Free State Project Forum

FSP -- General Discussion => Prospective Participants => Topic started by: PhileasFg on February 13, 2006, 03:02:14 pm

Title: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: PhileasFg on February 13, 2006, 03:02:14 pm
Greetings, all:

I've been posting on various boards in the FSP forum for about a week now. I'm definitely interested in joining the FSP and moving to NH as soon as circumstances permit. There's just one problem.

For most of my life, I've lived on government subsidies. This has included medicaid, Pell grants, and worst of all, Supplemental Security Income. Being liberty-minded, and against all forms of government-coerced income redistribution, I've resolved to repent of my hypocrisy  by parting company with the Social Security Administration, once and for all. I intend to secure full-time employment (the exact nature of which is unimportant) before my next check arrives.

Is my intention to do so enough that I could join the FSP, or would the moral choice be to first jettison the system, then join the FSP?
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: cathleeninnh on February 14, 2006, 01:23:53 pm
We all have been enmeshed in the "system" to one extent or another. I know a number of FSP members who are "on the dole". They aren't usually very vocal; I would think there might be some shame in admitting it. Being involved in the FSP and liberty activism has helped me examine my options. I imagine it could do the same for you. Isn't it better to get some distance from the problem, clear the mind and work to cut the ties, rather than sink back into the clutches of socialism?

Cathleen
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: JasonPSorens on February 15, 2006, 06:18:38 pm
After my wife got cancer, we decided not to file for disability even though she is clearly eligible and cannot work. I think if you've been on public assistance all your life, it's even more important to get off. You'd probably be surprised what you can accomplish when you have no other choice but to pay your own way. It will involve financial sacrifices, certainly, but you'll probably find an inner strength and satisfaction you haven't really known before. In New Hampshire, there will also be people able & willing to help you make the transition.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: UCCO2004 on February 15, 2006, 08:45:46 pm
The truth is that none of us, not even Libertarians, are pure and unsullied by welfare statism.  Most of us drive government roads that were financed by taxes, and maybe even built using eminent domain.  Many of us also attended public schools through our teenage years, and some of us later went on to attend public colleges.  At least Libertarians have an ethical approach that is fair to other people in that we would rather pay user fees, or pay back our student loans, than pass levies and raise taxes and otherwise force our neighbors to provide the services we enjoy.

I am one Libertarian who has been caught in the Catch-22 of welfare statism:  My parents sent me to attend public schools in a well-off suburban district here in Cincinnati, Ohio.  I had many positive experiences during elementary school, but many negative experiences in middle school and high school.  Some of my teachers were good, and some of my teachers were incompetent.  I also chose to attend one of the suburban campuses of the University of Cincinnati that my parents graduated from.  I had some extremely liberal professors in my liberal arts classes, but political views were mostly irrelevant in my graphic arts classes and my web design classes. 

Although I still oppose compulsory education, I no longer have an unthinking hatred of public schools, and I actually learned of the Libertarian Party from my government-purchased 12th-grade Citizenship textbook, at a time when I was drowning in the ideologies of leftism and environmentalism.  Had the government not invested in such an excellent high school textbook, would I have ever become a Libertarian?

I once wrote inflammatory guest columns and letters-to-the-editor of the local newspapers, some of which were actually printed in the late 1990s, relentlessly criticizing compulsory education as well as unequivocally supporting privatization.  This was motivated mostly by the bad experiences in middle school and high school, as well as the infantile attitude of Demopublican politicians that we should always support school levies, no matter how incompetently the public schools are run.

Privatization should still be considered as a legitimate option for improving education, although having benefited from public schools, I might simply be content to reform K-12 education.  There should be both middle school and high school admission standards similar to what public colleges have, thus eliminating bullies, wiggers, and at least some jocks.  There should also be user fees required from parents based on the number of children they have in public schools, thus eliminating any future use of school levies.  There should also be voluntary attendance, thus eliminating truancy officers.  There should not be school uniforms, sexually segregated classes, or anything else that is anti-individualism.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: PhileasFg on February 16, 2006, 12:29:47 am
I was hoping for an "Aye" or a "Nay" as to whether I should actually sign the pledge while still a voluntary recipient of government funds. At times, I think I'd like to just walk into the Social Security office, and tell the desk clerk (he's very rude and condescending) that I rejoice in never having to look upon his ugly mug ever again. There would be something just so empowering about saying "no" to the government and getting away with it.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: freedomroad on February 16, 2006, 12:58:44 am
Is my intention to do so enough that I could join the FSP, or would the moral choice be to first jettison the system, then join the FSP?

It doesn't matter.  You can be on government welfare and still be a member of the FSP.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: FreeBoB on February 16, 2006, 01:23:49 am
Join, move, and people will help you get going in NH.  It's a wonderful thing to make enough to live well!  ;D

FSP Welcome Wagon:  http://www.freestateproject.org/community/welcomewagon/  (scroll down to the NH local groups too).
Visit NH Underground and talk to the folks on the Forum:  http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php
and the website too:  http://www.soulawakenings.com/
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: David Wolfe on February 16, 2006, 01:45:38 am
Don't hate the player, hate the game.  Everyone should take responsibility for themself, but the government's entangled in all our lives.  It certainly is in mine.  Even if you started your own business you'd still be dealing with taxes and regulations.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: lordpoee on February 17, 2006, 05:08:32 pm
I was on Social Security for some time, but Liberty Mindedness helped me kick the habit. When they sent me my re-application form, I did not send it in. I have been happier sisnce. I make more money working (not to much more.) and i feel I have a stronger voice in society.

Socila Security tends to give people who could otherwise work, a crutch. I was awlays waiting for "the perfect job" it never came along, and probably never would have.

From my check they take out over six hunderd dollars every year. The Average Social Security check is about $600.

Thats means for one person in america to recieve a monthly check for $600, it takes no less than twelve people in my tax bracket paying into social security.

This logic alone shows that Social Security is a DOOMED system.


Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RidleyReport on February 18, 2006, 06:24:06 pm
Phileas thanks for being candid ; you're 100% better than the majority of socialist security recipients who pine for more aid , or against any reform, with no remorse about the money they've received or the way it was taken.

