Is housing a right

[SP1!]

Now, contrary to what most believe on this board, Im not a huge fox news watcher but who is right here? Do people have a right to housing and for the people to provide it for them?

<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/LjM866oZwMM&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/LjM866oZwMM&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>

Personally I think that if you cant afford a house stay in an apartment, then save. Thats how everyone I know got into a house, most people today seem to think they can just stay in an apartment then move into a house with no money down, I tend to think those days are over. If you cant afford some out of pocket expense you have no business being in a house.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4xcEZRy2FY

Thats most of the interview of a crazy bitch

[Tallman388]

Most people are in peril of losing their home for a variety of reasons, do they deserve the right to have some way to keep the home? If the means exist for them to keep the home from being foreclosed upon, I say yes.
I'm not sure people who have zero down mortgages and are getting crushed right now should be blamed, but they shouldn't be absolved of blame, either. It's too late for the blame game. Just get this mess fixed and move on.

I don't think the lady from ACORN could've talked her way out of that argument, she seemed a little slow witted to be arguing ACORN's positions.

[led37zep]

Housing is not a right, nor is health care or a lot of the other things people think they deserve.

Earning and deserving are two totally different things.

[SP1!]

Most people are in peril of losing their home for a variety of reasons, do they deserve the right to have some way to keep the home? If the means exist for them to keep the home from being foreclosed upon, I say yes.
I'm not sure people who have zero down mortgages and are getting crushed right now should be blamed, but they shouldn't be absolved of blame, either. It's too late for the blame game. Just get this mess fixed and move on.

I don't think the lady from ACORN could've talked her way out of that argument, she seemed a little slow witted to be arguing ACORN's positions.
Im sorry but I think 60% of the blame lies on people who get into homes they know they cant afford, hell me and the GF got approved for a $650K home and I wouldnt sign it, why? Because I knew that we couldnt afford it in the end, the home would be where we had to stay all the time, god forbid one little thing goes wrong. You can read that in almost every article about the people being foreclosed on, we thought it was a little high for us but thought it was a good investment. Homes arent supposed to be investments.

The agents and the banks deserve blame as well but most of the blame lies on the home buyer, you know damn good and well what you can afford.

And if you get most social rights people in those situations they cant debate because their argument does not hold up to common sense, its the same reason why most left leaning talk radio fails.

[FezsAssistant]

It is now. I'm going to hurry up and get a mortgage and NOT pay it. I want a free house.

[SP1!]

It is now. I'm going to hurry up and get a mortgage and NOT pay it. I want a free house.

Thats what I was thinking after we showed restraint on getting that house, according to the new plan that obama was pushing we should have been stupid and bought over our head, they would have taken care of everything.

[underdog]

Housing is not a right, nor is health care or a lot of the other things people think they deserve.

Earning and deserving are two totally different things.

The point of a society is to help it's weakest members.

Having a house is not a right, but housing is and should absolutely be a right.

[Ritalin]

Housing is not a right, nor is health care or a lot of the other things people think they deserve.

Earning and deserving are two totally different things.

No, I disagree.

Health care is a right.

[epo]

''The answer to America's problems lies in our neighborhoods''

'Under this credit private investors will have a powerful incentive to increase the supply of affordable houses'

[underdog]

No, I disagree.

Health care is a right.

Seriously. I don't get the "fuck 'em, they don't make enough money, let them die" sort of thinking.

[~Katja~]

Housing is not a right, nor is health care or a lot of the other things people think they deserve.

Earning and deserving are two totally different things.

I actually wonder about that healthcare comment myself right now... is it a right? and if not, have I earned it by now?
I don't know why when you lose your job you are eligible for unemployment for a certain period of time, but not healthcare with it. In Europe that goes hand in hand. And especially for children.

[led37zep]

I actually wonder about that health care comment myself right now... is it a right? and if not, have I earned it by now?
I don't know why when you lose your job you are eligible for unemployment for a certain period of time, but not healthcare with it. In Europe that goes hand in hand. And especially for children.

I've been working freelance for the last 7 years and have to pay for my own health insurance. My job isn't part of a union (although a few have tried) and we're only on a job for 10-15 days at a time. So we have to go out and purchase our own health insurance, it sucks but that's how it is. But because I want it, or think I've put in my time does that make it a right? Absolutely not.

