Greeting from Dr. Seuss [Design]

Prev: Somewhat OT: What can break on a cell phone?
Next: Strange idea..

From: Jim Thompson on 11 Jul 2010 13:22

From: dagmargoodboat on 11 Jul 2010 21:46

On Jul 11, 12:22 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...(a)On-
My-Web-Site.com> wrote:
> Greeting from Dr. Seuss...
>
> http://www.godlikeproductions.com/forum1/message1111192/pg1

Priceless.

From the comments:
"Show me on the doll where Uncle Sam touched you."

--
Cheers,
James Arthur

From: Joel Koltner on 11 Jul 2010 22:04

<dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:67345a88-08bd-44d5-978b-e22e3031c1ee(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>From the comments:
> "Show me on the doll where Uncle Sam touched you."

:-)

Don't you think the captioned photo a few posts above that one is a little
disingenuous? If the guy is homeless, presumably if he has *any* phone, it's
going to be a cell phone, I don't think it's a Blackberry anyway (looks more
like a Palm Treo) -- and even if it were, Blackberries these days are usually
<$100 anyway with a contract, and how in the world do they know what service
plan he has? -- It could easily be a $10/mo plan.

Heck, I'm happy he's spending whatever income he does have a on a cell phone
rather than, e.g., cable TV -- at least the phone goes a lot further towards
helping him get a job than the later.

I guess the basic "disconnect" I have is that I don't think it should require
having absolutely *zero* disposable income to still qualify for *some*
government assistance.

---Joel

From: dagmargoodboat on 12 Jul 2010 15:18

On Jul 11, 9:04 pm, "Joel Koltner" <zapwireDASHgro...(a)yahoo.com>
wrote:
> <dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
>
> news:67345a88-08bd-44d5-978b-e22e3031c1ee(a)i31g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
>
> >From the comments:
> > "Show me on the doll where Uncle Sam touched you."
>
> :-)
>
> Don't you think the captioned photo a few posts above that one is a little
> disingenuous? If the guy is homeless, presumably if he has *any* phone, it's
> going to be a cell phone, I don't think it's a Blackberry anyway (looks more
> like a Palm Treo) -- and even if it were, Blackberries these days are usually
> <$100 anyway with a contract, and how in the world do they know what service
> plan he has? -- It could easily be a $10/mo plan.

Aren't Crackberries fitted with full keyboards, bristling with
buttons?

> Heck, I'm happy he's spending whatever income he does have a on a cell phone
> rather than, e.g., cable TV -- at least the phone goes a lot further towards
> helping him get a job than the later.
>
> I guess the basic "disconnect" I have is that I don't think it should require
> having absolutely *zero* disposable income to still qualify for *some*
> government assistance.

I don't mind a homeless guy having a cell phone--all the homeless guys
I know have them. It is sort of telling, though, if they've got
better phones than I do. This guy did.

I think that's what bugged people about that photo.

Oh, and a minor point--government has no money but that which they
have taken from someone. So let's clarify that to say

"[income level] to qualify for *some* government assistance"

is to speak about setting an income threshold below which someone has
to drop, and thereupon compelling citizens to support him.

Could be true--the spirit of it--but let's not lose sight of what
we're talking about: force, on the one hand, and an incentive to
poverty on the other. Is that always a good thing?

--
Cheers,
James Arthur

From: Joel Koltner on 12 Jul 2010 16:00

<dagmargoodboat(a)yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:4dd7c2f1-aa58-4152-90b8-89f358a98291(a)z10g2000yqb.googlegroups.com...
> Aren't Crackberries fitted with full keyboards, bristling with
> buttons?

Yes, but so are many other models today as well.

> I don't mind a homeless guy having a cell phone--all the homeless guys
> I know have them. It is sort of telling, though, if they've got
> better phones than I do. This guy did.

Yeah, I see what you mean... although without getting a good look at the
phone, I can't really say if it is a reasonably new, fancy, expensive model --
or something like a Palm Treo 600, an older model that would cost <$50 (...yet
not too many years ago even a very basic "just makes calls" phone without a
camera, big screen, the Internet, etc. cost far more than that!)

> I think that's what bugged people about that photo.

Fair enough...

> Oh, and a minor point--government has no money but that which they
> have taken from someone. So let's clarify that to say
>
> "[income level] to qualify for *some* government assistance"
>
> is to speak about setting an income threshold below which someone has
> to drop, and thereupon compelling citizens to support him.

Yes, agreed -- any "government assistance" is really just legally-compelled
assistance from one's fellow citizens (and sometimes non-citizens -- some of
those illegal immigrants are paying taxes too :-) ). People of all political
persuasions naturally tend to start "spinning" and "sugar coating" the
particular terms used -- or similarly venturing into using perjorative times
to describe things they don't like.

> Could be true--the spirit of it--but let's not lose sight of what
> we're talking about: force, on the one hand, and an incentive to
> poverty on the other. Is that always a good thing?

Not at all; it's a very difficult balancing act, determining when providing
someone with additional welfare will tend to make them less likely rather than
more likely to become a productive citizen in the long-term. One person might
reasonably view a soup kitchen/homeless shelter as an "incentive to poverty"
whereas another can reasonably view it as a means by which an individual can
save up enough money (not having to purchase food or shelter) to put
themselves through school and get a good-paying, productive job. I know some
people think liberals want a large welfare class since it does effectively
give the government more power, but personally I think that's a pretty cynical
view and that very, very liberals truly desire it.

---Joel

| Next | Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5
Prev: Somewhat OT: What can break on a cell phone?
Next: Strange idea..