Pages:
Author

Topic: Contribute, or die. - page 2. (Read 2259 times)

legendary
Activity: 3990
Merit: 1385
December 31, 2015, 05:39:00 AM
#29
I agree. The capitalistic bosses are lazy, they dont work. We must send them to Siberia for euthanasia.

Gonna be a cold winter before it is over this new year.

Smiley
hero member
Activity: 616
Merit: 500
December 31, 2015, 04:30:31 AM
#28
I agree. The capitalistic bosses are lazy, they dont work. We must send them to Siberia for euthanasia.
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
December 31, 2015, 01:04:21 AM
#27

So now it's about morality? I thought it was about not having to support all the "deadbeats". If that's the case why aren't you supporting greater funding for mental health and research into traumatic head injuries? These people aren't broken, they are ill, but they can be helped.
It's about many things. Money, the ill, the paralyzed, the wounded, and the obsolete. I can try explaining myself in a different way.


People who are dealing with cancer are always on edge. Some of them are consistently in physical pain where they actually feel their body slowly shutting down. For some, it's more painful then having your legs sawed off slowly. I can't look at those people and say " It's gonna be okay". It won't be okay and in the meantime, things are gonna be painful. I will never know their pain and I refuse to look them in the eye and tell them they should fight to live if I know they're in pain and I know there's no hope for them to work the same way again. They won't be happy working. Cancer victims would eventually die. A miracle would have to happen for them to live and only a handful of miracles have happened when it comes to cancer survivors. For the ones that live, they will not work the same way again. We can't gamble when it comes to a person's physical and mental pain. I'd rather they die now than later and endure more months or years or however long they have until their scheduled death from cancer.
I never said I was against voluntary euthanasia, I support it in fact. I do not however support viewing people as cogs who need to contribute with the alternative being death. I believe wholeheartedly that the paralyzed, sick, and weak ought to be taken care of if they wish to live.
I do too but only if they can be cured to get back on their feet to work to contribute positively to the rest of society.
Well that's where our opinions differ I suppose.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 31, 2015, 12:59:28 AM
#26

So now it's about morality? I thought it was about not having to support all the "deadbeats". If that's the case why aren't you supporting greater funding for mental health and research into traumatic head injuries? These people aren't broken, they are ill, but they can be helped.
It's about many things. Money, the ill, the paralyzed, the wounded, and the obsolete. I can try explaining myself in a different way.


People who are dealing with cancer are always on edge. Some of them are consistently in physical pain where they actually feel their body slowly shutting down. For some, it's more painful then having your legs sawed off slowly. I can't look at those people and say " It's gonna be okay". It won't be okay and in the meantime, things are gonna be painful. I will never know their pain and I refuse to look them in the eye and tell them they should fight to live if I know they're in pain and I know there's no hope for them to work the same way again. They won't be happy working. Cancer victims would eventually die. A miracle would have to happen for them to live and only a handful of miracles have happened when it comes to cancer survivors. For the ones that live, they will not work the same way again. We can't gamble when it comes to a person's physical and mental pain. I'd rather they die now than later and endure more months or years or however long they have until their scheduled death from cancer.
I never said I was against voluntary euthanasia, I support it in fact. I do not however support viewing people as cogs who need to contribute with the alternative being death. I believe wholeheartedly that the paralyzed, sick, and weak ought to be taken care of if they wish to live.
I do too but only if they can be cured to get back on their feet to work to contribute positively to the rest of society.
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
December 31, 2015, 12:45:29 AM
#25

So now it's about morality? I thought it was about not having to support all the "deadbeats". If that's the case why aren't you supporting greater funding for mental health and research into traumatic head injuries? These people aren't broken, they are ill, but they can be helped.
It's about many things. Money, the ill, the paralyzed, the wounded, and the obsolete. I can try explaining myself in a different way.