You do bring up a good point about being given access to unemployment insurance but not some form of health insurance. I wonder how popular a system would be where you paid into a system (similar to unemployment insurance) that covered you while/if you became unemployed.

[Recyclerz]

If your question is do people have the right to own homes that they can't otherwise afford without substantial taxpayer subsidies (the position that the ACORN lady was badly defending) the obvious answer is no.

However the folks in this thread seem to be swallowing whole the meme that the right-wing chorus are pushing that the root of our current financial/economic crisis is that poor, especially minority, people bought homes they couldn't afford with encouragement from would-be social engineers who thought it would be a nice (i.e. liberal) thing to do and now they expect to have their mistakes comped with other people's money. While this scenario has taken place in too many instances, it represents such a small fraction of the whole picture that pushing this story exclusively is the equivalent of a lie.

This probably isn't the venue to argue these things comprehensively so let me just give a listing of other folks you can be mad at for our present state of fucked-upedness besides the ACORN lady:

The leadership of financial firms who so fell in love with their year-end bonuses that they abandoned their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders and engaged in leveraged gambles that common sense would recognize as shite.

The heads of hedge funds who did the same thing as above but who did so on a scale so as to make the Wall St. types look like grandmas playing the nickel slot machines in AC.

Mortgage brokers who basically committed fraud with the liar's loans, etc.

The ratings agencies that gave worthless financial instruments AAA ratings in a manner not unlike a hoo-ah faking an orgasm during a $100 fuck.

The mainstream media, who are so stupid as to be fooled all of the time, pushing the message that housing prices only go up.

People with no real estate experience who decided that they were going to become millionaires by flipping houses, condos, etc.

People who wanted to live large by taking out home equity loans to finance a lifestyle they couldn't otherwise afford with no real plan to pay it back other than by selling their current house at a huge profit

and on and on.

The only other point I would make is that Obama didn't invent subsidizing homeowners. The income tax deduction for homeowners on mortgage interest and real estate taxes for first & second homes is the biggest "giveaway" to any special interest group that there is. And I don't think anybody on this board is going to refuse to take advantage of it on principle.

[~Katja~]

I've been working freelance for the last 7 years and have to pay for my own health insurance. My job isn't part of a union (although a few have tried) and we're only on a job for 10-15 days at a time. So we have to go out and purchase our own health insurance, it sucks but that's how it is. But because I want it, or think I've put in my time does that make it a right? Absolutely not.

You do bring up a good point about being given access to unemployment insurance but not some form of health insurance. I wonder how popular a system would be where you paid into a system (similar to unemployment insurance) that covered you while/if you became unemployed.

well I think it should be part of UI.. we also pay disability insurance but just as UI it is a different matter from state to state.
There is no universal system for it.

If I were to do freelance work only I obviously take bigger risks than being a w2 employee, but at the same time take home the full pay and not an hourly rate for a project that gets paid at least twice if not way more than that compared to what an employee gets for same time spent on the same project. It's a matter of making it work for you and I know for myself that if I am not getting jobs as an employee within the next six months I will work on building up my freelance jobs.

[SinA]

Are you asking if home-ownership is a right? If so, then no. However, I think that having the opportunity to own a home is a right... or that no one who wants and can afford to own a home should be discriminated against.

But if you're asking if shelter is a right, then yes There are problems making that right universal (drugs, crime, disability, etc), that I won't pretend to know how to solve, but I think there is some obligation that' we fail there.

[Recyclerz]

I've been working freelance for the last 7 years and have to pay for my own health insurance. My job isn't part of a union (although a few have tried) and we're only on a job for 10-15 days at a time. So we have to go out and purchase our own health insurance, it sucks but that's how it is. But because I want it, or think I've put in my time does that make it a right? Absolutely not.

You do bring up a good point about being given access to unemployment insurance but not some form of health insurance. I wonder how popular a system would be where you paid into a system (similar to unemployment insurance) that covered you while/if you became unemployed.

I think that we are going to find out how popular that idea is within a year when Obama breaks out the health care reform package. Having access to an affordable healthcare plan independent of employment (and preferrably with a range of choices) is something that would do a world of good for rationalizing the job market in this country.

[Bob Impact]

The only rights you have are as follows:
1) You have the right, and the moral obligation to make your own decisions.
2) You have the right to your life, your body and your mind without encroachment from others.

