Originally Posted by secretsquirrel
The biggest fallacy the hateful Republicans (not all Republicans, just the hateful ones) ever pushed was that people using these programs don't want to work. But we know thats not true. When there are an abundance of jobs, the amount of people on these programs go down considerably.
Yes, but the number does not drop down to zero. Fact is, there are some people who do abuse the system of entitlements. Not 100% of everyone who is currently unemployed is doing absolutely everything possible to find a new job. Some, not all, but some of the people using these programs really dont want to work.
I assume nobody is claiming the abuse rate is zero, because that would be monumentally naive. I have no sympathy for those people, and hopefully you dont either. If you really think that stating this unpleasant fact about human nature makes me hateful, then so be it.
Like it or not, there are some people who truly believe that it's the governments job to equalize the outcomes of individuals personal decisions. Those are the people who Romney was talking about. I dont agree they represent 47% of the population, but I dont think it is 0% either. Regardless of your political stripe, it is hard to dispute his assertion that there is probably nothing he can do or say to get them to vote for him anyways. That nugget is the kind of statement of absolute truth you dont often hear from politicians.
Either way, even if someone really WANTS to work, sometimes the horrific economic climate makes that next to impossible (CNN has an ongoing series about some motivated, long-term unemployed people who have literally sent out hundreds of job applications over the course of months or years and still cant find anything). Given that sad state of affairs, it can create an incentive for some these folks to vote for whoever will continue their entitlement program in the short term. Maybe a real good job is still a year or more away, especially if they are retraining themselves, and in the meantime they still have to eat. This voting incentive, in a perverse way, rewards rather than punishes the stewards of the failed economic programs that are keeping them in this jam in the first place.