I know that a human being ought to be an end in itself, and not merely a means to an end. But that knowledge is wasted on me.
I look at a homeless person, and I just don't care. I understand that most have a mental condition that causes them to make the decisions they have made. I support only the social programmes designed to attack the cause of homelessness. Treating the problem with charity and hand-outs reminds me too much of parasitism. Bayview and Sheppard is my neighborhood, my home. Take your panhandling somewhere else.
I look at the latest gang-related homicide, and I applaud the culling of the criminal herd. Let the gangbangers kill each other. They do society a service. Only when innocents are harmed should we so much as lift a finger to stop the killing. Look at the photos of the shooters and victims of last year's homicides and tell me again why the police shouldn't profile racially.
I consider the American Dream of loan-sharking on a massive level, and I laugh at the innovative thinking that broke the mold. Loan money to people who have no hope of paying, and then profit by charging interest. Now, do it to entire countries on a global level. Since when is it not your fault that you spend far more than you make? Why, in some countries, you can't get a credit card if you don't have a job. Those countries aren't as powerful as the US for a reason.
I see hypocrisy in the things that are good. Throwing money at a problem won't make it go away. In some cases, it helps reduce the suffering, but in most cases, it merely massages away the pity in your selfish little heart. Your money really won't get to that starving child in Africa. You've only made sure that the flavour of the month in charge can afford more bullets for his soldiers. Plus, you get some taxes back in the process - awsome!
I embrace our way of life, know that I can make a difference, but would rather serve the self before the other. I won't leave the comforts of home. I will not get off my ass to help eradicate poverty. If I slum it, it's because I'm on vacation, and I'm interested in your national dish. I confess. I can fly away and be in Africa in a month, helping the Red Cross in some Godforsaken refugee camp, but I won't. And neither will you. The difference is that I admit that I'm selfish, and when we both get to hell, I'll know why I'm there.
I admire the ones who sell their souls for ridiculous amounts of money, because of the sheer weight of their achievements.
More than that, I admire the one who can give it up and fly away, to make the world a better place.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
20 comments:
i...agree with your ultimate point. we are indeed a society of hypocrites.
i cannot agree with your generalizations about homeless people, hahaha
the fact is, not all homeless people are there by choice. that's....just a fact. i actually think you might want to narrow your bias to perhaps just panhandlers. they are a subset of homeless people that i think largely deserves most of your wrath.
there is however an entire (and i would argue majority) of homeless people that don't need, want, or expect your pity.
those are the people i like to help. not the crack addict shaking a can on the corner.
yes, I want all the gangs to kill each other too...so we won't have any more gangs left. too bad they have such freakin bad aim. Go dustin, it will be your gift to society to teach them how to aim properly...
Re: Homeless
Yes, there exist a large majority of homeless people that don't need, want or expect my pity. Then why do they congregate in the cities, where the social programmes they 'need' are located? Without the pity that they don't 'need or want,' they'd be dead, or forced into a productive role in society. Fertilizer, by the way, is considered a productive role in my books. The point is, they're still parasites that live off my tax dollars, which could be better used elsewhere. If they can't respect the laws and rules that we as a society have agreed to live by, then there's no reason that they should be a part of our society. Regardless, the 'point' that I was hinting at was that the 'help' that most people give does more harm than good. If you want to help them, figure out how to get them back on their meds and in therapy. Otherwise, like the sign says in the Toronto Metropolitan Zoo, "please don't feed the animals."
Re: Loans
The trick about giving out loans to people who couldn't possibly pay them back - they'll be paying you more money than you ever lent them in the first place. In fact, they'll pay you their whole life. It's like an extra tax. On the global scale, you can secure their resources. For example, if Afghanistan can't pay the US back in dollars, they can pay it back in Oil. The US gets free oil, and Afghanistan gets fuck-all. Initially, the money loaned to the third world countries go straight back to the first world in the form of government contracts. When the third world can't pay back the loan, then the first world will just have to take more favorable contracts for whatever resources remain. Little by little, the third world is driven further into debt, and the first world further into wealth. And, thats why we can't eliminate the debts of other countries. It's like burning cash for no good reason.
Re: Gangs
If I taught gangbangers how to shoot, then I'd be worried for the police.