That's it. There is NOTHING else you are entitled to.

[SP1!]

''The answer to America's problems lies in our neighborhoods''

'Under this credit private investors will have a powerful incentive to increase the supply of affordable houses'
The problem is that the people decided they wanted to move to a neighborhood they couldnt afford, people should know their limitations before they buy a home way out of their price range.

If your question is do people have the right to own homes that they can't otherwise afford without substantial taxpayer subsidies (the position that the ACORN lady was badly defending) the obvious answer is no.

However the folks in this thread seem to be swallowing whole the meme that the right-wing chorus are pushing that the root of our current financial/economic crisis is that poor, especially minority, people bought homes they couldn't afford with encouragement from would-be social engineers who thought it would be a nice (i.e. liberal) thing to do and now they expect to have their mistakes comped with other people's money. While this scenario has taken place in too many instances, it represents such a small fraction of the whole picture that pushing this story exclusively is the equivalent of a lie.

This probably isn't the venue to argue these things comprehensively so let me just give a listing of other folks you can be mad at for our present state of fucked-upedness besides the ACORN lady:

The leadership of financial firms who so fell in love with their year-end bonuses that they abandoned their fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders and engaged in leveraged gambles that common sense would recognize as shite.

The heads of hedge funds who did the same thing as above but who did so on a scale so as to make the Wall St. types look like grandmas playing the nickel slot machines in AC.

Mortgage brokers who basically committed fraud with the liar's loans, etc.

The ratings agencies that gave worthless financial instruments AAA ratings in a manner not unlike a hoo-ah faking an orgasm during a $100 fuck.

The mainstream media, who are so stupid as to be fooled all of the time, pushing the message that housing prices only go up.

People with no real estate experience who decided that they were going to become millionaires by flipping houses, condos, etc.

People who wanted to live large by taking out home equity loans to finance a lifestyle they couldn't otherwise afford with no real plan to pay it back other than by selling their current house at a huge profit

and on and on.

The only other point I would make is that Obama didn't invent subsidizing homeowners. The income tax deduction for homeowners on mortgage interest and real estate taxes for first & second homes is the biggest "giveaway" to any special interest group that there is. And I don't think anybody on this board is going to refuse to take advantage of it on principle.
Bingo, everyone should have a right to purchase a house, if they qualify, if they dont tough shit. Clean up your credit then come back, shit happens and people will recover.

As for health care, most places will give health care at public(federally funded) hospitals and under emergencies no hospital can refuse you service or suffer fines/lawsuits.

The problem is most people have come to be coddled and just expect shit to be provided for you when nothing was provided for our parents or grand parents, hell we arent too far removed from our relatives hunting for food in the mountains. We are spoiled as a nation and this bitch saying housing is a right is bullshit, lower your expectations, not everyone gets to drive a Mercedes.

[underdog]

The problem is that the people decided they wanted to move to a neighborhood they couldnt afford, people should know their limitations before they buy a home way out of their price range.

It wasn't neighborhoods, it was just houses. They started building ridiculous houses in regular areas. My parent's house nearly tripled in value in 5 years because of the houses being built in their neighborhood. Now half those houses are being foreclosed and my parents house's value is back to where it belongs.

[SP1!]

It wasn't neighborhoods, it was just houses. They started building ridiculous houses in regular areas. My parent's house nearly tripled in value in 5 years because of the houses being built in their neighborhood. Now half those houses are being foreclosed and my parents house's value is back to where it belongs.

Yes but the areas are usually nice or decent that the build those homes in, up where we are homes down the street started out at $450K but now are back down to the mid $200s-300s, where they belong. Now over near my dads the homes never broke $350K cause the area wasnt as nice so it does have a lot to do with the area/neighborhood you start out in, most of these people moved to the wrong part of town and they should have knew better.

[Recyclerz]

The only rights you have are as follows:
1) You have the right, and the moral obligation to make your own decisions.
2) You have the right to your life, your body and your mind without encroachment from others.

That's it. There is NOTHING else you are entitled to.

Bob, aren't you getting married to the lovely Sarah Impact?

I think decorum requires that you dial back on publicly pointing to your woody for Ayn Rand all the time, my brother. :wink:

[conman823]

The point of a society is to help it's weakest members.

