Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 37
Default Something to think about

Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.



  #2   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,427
Default Something to think about

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.


Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.

--
Nom=de=Plume


  #3   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 463
Default Something to think about

On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:02:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.


Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.


And what is wrong with thinking about cities? Do the majority of the
poor not live in large cities?
--

John H
  #4   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,427
Default Something to think about

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:02:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.


Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.


And what is wrong with thinking about cities? Do the majority of the
poor not live in large cities?
--

John H



Do you think they would live in the country with no services available?

--
Nom=de=Plume


  #5   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 463
Default Something to think about

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:02:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:02:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.

Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.


And what is wrong with thinking about cities? Do the majority of the
poor not live in large cities?
--

John H



Do you think they would live in the country with no services available?


No. But then again, the Democrat leadership in the big cities seems to
be providing even less.
--

John H


  #6   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,427
Default Something to think about

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:02:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:02:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.

Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.

And what is wrong with thinking about cities? Do the majority of the
poor not live in large cities?
--

John H



Do you think they would live in the country with no services available?


No. But then again, the Democrat leadership in the big cities seems to
be providing even less.
--

John H



Really? That's not been my experience working with the homeless. In any
case, do you think they should migrate to the country? Historically, the
migration moves from country to city.

Must everything bad be the Democrat's fault? Because, that seems to be the
theme for you.


--
Nom=de=Plume


  #7   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 463
Default Something to think about

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 16:58:48 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:02:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:02:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.

Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.

And what is wrong with thinking about cities? Do the majority of the
poor not live in large cities?
--

John H



Do you think they would live in the country with no services available?


I really think that is the biggest flaw in the "Great Society"
program. They piled all the welfare money up in the city where the
people were concentrated in ghettos instead of spreading it out across
the countryside and diluting the problem.
If you are trying to find jobs for a few marginally qualified people
per town it is easier than having them all in one area. The cost of
living is also lower out in the country if you are just sending them a
check.
Unfortunately with the collapse of the manufacturing base in this
country marginally skilled people are in serious trouble, no matter
where they live but that is another problem..


And it seems to me the Marion Barrys of the world are trying hard to
keep them 'marginal'.
--

John H
  #8   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
Jim Jim is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Sep 2009
Posts: 160
Default Something to think about

nom=de=plume wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:02:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:02:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.
Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.
And what is wrong with thinking about cities? Do the majority of the
poor not live in large cities?
--

John H

Do you think they would live in the country with no services available?

No. But then again, the Democrat leadership in the big cities seems to
be providing even less.
--

John H



Really? That's not been my experience working with the homeless. In any
case, do you think they should migrate to the country? Historically, the
migration moves from country to city.

Must everything bad be the Democrat's fault? Because, that seems to be the
theme for you.


You have experience working with the homeless, from your house? With an
ocasional outcall?
  #9   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,427
Default Something to think about

"Jim" wrote in message
...
nom=de=plume wrote:
"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:02:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:02:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those
in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.
Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.
And what is wrong with thinking about cities? Do the majority of the
poor not live in large cities?
--

John H

Do you think they would live in the country with no services available?
No. But then again, the Democrat leadership in the big cities seems to
be providing even less.
--

John H



Really? That's not been my experience working with the homeless. In any
case, do you think they should migrate to the country? Historically, the
migration moves from country to city.

Must everything bad be the Democrat's fault? Because, that seems to be
the theme for you.


You have experience working with the homeless, from your house? With an
ocasional outcall?



What is your problem? Have you always been in your house? Don't get out
much? That's sad.


--
Nom=de=Plume


  #10   Report Post  
posted to rec.boats
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by BoatBanter: Aug 2009
Posts: 5,427
Default Something to think about

wrote in message
news
On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 12:02:31 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"JohnH" wrote in message
. ..
On Sun, 20 Sep 2009 18:02:43 -0700, "nom=de=plume"
wrote:

"Toots Sweet" wrote in message
...
Democrats are for fair elections, helping the poor, assisting those in
need, the disenfranchised and minorities everywhere. Which is a good
thing.

At the same time, Democrats have been in charge of the major cities,
New York, New Orleans, Chicago, etc., for the past 50 years.

Think about that.

Think states, not cities and you'll see the light.

And what is wrong with thinking about cities? Do the majority of the
poor not live in large cities?
--

John H



Do you think they would live in the country with no services available?


I really think that is the biggest flaw in the "Great Society"
program. They piled all the welfare money up in the city where the
people were concentrated in ghettos instead of spreading it out across
the countryside and diluting the problem.
If you are trying to find jobs for a few marginally qualified people
per town it is easier than having them all in one area. The cost of
living is also lower out in the country if you are just sending them a
check.
Unfortunately with the collapse of the manufacturing base in this
country marginally skilled people are in serious trouble, no matter
where they live but that is another problem..



Pretty hard to offer services onezee twozee don't you think? Not very cost
effective or practical. The Great Society did a lot of good, but it wasn't
perfect.


--
Nom=de=Plume


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:15 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017