Here's a New Development

I have now decided that neither the Republican NOR Democrat Party is worth identifying with.

All they care about are stripping you of your rights (in different areas) and getting elected through whatever means necessary.

Democrats can't talk about budget and fixing it because of things I am sure you're all aware of it.

Republicans can't talk budget because they will counterbalance whatever savings with military increases, and don't forget about Medicare (Part D), Wikipedia is your friend.

Democrats can't talk regulations because it's a constitutional right to own a gun. (takes over a year, over 500 dollars, endless paper work, and even an interview with a criminal investigator in New York (City, if i'm not mistaken) to get a gun.

Neither Democrats nor Republicans can talk about getting back to religion because of their Hypocrisy in such areas as Marital problems.

I don't even want to get started with requiring recycling etc, when there is no law requiring individuals to help another who is dying and they can do something about it but chooses not to. (drowning in your pool in back yard, and neighbor is full well of what's going on but still ignores you)

Personal Privacy? Internet Privacy? In each case the winner depends on two things: The highest bidder and The most Outspoken group.

Bleh. I'm done ranting.

...You kidding me? You're just noticing this? Somebody hasn't had their prescribed daily dose of Bill Hicks, I can see.

Okay? I'm kind of confused, but I think I'm going to stick with the fact that I'm a democrat.

Join the club. I've been unaffiliated since the day I reached voting age.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rorschach

...You kidding me? You're just noticing this? Somebody hasn't had their prescribed daily dose of Bill Hicks, I can see.

---

Why is it that I love you so much and I don't even know you, you just registered. :phonegonk:

teek's not the only one getting flustered.

i like this kid.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rob Oplawar

Join the club. I've been unaffiliated since the day I reached voting age.

---

Where are da T - Shirts?

I personally think that the overwhelming majority of Australian politicians should not be responsible for a pet rock let alone the running of a country, the only person I truly WANT to see in charge is myself since I'm actually in touch with the world more than most of them

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

Where are da T - Shirts?

---

Right here, pumpkin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TeeKup

Why is it that I love you so much and I don't even know you, you just registered. :phonegonk:

---

I'm laughing at all this attention. Shame it won't last.

You are now me 1 year ago. feels good doesn't it? Non-affiliation is the best choice. Wise man follows no extremes.

Yeah the best thing to do is do what is smart and accomplishes your goals.

In my case my goals (for society) are to increase the average education levels, decrease the average crime levels, foster an interactive and less passive society, and allow for individual innovation to determine one's fate.

This path is most easily and stably reached using fiscal socialism and (according to statistics) judicial liberalism.

This is why democracy limited at voting simply doesn't work... you need to be active -- email your MP, Governor, or other representative with your demands... and state what you wish to accomplish.

Ron Paul ftw.

I disagree with what you say, moderator with a terribly annoying to type name. I believe that socialism has a dulling effect on society's intellect. Part of being an intelligent human being is being able to support yourself, without the assistance of a higher power (referring to government). With socialism, the government takes a more active role in regulating the way we live. When (for any reason) that government is taken away, we are all left staring at the sky like snakes in a cage, waiting for master to throw us a mouse.

This is all just my theory of course. I just believe that all people should be self sufficient. It shouldn't take a government or a god to make us behave. But then I guess that's just being pretentious.

I HATE people who are so one-sided and think that anything related to the opposite party is completely wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICEE

It shouldn't take a government or a god to make us behave. But then I guess that's just being pretentious.

---

I find that ironic considering that the government has to declare the wars for its people, and the people have to declare the wars for their god. Not that I give a fuck about having wars... shit, it makes for great television and a whole lot of interesting stories.

I understand that governments have the obligation to protect its citizenry and people try to police their creed's moral boundaries, but just once I'd like someone to admit that they're completely full of shit and that their practical objective is really second banana to getting thier jollies out of the unfortunate consequences of war while they've got the opportunity and the comfort of being in a position that allows them to do so. Similarly to what I said just above. :eyesroll:

Everyone feels it, everyone knows it, everyone accepts it, but no one talks about it. Now that's what I call being pretentious.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phopojijo

Yeah the best thing to do is do what is smart and accomplishes your goals.

In my case my goals (for society) are to increase the average education levels, decrease the average crime levels, foster an interactive and less passive society, and allow for individual innovation to determine one's fate.

This path is most easily and stably reached using fiscal socialism and (according to statistics) judicial liberalism.