Far as I'm concerned you're welcome here. 
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Power Penguin on February 18, 2006, 06:44:39 pm
PhileasFg, don't worry. It's not that you were a government dependent then, it's that you're doing something about it NOW! In some ways, this shows that you are a stronger person than a lot of us, because you had more to 'loose' in terms of kickbacks. In the long run, as communist as this sounds, you really do have "nothing to loose but your chains". BTW, I think this came from Paine, et al before Marx anyway, which makes sense. Communism is good at ripping off and mass producing useless crap but very bad at coming up with new ideas! D)

BTW, in terms of job skills, what do you have? I'm trying to start a security and privacy buisiness that caters primarily to activists and pro-liberty buisinesspeople that want to do what they're doing without governmental and frivilous (spelling?) legal harassment. In short, I need people with tech skills primarily, but also legal minds and even a few 'grunts'!
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: PhileasFg on February 21, 2006, 03:02:22 pm
BTW, in terms of job skills, what do you have? I'm trying to start a security and privacy buisiness that caters primarily to activists and pro-liberty buisinesspeople that want to do what they're doing without governmental and frivilous (spelling?) legal harassment. In short, I need people with tech skills primarily, but also legal minds and even a few 'grunts'!

My resume can be found at: http://babylon.d2dc.net/~phileasfg/cac_resume.pdf
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: lloydbob1 on February 21, 2006, 03:16:03 pm
The truth is that none of us, not even Libertarians, are pure and unsullied by welfare statism.  Most of us drive government roads that were financed by taxes, and maybe even built using eminent domain.  Many of us also attended public schools through our teenage years, and some of us later went on to attend public colleges.  At least Libertarians have an ethical approach that is fair to other people in that we would rather pay user fees, or pay back our student loans, than pass levies and raise taxes and otherwise force our neighbors to provide the services we enjoy.

I am one Libertarian who has been caught in the Catch-22 of welfare statism:  My parents sent me to attend public schools in a well-off suburban district here in Cincinnati, Ohio.  I had many positive experiences during elementary school, but many negative experiences in middle school and high school.  Some of my teachers were good, and some of my teachers were incompetent.  I also chose to attend one of the suburban campuses of the University of Cincinnati that my parents graduated from.  I had some extremely liberal professors in my liberal arts classes, but political views were mostly irrelevant in my graphic arts classes and my web design classes. 

Although I still oppose compulsory education, I no longer have an unthinking hatred of public schools, and I actually learned of the Libertarian Party from my government-purchased 12th-grade Citizenship textbook, at a time when I was drowning in the ideologies of leftism and environmentalism.  Had the government not invested in such an excellent high school textbook, would I have ever become a Libertarian?

I once wrote inflammatory guest columns and letters-to-the-editor of the local newspapers, some of which were actually printed in the late 1990s, relentlessly criticizing compulsory education as well as unequivocally supporting privatization.  This was motivated mostly by the bad experiences in middle school and high school, as well as the infantile attitude of Demopublican politicians that we should always support school levies, no matter how incompetently the public schools are run.

Privatization should still be considered as a legitimate option for improving education, although having benefited from public schools, I might simply be content to reform K-12 education.  There should be both middle school and high school admission standards similar to what public colleges have, thus eliminating bullies, wiggers, and at least some jocks.  There should also be user fees required from parents based on the number of children they have in public schools, thus eliminating any future use of school levies.  There should also be voluntary attendance, thus eliminating truancy officers.  There should not be school uniforms, sexually segregated classes, or anything else that is anti-individualism.

If you and/or your parents pay taxes, then using public roads and education is not, technically, welfare.
Between road taxes and the out of pocket costs of government college tuition, books, other costs, you're probably paying more in than you would if they were private.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Power Penguin on February 24, 2006, 02:44:28 am
BTW, in terms of job skills, what do you have? I'm trying to start a security and privacy buisiness that caters primarily to activists and pro-liberty buisinesspeople that want to do what they're doing without governmental and frivilous (spelling?) legal harassment. In short, I need people with tech skills primarily, but also legal minds and even a few 'grunts'!

My resume can be found at: http://babylon.d2dc.net/~phileasfg/cac_resume.pdf

I just read your resume. Not bad for a so called 'welfare queen'! 8-) If you or anyone else is seriously interested in this idea, PM me and we can  exchange career history info, buisiness ideas, etc.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: maxxoccupancy on March 30, 2006, 01:18:13 am
I grew up in public housing, attended public schools, received federal financial aid, and am now drawing unemployment benefits.  The purpose of all of these programs is psychological dependency.  If you are thinking like a libertarian, you have broken that grip already.  It is much better to work, even if you make the same amount of money, but getting off the dole is separate from voting proliberty.

It doesn't make sense for the public sector unions to take your money, then make you go back to some government office to get some of your own money back.  When you realize that this is a big vote buying system (like the old system of big city party bosses buying votes--helping their cronies get elected), you see why the system is set up the way it is.

First, vote against the good ol' boy network, then try to get back on your feet.

--Max
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Tracy Saboe on May 09, 2006, 05:07:58 am
I congradulate you on getting off the dole (or striving too.) I know all too well how difficult it is to get off once your on.

Sign the pledge. Come to new Hampshire.

Just expect welfare to not be around much more, and as logn as you work to abolish it, I don't see a problem.

You could even be a testiment to how the "free" money was making you lazy and crushing your spirit. And work to get other people off the dole and build opposition to it.

We've all become entangled at one point or another. I have an FHA loan for my house because I applied for it before I realized what it was when we bought our house, (Allong w/ a MAPP loan from the State to help pay for the down payment) and I used to have a Government subsidized Staford loan. We all realize the errors of our ways at different points in time.

The point is, what you do, now that you've realized the errors of your ways. I would advise getting on your feet somehow even if the good old boys network doesn't go away. (It'll be their for a while. The welfare system needs to go away so their's less power for the good old boys to control to begin with.)

Tracy
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on May 28, 2006, 11:14:39 pm
Certainly, involvement with the Free State Project does not require that one reject government welfare, but the questions of when and why welfare should be rejected are ones I have considered but not answered sufficiently.