....i don't know where to begin...
although your points on macro economics are valid, you seem to assume the reason we profit off third world countries is purely fiscal.
it's not that simple. it's cultural and social as well. besides, the US is probably the most indebt nation in the world -- they just don't pay anyone back.
as for homeless people, when's the last time your tax dollars went to a private homeless shelter or soup kitchen? when's the last time Goodwill got a government grant?
how are your tax dollars paying for that help? how are those a strain on your wallet? how are they breaking any laws by accepting help from people who want to help them?
maybe people come to the city to find a job? isn't that a better idea than staying somewhere you know has no work for you?
not to be captain obvious, but i'm going to pull out the over-generalization card on your part for this one....
and about gangs, the police DO racially profile. no one is naive enough to think otherwise, they just don't admit it. should we have something more overt? internment camps maybe? giant yellow star of davids?
you realize if every 16 year old in a gang died today, we'd lose millions of great minds. kids make mistakes. not every mistake deserves to lead to death.
man. it's like ignorance day out here. lets just kick all the minorities out of canada while we're at it because we're taking all the jobs.
Re: US
They don't pay up because they owe the debt to... themselves.
Re: Homeless.
Unfortunately, some homeless shelters are public. Meaning that they're subsidized by the government. Meaning it costs me money. Private shelters, say run by a church, recieve government grants from the City of Toronto to help them operate. My tax dollars are at work in both cases here.
Soup Kitchens should be reserved for poor people who barely scrape by, but who are willing to work. That the bums take advantage of free food, without any return contribution to society is what I'm ranting about. And yes, funded again by the City of Toronto.
I mean, did you just assume that this support structure didn't receive any help whatsoever from the government? Millions of dollars go into 'helping' the homeless, and yet some of them 'don't need or want' my help. Others don't deserve my help. I want to be able to opt out of paying chunks of property tax or perhaps income tax because I can't care less about the homeless.
Sure, it's not against the law to receive help from people. But that's where you're taking things for granted. I never said receiving help was wrong. Vagrancy is against the law. Homeless people, sleeping on my sidewalk, are therefore breaking the law. Tent city was trespassing. That's against the law. Public indecency is against the law. Shitting and pissing in public is against the law. Do I need to keep going, or can you start coming up with ones of your own?
Came to the city to find a job? HAHAHAHAHAHA. When's the last time you saw a homeless person WORKING? Oh, and holding the door open for you at timmies or leaving secret code on the armouries wall doesn't count.
We have the camps already. Driftwood. Look at the way that neighborhood is designed. Keeps us out, keeps them in. Notice how all the really bad areas of the city are built so that the community faces inward instead of outward. I mean, 3 people got shot last night at Jane and Finch (really). I'd say the design works. The Yellow Star. Thankfully, the gangbangers have done that for us. Gang colours. Just not long ago, some teenager got stabbed because he was wearing a hankerchief. Apparently, he didn't know what it meant at his school, he just thought it looked cool.
Right, i agree that not every 16 year old who makes a mistake deserves to die. That decision to straighten out is on them. Until that point comes when they decide it's time to get out, they deserve everything that comes to them.
Don't let the star fool you. There's more to the portugese deportations than what the star selectively chose to write about.
if you guys could continue this debate either here, or on the board, that'd be great. please don't change this to a private debate via email.
i find it too interesting, and quite amusing.
dance puppets, dance!
a large portion of the US debt it owed internally, but the majority is still owed to private holdings. close to a quarter of the total national debt is owed to international foreign sources alone. that's a boatload of money, and it's growing by the day.
i HAVE met homeless people who work. you think it's easy finding a job when you're homeless? you think you can just work oddjobs and afford a place to live off it? they work crap jobs and do their best. doesn't mean they can afford a condo.
some people just have had shitty lives. if you can think of a cure for that, i'm all ears.
i assume though that you have no problem with working homeless people. and you shouldn't. the point is however, that you can't take away those services that they depend on just because a portion of that population takes advantage of it.
you could say that about welfare, or healthcare, but ultimately the pros outweigh the cons.
don't paint all homeless people with the same brush just because of the rotten apples. they're PEOPLE dude. try talking to a few of them. they have stories to tell.
as for gangbangers -- i'd imagine its hard to grow up right when you have no positive influences.
it's too easy to ignore them because they need help and we're unwilling to be concerneed for anyone but ourselves.
it may sound naive to be altruistic, but the fact is in the end you get a lot more out of it than you do for only looking out for number 1.
otherwise, you'd hate canada. you'd be dying to move to the US.
but that doesn't seem to be the case. ever wonder why that is?
dude, if you want to get mad at someone, don't get mad at homeless people. really, what's a bowl of soup gonna set you back anyway? and most of these soup kitchens are charities anyway that get donations from people specifically to feed homeless people.