People who are dealing with cancer are always on edge. Some of them are consistently in physical pain where they actually feel their body slowly shutting down. For some, it's more painful then having your legs sawed off slowly. I can't look at those people and say " It's gonna be okay". It won't be okay and in the meantime, things are gonna be painful. I will never know their pain and I refuse to look them in the eye and tell them they should fight to live if I know they're in pain and I know there's no hope for them to work the same way again. They won't be happy working. Cancer victims would eventually die. A miracle would have to happen for them to live and only a handful of miracles have happened when it comes to cancer survivors. For the ones that live, they will not work the same way again. We can't gamble when it comes to a person's physical and mental pain. I'd rather they die now than later and endure more months or years or however long they have until their scheduled death from cancer.
I never said I was against voluntary euthanasia, I support it in fact. I do not however support viewing people as cogs who need to contribute with the alternative being death. I believe wholeheartedly that the paralyzed, sick, and weak ought to be taken care of if they wish to live.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 31, 2015, 12:38:51 AM
#24

So now it's about morality? I thought it was about not having to support all the "deadbeats". If that's the case why aren't you supporting greater funding for mental health and research into traumatic head injuries? These people aren't broken, they are ill, but they can be helped.
It's about many things. Money, the ill, the paralyzed, the wounded, and the obsolete. I can try explaining myself in a different way.


People who are dealing with cancer are always on edge. Some of them are consistently in physical pain where they actually feel their body slowly shutting down. For some, it's more painful then having your legs sawed off slowly. I can't look at those people and say " It's gonna be okay". It won't be okay and in the meantime, things are gonna be painful. I will never know their pain and I refuse to look them in the eye and tell them they should fight to live if I know they're in pain and I know there's no hope for them to work the same way again. They won't be happy working. Cancer victims would eventually die. A miracle would have to happen for them to live and only a handful of miracles have happened when it comes to cancer survivors. For the ones that live, they will not work the same way again. We can't gamble when it comes to a person's physical and mental pain. I'd rather they die now than later and endure more months or years or however long they have until their scheduled death from cancer.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 31, 2015, 12:28:02 AM
#23
A lot of people however doesnt have the opportunity to work... I think you're being cruel to those people here  Undecided
How do they not have the opportunity to work? Tell me please. Anyone can go out and get a job. Even if it's a minimum wage job, it's a job and you will be respected for contributing to society in a way that we need you to.

What if you're paralyzed?
Permanently or temporarily? If temporarily, for how long?
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
December 31, 2015, 12:22:30 AM
#22
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
Doing WHAT?
Being TV celebrities. "Acting" and what not. That's why I asked how do you determine who is "contributing". You and I might agree that people like Kim and Snooki contribute nothing of value to society, but what right do you have to place lives and livelihoods on the line based on how you feel?

Part of living in a developed country is not having homeless people starving to death outside Walmart. Do you really not believe in society supporting the homeless?
I believe in the homeless supporting themselves. They need to get off the ground, suck it up and get a job to take care of themselves. People that don't even know the homeless personally shouldn't be working harder than the homeless are to fix their own problems. And if it's a sitiation where people just don't wanna hire somebody even though they comply with the minimum requirements, you can sue. I'm sure Trump will agree. Blessed be his name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis
I get the impression you are young.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/29/traumatic-brain-injury-homelessness_n_5227637.html
Many homeless people have traumatic brain injuries. In addition many have preexisting mental illnesses. They can't suck it up and just get jobs. They can't have their daddy give them a "A Small Loan of a Million Dollars?.

You foolishly believe that everyone is in the situation they are in because they deserve it. It's an enticing position to hold. It's fun to be able to yell about how everyone just needs to work harder and suck up everything that comes their way. But it is a viewpoint that conflicts with reality.

http://www.veteransinc.org/about-us/statistics/
"Approx. 33% of homeless males in the U.S. are veterans."

You tell me. Are these veterans just lazy bums? Do you want them to die off because they no longer contribute?