After reading Ayn Rand's Atlas Shrugged before my last year of high school, I decided to leave the public school system and home school myself.  Rand makes the argument in that book that accepting welfare implies sanctioning welfare and the taxation that supports it, yet as every man, woman, and child suffers from taxes and unjust regulation, the argument can be made that accepting welfare is no more wrong than accepting a tax decrease.  We could say welfare is acceptable so long as it does not exceed taxes paid and costs incurred by regulation, yet that would be impossible to calculate accurately, and it is unclear why accepting welfare would be wrong even when it exceeds taxes paid and costs incurred by regulation.  The beneficiary has not taxed anyone or necessarily even asked that anyone be taxed.  Declining welfare could be a way for one to prove that he/she is not voting for increased welfare selfishly, which could be a solution for someone who would not otherwise vote, but I don't know that such concern for the opinions of others is warranted. 

The most important thing is to vote for pro-liberty candidates/policies and/or engage in pro-liberty activism. If thou are working to end welfare yet receive a SS check monthly, it is hard to argue that thou are really pro-welfare, and if someone nevertheless argues that, so what? I made the decision to quit public school, but now I am looking at attending college, and financially, private schools are out of the question, which leaves public colleges. I and my parents pay taxes, which help pay for the public colleges in my state, and my tuition pays for the college I attend, as well.  Is it the same as public high school? To complicate things, I received a merit scholarship to attend a local public university. Would attending on a merit scholarship be distinguishable from attending while paying full tuition?

Now asking myself these questions, I realize I never fully understood why I shouldn't take welfare. Taking tax funded perks seems awkward if not downright immoral to me, an Objectivist(?) libertarian, on an intuitive level, yet I cannot answer why.

Any suggestions?
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Rocketman on May 29, 2006, 01:10:48 am
I woudn't be likely to accept government "handouts" for myself, but I wouldn't blame somebody else for doing so under adverse circumstances... hey, as long as you don't move to New Hampshire and become a leech here!
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Denis Goddard on May 30, 2006, 03:57:37 pm
Taking tax funded perks seems awkward if not downright immoral to me, an Objectivist(?) libertarian, on an intuitive level, yet I cannot answer why.
Any suggestions?

This is one of those issues that Libertarians will be arguing both sides of, until long after we've all passed away ;)

Personally, I figure that if you're agitating for freedom and for the reduction of all taxes, then taking some State tax credit or other handout is effectively using the State's money against it. That's rather poetic in a way. I'm reminded of that quote from the great 80's movie Real Genius, where Laslo is explaining why he's sending tens of thousands of applications to a sweepstakes:
"They made the rules!"
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Dreepa on May 31, 2006, 08:35:10 am

Personally, I figure that if you're agitating for freedom and for the reduction of all taxes, then taking some State tax credit or other handout is effectively using the State's money against it. That's rather poetic in a way.
Except the taxes will never be lower because the taxes need to be collected to pay the welfare. A Dog chasing his tail.
Get off, get a job and then work on reducing taxes.
You have to not be part of the problem before you can be part of the solution.

Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Denis Goddard on May 31, 2006, 10:12:46 am
You're either part of the solution,
or you're part of the precipitate :)
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Rocketman on May 31, 2006, 05:58:44 pm
I suppose it has occured to me that a person with invisible income could go on welfare and then donate 100% to support liberty activism.  Hmmm.... any takers?
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Denis Goddard on May 31, 2006, 09:29:04 pm
I suppose it has occured to me that a person with invisible income could go on welfare and then donate 100% to support liberty activism.  Hmmm.... any takers?

I honestly can't explain how exactly that's immoral, but it makes me feel.... icky.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Rocketman on May 31, 2006, 10:17:36 pm
I suppose it has occured to me that a person with invisible income could go on welfare and then donate 100% to support liberty activism. Hmmm.... any takers?

I honestly can't explain how exactly that's immoral, but it makes me feel.... icky.


Me too, and I can't explain why... I guess it would be sort of hypocritical given how frequently and loudly I complain about them taking my money and using it to disseminate ideas I disagree with (oh, and lies... a lot of lies).

But then again, why does pro-government media dwarf anti-government media in the free-speech-loving land of liberty?  Simple, it's because government has the power to steal from people and use the loot to run statist schools, print and distribute piles of statist bullshit, and bribe citizens (especially nonproducers) with pork so they will remain loyal statists.  And then they say money isn't speech (The Bipartisan Campaign Finance Reform Act, a.k.a. McCain-Feingold).   ::)

Government also has considerable power (again, our tax dollars at work) to restrict speech it doesn't like, because American citizens have failed in their duty to enforce (or even f---ing understand) the Bill of Rights.

On the flip side, any pro-liberty media has to be paid for (and in some cases, purchased by consumers) with what little we have left after taxes, taxes, and more taxes. This makes pro-liberty media much harder to create and harder for consumers to afford.  Hooray for the internet, for as long as we can keep it mostly free.

So there is a very rational argument for doing the welfare scheme.  It would take a few drops of rain out of the pig trough and put them back in the freedom bucket from whence they came.  And yet, I can't get past the ickiness factor... hell, I must be human.   :P
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on May 31, 2006, 11:30:11 pm
Quote
Quote
Personally, I figure that if you're agitating for freedom and for the reduction of all taxes, then taking some State tax credit or other handout is effectively using the State's money against it. That's rather poetic in a way.

Except the taxes will never be lower because the taxes need to be collected to pay the welfare. A Dog chasing his tail.
Get off, get a job and then work on reducing taxes.
You have to not be part of the problem before you can be part of the solution.

Maybe. But won't taxes and spending be determined more by the tolerance of taxpayers and shrewdness of politicians than by the number of takers of handouts.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Mice Elf on June 05, 2006, 06:57:07 pm
Who better to "take" from the system then someone fighting to abolish the system it takes from? Will the refusal to take the money improve the system? Will the funds not used reduce the amount of funds needed, and therefore not taken from all of us? I think not!
Is it hypocritical? Perhaps, but I'd rather the ill gotten gains go to pro-liberty peoples. So long as the participant accepts the dissolution of the system they use then I don't see the problem. Using the resources of a system to fight the system is poetic. Much like the Free State Project itself.
Just trying to be:
Mice Elf
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 05, 2006, 08:20:58 pm
I would like to add my two sense to all the rational individuals here who have been able to look at this situation rationally. 