This is why democracy limited at voting simply doesn't work... you need to be active -- email your MP, Governor, or other representative with your demands... and state what you wish to accomplish.

---

If you make a political party, I'll join.

Nah Phop. I don't care. I want two things: Term limits on ALL gvt. employees and a simple, easy to understand, flat tax rate. If anything happens in gvt. that I want, those 2 items would be it.

I couldn't care less about anything else.

What i want out of government is pretty plain and simple, a governing body that serves the peoples best interests not insists the people serve the political bodies best interests.
Im not sure how many people have looked into british politics as of late but all thats been in the news for the past month or so is how politicians have been abusing a system called a expenses claim, where politicians claim "expenses" on things ranging from simple household items upto a full blown house mortage, their claiming tax payer money to pay for their second homes.
There are many people who have only just enough income to rent houses let alone have a £xxx,xxx mortage.
The current prime minister Gordon Brown yesterday admitted he is not very good with politics but said he would not step down untill he got pushed down basicly.
The house of commons speaker stepped down today from his position and from politics completely, the home secretary has announced she will step down soon, there are many politicians stepping down because they cannot handle the heat they have caused.

So as i said, what i want from government is for them to work for the peoples best interests, improving public services working on new workable legislations that will improve the lives of the populartion as a whole not just those in politics, afterall it is the population who pays their wages.

I don't understand why anyone feels they need to identify with a PARTY. Why can't people view their own needs and their own community's needs and vote from that point of view rather than conforming to every single policy a few politicians agree on?

I just feel government needs to get out of peoples lives. Let us live it the way we want to live our lives. This country was founded on the belief of small government and I believe it needs to stay that way. More problems arise the bigger government is.

Power is always abused and there is nothing we can do to stop that other than by limiting powers.

THIS ISNT FREEDOM, THIS IS MADNESS!!!
THIS IS AMERICAAAA!!!!!!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rorschach

I find that ironic considering that the government has to declare the wars for its people, and the people have to declare the wars for their god. Not that I give a fuck about having wars... shit, it makes for great television and a whole lot of interesting stories.

I understand that governments have the obligation to protect its citizenry and people try to police their creed's moral boundaries, but just once I'd like someone to admit that they're completely full of shit and that their practical objective is really second banana to getting thier jollies out of the unfortunate consequences of war while they've got the opportunity and the comfort of being in a position that allows them to do so. Similarly to what I said just above. :eyesroll:

Everyone feels it, everyone knows it, everyone accepts it, but no one talks about it. Now that's what I call being pretentious.

---

I am now on the "liking this kid" band wagon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICEE

I am now on the "liking this kid" band wagon

---

Yeah... Just one thing about Rorsach's post, which at this point many will probably decide i'm just nitpicking.

When the founders of the government created the (Republic) the idea was that Congress would act as the will of the people as well as do what feels right. The only problem is that they probably never imagined this day and age when we literally could have at the very least half the population voting within a reasonable time period thanks to digitizing everything.

Now it's Congress does what it thinks is best for itself while the people are left to do what's best for the country. It doesn't matter what party. The only reason no one's changed the reason to the PEOPLE deciding their taxes and who to go to war with, is because no one is man enough to do it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ICEE

I disagree with what you say, moderator with a terribly annoying to type name. I believe that socialism has a dulling effect on society's intellect. Part of being an intelligent human being is being able to support yourself, without the assistance of a higher power (referring to government). With socialism, the government takes a more active role in regulating the way we live. When (for any reason) that government is taken away, we are all left staring at the sky like snakes in a cage, waiting for master to throw us a mouse.

This is all just my theory of course. I just believe that all people should be self sufficient. It shouldn't take a government or a god to make us behave. But then I guess that's just being pretentious.

---

Point 1) My name is very fun to say... which actually is why I chose it.

Point 2) You are confused about what actual socialism is (at least used in the context of social programs...).

Socialism is not about regulating the way we live... it's about granting the fundamentals to determine how we wish to live to anyone and everyone.

Socialism isn't getting a cheque in the mail and doing as the government tells you... despite what the Cold War "taught" you... it's taking care of what can cause you to fail that's not your control... letting you succeed in what is your control.

Tomorrow's world's greatest writer could die today of cancer.
Tomorrow's world's greatest surgeon could be too far in debt to go to medschool.
Tomorrow's world's greatest physicist could have slipped through the cracks at school.