Well, they use to be needed. Now they are not. We have no ue for them anymore so they should be allowed to go to a hospital, and be gently and painlessly put to sleep. I see nothing wrong with that. To be honest, most homeless people probably wish they were dead because roaming the streets with no where to really go, digging in the trash cans for food and sleeping under benches is a whole lot more degrading than accepting the fact that you simply cannot meet the minimum requirements for any job anymore and should voluntarily check into a hospital to be euthanized.

Now if only hospitals would allow that.
"We have no use for them anymore so kill them"
Literally Hitler. We clearly hold different moral standards so this discussion is pointless.
Guess the elderly should all be put down too then. Sorry Grandma.
Also, no one except the terminally ill and small number of suicidal are going to voluntarily check in to be killed. Go ask a homeless person if they want to be murdered and I'm guessing the vast majority will give an emphatic no.


...Except the difference between Hitler and I is I grew up in a loving family, and don't want people to suffer.



So now it's about morality? I thought it was about not having to support all the "deadbeats". If that's the case why aren't you supporting greater funding for mental health and research into traumatic head injuries? These people aren't broken, they are ill, but they can be helped.
full member
Activity: 211
Merit: 100
December 31, 2015, 12:20:05 AM
#21
A lot of people however doesnt have the opportunity to work... I think you're being cruel to those people here  Undecided
How do they not have the opportunity to work? Tell me please. Anyone can go out and get a job. Even if it's a minimum wage job, it's a job and you will be respected for contributing to society in a way that we need you to.

What if you're paralyzed?
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 31, 2015, 12:14:48 AM
#20
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
Doing WHAT?
Being TV celebrities. "Acting" and what not. That's why I asked how do you determine who is "contributing". You and I might agree that people like Kim and Snooki contribute nothing of value to society, but what right do you have to place lives and livelihoods on the line based on how you feel?

Part of living in a developed country is not having homeless people starving to death outside Walmart. Do you really not believe in society supporting the homeless?
I believe in the homeless supporting themselves. They need to get off the ground, suck it up and get a job to take care of themselves. People that don't even know the homeless personally shouldn't be working harder than the homeless are to fix their own problems. And if it's a sitiation where people just don't wanna hire somebody even though they comply with the minimum requirements, you can sue. I'm sure Trump will agree. Blessed be his name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis
I get the impression you are young.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/29/traumatic-brain-injury-homelessness_n_5227637.html
Many homeless people have traumatic brain injuries. In addition many have preexisting mental illnesses. They can't suck it up and just get jobs. They can't have their daddy give them a "A Small Loan of a Million Dollars?.

You foolishly believe that everyone is in the situation they are in because they deserve it. It's an enticing position to hold. It's fun to be able to yell about how everyone just needs to work harder and suck up everything that comes their way. But it is a viewpoint that conflicts with reality.

http://www.veteransinc.org/about-us/statistics/
"Approx. 33% of homeless males in the U.S. are veterans."

You tell me. Are these veterans just lazy bums? Do you want them to die off because they no longer contribute?

Well, they use to be needed. Now they are not. We have no ue for them anymore so they should be allowed to go to a hospital, and be gently and painlessly put to sleep. I see nothing wrong with that. To be honest, most homeless people probably wish they were dead because roaming the streets with no where to really go, digging in the trash cans for food and sleeping under benches is a whole lot more degrading than accepting the fact that you simply cannot meet the minimum requirements for any job anymore and should voluntarily check into a hospital to be euthanized.

Now if only hospitals would allow that.
"We have no use for them anymore so kill them"
Literally Hitler. We clearly hold different moral standards so this discussion is pointless.
Guess the elderly should all be put down too then. Sorry Grandma.
Also, no one except the terminally ill and small number of suicidal are going to voluntarily check in to be killed. Go ask a homeless person if they want to be murdered and I'm guessing the vast majority will give an emphatic no.


...Except the difference between Hitler and I is I grew up in a loving family, and don't want people to suffer.


member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
December 31, 2015, 12:12:12 AM
#19
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
Doing WHAT?
Being TV celebrities. "Acting" and what not. That's why I asked how do you determine who is "contributing". You and I might agree that people like Kim and Snooki contribute nothing of value to society, but what right do you have to place lives and livelihoods on the line based on how you feel?