I'm personally employed by the federal government.  My activism is being funded by your stolen taxpayer dollars.  Can you think of a better use for them?  Can you think of anyone you'ld rather have sitting in my bureaucratic cubicle?  The option isn't can we do away with my position or with Social Security, the question is what most advances liberty in the short and longterm now in this particular circumstance. 

That's why I saw leech away!  You're not stealing from me.  Those tax dollars of mine were stolen long before they fell into your hands.  You're stealing from the government now, just as I am.  If you don't accept those stolen funds, they'll just go to someone else and I'ld much rather you put them to good use.   Let your disgust and misplaced guilt fuel your activism.  One caveat, don't leech off of New Hampshire' taxpayers specifically.  New Hampshire's comparative freedom (with respect to the other states) must be preserved at almost all costs in order to enhance the incentives for future freedom loving immigrants to the state and to accentuate the success of liberty in the state.   

Regards,
Rob Rolen
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: JasonPSorens on June 05, 2006, 11:22:44 pm
I would have no problem taking a large government grant for my research, even though I would have a problem with going on welfare or unemployment insurance. Hypocritical? Maybe. But I agree with the arguments above that the money is going to be used, so it might as well be used for a good cause. If the feds wanted to make a large donation to the FSP to get libertarians to move to NH, I probably wouldn't want to stop them. Of course, the problem comes in when you start to make concessions in order to keep the money flowing. You can't let yourself become dependent, and human nature being what it is, that happens all too often. Even Robert Nozick sued his landlord for not abiding by the rent control regulations.  :(
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 06, 2006, 12:42:58 am
Libertarian Leeching Guidelines

1. Never sell out to the government for your own money. Ex. I won't register w/ the selective service system because I feel doing so would be tantamount to self-enslavement and refusing to do so is a small act of civil disobedience.  Because I am not registered, I cannot get federal student aid. If I registered to get student aid, I would be selling out. The only problem with this rule is that the federal government could tax so much money that people would be forced to conform to the requirements of conditional welfare grants in order to survive. At what point are taxes so excessive that selling out is really just getting by under despotism?

2. Never, ever, ever advocate for pro-leeching policies, e.g. increased welfare funding.

3. Reply to accusations of hypocrisy by pointing out that accepting a gift is not the same as stealing it.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Denis Goddard on June 06, 2006, 01:52:51 pm
Using the resources of a system to fight the system is poetic. Much like the Free State Project itself.

Well said, Mice Elf... and welcome to the Board! :D

the problem comes in when you start to make concessions in order to keep the money flowing.

Yep.
That's the "strings-and-crack" financing strategy of our statist do-gooders.
There is so much education to be done....
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Roycerson on June 06, 2006, 03:20:39 pm
I can't be believe I'm reading this.  I am less proud to be a part of the FSP than I was yesterday.

I would have no problem taking a large government grant for my research, even though I would have a problem with going on welfare or unemployment insurance. Hypocritical? Maybe. But I agree with the arguments above that the money is going to be used, so it might as well be used for a good cause.

What if instead of cash it was a car that was taken from someone and given to you.  Would you feel alright about driving that car so long as you drove it to pro-liberty lectures?  Would you give it back to the person it was taken from?

And that bit about the money is going to be spent anyway is pretty thin.  If nobody cashed their welfare checks this year would taxes go up next year?  Why don't we all encourage our kids to accept government scholarships to study political science, so long as they use that education to be better advocates of freedom.  You know what, they're gonna need to eat while they're fighting for freedom.  If they get food stamps then Uncle Sam will pay for the calories they burn while carrying pro-liberty signs.  But where are they going to live?  I know, section 8 housing. 

We can have whole armies of liberty activists feeding themselves with food stamps and living in tax-payer funded housing.  Boy we could really make a difference then!
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 06, 2006, 04:50:21 pm
What if instead of cash it was a car that was taken from someone and given to you. Would you feel alright about driving that car so long as you drove it to pro-liberty lectures? Would you give it back to the person it was taken from?

We're not talking about driving someone elses car to some worthless lecture that has little or no chance of restoring freedom.  We're are talking about driving a car that is already yours by virtue of the fact that the government has given it to you.  The same government that has stolen from, will continue to steal from you and your children, and will harm you in inumerable other irreparable ways.  Yes the government does not own that car, but neither does the person the government stole it from.  More often than not, the person it was stolen from gave it up willingly, did not fight to prevent it from falling into the hands of an entity that they knew was going to use it for harm.  In my opinion, if it were my car that I allowed the government to steal, I would be almost complicit in the governments conduct by allowing them to take it from me.  I will go so far as to say that I have no right to a return of the money that I have to some extent or another allowed them to steal from me, in fact, I might even venture to say that I deserve to never see it returned since I did so little to prevent it's theft and subsequent misuse towards the destruction of others freedoms.  And I especially have no right to the return of the car if the person now in possession of it intends to use it in a manner that will most effectively stymy the very system that provided him/her that car.  In fact, I will cheer that person on most heartily and praise him for retrieving that stolen item from government and using it to effectively bring about its demise.   

And that bit about the money is going to be spent anyway is pretty thin. If nobody cashed their welfare checks this year would taxes go up next year?

Yes, they might not go up, but how in the world is that remotely relevant.  The only thing I and other liberty loving individuals have control over is whether or not I (as a member of a fairly miniscule minority) will choose to cash that welfare check (which would allow me and whoever to devote ourselve to fare greater effective activism than would be possible with any other real job).  If we don't cash it, maybe just maybe their might be some miniscule reduction in the amount of government theft over the near future, but we will have sacrificed a huge advance in freedom and a huge decrease in government theft for it (especially if you put any stock in the potential of the FSP).  Under such conditions, where the burden is borne more or less evenly across the country, it would be a horrible miscalculation to not cash the check or let someone of less awareness/character fill the make-work position.   

You should be proud of your fellow FSP members who are clear headed enough to see this.

Why don't we all encourage our kids to accept government scholarships to study political science, so long as they use that education to be better advocates of freedom.

Assuming such an education wouldn't be a ridiculous waste of time and money, yes we should encourage them to do so if there is real hope of it promoting more freedom through the FSP than it destroys.   

You know what, they're gonna need to eat while they're fighting for freedom. If they get food stamps then Uncle Sam will pay for the calories they burn while carrying pro-liberty signs.