The path to getting the most innovation in the world is paved with diversity in opinions and intellectual styles. In fact higher education and quality of life *increases* active participation... not numbs it. What numbs it is believing that your potential in life is less than what it is simply because you were not given the education, health, or financial ability to reach your personal potential.

... it also prevents the private sector for imposing its own regulations upon you... and those people you simply cannot vote out of office.

I don't believe that it works that way, as nice as it may sound. For the greatest surgeon of tomorrow to succeed, he has to want to succeed, and to make himself do it. without strong evidence that he is going to follow through and do what it takes to achieve his potential, I don't believe my tax dollars should go to helping him. The fact of the matter is that people are lazy. What makes them change their ways is competition, the chance to be better than someone else. It may be an ugly, spiteful truth, but it is the truth. What qualifies our being "better" than someone else in this society is money. If the surgeon of tomorrow has not got the bright future of making ridiculous amounts of cash, why should he strive for that future? At our most basic level, this is how humankind thinks. Its simple economics. Of course, there is always going to be the backlash. The writer of tomorrow may not be able to scrounge up the cash to pay the surgeon of tomorrow's hefty bill to remove his cancer, and for this type of instance I suppose some moderate government program may be acceptable, but for the most part I do not believe that socialistic methods are ever going to be the best course.

... and the people who will be lazy will settle into the sloppy seconds jobs and will have done so according to no influence other than their own.

Giving everyone the tools to succeed means that everyone will need to be more competitive to get into the "successful" jobs...

... there are two differences:

1) The people who "fail" deserve to have failed.
2) There's infrastructure for people to succeed in non-conventional ways... paving the way for new business models or even industries that otherwise wouldn't exist.

This debate could rage on into oblivion I suppose. I think I will stop now though, there really is no point. If there was ever a way for one person to quell another person's opinions with their own, I think humanity would have found it by now. I tip my cap to a well formed arguement

I agree, the democrats are too far right for me


the republicans are just insane


~i got opinions~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phopojijo

Point 1) My name is very fun to say... which actually is why I chose it.

Point 2) You are confused about what actual socialism is (at least used in the context of social programs...).

Socialism is not about regulating the way we live... it's about granting the fundamentals to determine how we wish to live to anyone and everyone.

Socialism isn't getting a cheque in the mail and doing as the government tells you... despite what the Cold War "taught" you... it's taking care of what can cause you to fail that's not your control... letting you succeed in what is your control.

Tomorrow's world's greatest writer could die today of cancer.
Tomorrow's world's greatest surgeon could be too far in debt to go to medschool.
Tomorrow's world's greatest physicist could have slipped through the cracks at school.

The path to getting the most innovation in the world is paved with diversity in opinions and intellectual styles. In fact higher education and quality of life *increases* active participation... not numbs it. What numbs it is believing that your potential in life is less than what it is simply because you were not given the education, health, or financial ability to reach your personal potential.

... it also prevents the private sector for imposing its own regulations upon you... and those people you simply cannot vote out of office.

---

you know i'd consider turning gay for you if you ask me.
Take not of this post kiddies because after the fiasco of socialism and all that crap that was spouted during the last election This is some information you seriously need to pick up.

The crap they said about socialism is on par with the shit they said about Obama being a terrorist with links to terrorist ORGANISATIONS AND HE"S GUNNA BLOW UP THE WORLD, and all that other curtain walled crap they pulled.

Socialism allows those who do no work never to feel the pang of not doing the work, and it makes it harder for those who DO do the work to actually succeed.

It doesn't give people the chance to succeed any more than regular capitalism. In fact, if you look at Canada and Britain (Socialist) to America (Capitalist) you will see that America has more people have succeeded than anywhere else in the world. It's just simple facts.

A motivated person is going to succeed no matter what. It's all in the mindset of the person.

Oh, and I can't convince you about Socialism unless I can convince you that Human Nature is such that we are lazy at heart. You can't convince ICEE that Socialism is best unless you can convince him that people won't take advantage of being able to be lazy.

What is this rabble? >:U

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

Socialism allows those who do no work never to feel the pang of not doing the work, and it makes it harder for those who DO do the work to actually succeed.

Sounds like you're talking about welfare. Welfare exists in my partially Socialist nation of Canada, as well as your Capitalist nation of America. And frankly, it's just the proper thing to do. You want to see stuff get hard for "people who do the work to succeed"? Take it away. Then watch the increase in violent crimes and robberies infest your neighbourhood, because they have no other option.

It doesn't give people the chance to succeed any more than regular capitalism. In fact, if you look at Canada and Britain (Socialist) to America (Capitalist) you will see that America has more people have succeeded than anywhere else in the world. It's just simple facts.

Of course you have more success stories, you have more people. Hell, the State of California has more people in it than the entire country of Canada. And what does that even mean, "has more people that have succeeded"? What census gets handed out asking "have you succeeded?"

A motivated person is going to succeed no matter what. It's all in the mindset of the person.

That's not true. That's impossible.

Oh, and I can't convince you about Socialism unless I can convince you that Human Nature is such that we are lazy at heart. You can't convince ICEE that Socialism is best unless you can convince him that people won't take advantage of being able to be lazy.

Yeah, people will take advantage of it. But you shouldn't be angry at Socialism. It isn't Socialism's fault. Socialism can be implemented properly, given the right way of doing it, such as with healthcare and education, as well as with government aid money, though even I admit, that system needs to be reformed to limit abuse.

---

The truth! In bold!

Frankly, Socialism is great. Not hardcore, full-on Socialism, mind you, but a peanut Socialist centre wrapped in a chocolatey Capitalist shell. Y'know, like Canada or the U.S. =__= I'm not even sure why this was brought up...

Mmm... Peanut M&M's of Government...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

A motivated person is going to succeed no matter what. It's all in the mindset of the person.

---

That's not true.

Get a crappy math program at your school and see how many physicists comes out the other end.

In my graduating class we had 3 physics degrees. (Myself, Aaron {who went on to grad school I believe} and Joey)... how often do you see that happening?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phopojijo

That's not true.

Get a crappy math program at your school and see how many physicists comes out the other end.

In my graduating class we had 3 physics degrees. (Myself, Aaron {who went on to grad school I believe} and Joey)... how often do you see that happening?

---

If you're motivated and in love with what you do you can succeed despite the odds. Heck, look at Einstein. His math teachers dismissed him/wrote him off completely and look what we got out of him.

I'm not saying the success rate's going to be high, but I'm talking about specific types of individuals here not clumps of people.

Also, what's with the Tags at the bottom of the thread?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

I'm not saying the success rate's going to be high

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

A motivated person is going to succeed no matter what.

---

=_______=

We get what you're saying, but you're making out Socialism to be a baby-killer, and Capitalism to be a miracle drug.

What they're saying isn't true is that motivation by itself is enough. It takes more than that, and a lot of what it takes more if is out of anyone's control.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

If you're motivated and in love with what you do you can succeed despite the odds. Heck, look at Einstein. His math teachers dismissed him/wrote him off completely and look what we got out of him.

I'm not saying the success rate's going to be high, but I'm talking about specific types of individuals here not clumps of people.

Also, what's with the Tags at the bottom of the thread?

---

And specific types of individuals develop immunity to HIV.

You can point to outliers -- but they had an opportunity to capitalize on. (The hookers' case it was genetics)

You're neglecting:

1) Some people may not have ANY opportunity, at all.
2) A lot of people cannot succeed because their environment "taught" them they cannot succeed. The Government needs to change that environment by socialized education and social programs that prevent people from getting into debt because their gallbladder explodes... otherwise it will perpetuate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phopojijo

And specific types of individuals develop immunity to HIV.

You can point to outliers -- but they had an opportunity to capitalize on. (The hookers' case it was genetics)

You're neglecting:

1) Some people may not have ANY opportunity, at all.
2) A lot of people cannot succeed because their environment "taught" them they cannot succeed. The Government needs to change that environment by socialized education and social programs that prevent people from getting into debt because their gallbladder explodes... otherwise it will perpetuate.

---

1) Thanks for that Article. It was quite mind-opening.
2) The Article stated that it was possible you develop immunity to it by repeated exposure, not genetics, however I am sure that genetics played a large role. (/offtopic)

3) Why would I believe in that government if, in Washington DC, Chicago, Cleveland, Memphis, Milwaukee, and Oakland, under those same principles, less than 50% of the students there graduate?

Genetic HIV Resistance Deciphered

Yeah I forgot to quote the second article.

*************

I don't understand what you're getting at... if you're somehow stating that "Blue states" have less than 50% of students graduate...

... well...

It's kinda well documented that nations with higher levels of socialism have higher education levels.

See page 6... smaller bar = better. Canada and the UK kinda -- well -- their average rankings added together still beats the USA. The source is UNICEF sooo yeah.