Having a house is not a right, but housing is and should absolutely be a right.

This is true. If you screwed up your home and the family has to move out then this money should go into seeing that you get some 2 bedroom Public Housing somewhere. It certainly should entitle you to live in the same home you CAN'T AFFORD.


More and more I feel like working hard and "doing things the right way" is a joke in this country.

[underdog]

Yes but the areas are usually nice or decent that the build those homes in, up where we are homes down the street started out at $450K but now are back down to the mid $200s-300s, where they belong. Now over near my dads the homes never broke $350K cause the area wasnt as nice so it does have a lot to do with the area/neighborhood you start out in, most of these people moved to the wrong part of town and they should have knew better.

All around Mass, they just built homes where there weren't homes before. The average home in my parent's area was like 250-300k. Suddenly, they started building 700k - 900k homes in the same area. It didn't even make sense.

This is true. If you screwed up your home and the family has to move out then this money should go into seeing that you get some 2 bedroom Public Housing somewhere. It certainly should entitle you to live in the same home you CAN'T AFFORD.


More and more I feel like working hard and "doing things the right way" is a joke in this country.

You're right. We should just let families starve and die off.

[made cummsies]

no

[A.J.]

Let's see what the Constitution says.

[boosterp]

Housing is not a right, nor is health care or a lot of the other things people think they deserve.

Earning and deserving are two totally different things.

My thoughts also.

Let's see what the Constitution says.

Exactly, let's see... No mention of housing or health care, guess not.

[Yosammity]

...Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness... And that Bill of Rights thingie.

[Lil oc]

It is funny how the huge businesses that run and profit from health care have you convinced you do not deserve any return on the tax dollars you contribute for health care. Won't even get into the fact that the US spends more per capita on health care than countries that actually provide it to their people.

[foodcourtdruide]

I think this argument always comes down to the objectivist vs. altruist debate. Honestly, I think taking an extreme point of view of either side is naive. I'll take altruism with a light splash of objectivism please.

[Zorro]

It wasn't neighborhoods, it was just houses. They started building ridiculous houses in regular areas. My parent's house nearly tripled in value in 5 years because of the houses being built in their neighborhood. Now half those houses are being foreclosed and my parents house's value is back to where it belongs.

Which is the exact argument for the government not picking winners and losers.

[HBox]

Which is the exact argument for the government not picking winners and losers.

And yet if the government does nothing and lets a flood of foreclosures go through, home prices for people who have responsible mortgages will fall even further, perhaps to a point where even they owe more on their home than what it has become worth.

It's one thing to stand for principles, and not rewarding irresponsible people for their irresponsible actions is certainly a righteous one, but you don't want to shoot your own self ion the foot to do so. This is an economic calamity. It's not fair that banks and irresponsible home owners will get something out of this but the alternative is worse.

What's done is done, the anger should should be more focused on not letting this happen again, not punishing these people even if we have top take the entire country along with it.

[SP1!]

I think this argument always comes down to the objectivist vs. altruist debate. Honestly, I think taking an extreme point of view of either side is naive. I'll take altruism with a light splash of objectivism please.
The problem with both are they use very little common sense, if you were to offer someone a discount on a house in an economically deprived area over ending up bankrupt where they are most would chose to go bankrupt. People are selfish and only think of themselves mainly which got them in this mess in the first place.

And yet if the government does nothing and lets a flood of foreclosures go through, home prices for people who have responsible mortgages will fall even further, perhaps to a point where even they owe more on their home than what it has become worth.

It's one thing to stand for principles, and not rewarding irresponsible people for their irresponsible actions is certainly a righteous one, but you don't want to shoot your own self ion the foot to do so. This is an economic calamity. It's not fair that banks and irresponsible home owners will get something out of this but the alternative is worse.

What's done is done, the anger should should be more focused on not letting this happen again, not punishing these people even if we have top take the entire country along with it.
Im sorry but thats not true, home values fell most dramatically in areas that were shitty to start with, our will not fall any lower since even smaller homes are selling for more around us. Severely inflated homes were in specific areas of the country and it affected us to a certain extent when those people would sell their homes then over pay for homes in states where $500k would get you a mansion.

What this has stopped is the exploding home market down here, now we have a bunch of PVC farms where they started build out but never finished the homes and the town home market is dead.