Excellent idea!  That cost is borne fairly evenly across the country and to a large extent is being borrowed from people across the globe who are trusting (amd complicit) enough to think that our government will still have a sufficient stranglehold on it's citizens to extract enough funds to repay the bloated debt that they are currently hoping to unload in the future on the next unsuspecting generation.  Those people deserve to have their investments in our government fail, and those activists should be proud of the fact that they are saving the money on that food and using it to fund the FSP. 

But where are they going to live? I know, section 8 housing.

Another excellent idea!  Save that money and use it to do something that has a real chance of destroying such programs altogether like the FSP, especially if it is a place outside of NH. 


We can have whole armies of liberty activists feeding themselves with food stamps and living in tax-payer funded housing. Boy we could really make a difference then!

Yes they could!  I don't know big this army you speak of is going to be, but 20,000 would suit me just fine.  You should run with that idea. 

Let's be honest here.  All these previous objections were just smoke screens for the real objection, the only objection that really counts: 

Are you sure you can keep from becoming corrupted by the abomination you're feeding off of, the system you profess to abhor?

If the answer is no, then don't even think about attempting it.  Nothing could be worse than losing an advocate for freedom AND gaining another worthless leech.

If the answer is yes, may the wind be at your back and may you have incalculable success plundering the government stores of their ill gotten gains.  Please do your best to leave only a trail of evidence that points back to them and their system. 

Long live the FSP socialism leeches!  Here's to hoping that their scheming won't be required for much longer.

Salutations,
R. Rolen

Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: JasonPSorens on June 06, 2006, 05:56:42 pm
I can't be believe I'm reading this.  I am less proud to be a part of the FSP than I was yesterday.

I would have no problem taking a large government grant for my research, even though I would have a problem with going on welfare or unemployment insurance. Hypocritical? Maybe. But I agree with the arguments above that the money is going to be used, so it might as well be used for a good cause.

What if instead of cash it was a car that was taken from someone and given to you.  Would you feel alright about driving that car so long as you drove it to pro-liberty lectures?  Would you give it back to the person it was taken from?

I would give it back to the person it was taken from, if possible (i.e., the government wouldn't just take it right back). But I think taxes are probably different, b/c it's very difficult to identify whom exactly that money was taken from. If it were, I would give it back to the taxpayers. But if I tried to do that with a grant, I might be prosecuted for fraud.

Quote
And that bit about the money is going to be spent anyway is pretty thin.  If nobody cashed their welfare checks this year would taxes go up next year?

Probably.  :-\

Quote
Why don't we all encourage our kids to accept government scholarships to study political science, so long as they use that education to be better advocates of freedom.  You know what, they're gonna need to eat while they're fighting for freedom.  If they get food stamps then Uncle Sam will pay for the calories they burn while carrying pro-liberty signs.  But where are they going to live?  I know, section 8 housing.

I don't believe in being a net leech. For that reason, I wouldn't take subsidies for personal expenses, certainly not in excess of the taxes I pay. But taking a government grant for research doesn't go to pay my personal expenses; it just directs some of what would otherwise be spent promoting socialism to promoting free markets.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Denis Goddard on June 06, 2006, 06:54:10 pm
I can't be believe I'm reading this.  I am less proud to be a part of the FSP than I was yesterday.

Two points:
a) the FSP is the people in it, not any one person. Especially not Jason :P
b) theorizing on internet message boards is... well, I think Buckminster Fuller put it best: "irrelevant to the propagation of life (http://www.rwgrayprojects.com/synergetics/s02/p2000.html)"

Come to NH, at least for PorcFest, and see what the FSP is really about -- getting the government out of everyone's life. REALLY. NOW.
No bull-shitting, no idle talk!
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 06, 2006, 10:33:03 pm
Quote
What if instead of cash it was a car that was taken from someone and given to you.  Would you feel alright about driving that car so long as you drove it to pro-liberty lectures?  Would you give it back to the person it was taken from?

What if it was a car that was taken from you and later returned to you? Would you take it back or refuse it? You would obviously take it. I don't think there is any question that leeching benefits not exceeding taxes paid is OK. Net leeching's merits are less clear.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Roycerson on June 07, 2006, 01:39:41 am
Quote
What if instead of cash it was a car that was taken from someone and given to you.  Would you feel alright about driving that car so long as you drove it to pro-liberty lectures?  Would you give it back to the person it was taken from?

What if it was a car that was taken from you and later returned to you? Would you take it back or refuse it? You would obviously take it. I don't think there is any question that leeching benefits not exceeding taxes paid is OK. Net leeching's merits are less clear.


I understand people who don't mind taking up to as much as they have put in.  Jason said "large government grant".  There is no telling exactly what he meant by that.

I don't believe in taking any of it regardless of how much I put in for the same reason I don't buy powertools at pawn shops anymore.  I'm in construction and I've had 10's of thousands of dollars worth of tools stolen from me over the years.  It would be real easy for me to buy someone else's stolen tools from a pawn shop and justify it because I'm just recouping what was stolen from me.  Meanwhile some guy across town is buying my stolen tools.  Every tool that leaves the shelves creates that much more demand for continued influx of stolen tools.  Every dollar accepted from the federal government creates that much more demand for them to raise more money.


I don't believe in being a net leech. For that reason, I wouldn't take subsidies for personal expenses, certainly not in excess of the taxes I pay. But taking a government grant for research doesn't go to pay my personal expenses; it just directs some of what would otherwise be spent promoting socialism to promoting free markets.

You don't know where that money would have gone.

Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Roycerson on June 07, 2006, 01:43:07 am
Long live the FSP socialism leeches!  Here's to hoping that their scheming won't be required for much longer.

Salutations,
R. Rolen

I think this guy actually believes what he is saying. 

Behold the bottom of the slippery slope.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Dreepa on June 07, 2006, 08:20:46 am
Wow and I thought I was a mild one.....

Leech = thief.

Royerson you are right.

To the rest of you... Move to NH.

If you plan on leeching(welfare etc) off the system I will make sure that  everyone knows so don't tell me.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: JasonPSorens on June 07, 2006, 08:44:47 am
I don't believe in being a net leech. For that reason, I wouldn't take subsidies for personal expenses, certainly not in excess of the taxes I pay. But taking a government grant for research doesn't go to pay my personal expenses; it just directs some of what would otherwise be spent promoting socialism to promoting free markets.

