@averagejoe1 said"Question: Does giving the money to people on the street create more homelessness?
Question: Does giving the money to people on the street create more homelessness?
Z's Answer: ' Its a good idea'. No mention of effect of more homelessness. That does not answer the question. One simple question. Are you OK, Z? Maybe you need to see someone.
This once agains shows what I am trying to help you kids with. You are so emotional, and you truly do not answer questions. Ask Me one.
Maybe you can answer this one: Why not $4000/month?
Z's Answer: ' Its a good idea'. No mention of effect of more homelessness. That does not answer the question. One simple question. Are you OK, Z? Maybe you need to see someone."
ooo that's what your question was. no wonder i didn't get it, it was so stupid my mind simply refused to register it.
OK, since you wanted a no spin answer, then no, handing out cash to homeless doesn't create more homeless and you are dumb for asking
@zahlanzi saidQuestion quite clear. You skirted it. You lose.
"Question: Does giving the money to people on the street create more homelessness?
Z's Answer: ' Its a good idea'. No mention of effect of more homelessness. That does not answer the question. One simple question. Are you OK, Z? Maybe you need to see someone."
ooo that's what your question was. no wonder i didn't get it, it was so stupid my mind simply refused to re ...[text shortened]... swer, then no, handing out cash to homeless doesn't create more homeless and you are dumb for asking
Then you say, without any explanation or reason, that it will not create more homelessness.
Then, I guess I can hereby state, as maybe an art critic, that that the Mona Lisa is not worth the paint that it is painted with. Wouldn't you think that persons-notable would demand an explanation?
Yes, you must be so stupid. I'm working with you, though, you can do this. Have you checked out SueShe's answers? Geez
@averagejoe1 said"Then you say, without any explanation or reason, that it will not create more homelessness."
Question quite clear. You skirted it. You lose.
Then you say, without any explanation or reason, that it will not create more homelessness.
Then, I guess I can hereby state, as maybe an art critic, that that the Mona Lisa is not worth the paint that it is painted with. Wouldn't you think that persons-notable would demand an explanation?
Yes, you must be so ...[text shortened]... stupid. I'm working with you, though, you can do this. Have you checked out SueShe's answers? Geez
explanations are for intelligent people who can understand and learn from them
you imbeciles can't learn. You don't teach magahats jack. You just wait for them to die of old age or you outvote them.
@zahlanzi saidSo emotional, Zahlanzi. Not many points in that. Not too late to turn it around.
"Then you say, without any explanation or reason, that it will not create more homelessness."
explanations are for intelligent people who can understand and learn from them
you imbeciles can't learn. You don't teach magahats jack. You just wait for them to die of old age or you outvote them.
You just made a ludicrous statement that explanations are for intelligent people, which can only lead us to conclude that they are not for unintelligent people?.
Please share your intelligent logic of that little nugget, please?
@averagejoe1 saidSee? Here you go again.
A pitiful avoidance-answer to a simple question. And alas, you talk about 'me' again. Libs make all things personal, because they are so dependent on each other. Look at an issue, comment on the issue, that's all it takes. I am trying to apply an analogy to your foolishness, but none comes to mind for this nothingness.
I did answer your question. You just don’t like the answer, because all you want is something simple. And many things just aren’t as simple as you.
1 edit
@shavixmir saidThis is the way Shav 'answered my question'. He starts with 'Who in he hell is going to answer you?!", then does an emotional lib rant, and never answers the question.
See? Here you go again.
I did answer your question. You just don’t like the answer, because all you want is something simple. And many things just aren’t as simple as you.
Here is his answer.
"Who the hell is seriously going to answer you. When you don’t like an answer, you constantly say nobody is answering your question and now you’re pre-building that reply into your fukking question.
There could be benefits to society with a universal basic income.
How much is it worth to you to not be bothered by beggers, for example.
Why are all these people homeless in the first place? What solutions do you have to solve that problem? And how much will that cost?"
Shav's only likely sentence which he thinks is an answer is that giving people money will reduce the amount of beggars. What an idiot. Beggars have been depicted asking for 'alms' in all the religious movies, begging is 1000s of years old, and the Dems and Shav think will fix it after all these years. Jesus.