[Zorro]

And yet if the government does nothing and lets a flood of foreclosures go through, home prices for people who have responsible mortgages will fall even further, perhaps to a point where even they owe more on their home than what it has become worth.

It's one thing to stand for principles, and not rewarding irresponsible people for their irresponsible actions is certainly a righteous one, but you don't want to shoot your own self ion the foot to do so. This is an economic calamity. It's not fair that banks and irresponsible home owners will get something out of this but the alternative is worse.

What's done is done, the anger should should be more focused on not letting this happen again, not punishing these people even if we have top take the entire country along with it.

Not about anger, not about principles just common sense. As prices fall more people can afford homes as they buy the inventory shrinks and prices rise. Keeping people in homes they cannot afford may seem like a laudable goal, but it artificially inflates prices blocking people from the market who would otherwise buy.

from the New York Times.

Most troubled homeowners whose mortgages were modified are again falling behind on payments, a top banking regulator said on Monday, raising questions about whether policy makers and lenders can successfully help them stay in their homes.

[scottinnj]

Housing is not a right, nor is health care or a lot of the other things people think they deserve.

They are if the country decides that they are.

A basic education through to High School is a right, because the taxpayers who fund the schools collectively have decided it is.

Whether right or wong, "rights" such as these are always decided by the majority of citizens.

[HBox]

Im sorry but thats not true, home values fell most dramatically in areas that were shitty to start with, our will not fall any lower since even smaller homes are selling for more around us. Severely inflated homes were in specific areas of the country and it affected us to a certain extent when those people would sell their homes then over pay for homes in states where $500k would get you a mansion.

What this has stopped is the exploding home market down here, now we have a bunch of PVC farms where they started build out but never finished the homes and the town home market is dead.

Not really true. (http://seekingalpha.com/article/122499-december-case-shiller-report-delivers-more-bad-housing-news?source=feed)

Of the markets listed here Miami and Los Angeles had the most drastic rise and fall of home prices while the markets that never really boomed all that much and have experienced a much less severe downturn are Cleveland, Dallas, Atlanta and Charlotte.

[Bob Impact]

Not really true. (http://seekingalpha.com/article/122499-december-case-shiller-report-delivers-more-bad-housing-news?source=feed)

Of the markets listed here Miami and Los Angeles had the most drastic rise and fall of home prices while the markets that never really boomed all that much and have experienced a much less severe downturn are Cleveland, Dallas, Atlanta and Charlotte.

Up here in CT we say a market boom and no major downturn. I keep waiting for it, eventually I'll be able to buy a house.

[SP1!]

Not really true. (http://seekingalpha.com/article/122499-december-case-shiller-report-delivers-more-bad-housing-news?source=feed)

Of the markets listed here Miami and Los Angeles had the most drastic rise and fall of home prices while the markets that never really boomed all that much and have experienced a much less severe downturn are Cleveland, Dallas, Atlanta and Charlotte.

Shit thats what I meant, those markets inflated ours but down here prices fell when those markets crashed but still in certain areas the prices are high, its just they cant get loans right now. Im loving that since its stopping all the shitty homes and town homes being built, now they have to build quality to sell or face going bankrupt, they had it so easy for so long.

But in essence I agree that those that are responsible should not those that just decided to buy a home as an investment thinking they could get their money back later, you got fucked, bite the bullet and try to regroup.

[conman823]

You're right. We should just let families starve and die off.

No, I didn't say that. I said they should get a roof over thier heads, just not the roof they cannot afford. Thats what Public Housing is for.

This country is to rich to let anyone person or a family live on the streets. Thats actually unthinkable to me when I see how the gov't wastes money.

Now if you don't like living in some shit-hole Project somewhere, then by all means move yourself out when you get back on your feet.

[epo]

They are if the country decides that they are.

A basic education through to High School is a right, because the taxpayers who fund the schools collectively have decided it is.

Whether right or wong, "rights" such as these are always decided by the majority of citizens.

Ding. As long as a social decision doesn't run contrary to the Constitution it will become an accepted social tenet.

[conman823]

Ding. As long as a social decision doesn't run contrary to the Constitution it will become an accepted social tenet.

Isn't that the same logic Nazi's used?

[scottinnj]

Isn't that the same logic Nazi's used?

Apples and Oranges. The Nazis didn't have a Bill of Rights on their constitution. Besides, when they took power, they burned it anyway, along with a few thousand textbooks.

The basic rights of Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness shall not be infringed upon, but certainly expanded if the majority decides something is a right.

I personally don't think housing is a "right" but I do think people have a right to not have to sleep on the streets or in their cars. Especially families who are struggling to rebuild their lives after a financial setback.

King David was given the plans to the Temple in order to have his son Solomon build it for the Jewish people. David was of course, not allowed to build it due to his infidelity with Bathsheeba, but a key part of the temple was a seat. A very special seat commanded by God to have in His house. It was the "seat of mercy" If you entered God's house a broken human for whatever reason, there was always a seat for you, the seat of mercy. If we truly are the Judeo-Christian nation we claim to be, shouldn't we as a nation have a seat of mercy for our neighbors who are in dire straits? Whether the government supplies that seat or we as citizens supply it, there should always be a seat of mercy in God's country.

(see how I snuck in a U2 reference there at the end? I'm clever!)

[SP1!]

You're right. We should just let families starve and die off.
Families should have the common sense not to buy a home that is way over their fucking head, let a couple of these people burn and maybe, just maybe people will understand there are consequences to your actions since most of these people are just buying homes thinking the value will keep going up and they can sell it to bail themselves out. Its bullshit but most of you people refuse to see the flaw in your thinking.

Ding. As long as a social decision doesn't run contrary to the Constitution it will become an accepted social tenet.
Not always and never if it costs money, there will be a revolt which is already starting the dems who initially supported this shit are now starting to change their tune since they have received emails from their constituents who disagreed.

The people should be allowed to fail, its the only way people learn.


I personally don't think housing is a "right" but I do think people have a right to not have to sleep on the streets or in their cars. Especially families who are struggling to rebuild their lives after a financial setback.The problem is that its not just a financial setback, they bought homes they knew they couldnt afford simply because they assumed(wrongly) that the value would keep climbing, now that they took a tumble we should bail them out? Fuck them, they need to suffer for their idiocy.

[conman823]

Families should have the common sense not to buy a home that is way over their fucking head, let a couple of these people burn and maybe, just maybe people will understand there are consequences to your actions since most of these people are just buying homes thinking the value will keep going up and they can sell it to bail themselves out. Its bullshit but most of you people refuse to see the flaw in your thinking.

The people should be allowed to fail, its the only way people learn.

Fuck them, they need to suffer for their idiocy.

They should be allowed to fail, but this country HAS too much to at least not provide basic housing to its people. It give away money to the tune of BILLIONS for Bullshit outside of our boarders, and we're suppose to let people just roam the streets with 3 kids and a dog because they made a mistake?

I agree people shouldn't be able to remain in the homes they cannot afford ( Hit the bricks pops I need to buy your house for Under Value because thats my American Dream!), but still "The System" of Welfare and Public Housing works if not abused....which is of course a whole other discussion.

[Recyclerz]

...
King David was given the plans to the Temple in order to have his son Solomon build it for the Jewish people. David was of course, not allowed to build it due to his infidelity with Bathsheeba, but a key part of the temple was a seat. A very special seat commanded by God to have in His house. It was the "seat of mercy" If you entered God's house a broken human for whatever reason, there was always a seat for you, the seat of mercy. If we truly are the Judeo-Christian nation we claim to be, shouldn't we as a nation have a seat of mercy for our neighbors who are in dire straits? Whether the government supplies that seat or we as citizens supply it, there should always be a seat of mercy in God's country.

(see how I snuck in a U2 reference there at the end? I'm clever!)

Not only a U2 shout out but also a Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds reference in a song that conflates the Biblical allusions with a looming session with the electric chair for a confessed killer.

The Mercy Seat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFdUTM4gU-o)

Our buddy Scott has more layers than a Paul Prudhomme birthday cake. :wink:

[SP1!]

They should be allowed to fail, but this country HAS too much to at least not provide basic housing to its people. It give away money to the tune of BILLIONS for Bullshit outside of our boarders, and we're suppose to let people just roam the streets with 3 kids and a dog because they made a mistake?