You don't know where that money would have gone.

With the major federal grant programs, you usually have a pretty good idea. Some of the grants might also go to fund worthwhile research, but a lot of it, even NSF grants, funds ideologically driven work.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 08, 2006, 12:14:43 am
Quote
I don't believe in taking any of it regardless of how much I put in for the same reason I don't buy powertools at pawn shops anymore.  I'm in construction and I've had 10's of thousands of dollars worth of tools stolen from me over the years.  It would be real easy for me to buy someone else's stolen tools from a pawn shop and justify it because I'm just recouping what was stolen from me.  Meanwhile some guy across town is buying my stolen tools.  Every tool that leaves the shelves creates that much more demand for continued influx of stolen tools.  Every dollar accepted from the federal government creates that much more demand for them to raise more money.

If people stop buying stolen tools, the value of stolen tools will drop, and thieves will have less incentive to steal them. If people do not take government welfare, the government will have more money to spend on other programs, it will not have a disincentive to tax.

Quote
Every dollar accepted from the federal government creates that much more demand for them to raise more money.
There is an unlimited demand for money, and most people don't care where it comes from, and rightly so. So the refusal of a handful of people to take welfare would make no difference in the demand for welfare.  Even if everyone refused to accept welfare from the government, the government would have no less incentive to tax because politicians have an unlimited desire to spend money, to exercise power. Their only disincentive to spend is political fallout, which is not created by welfare programs that are closer to being within budget because some people won't take the money. It is created by angry taxpayers. It is OK to take welfare, but

1. don't become dependent
2. stay angry at government spending and taxation

Quote
If you plan on leeching(welfare etc) off the system I will make sure that  everyone knows so don't tell me.

There is no shame in selfish, rational behavior.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: lasse on June 08, 2006, 12:57:31 am
There is no shame in selfish, rational behavior.
There is shame in theft.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Rocketman on June 08, 2006, 01:40:42 am
To be clear, my condition in the original scenario was that all socialist handouts received be donated to anti-government causes, not spent on donuts, beer, and pot... certainly not for an army of so-called liberty activists living in government housing!  The people of New Hampshire would rightly be annoyed by that sort of thing.

Jason's rationale for being willing to accept a research grant makes total sense.  Under the current system, government grants are intended to fund worthwhile research -- which should theoretically include a few non-statist researchers?  The unfortunate reality is that grants are typically offered only when a government agency expects to like a study's results.   ::)
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 08, 2006, 05:45:20 am
There is no shame in selfish, rational behavior.
There is shame in theft.

And accepting a check written out to you is theft how?
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: lasse on June 08, 2006, 05:48:14 am
There is no shame in selfish, rational behavior.
There is shame in theft.

And accepting a check written out to you is theft how?
Not directly. I'd consider it fencing or whitewashing of the government's plunder instead.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 08, 2006, 06:55:04 am
There is no shame in selfish, rational behavior.
There is shame in theft.

And accepting a check written out to you is theft how?
Not directly. I'd consider it fencing or whitewashing of the government's plunder instead.

I can agree with that. But I don't know that there is anything wrong with it, considering the impossibility of returning the property to the rightful owners. Fencing is wrong because it abets theft. Taking welfare does not abet taxation.

Things that do abet taxation:

Voting for politicians who favor tax/spending increases
Filing income tax returns
Paying employees' payroll taxes

Many libertarians do some of these things without giving it a second thought, but wouldn't dream of seeking or accepting government welfare. This is absurd. Taxpayer cooperation and voter acceptance allow taxation to occur, not welfare recipients. Welfare recipients may be more likely to support taxation, but they don't have to support taxation just because it benefits them in the short term. Voting for politicians who support tax/spending increases is tantamount to theft. Cooperating with taxation by filing returns, whithholding payroll taxes, and the like makes the government's theft easier. Accepting government welfare copensates you for the gigantic pain in the butt government is, albeit unjustly, and does not influence taxation one iota so long as you maintain your stance on government spending and taxation. Someone might refuse welfare in defiance and as a statement of disgust at the obscene practice of socialism, but I don't believe doing otherwise is morally reprehensible.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: lasse on June 08, 2006, 07:11:46 am
It's true that it doesn't help the tax issue to refuse welfare, but it certainly won't help if you do. It's a bit like the argument of software pirates - 'it doesn't cost anything to make bits and bytes, and so it won't matter if i take it'. True enough, but it's a matter of principle. However contentious immaterial rights may be, someone did make that music. And someone, somewhere did earn the money the buccaneers calling themselves the Government are attempting to stuff up your arse. Are you principled?
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 08, 2006, 09:20:22 am
It's true that it doesn't help the tax issue to refuse welfare, but it certainly won't help if you do. It's a bit like the argument of software pirates - 'it doesn't cost anything to make bits and bytes, and so it won't matter if i take it'. True enough, but it's a matter of principle. However contentious immaterial rights may be, someone did make that music. And someone, somewhere did earn the money the buccaneers calling themselves the Government are attempting to stuff up your arse. Are you principled?

Piracy is wrong on principle because it fails the "What if everyone did it?" test. If everyone did it, software and music quality and quantity would drop and creators of music and software would go out of business, having no incentive to create and innovate. Accepting welfare, on the other hand, passes this test. Currently, just about everyone takes welfare when they can. But there is little reason to think things would change for the better if everyone refused welfare.

Quote
Even if everyone refused to accept welfare from the government, the government would have no less incentive to tax because politicians have an unlimited desire to spend money, to exercise power.
                                                                            *
"""                                                                        /\     
....                                                                  *  <  >  *
                                                                            \/
                                                                            *
Quote
Are you principled?

Yes.
                                                                            *
"""                                                                        /\     
....                                                                  *  <  >  *
                                                                            \/
                                                                            *
Quote
It's true that it doesn't help the tax issue to refuse welfare.

Then why not take it?  Taking it violates no one's rights, hurts no one, and is helpful to me. Sure, the taxation that funds it is wrong. Fight the taxation, but why shouldn't you take the money if it's given to you?
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Dreepa on June 08, 2006, 10:10:19 am
The good news is that it is getting harder to get welfare.

If you move to NH and receive welfare I hope you remember the pledge of the FSP.

