She is most likely volunteering, donating food and clothing, paying taxes to support welfare programs and public education and safety, raising children that do not become criminals and wind up in prison ($$ $), paying her bills, etc. And she also contributes her children to the military and public service programs and doesn't expect the government to take care of her and her brood from cradle to grave.
On Jul 22, 8:08�pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > And just what does the "housewife" put (in real money) into the nations > pocketbook ?? nothing...the same amount as the welfare mom. > > they both "take" just from different sources. > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 7:03 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > One gives and one takes. > > > On Jul 22, 7:49 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > I forgot nothing. You must have missed the phrase "contribute financially > > to > > > the nations pocketbook" contained in my post. > > > > As to a link to female family members I may have the above phrase still > > > counts. there is indeed similarity to a "housewife" and a "welfare mom" > > as > > > far as the above phrase is concerned. > > > > If there is a difference in that narrow definition please be so kind as > > to > > > explain it to me. > > > �> On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 6:20 PM, rigsy03 <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > You are forgetting about men or women who inherit their wealth and > > > > property and therefore are taxpayers unless you are against > > > > inheritance, life insurance, wills and trusts, family businesses, etc. > > > > Motherhood/wifedom are not voluntary- they are the roles most women > > > > take on as part of their sexual identity. I realize the role of wife > > > > and mother have been terribly degraded in the years following women's > > > > liberation but I'm sure your mother, wife and daughter will understand > > > > your linking them to women "on the dole". I'll try that phrase at the > > > > next tea party/luncheon and see where it goes. Don't show up if you > > > > value your hide. > > > > > On Jul 22, 1:12 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > YES, but I think Holly's point that the housewife VOLUNTEERS to NOT > > > > > contribute financially to the nations pocketbook. As a matter of fact > > she > > > > > actually COSTS by filing jointly with her taxpaying husband. > > > > > > Regardless of her intrinsic value in keeping house, raising kids, > > keeping > > > > > the wage earning, tax paying man in her life laid and fed .... she > > > > neither > > > > > earns or pays and does so voluntarily... the SAME as the welfare > > > > recieving > > > > > woman, who may or may not be "on the dole" through some fault of her > > > > own... > > > > > trhere are actually people in this position that are not there > > > > > voluntarily... as opposed to a housewife who is.. > > > > > > On Wed, Jul 22, 2009 at 10:44 AM, Sage2 <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > Holly, > > > > > > > Contributing financially INCLUDES paying taxes !! > > > ************************************************************************ > > > > > > > On Jul 22, 11:28 am, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > perp, > > > > > > > > Thought we were only talking about contributing financially to > > > > > > > society. > > > > > > > > On Jul 22, 10:19 am, Perplexed <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > You miss the point entirely. Raising children in a stable > > > > household > > > > > > > > that pays taxes positively contributes to society. You seem to > > > > think > > > > > > > > it's no different than a welfare sloth who lives their entire > > life > > > > > > > > without a job and births multiple illegitimate kids at the > > expense > > > > of > > > > > > > > others. I clearly distinguished between the two. > > > > > > > > > On Jul 20, 11:29 pm, Hollywood <[email protected]> > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > Perp, > > > > > > > > > > Why yes, if you are a full time stay-at-home-mom by > > difinition > > > > you > > > > > > > > > would not have a paying job. Isn't that what I said? > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 20, 9:01 pm, Perplexed <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > And don't forget the stay-at-home- > > > > > > > > > > mom. > > > > > > > > > > ----------- > > > > > > > > > > Millions of "stay at home moms" have multiple kids from > > > > multiple > > > > > > > > > > fathers and live in subsidized housing and don't have jobs. > > > > Others > > > > > > do > > > > > > > > > > crack all day long. Those "stay at home moms" who appear on > > a > > > > > > joint > > > > > > > > > > tax return where taxes are paid should be able to vote. The > > > > others > > > > > > > > > > who don't contribute to society but rather leech off of it > > > > > > shouldn't. > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 20, 12:46 pm, Hollywood < > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > Richard, > > > > > > > > > > > > I understand that. I was simply pointing out some obvious > > > > > > problems > > > > > > > > > > > with it. > > > > > > > > > > > So, a college student working part time while going to > > school > > > > > > would > > > > > > > > > > > not get a vote? The under-employed? And don't forget the > > > > > > stay-at-home- > > > > > > > > > > > mom. > > > > > > > > > > > > And the rich have the greatest incentive to vote for laws > > > > that > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > increase their stock dividends at the expense of the > > workers. > > > > > > Endless > > > > > > > > > > > war? Great idea, I've got lots of stock in the defense > > > > industry > > > > > > > > > > > sector. Won't be my kids doing the fighting & dying. > > Increase > > > > > > minimum > > > > > > > > > > > wage? Fuck that, will reduce profts of companies I have > > stock > > > > in. > > > > > > > > > > > Clean air, clean water, safe working conditions? Fuck > > that, > > > > it > > > > > > will > > > > > > > > > > > increase the cost of doing business. > > > > > > > > > > > > Core problem here is that EVERYONE is thinking in the > > terms > > > > of > > > > > > short- > > > > > > > > > > > term self interest. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 20, 11:24 am, RichardForbes < > > > > [email protected] > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > I was simply tossing out an alternative interpretation. > > > > But, I > > > > > > guess > > > > > > > > > > > > if someone is contributing to Social Security, they get > > a > > > > pass. > > > > > > If > > > > > > > > > > > > they are below the full time minimum wage level, they > > > > should > > > > > > not. My > > > > > > > > > > > > real point was that those who are a net drag on society > > are > > > > the > > > > > > ones > > > > > > > > > > > > who have the greatest incentive to vote for welfare > > > > programs > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > > > > > raise taxes, decrease our competitiveness and endanger > > > > future > > > > > > > > > > > > generations. The questions you asked are just as > > > > reasonable as > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > > > > one I raised. But, make no mistake about it, our > > founding > > > > > > fathers > > > > > > > > > > > > feared that the economic populism resulting from pure > > > > > > democracy, even > > > > > > > > > > > > with the checks and balances they put in place, would > > be > > > > our > > > > > > biggest > > > > > > > > > > > > risk to long-term success as a nation. We are living > > their > > > > > > worst > > > > > > > > > > > > fears at the present. > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 20, 8:47 am, Hollywood < > > [email protected] > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Richard, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Ok,you have a right to your opinion. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who gets to define "temporarily"? > > > > > > > > > > > > > Who gets to define what a more appropiate ratio would > > be? > > > > > > > > > > > > > The disabled would get no vote? > > > > > > > > > > > > > How much in taxes do you think a Pfc. in the Marines > > > > pays? > > > > > > Does he > > > > > > > > > > > > > "contribute to the economy" enough to "deserve" a > > vote? > > > > Take > > > > > > note you > > > > > > > > > > > > > said "contribute to the economy" as the deciding > > factor > > > > NOT > > > > > > > > > > > > > "contribute to the safety or stability". > > > > > > > > > > > > > How about a stay-at-home-mom, raising her family? No > > vote > > > > for > > > > > > her? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 20, 9:25 am, RichardForbes < > > > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The ratio seems excessive, but for those who do not > > pay > > > > > > taxes and > > > > > > > > > > > > > > effectively do not contribute to the economy, it > > does > > > > seem > > > > > > reasonable > > > > > > > > > > > > > > to temporarily withhold their voting privilege. > > That > > > > would > > > > > > be strong > > > > > > > > > > > > > > incentive to get of their butts and get a job. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Jul 20, 8:15 am, Hollywood < > > > > [email protected]> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On another forum a certain conservative poster > > who > > > > goes > > > > > > by the nic of > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The Supreme Turtle pretty much openly posed that > > > > > > question. I quote his > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > words" "if you pay 100k in taxes you should have > > ten > > > > > > times the votes > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > of someone who pays 10K" End quote. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Well , I made my feelings about such a statement > > > > pretty > > > > > > clear but am > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > most curious about what posters here think of > > that. > > > > Fire > > > > > > away folks, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > what do you think? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Should the U.S. be ruled by the rich?- Hide > > quoted > > > > text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > -- > > > > > Mark M. Kahle, ,www.filacoffee.com-Hidequoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > -- > > ... > > read more �- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