I think that's a sign that you need to embrace Socialism a bit and buff up your education levels.

Well I'm Canadian so I'm not trying to move to a socialist state -- since everything I've been talking about has been implemented here albeit it could be better. I've pretty much succeeded in life due to the social programs that were created.

The problem is I want the world to be on the path where everyone has their own free will whether to succeed or fail -- indiscriminate of their race, gender, or income level.

This world has practical applications... problems will be solved much easier because there's so many more... and different... views and opinions working to solve it...

... and it has the nice application that you know if someone failed -- it simply was not because they had no choice BUT to fail.

You may like the USA how it is now... but that kind-of defeats the purpose of "Earning what you deserve" since it depends heavily on who and where you were born to.

Quote:

---

Overall, these data show that some countries do a very much better job than others in containing educational disadvantage. A child starting school in Canada, Finland, or Korea, for example, has both a higher probability of reaching a given level of educational achievement and a lower probability of falling well below the average than a child starting school in Denmark, Germany, Greece, Hungary, or the United States.

---

And that's the harsh facts about your nation.

So as I said before...

Socialism is the tool to provide maximum accessibility to the Free and Open market.

@OP: Political parties had been a no no in public view since the founding fathers. We should go back to the first 2 election. No party!!!!(political party) So you're basically over 200 years behind.

Hmm... I'm now interested in that HIV article. I'll read it after I finish my essay on William J. "Dollar Bill" Jefferson for my US government class.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by InnerGoat

I agree, the democrats are too far right for me


the republicans are just insane


~i got opinions~

---

^

I'm against economic imperialism, but it's never even acknowledged in mainstream political discussion. I'm appalled at the way the corporate system has been structured over the last fifty years to perpetuate world inequalities. CIA activities threaten the sovereignty of legitimate leaders the world over, and the way that World Bank loans are funneled directly back to American companies is simply diabolical.

Yet, these things are drowned out in the din of a superficial culture that seems to erode our minds.

...

stop the drug war, it kills more people than drugs ever could

oh, open relations with Cuba, corn syrup is gross

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dwood

Canada and Britain (Socialist)

---

lol http://i29.photobucket.com/albums/c2...ot-allears.gif

you where sooooo close Dwood,
failed at the last hurdle.

take note of some of the opinions you've heard here and check it out in a little more depth, and ya never know ya might just learn something :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ßðÐŻÍ££å

you where sooooo close Dwood,
failed at the last hurdle.

take note of some of the opinions you've heard here and check it out in a little more depth, and ya never know ya might just learn something :)

---

tbqh I would be fine with socialism if we had flat taxes at reasonable rates. None of this "adjustable" with income on more than two levels crap.

I just care that you don't penalize people for being successful.

You're not penalizing someone for being successful. More success = more money like usual

(unless you're right near the cusp of a bracket -- which would be fairer if it was some sort of smooth function but -- well -- taxes are hard enough for people to do right now... and the effect is that the rich ends up donating to some cause whatever money would push them into the lower bracket anyway so... meh...)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phopojijo

You're not penalizing someone for being successful. More success = more money like usual

---

I'm going to say this- Yes, you are punishing someone for being successful, by making them pay more of what they earn through (generally) hard work and patience.

Quote:

---

(unless you're right near the cusp of a bracket -- which would be fairer if it was some sort of smooth function but -- well -- taxes are hard enough for people to do right now... and the effect is that the rich ends up donating to some cause whatever money would push them into the lower bracket anyway so... meh...)

---

Which is my point. And with a high up to (what, 35%?) when you hit that top bracket within at least 30,000 dollars, you might as well be making the amount of money in the bracket lower than you.

A flat tax/lower taxes would make more money for America than a graduated tax/raising taxes.

http://www.house.gov/jec/fiscal/tx-g...t/reagtxct.htm

see but what your not understanding is that with the current system in place wether it's social status, wealth or available facilities many, many, people are born into room with a glass ceiling.

You might say they have the exact same rights as everybody else, but they dont have the facilities to fully utilize them.
as phopo said, shitty math teacher = shitty math students in 99% of all cases. Why do you think really good teachers are paid a fuck load to teach at exclusive schools? you know the schools that kids it disadvantaged backrounds cannot afford to attend and therefore garner the same chance as the lucky white boy with rich parents.
Socialism in a minimalist state Fixes this by allowing the chance for everyone to succeed, and therefore increasing the competition within the system and improving results across the board.

now the kid from the bad neighbourhood has a chance to take down the rich lucky white boy.
because if they had the same intelligence, the same teacher and learnt the same methods and practices, the kid that is more determined will win.
and if it happens to be the poor kid beats the rich kid, Suck shit for the rich kid because the poor fella EARNED IT.