Taking welfare is not helping the government get smaller.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 08, 2006, 10:21:03 am
Neither is eating lunch, but neither make government bigger either. In fact, taking welfare could help the government get smaller.

More welfare takers=more money spent on welfare=more strain on the government=more imminent government breakdown.

Also, more libertarian welfare takers=more libertarian dollars spent in defense of liberty=smaller government.

That doesn't mean, of course, that FSP participants should limit their actions to overloading the welfare state.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: lasse on June 08, 2006, 10:54:11 am
Neither is eating lunch, but neither make government bigger either. In fact, taking welfare could help the government get smaller.

More welfare takers=more money spent on welfare=more strain on the government=more imminent government breakdown.

Also, more libertarian welfare takers=more libertarian dollars spent in defense of liberty=smaller government.

That doesn't mean, of course, that FSP participants should limit their actions to overloading the welfare state.
So the aim is not to promote libertarian views and push on libertarian issues, but to use unethical methods to 'break down' the government? Might as well start by bombing your city hall.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_of_the_deed
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 08, 2006, 11:06:04 am
Quote
unethical methods
When did I suggest using unethical methods? How is accepting welfare, which I did suggest, comparable with bombing city hall (V for Vendetta!!! ;D). I never advocated violence. Why the link to an article on propaganda of the deed? Would the breakdown of the welfare state be a bad thing?

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: lasse on June 08, 2006, 01:28:12 pm
Quote
unethical methods
When did I suggest using unethical methods? How is accepting welfare, which I did suggest, comparable with bombing city hall (V for Vendetta!!! ;D). I never advocated violence. Why the link to an article on propaganda of the deed? Would the breakdown of the welfare state be a bad thing?

 ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???
You didn't say 'breakdown of the welfare system', you said 'breakdown of the government'.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Denis Goddard on June 08, 2006, 01:45:06 pm
If you move to NH...

If I Recall Correctly, NH has no State unemployment benefits.
So, keep that in mind before moving ;)
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 08, 2006, 03:17:19 pm
Long live the FSP socialism leeches!  Here's to hoping that their scheming won't be required for much longer.

Salutations,
R. Rolen

I think this guy actually believes what he is saying. 

Behold the bottom of the slippery slope.

If by the bottom of the slippery slope you mean a rational full expression of a logical strategy, then I agree.  If on the other hand you meant some slight against the arguments I've presented, please state them openly on this forum instead of cowardly hiding behind imaginary objections.  And no, I don't "believe" what I am saying, I merely think that it is a blatantly obvious rational utilitarian deduction from the facts associated with the disgusting, wasteful, irrational welfare/warfare system we are all currently embedded in.  If you want to call it theft (which I reject on obvious grounds) or being an accomplice/indirect-supporter to theft (which I reject on more subtle grounds as expressed relatively well by others here) that's fine.  I still think it is justified on obvious utilitarian grounds, especially when calculated under the typical valuation systems of those posting here. 

Regards,
R. Rolen
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 08, 2006, 03:22:08 pm
Wow and I thought I was a mild one.....

Leech = thief.

Royerson you are right.

To the rest of you... Move to NH.

If you plan on leeching(welfare etc) off the system I will make sure that  everyone knows so don't tell me.

Tell who you wish.  Let them judge who is contributing more to their final liberation, the leeches/thiefs or the "principled" lay-abouts who can't find the time to do anything because their honest respectable jobs consume the vast majority of their time and effort.  If they can't appreciate the obvious, then I have no reason to respect their judgment anyway. 

Regards,
R. Rolen 
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 08, 2006, 03:42:05 pm


Piracy is wrong on principle because it fails the "What if everyone did it?" test.

What a ridiculous test.  When does everyone do anything?  Do you enjoy ignoring reality?  The reason piracy is "wrong on principle" is because people believe in a principle called "justice" which demands that you proportionaltely compensate the person responsible for the value you have received in exactly the same manner as you would wish to be compensated by a person responsible for causing you harm, and in proportion to the damage you perceive to have been done.  From a utilitarian angle, this also allows the free market to respond with extreme accuracy to all demands (should a sufficient percentage act similarly). 

Why do people believe in "justice" and how does each person define it?  That's a little harder to explain. 

Regards,
R. Rolen
   
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Dreepa on June 08, 2006, 03:46:33 pm
Using those arguments then everyone who can't move because they don't have a job should move here and go on welfare.


Aye Carumba.

Come to NH and be a welfare queen!  -- New motto of the FSP? :'(
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 08, 2006, 03:53:57 pm
Using those arguments then everyone who can't move because they don't have a job should move here and go on welfare.


Aye Carumba.

Come to NH and be a welfare queen! -- New motto of the FSP? :'(

And what would be wrong with that?  Reasons please!!!!  What objection would you have to an army of freedom activists flooding into NH?  So what if they happen to be temporary welfare queens?  I'm not talking about staying on the dole forever, just as long as the calculus justifies it.  Did you not understand anything I've said?   
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Dreepa on June 08, 2006, 04:10:22 pm
So are you are saying the ends justifies the means?

It is ok for 10 people to move in and receive welfare (thereby raising my taxes) as long as they work for 'liberty'?  Is that what you think is ok?
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 08, 2006, 05:14:47 pm
So are you are saying the ends justifies the means?

It is ok for 10 people to move in and receive welfare (thereby raising my taxes) as long as they work for 'liberty'? Is that what you think is ok?

Given a few other conditions that you seem to have either ignored or missed, yes.  You don't think the ends justify the means in the case I presented?  Reasons please?  ...or are you only capable of emotional outbursts devoid of rational thought?

And by the way, why are you still paying your taxes and thereby not only funding the government but lessening the burden on others who might otherwise be inspired/enraged into action/refussal, precipitating a cycle of refusal that might have significant positive overall effects (not to mention all the pro-freedom things you could use that money for)?  Do your ends in your case justify your means?  That's an honest question since I have no knowledge of your circumstances.     

Regards,
R. Rolen 
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: lasse on June 08, 2006, 06:18:58 pm
Refusing to pay taxes gets you fined and in worst case jailed. Refusing welfare gets bewildered looks.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Dreepa on June 08, 2006, 06:47:14 pm

Given a few other conditions that you seem to have either ignored or missed, yes.  You don't think the ends justify the means in the case I presented?  Reasons please?  ...or are you only capable of emotional outbursts devoid of rational thought?

