4 ms·

I wasn't talking about those people, was that not clear? I wrote because you were being either sarcastic or snarky or chronically compassionate. There are sca

I wasn't talking about those people, was that not clear? I wrote because you were being either sarcastic or snarky or chronically compassionate. There are scam artists that stitch the rich tapestry of welfare programs together to make a living. You might choose to look the other way, out of compassion, whereas I choose to look straight at it and call it theft, out of compassion. I am being compassionate (tough love). You are being compassionate (empathy). Both of our voices are important in this discussion. I actually don't believe you have to sacrifice your belief system to acknowledge there are fraudsters in the system who are a drain on society. Everything I have read about SSD says the fraudulent claims are anywhere between 1% and 25% of the total. I'm willing to accept that as few as 1% of claims are fraudulent, but even 1% would be 106000 out of 10.6 million (2011 numbers), and that's still a ton of fraud just in that one benefit.

mikeash 9y ago
I was talking about those people. Was that not clear? I was being sarcastic because I was replying to a person who said that avoiding poverty was simple, all you have to do is get a job. I don't see what any of your comment has to do with this.
- EdSharkey 9y ago
  You appreciate only your side of this debate. Whereas I appreciate both. My comment has to do with one-sidedness.
  - mikeash 9y ago
    This is an interesting tactic: try to forcibly shift the conversation in a completely different direction, and then criticize the other person when they don't follow. I can't say it's working, but it's not a bad attempt.
    - EdSharkey 9y ago
      Tactic, pfft. I never downvoted you even though you started out with useless sarcasm. You didn't launch with name calling as your peers so often do. But now you're skating on thin ice with this useless negativity. Can't we have a conversation anymore? Try getting involved by making an argument next time and bolster your philosophy rather than throwing shade on others.

mikeash 9y ago

I was talking about those people. Was that not clear? I was being sarcastic because I was replying to a person who said that avoiding poverty was simple, all you have to do is get a job. I don't see what any of your comment has to do with this.

EdSharkey 9y ago
You appreciate only your side of this debate. Whereas I appreciate both. My comment has to do with one-sidedness.
- mikeash 9y ago
  This is an interesting tactic: try to forcibly shift the conversation in a completely different direction, and then criticize the other person when they don't follow. I can't say it's working, but it's not a bad attempt.
  - EdSharkey 9y ago
    Tactic, pfft. I never downvoted you even though you started out with useless sarcasm. You didn't launch with name calling as your peers so often do. But now you're skating on thin ice with this useless negativity. Can't we have a conversation anymore? Try getting involved by making an argument next time and bolster your philosophy rather than throwing shade on others.