Part of living in a developed country is not having homeless people starving to death outside Walmart. Do you really not believe in society supporting the homeless?
I believe in the homeless supporting themselves. They need to get off the ground, suck it up and get a job to take care of themselves. People that don't even know the homeless personally shouldn't be working harder than the homeless are to fix their own problems. And if it's a sitiation where people just don't wanna hire somebody even though they comply with the minimum requirements, you can sue. I'm sure Trump will agree. Blessed be his name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis
I get the impression you are young.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/29/traumatic-brain-injury-homelessness_n_5227637.html
Many homeless people have traumatic brain injuries. In addition many have preexisting mental illnesses. They can't suck it up and just get jobs. They can't have their daddy give them a "A Small Loan of a Million Dollars?.

You foolishly believe that everyone is in the situation they are in because they deserve it. It's an enticing position to hold. It's fun to be able to yell about how everyone just needs to work harder and suck up everything that comes their way. But it is a viewpoint that conflicts with reality.

http://www.veteransinc.org/about-us/statistics/
"Approx. 33% of homeless males in the U.S. are veterans."

You tell me. Are these veterans just lazy bums? Do you want them to die off because they no longer contribute?

Well, they use to be needed. Now they are not. We have no ue for them anymore so they should be allowed to go to a hospital, and be gently and painlessly put to sleep. I see nothing wrong with that. To be honest, most homeless people probably wish they were dead because roaming the streets with no where to really go, digging in the trash cans for food and sleeping under benches is a whole lot more degrading than accepting the fact that you simply cannot meet the minimum requirements for any job anymore and should voluntarily check into a hospital to be euthanized.

Now if only hospitals would allow that.
"We have no use for them anymore so kill them"
Literally Hitler. We clearly hold different moral standards so this discussion is pointless.
Guess the elderly should all be put down too then. Sorry Grandma.
Also, no one except the terminally ill and small number of suicidal are going to voluntarily check in to be killed. Go ask a homeless person if they want to be murdered and I'm guessing the vast majority will give an emphatic no.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 31, 2015, 12:05:39 AM
#18
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
Doing WHAT?
Being TV celebrities. "Acting" and what not. That's why I asked how do you determine who is "contributing". You and I might agree that people like Kim and Snooki contribute nothing of value to society, but what right do you have to place lives and livelihoods on the line based on how you feel?

Part of living in a developed country is not having homeless people starving to death outside Walmart. Do you really not believe in society supporting the homeless?
I believe in the homeless supporting themselves. They need to get off the ground, suck it up and get a job to take care of themselves. People that don't even know the homeless personally shouldn't be working harder than the homeless are to fix their own problems. And if it's a sitiation where people just don't wanna hire somebody even though they comply with the minimum requirements, you can sue. I'm sure Trump will agree. Blessed be his name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis
I get the impression you are young.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/29/traumatic-brain-injury-homelessness_n_5227637.html
Many homeless people have traumatic brain injuries. In addition many have preexisting mental illnesses. They can't suck it up and just get jobs. They can't have their daddy give them a "A Small Loan of a Million Dollars”.

You foolishly believe that everyone is in the situation they are in because they deserve it. It's an enticing position to hold. It's fun to be able to yell about how everyone just needs to work harder and suck up everything that comes their way. But it is a viewpoint that conflicts with reality.

http://www.veteransinc.org/about-us/statistics/
"Approx. 33% of homeless males in the U.S. are veterans."

You tell me. Are these veterans just lazy bums? Do you want them to die off because they no longer contribute?

Well, they use to be needed. Now they are not. Nothing lasts forever. We have no use for them anymore so they should be allowed to go to a hospital, and be gently and painlessly put to sleep. I see nothing wrong with that. To be honest, most homeless people probably wish they were dead because roaming the streets with no where to really go, digging in the trash cans for food and sleeping under benches is a whole lot more degrading than accepting the fact that you simply cannot meet the minimum requirements for any job anymore and should voluntarily check into a hospital to be euthanized.


