Bloomberg running for Prez?!?!

[beachblanket]

Ahh hell, who ISN'T running for President this time around?

Pat Paulsen (I guess I'm showing my age here ), and I miss that. If he was still with us, he'd be providing some desperately needed levity to the race.

 

[cardaway]

It's still a handout. I'm not a big fan of welfare either. The way I was brought up was if I wanted that popsicle from the ice cream truck I would have some sort of chore waiting later as the trade off. I don't "expect" anything to be given to me. It makes it all the sweeter when it does happen. Not a bad way to think, imho.

ITA. Another hand-out, not a hand up. A hand up would be getting them a job, or getting somebody some tutoring, not giving out money like candy (or ice cream ).

 

[eclectics]

ITA. Another hand-out, not a hand up. A hand up would be getting them a job, or getting somebody some tutoring, not giving out money like candy (or ice cream ).

Exactly. Help get them decent jobs, maybe help pay for some advanced education, give them a voucher to an eye doctor if they need glasses. There are so many better ways to help than by simply handing over a check.

 

[Fitswimmer]

It's still a handout. I'm not a big fan of welfare either. The way I was brought up was if I wanted that popsicle from the ice cream truck I would have some sort of chore waiting later as the trade off. I don't "expect" anything to be given to me. It makes it all the sweeter when it does happen. Not a bad way to think, imho.

I was raised that way too, but these people weren't. I didn't understand it either until I worked with them. We were raised to value education, to value hard work because our parents did. When you get a second or third generation that hasn't held a job, or gotten through high school you don't have those built in values of responsibility and reward for doing the right thing. I was raised knowing that I was going to college, it was a natural progression after HS, like 11th grade!. When we wanted xtra money to go to Disney, Dad got a second job or we cut back on things.

I would still rather see a reward for doing something than for doing nothing, which is all welfare is. There's no strings attached.

 

[eclectics]

I would still rather see a reward for doing something than for doing nothing, which is all welfare is.

Their "reward" should be a helping hand like I mentioned above. I agree, welfare is in need of serious reform. I can see food stamps in certain cases as well as health care assistance, and maybe even rent relief, but this check in the mailbox every month without working for it is not helping these people better themselves. And by Bloomberg giving these people checks, all he is doing is reinforcing the welfare mentality.

 

[cardaway]

I would still rather see a reward for doing something than for doing nothing, which is all welfare is. There's no strings attached.

I would actually agree with something like that plan replacing welfare, but I'm toally against any more hand-outs being given to people already on the system.

 

[LoraJ]

Didn't he switch from Democrat to Republican just to better his chances of winning as Mayor? I never thought of him as a Republican.

 

[NewJersey]

I would seriously consider a vote for him if he ran. We've got the bulk of the Republican party of today who are hell-bent on using Christianity to run everyone's lives, while we have the Democrats usual slogan of "their idea sucks, so vote for me." Frankly, I'm so fed up with both parties, the extremism on both sides, and the do-nothing attitude of Congress. The primaries are a joke as both sides pander to the extreme right and extreme left.

 

[DISUNC]

Ahh hell, who ISN'T running for President this time around?

Aint that the truth!

 

[Charade]

Yes, and Hillary was going to serve out her second term in the Senate too. If they didn't all lie like cheap rugs about this issue, nobody would be pressing them.

I'll believe that he's not running when the next President is sworn in and it's not him.

 

[Charade]

I would seriously consider a vote for him if he ran. We've got the bulk of the Republican party of today who are hell-bent on using Christianity to run everyone's lives, while we have the Democrats usual slogan of "their idea sucks, so vote for me." Frankly, I'm so fed up with both parties, the extremism on both sides, and the do-nothing attitude of Congress. The primaries are a joke as both sides pander to the extreme right and extreme left.

Huh? Really? Except for a couple of hot topics (like on that other thread), I just don't see it. But it makes for good "talking points".


Bloomberg is hell bent (and sneaky about it too) on serious gun control. Actually, he believes no private citizen should own a gun. He's got a no smoking, no trans-fat city. He wants to implement a commuter "tax". How isn't that running everyone's lives?

 

[cardaway]

Huh? Really? Except for a couple of hot topics (like on that other thread), I just don't see it.

Take those blinders off before you hit somebody.

 

[NewJersey]

Huh? Really? Except for a couple of hot topics (like on that other thread), I just don't see it. But it makes for good "talking points".


Bloomberg is hell bent (and sneaky about it too) on serious gun control. Actually, he believes no private citizen should own a gun. He's got a no smoking, no trans-fat city. He wants to implement a commuter "tax". How isn't that running everyone's lives?

I don't think he's sneaky at all, considering he's been out trying to get support from mayors around the country for serious gun control laws. A no smoking city (as NJ is a no smoking state) is one of the best things I love about going out in the city and my state. I don't come home from a bar or restaurant smelling like I put a day in at the Marlboro factory..let alone the health benefits of banning smoking.

While I'm up in the air with the commuter tax, there are some cities that have it, or are in the process of implementing it. It's a way to raise extra funds and not tax the residents (smart political idea - similar to taxes on hotel rooms), and in this case it's part of the environmental plan of the city. It also serves to cut down on congestion going into the city, as it hopefully pushes drivers to carpool or take mass transit.

As you have said in earlier threads, both parties have things out there that attempt to run citizens' lives. Although I just don't find any justification when the basis is someone's religious beliefs (banning gay marriage, Terri Schiavo, and making abortions illegal).

 

[DISUNC]

Didn't he switch from Democrat to Republican just to better his chances of winning as Mayor?

Maybe he just wants the other guys job on Law & Order!

 

[Fitswimmer]

It all depends on what kind of government intervention you're comfortable with. Bloomberg's type of intervention is with public behavior, no smoking in public, no public consumption of trans fats, no driving in congested areas without paying. The Republican party wants to intervene in issues regarding personal morality like whether or not to have a child, whether terminally ill individuals can choose how and when they end their lives and who can marry who.

I don't have a big issue with the no smoking, no trans fats stuff. I'm not fond of the government crawing into my kitchen, but so far it's only public places. Same with smoking, as an ex smoker I don't mind that it's not allowed in public places, but I would mind if it was extended into people's apartments and cars. As it is, fine-but if it starts moving into people's private lives, then it's just as much Mommy behavior as what the Republicans are doing with personal morality.


As far as personal morality, I've said more than once on this board that I don't like legislating it. I don't need civil law to reflect my Church's beliefs for me to be able to live by those beliefs and I'm suspicious of those that do.

I DON"T like the commuter tax at all since it will hit NJ very hard. NJ Transit will not be able to support the increased ridership and we will not get the $$ to pay for it, because all the money from the tax will go to NY.

Gun control really doesn't affect MOST of the crimes that are committed with guns. Yes, better control might have stopped the VT gunman from arming himself, but it's not going to stop the flow of guns into the city because they're already illegal!