I agree people shouldn't be able to remain in the homes they cannot afford ( Hit the bricks pops I need to buy your house for Under Value because thats my American Dream!), but still "The System" of Welfare and Public Housing works if not abused....which is of course a whole other discussion.

The problem is that we give that money away for a reason, to maintain trade agreements, without that we are fucked. People feel they are entitled to live better than they currently are though and thats just fucking wrong, do you realize there are still fee loaders living in FEMA provided hotels from katrina? That is fucking bullshit, those people are just god damn lazy thinking they deserve that since they lost their home after a week of warnings. Shit happens, get over it and move on this kind of shit didnt happen during the most formative years of the nation and now we are too soft for any kind of adversity. Its getting pathetic and it really bothers me.

[conman823]

The problem is that we give that money away for a reason, to maintain trade agreements, without that we are fucked. People feel they are entitled to live better than they currently are though and thats just fucking wrong, do you realize there are still fee loaders living in FEMA provided hotels from katrina? That is fucking bullshit, those people are just god damn lazy thinking they deserve that since they lost their home after a week of warnings. Shit happens, get over it and move on this kind of shit didnt happen during the most formative years of the nation and now we are too soft for any kind of adversity. Its getting pathetic and it really bothers me.

The system isn't without issues. Still, if I needed some of these programs for whatever reason in the future I would like to know they are available. I worked steady since I was 16 yrs old, but if my company decides to shit-can me tommorrow I would like to have my unemployment please. And if for some reason the earth opened up under my house and swallowed it into the depths of Hades I would like to know I can get some temporary housing.

To get too personal about it, my mother was a single parent for many years after I was born. She swallowed her pride and took Welfare and Foodstamps to keep us going. She sold her car and walked/bused to work everyday. As soon as she was able to return to her career she ditch all that shit because she had pride in herself. Point is it was there when she needed it, she used it as it was intended, and moved on.

Can hold everyone to a single standard, and you yourself never know where you will be in 10 years.

I rather some American citizen get it then that money be spend dropping "aid" into Africa that some fucking warlord steals and sells to the people.

[scottinnj]

Not only a U2 shout out but also a Nick Cave & The Bad Seeds reference in a song that conflates the Biblical allusions with a looming session with the electric chair for a confessed killer.

The Mercy Seat (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WFdUTM4gU-o)

Our buddy Scott has more layers than a Paul Prudhomme birthday cake. :wink:

That's actually my next journey in my Bible studies. I'm currently a supporter of the death penalty, but I want to get deeper into the "mercy seat" concept God wants-to see if the DP jives or not with the whole WWJD philosophy. I've been flat-oout amazed at how much change is in my heart due to a reawakening to God's word vs. what I was taught in religious classes back in high school.

[scottinnj]

She swallowed her pride and took Welfare and Foodstamps to keep us going.


We were on WIC back in Kansas when my oldest was 2 and my number 2 was a newborn. I always felt weird in the checkout line, like I should just stop, shake everyone's hand and say "thanks" for the assistance.

Looking back we should never have had kids that early, so hopefully lessons learned will be passed on to my kids so they won't do the same thing, but also be aware that there are people who need it.

[Syd]

That's actually my next journey in my Bible studies. I'm currently a supporter of the death penalty, but I want to get deeper into the "mercy seat" concept God wants-to see if the DP jives or not with the whole WWJD philosophy. I've been flat-oout amazed at how much change is in my heart due to a reawakening to God's word vs. what I was taught in religious classes back in high school.

Death penalty definitely does not jive with what Jesus would do. Eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth speaks more to acting with an appropriate response. It's not about mirroring the horrors that someone committed -- that just helps continue the cycle of violence. Strength is about suffering a loss of a loved one and not wanting to lash out for need of revenge. It's about becoming a more perfect person.

Plus, there is the issue of being directly told in no uncertain terms that it is mortal sin to kill someone. Even if it is the "right" thing to do, you can't deny that having blood on your hands causes your soul to be in serious question.

[scottinnj]

Strength is about suffering a loss of a loved one and not wanting to lash out for need of revenge. It's about becoming a more perfect person.



That's where I'm going to begin this. The "Eye for and Eye" thing you are correct, it was about equal compensation for a wrongdoing. Plus that was Old Testament Law, and since the crucifixtion, we live in an age of grace, and we strive to be a more perfect person.

Thanks Syd-very interesting! And a good starting point on this study