Now if only hospitals would allow that.
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
December 30, 2015, 11:58:47 PM
#17
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
Doing WHAT?
Being TV celebrities. "Acting" and what not. That's why I asked how do you determine who is "contributing". You and I might agree that people like Kim and Snooki contribute nothing of value to society, but what right do you have to place lives and livelihoods on the line based on how you feel?

Part of living in a developed country is not having homeless people starving to death outside Walmart. Do you really not believe in society supporting the homeless?
I believe in the homeless supporting themselves. They need to get off the ground, suck it up and get a job to take care of themselves. People that don't even know the homeless personally shouldn't be working harder than the homeless are to fix their own problems. And if it's a sitiation where people just don't wanna hire somebody even though they comply with the minimum requirements, you can sue. I'm sure Trump will agree. Blessed be his name.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Just-world_hypothesis
I get the impression you are young.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/04/29/traumatic-brain-injury-homelessness_n_5227637.html
Many homeless people have traumatic brain injuries. In addition many have preexisting mental illnesses. They can't suck it up and just get jobs. They can't have their daddy give them a "A Small Loan of a Million Dollars”.

You foolishly believe that everyone is in the situation they are in because they deserve it. It's an enticing position to hold. It's fun to be able to yell about how everyone just needs to work harder and suck up everything that comes their way. But it is a viewpoint that conflicts with reality.

http://www.veteransinc.org/about-us/statistics/
"Approx. 33% of homeless males in the U.S. are veterans."

You tell me. Are these veterans just lazy bums? Do you want them to die off because they no longer contribute?
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 30, 2015, 11:49:26 PM
#16
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
Doing WHAT?
Being TV celebrities. "Acting" and what not. That's why I asked how do you determine who is "contributing". You and I might agree that people like Kim and Snooki contribute nothing of value to society, but what right do you have to place lives and livelihoods on the line based on how you feel?

Part of living in a developed country is not having homeless people starving to death outside Walmart. Do you really not believe in society supporting the homeless?
I believe in the homeless supporting themselves. They need to get off the ground, suck it up and get a job to take care of themselves. People that don't even know the homeless personally shouldn't be working harder than the homeless are to fix their own problems. And if it's a situation where people just don't wanna hire somebody even though they comply with the minimum requirements, you can sue. I'm sure Trump will agree. Blessed be his name. Also, those two ladies do not contribute anything necessary. They're dead weight. If they died, nobody important would care. Trump certainly wouldn't. The only people that'd care would be the Instagram girls that copy the kardashians' every single move.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 30, 2015, 11:46:40 PM
#15
A lot of people however doesnt have the opportunity to work... I think you're being cruel to those people here  Undecided
How do they not have the opportunity to work? Tell me please. Anyone can go out and get a job. Even if it's a minimum wage job, it's a job and you will be respected for contributing to society in a way that we need you to.
full member
Activity: 211
Merit: 100
December 30, 2015, 11:44:20 PM
#14
A lot of people however doesnt have the opportunity to work... I think you're being cruel to those people here  Undecided
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
December 30, 2015, 11:42:42 PM
#13
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
Doing WHAT?
Being TV celebrities. "Acting" and what not. That's why I asked how do you determine who is "contributing". You and I might agree that people like Kim and Snooki contribute nothing of value to society, but what right do you have to place lives and livelihoods on the line based on how you feel?

Part of living in a developed country is not having homeless people starving to death outside Walmart. Do you really not believe in society supporting the homeless?
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 30, 2015, 11:33:50 PM
#12
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
Doing WHAT?
member
Activity: 70
Merit: 10
December 30, 2015, 11:29:19 PM
#11
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Snooki and Kim Kardashian are both employed.
hero member
Activity: 518
Merit: 500
December 30, 2015, 11:17:46 PM
#10
Roll Eyes And how exactly would we determine who is "contributing"?
By finding out who has a JOB.
Pages:
Jump to: