting the Relationship Between Domestic Violence and Welfare, pp. 10-14 (1997). between one- and two-thirds of welfare recipients reported having suffered domestic violence at some point in their adult lives; between 15 - 32% reported current domestic victimization. Raphael & Tolman, Trapped by Poverty, Trapped by Abuse: New Evidence Documenting the Relationship Between Domestic Violence and Welfare, p. 21 (1997).

Source - American Bar Association (Link)

quote:

Originally posted by wolverine16 I do agree divorce/estrangement is a major problem, but I think that there are certain instances where it is necessary. There are different reasons for leaving a marriage, but domestic violence is a significant factor in cases where welfare is used, which makes sense to me, since a woman and her children need to get out of the situation ASAP: Source - American Bar Association (Link)

I can respect that. I'll even a....ag....agree with you on this point! Damn, Friday is giving me a case of the warm fuzzies!

quote:

Originally posted by Shakka I can respect that. I'll even a....ag....agree with you on this point! Damn, Friday is giving me a case of the warm fuzzies!

Wow, nice!

By all means though, if anyone has anything that shows there is a tremendous amount of abuse in the system since the last decade's reforms, please post it. While I come from a perspective that is more optimistic about the system, I don't want to come off as saying it's 100% perfect. The Tupac case that was mentioned earlier where royalties were exempt, that certainly shouldn't be happening if it still does (though I believe he died before TANF went into effect)! While there's different sides ideologically, nothing makes me angrier about politics than people like Rush Limbaugh or Randi Rhodes saying they are 100% right and the other side is 100% wrong. Those who think the government should play a role in providing welfare certainly don't advocate loopholes , and I'd like to close them just as much. The question is how often is this happening, which would demand attention and further reform.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Well thank goodness we have Republicans willing to push through legislation to outlaw gay marriages - that way we'll have one less thing to worry about that threatens the sanctity of marriage.....

Yeah, why should us breeders hog all the misery!

quote:

Originally posted by wolverine16 nothing makes me angrier about politics than people like Rush Limbaugh or Randi Rhodes saying they are 100% right and the other side is 100% wrong.

They cause more minds to be closed, taking their views as gospel, not getting 1st hand information personally.

A typical Limbaugh statement "...these doped up enviornmentalist wackos!..."

Look who's "calling the kettle black", we all know about his little "vacation".

"..The economy is at the strongest it has ever been!..." Not really from my persective, investors, CEOs and shareholders perhaps.

"...Unemployment is at it's lowest point..." I know many who's benefits have run out or have stopped looking and now stay at home with the kids.

Go out and talk to people, and use your eyes.

We have this system in Norway and I think it is appaling. My father is _punished_ for working 9-10 hours a day, seven days a week and keeping a business up and providing a secure job for several people.

He has to pay close to 60 % of his income in tax. A person who maybe just didn't care about college, and who is working 5 hours a day, 5 days a week, is let of _much_ easier.

It's just so wrong I don't have words.

How about if we invert the pyramid, the more a person works, the less tax they pay. Because no one wants to work harder for someone else.

But then have a fee structure to live in certain communities, if you were paying directly for a neighborhood park, parents would not hesitate to say "Junior!! stop breaking the swings!!" or "You clean that graffiti off NOW!!

We would become a country of gated communities...feudalism...it worked for centuries.

may the rich pay more tax - for controlling interests that ultimately the poor have to pay more for.....my 2 cents

What does that mean?

Wolverine, I have heard a figure around that 20%. I want to say 15% of welfare is abussed. Why do we seem to have this fixation on the urban minorities, while they are disproportionately represented on welfare, the majority is in white rural areas. But then again, I have heard all of this from a very liberal professor, so I hope someone will correct me if this isn't true.

quote:

Originally posted by kush paintings What does that mean? Wolverine, I have heard a figure around that 20%. I want to say 15% of welfare is abussed. Why do we seem to have this fixation on the urban minorities, while they are disproportionately represented on welfare, the majority is in white rural areas. But then again, I have heard all of this from a very liberal professor, so I hope someone will correct me if this isn't true.

No no no! I put that 20% as a hypothetical level where I would say we would need more reforms if that were, in fact, the case. I don't think it's anywhere near that level, particualarly since reforms were put in place during the last decade, I've suggested that it's nowhere near that high throughout this thread and I've been asking for someone to show me something that proves it's that high if it is actually true. The latter part of your post is absolutely true, it is not urban minorities that primarily use welfare programs.

There should be a middle class option added, since that's who often gets hit paying more taxes, not the rich. Cases in point in the U.S.: Repeal of the estate tax, tax cuts that overwhelmingly cut taxes for the highest tax bracket while leaving an ever-growing debt that must be paid off, proposed social security reform that would cut benefits for the wealthy & middle class and leaving a cap for taxing income at $90,000. The middle class winds up paying for more when taxes are cut for the wealthiest people.

Hmmm... well that is odd that you said that number, because my teacher said something in the area of 15% of cases. But then again, it was from a discussion a couple of weeks ago and I could have remembered that wrong.

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.