And by the way, why are you still paying your taxes and thereby not only funding the government but lessening the burden on others who might otherwise be inspired/enraged into action/refussal, precipitating a cycle of refusal that might have significant positive overall effects (not to mention all the pro-freedom things you could use that money for)?  Do your ends in your case justify your means?  That's an honest question since I have no knowledge of your circumstances.     


No I don't think the ends justifies the means in the case you presented.
If 20K people move to NH and 19K go on welfare of some sort most likely the taxes will rise on the 1K who are paying taxes.

How do you know I pay taxes?

This is the part where libertarians suck.  Everyone is so freakin' smart that they will talk and talk and talk about esoteric things but do little.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 08, 2006, 08:01:55 pm

No I don't think the ends justifies the means in the case you presented.
If 20K people move to NH and 19K go on welfare of some sort most likely the taxes will rise on the 1K who are paying taxes.

What?  You're not making any sense.  Why are you limitting your argument to just the 20K movers?  Let me see if I can't argue your position for you.  If the 20K (or 1K) people who are moving to NH go on welfare (or take government "jobs") so that they can the result will be a slight increase in the taxes of everyone across the country (an extremely unlikely assumption) and this will somehow be worse for liberty than all the additional freedom procured as a result of them now being able to devote substantially more of their time to activism.  Does that help? 

How do you know I pay taxes?

Do you even recall writing this?:

It is ok for 10 people to move in and receive welfare (thereby raising my taxes) as long as they work for 'liberty'?

It kind of implies that you are paying taxes, otherwise why would you gripe about it raising specifically YOUR taxes?
But like I said, I don't know the specifics of your situation and don't care since you obviously can't be bothered to explain yourself.     

This is the part where libertarians suck. Everyone is so freakin' smart that they will talk and talk and talk about esoteric things but do little.

We are specifically talking about how each of us plans on funding and increasing our activism.  There's nothing esoteric about this at all.  This is what some of us are doing right now you dimwit.  And yet you feel the need to cut down these FSP members' strategies even though they may make perfect sense and all while failing to provide any rational arguments for why they are so horribly unethical and intolerable.  If only you had a little more "freakin" smarts, this discussion wouldn't "suck" so much.  Do you need me to simplify it some more for you?

     
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Dreepa on June 08, 2006, 09:18:49 pm
or take government "jobs"

I never said anything about government jobs.  I am talking about welfare.

Quote
We are specifically talking about how each of us plans on funding and increasing our activism.  There's nothing esoteric about this at all.  This is what some of us are doing right now you dimwit.  And yet you feel the need to cut down these FSP members' strategies even though they may make perfect sense and all while failing to provide any rational arguments for why they are so horribly unethical and intolerable. 
and the I am the dimwit.. ok.  These are specific strategies?  Really exactly which people are doing that? Ok come to NH and come get your couple hundred dollar welfare checks and fight for small government.  If that is your plan have at it.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Denis Goddard on June 08, 2006, 10:37:25 pm
That's it....
Rob and Dreepa, you boys sit in opposite corners for the rest of class!

I want both of you to write a one-page essay titled "why it is a bad idea to beat up my best friends"
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Rocketman on June 08, 2006, 11:00:21 pm
Well, Rob's in Hawaii, right?  That would be the opposite corner.   :P
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: RobRolen on June 09, 2006, 03:17:08 am
I never said anything about government jobs.  I am talking about welfare.

I was talking about both as you would know if you read my posts, and there's really no big difference between the two anyway. 

and the I am the dimwit.. ok.  These are specific strategies?  Really exactly which people are doing that?

Me for one, and probably about 5% or more of the rest of the FSP members I'ld imagine. 

Ok come to NH and come get your couple hundred dollar welfare checks and fight for small government.  If that is your plan have at it.

Great!  So you agree now.  One thing though, my "welfare" check will be in the six figures this year with a similarly sized one waiting for me in NH in 2007-2008.  I look forward to buying everyone a nice hearty brew when I arrive, hopefully with a dozen signers in tow.  Then hopefully within a dozen years or less, I can help abolish all of the federal jobs in the state, mine included. 

Well, Rob's in Hawaii, right?  That would be the opposite corner.   :P

Precisely.  It's the rock fever talking.  Pay no attention to my vicious rants. 

Aloha to all (even Dreepa),
R. Rolen   
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Denis Goddard on June 09, 2006, 06:08:47 am
I look forward to buying everyone a nice hearty brew when I arrive, hopefully with a dozen signers in tow.
You name the place, I'll bring thirsty early-mover activists, yearning for a cold one and happy to see new blood! :)
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Icarus on June 09, 2006, 05:09:14 pm
or take government "jobs"
I never said anything about government jobs.
Not true.
I can't be believe I'm reading this.  I am less proud to be a part of the FSP than I was yesterday.

I would have no problem taking a large government grant for my research, even though I would have a problem with going on welfare or unemployment insurance. Hypocritical? Maybe. But I agree with the arguments above that the money is going to be used, so it might as well be used for a good cause.

Royerson you are right.

Recieving and using a government research grant is, for the purposes of this discussion, no different than taking a government job.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Dreepa on June 09, 2006, 05:13:26 pm
or take government "jobs"
I never said anything about government jobs.
Not true.
I can't be believe I'm reading this.  I am less proud to be a part of the FSP than I was yesterday.

I would have no problem taking a large government grant for my research, even though I would have a problem with going on welfare or unemployment insurance. Hypocritical? Maybe. But I agree with the arguments above that the money is going to be used, so it might as well be used for a good cause.

Royerson you are right.

Recieving and using a government research grant is, for the purposes of this discussion, no different than taking a government job.

I never said anything about government jobs.  I was talking about welfare.  Other people debating about jobs but I was only refering to welfare (ie gettting money for doing nothing).  I am ok with people having government jobs. Hopefully over time there will be less of them.

When I said 'Royerson you are right 'I was refering to this:
I can't be believe I'm reading this.  I am less proud to be a part of the FSP than I was yesterday.
Title: Re: Recovering Welfareholic
Post by: Rocketman on June 09, 2006, 08:36:56 pm
Denis you are right.