Home Original Content Funny Pictures Funny GIFs YouTube Funny Text Funny Movies Channels Search

hide menu
What do you think? Give us your opinion. Anonymous comments allowed.
#36 - augustusxxiv (07/06/2013) [-]
There's a difference between closing the gap a bit between rich and poor and mindlessly giving to the parasites of society.

A man earning near minimum wage in order to sustain himself and/or his family is a proletariat who requires assistance. A youth who is homeless and has made a conscious decision not to work and is crippled by alcoholism and drugs is a parasite.
#184 to #36 - larknok (07/06/2013) [-]
Consider the following.
User avatar #208 to #184 - augustusxxiv (07/06/2013) [-]
The ruling class are indeed also parasitic to society, but in a different way from homeless youth. To put it in one sentence:

The ruling class push down the middle and working class, while the homeless youth pull them down.
#210 to #208 - larknok (07/07/2013) [-]
Can you really call something a parasite if it asks, doesn't take, and only sustains itself on gifted money/resources? Imagine a tape worm slides up next to you, and instead of sneaking inside, turned to you and asked politely: "hey man, could I live in your intestines and feed off of your scraps?" You can say no, and be on your way.

The issue of government handouts is entirely different. Handouts are a matter of democratic decision-making. If you don't like it (and are vocal about it), then you don't appreciate the democratic system. Democracy isn't about the individual winning all the time. Its about making sure the majority opinion becomes expressed. I encourage you to lobby against supplying handouts to the wealthy, but then again, the government might be bought out, and simply choose to give out handouts to distract the public from the billions corporate executives (who buy out the politicians) sneak out under from our noses.
User avatar #166 to #36 - CRosBY (07/06/2013) [-]
Do you honestly believe most of these people choose to be homeless?
#85 to #36 - anonymous (07/06/2013) [-]
I think we, in the first world bitch too much anyhow. Absolute poverty is eliminated here, and all we have is relative poverty, which is **** in comparison. Those living below the poverty line eat out 3 times a week. Those on food stamps have big screen TVs. Those who live in ramshackle housing have 4 walls, clean running water, and enough square footage for an entire Asian family all to themselves.

Seriously, the problem is more perspective than anything else.
#65 to #36 - divinedrgn (07/06/2013) [-]
just so you know not all homeless choose to be homeless and with the way jobs are rightnow they would have a hell of a time getting one since companies tend to treat everybody as worthless little rats that they could replace at a whim. So basicly if you think about it in terms of a man who had a job and got laid off or fired who was unable to find another job due to the job market at the moment whom then would be unable to pay for a place to live he would then be considered homeless would he not???

I will thumb you up because I do agree that a lot of people do need help especially people in low income homes, but it is best not to judge a man from what he has or what he doesn't.
 Friends (0)