By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
eva01beserk said:
tsogud said:

I never said you had to be at an extreme, all I said was that being on the fence or "in the middle" on issues is not a definitive stance. You can be on the fence on things but ultimately, once you hear both sides of the argument, you have to come to your own conclusion on who/what you believe is right and then compromise from there IF you feel it's an issue worth compromising on. You can't be on the fence your whole life.

@bolded: Did you not understand what I wrote?? That's what those social programs do! That's us reaching out to the man before he's in that condition, so he has options. Not everyone is born with a roof over their heads, food on the table, and good health. And the best part is that these programs have been proven to work.

I honestly think you need to take a step back and look at the facts, apart from everyone else, and come to your own conclusion on what you believe. It seems you don't have your political beliefs all ironed out yet and that's fine but you at least need to have some idea on where you stand and where you draw the line. Maybe you'll end up admitting to yourself that maybe you're more conservative/liberal than you previously thought.

Well thas something you took cuz you refuse to accept what im saying. In no way am I indecisive or in the fence. I stated clearly what I believe should be done. You for some reason think that the only two options are get rid of all social programs or 100% free everything. I say we keep the social programs but only to those that really need it and never 100% everything, give them the need to work for the rest. Its quite simple, if you refuse to accept that than thats on you.

Then you have shown your willful ignorance on the matter entirely and you should educate yourself on the subject before you start posting nonsense on forums, or at least actually listen when people try to tell you that you have the situation misunderstood. These types of social programs can only work if we go "100% everything" as you put it. You can't just choose who gets what for free, for example this healthcare reform that I've been referencing is an all or nothing deal. Everyone has to pitch in and be covered in order for it to work the way it's intended, otherwise it's just another Obamacare. I completely understood what you said and meant but you have it wrong and you need to work on accepting constructive criticism.

Last edited by tsogud - on 25 June 2019