Too bad the rich lucky white boy's father was taxed nearly half of his income and between paying two mortgages and losing his job, the rich lucky white boy's family had to start rationing their food and now live in a house the size of the average living room while the rich lucky white boy cobbles together enough to finally fuck off back to a rented place where he can do what he wants again.

Yeah, redundancy sucks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by rossmum

Too bad the rich lucky white boy's father was taxed nearly half of his income and between paying two mortgages and losing his job, the rich lucky white boy's family had to start rationing their food and now live in a house the size of the average living room while the rich lucky white boy cobbles together enough to finally fuck off back to a rented place where he can do what he wants again.

Yeah, redundancy sucks.

---

I'd rebuttal but that doesn't make any sense what so ever...

If you're saying that the rich father went into debt trying to support the private school funding and the high taxes together... he wouldn't need to send his kids to a private school if the public school systems weren't designed to churn out blue collar.

If you're saying the tax rates will be so high a rich person cannot sustain himself you're delusional... he would have more spendable income than anyone poorer than him (ignoring the bracket overlap which frankly only exists because people can't do math well enough to do any more complicated taxes than we have now)... so if he's suffering to make end's meat -- the poor people would be literally dead on the streets.

If you're saying it's impossible to sustain a socialized necessity society at all -- you haven't been to Canada.

So there's 3 possible interpretations of your post and why they're all wrong.

Dad had a good, well-paying job. We had a house in Canada which we were renting out, and a house here which we were living in. After selling the house in Canada and thus paying off the one here, we decided to build on extensions; we also bought a farm. At that point, we could handle it, but only just; about half his income was going towards taxes. He then lost his job and can't get any form of financial support at all. He's nearly 60 and the only job Centrelink could offer him was as a brickie's APPRENTICE, about two hours' drive from the farm. Meanwhile, I had to blow every last cent I ever had, including what my grandfather left to me, to try and support myself while I was going to uni. That ran out pretty fast so my parents had to try and keep me afloat too, because I couldn't get a job and once again, I could not get ANYTHING from Centrelink because my father's now NON-EXISTENT income was 'too high'. My parents can barely afford a fucking thing and the only reason I'm not out on the streets is because I now get a carer's allowance - at the expense of my fucking life. I'm 19 and I'm stuck looking after my disabled grandmother all day, every day just to keep a roof over my head.

I'd like to know where all that bloody tax money went, because it sure as hell didn't go to me when I needed it, and nor did it go to any of my friends who needed it worse than me. It's a small wonder I'm getting anything now, because the first time I applied for a carer's allowance they turned me down. Apparently crippled and prone to careless behaviour and dangerous blood clots at any moment isn't disabled enough.

By the way, I was born in Edmonton and I spent the majority of my education in public schools.

Which is why there needs to be more (access to) social programs for people like you.

Exactly. I'm not arguing against the system, I'm arguing against the way it's employed over here. Most things are means-tested and the testing is immensely stupid. To qualify as independent you have to live fully independently of your parents for 18 months; I barely made two on my own money, and despite the fact barely any of dad's wages were actually going into his pocket, they still grouped him with the sorts who wipe their arses with hundred dollar notes. The fact my parents were over five hours away apparently had no bearing on how independent I was (while I was living off of my own savings). I'd heard tales about Centrelink doing nearly anything they could to dissuade people from lodging applications for benefits, and they turned out to be true. Masses of forms, huge delays, strict hours, and so on... it took about two months to finally get a letter back saying they'd denied my carer's allowance - and they could see full well I had no money, no assets I could sell and live off of, and my family wasn't much better off. The family GP happened to know exactly which boxes to tick, though, so after we got his second opinion (first time was the occupational therapist), they reluctantly started paying up.

Pretty sad state of affairs when someone in that bad a state of health just isn't sick enough to need full-time care, or when someone with no money and no prospect of getting a job which will pay enough to live off of isn't poor enough.

Yeah... which is why I started off stating that simply voting isn't enough... you need to push your MPs, Governors, etc.

You need to keep your government representatives honest.

((Good luck man))