YOU are right, niether I nor anyone liked your answer, which was a not-answer. All of you seem to be folding these days. Must be TDS. For the record, I think that they Want to be homeless.
@averagejoe1 saidLet me spell it out for you, because my answer was obviously too complicated for you:
This is the way Shav 'answered my question'. He starts with 'Who in he hell is going to answer you?!", then does an emotional lib rant, and never answers the question.
Here is his answer.
"Who the hell is seriously going to answer you. When you don’t like an answer, you constantly say nobody is answering your question and now you’re pre-building that reply into you ...[text shortened]... seem to be folding these days. Must be TDS. For the record, I think that they Want to be homeless.
- there are arguments for a universal basic income (handing out money to beggers).
- before determining if a solution is going to solve a problem, it’s better to get to the cause of the problem and tackle that instead.
You are welcome.
@shavixmir saidYes, and there are also arguments for paying off tuitions for college graduates, and whether or not we should have abortions, or capital punishment.
Let me spell it out for you, because my answer was obviously too complicated for you:
- there are arguments for a universal basic income (handing out money to beggers).
-
????????????????????????????? There are arguments. That is what this is. You must be upset, so, you won't argue.
@shavixmir saidexplain one of these “arguments” please
Let me spell it out for you, because my answer was obviously too complicated for you:
- there are arguments for a universal basic income (handing out money to beggers).
- before determining if a solution is going to solve a problem, it’s better to get to the cause of the problem and tackle that instead.
You are welcome.
@mott-the-hoople saidThey rant, they do not explain. Maybe he can get a link to explain, like Maruader does. Not a free thought among 'em.
explain one of these “arguments” please
@averagejoe1 saidThe sick puppies! What are they all about, money? for the homeless 🤷🏻♂️
Tlaib proposes bill to pay homeless $1400 a month. Does this create more homelessness? A simple question. How will you twist your not-answers?
@kevcvs57 saidkev bamboozle, you're bamboozled. It's not about where the money goes it's where the money comes from, money is not actually majic, The more money taken from productive people puts more productive people on the street. The tax burden comes at a cost, the IRS regularly ruins people, their lives and businesses, hulllloooo, next thing they're on the street and the goobermint is trying to support an ever growing pool of homeless from an ever shrinking pool, the productive.
The sick puppies! What are they all about, money? for the homeless 🤷🏻♂️
@wajoma saidMoney is an arbitrary token that you exchange for other arbitrary tokens or specific concrete items.
kev bamboozle, you're bamboozled. It's not about where the money goes it's where the money comes from, money is not actually majic, The more money taken from productive people puts more productive people on the street. The tax burden comes at a cost, the IRS regularly ruins people, their lives and businesses, hulllloooo, next thing they're on the street and the goobermint is trying to support an ever growing pool of homeless from an ever shrinking pool, the productive.
If you, as an average income type, want to pay less tax use the advantage of democracy and make the billionaires pay 95% tax
Any socioeconomic system that can only function by conning the quite poor into victimising and marginalising the really really poor is doomed
1 edit
@zahlanzi saidMom given $10,800 in taxpayer funds for poor families spent most of it on luxury miami trip: I wanted to blow it! 200,000 odd homeless in the U.S. in the 90's, you've spent billions since then and the number of homeless has tripled. Yeah, just hand out more money. All the democrats know how to do.
"Question: Does giving the money to people on the street create more homelessness?
Z's Answer: ' Its a good idea'. No mention of effect of more homelessness. That does not answer the question. One simple question. Are you OK, Z? Maybe you need to see someone."
ooo that's what your question was. no wonder i didn't get it, it was so stupid my mind simply refused to re ...[text shortened]... swer, then no, handing out cash to homeless doesn't create more homeless and you are dumb for asking
Thats a fox link Kev, be careful.
1 edit
@djj saidSo your point is, “this story justifies not giving millions of people the ability to feed their children’
Mom given $10,800 in taxpayer funds for poor families spent most of it on luxury miami trip: I wanted to blow it! 200,000 odd homeless in the U.S. in the 90's, you've spent billions since then and the number of homeless has tripled. Yeah, just hand out more money. All the democrats know how to do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yFmIaWsIABs
Thats a fox link Kev, be careful.
Gfy you stupid turd