get mad at those who sit at home all day collecting welfare! like the woman who was boasting to nurses that with this 4th child she was going to have she would be able to collect $60 000 a year from the government! are you kidding me? that's like DOUBLE the canadian median household income!!!
and before you shake your head at another homeless person, think of edmond yu, the U of T med student who got schizophrenia during 2nd year, then first accepted and subsequently refused to take drugs cause they turned him into vegetable. he became a homeless bum and then was shot by toronto police officers on a TTC streetcar.
a little excerpt from an article published in the toronto star 6 years ago on him:
"[his sister] recalls picking him up during one of his day passes from hospital. ``He wanted to go to U of T, and the first place he went was into the medical school, the lecture halls. Even after all these years, it still really moves me. He just walked around the lecture hall, touched the chairs, touched the tables, everything. I knew it really hurt.''
i never attacked your dedication to canada. i was saying that i KNOW you love canada, and as such you have accepted and agreed that the balance, moderation, and compromises that compose our society are the best possible option. you concede this yourself. so moving on....
you seem to infer that only crazy people need help.
you say you're against services that help non-crazy homeless people because they are just handouts, yet you specify that in order to make things work under the poverty line, you're going to be getting free clothes and free showers.
where are these clothes coming from? where are these showers? those sounds suspiciously like handouts to me..... and what if they use a government job search program? does that count as being a parasite?
my comment about pity is true. you think just because a homeless guy is at a soup kitchen, he WANTS to be there? you don't think they never have to swallow their pride? feel a bit of shame?
everyone needs help at one time or another, regardless of whether or not you're mental.
that's just life man. everyone hates that there are those who take advantage of the helpful and charitable. but again, that's life. my entire point has simply been:
you can't paint a whole group of people with broad negative strokes.
that's not even just my opinion, that's just common sense isn't it?? racism? sexism? any sort of bad-ism you can think of?
"all homeless people who aren't crazy are lazy no do-gooders who could not be homeless if they just tried".
i can't agree with you because i've met people who've been trying. who DO work jobs, who ARE educated, and yet do not have a place to live. they're also nice people, who don't really smell all that bad, and have a more positive outlook on life than even i do.
your generalization doesn't account or explain for those people. and as such, i feel those exceptions deserve all the help people choose to give them to get back on their feet.
as for illegal immigrants, from what i can see a lot of them make money -- surprise! -- illegally!
so in my book, that's even worse. i'd rather someone fail honestly than succeed crookedly.
as for the hypocrisy comment, i actually agreed with you. read my first post way at the start. a large portion of CBC christians have their priorities completely out of whack, i'd be the first to point that out. am i guilty? of course i am. does that mean i'll NEVER do anything about it? does that mean i don't HOPE to do something about it? no. but people try. people aspire.
am i saying all christians have a responsibility to finish university and immediately go into social aid? no. that's not what i'm saying. there are other ways to help the world outside of directly supporting toronto's homeless, and in the big picture it's clear there are more than just that one problem to consider.
besides, you admit yourself there are exceptions. people who are in fact "better than you". so then what's your point? that the hypocrites are hypocritical? well yes. yes they are.
that's thing dustin. people who help the homeless aren't better than you. i don't think they are. i bet they don't. and you shouldn't either.
they're just people doing what they're passionate about. i highly doubt a christian homeless aid worker would judge you or say pharmaceuticals is any less valid a vocation. we all have our own paths. that's just the way things are.
i know you're just arguing for the sake of arguing. i can tell in your language that you don't even fully care what you're saying anymore because frankly your reasoning gets continually less logical. and i don't take it personally at all, because to a certain extent i'm doing the same.
all i am saying is that you don't need to deny the fact you have a heart. i KNOW given the right circumstances you'd help a homeless person. so despite all your ranting about social conservatism and sinking and swimming, you understand that people need help sometimes, and you'd offer it in the right circumstance. to me, that fact makes your whole argument moot.
after all, you admit it yourself.
you're a good person.
really.
dude you talk about his "choice" to stop the meds?
wouldn't you "choose" to stop the meds if
a) you're paranoid, so you don't even think you're crazy and,
b) the meds turned you into a walking zombie who couldn't even hold a bowl of soup or control his bowels???
Re: Loans
In the ‘80s, when 3rd world countries took out huge loans from private banks, that money they borrowed was more than the combined assets of the 30 largest banks in America. When those loans were about to default, the US and other countries bailed their assets out by paying the loan payments, rather than having the 3rd world countries default. If those countries defaulted, the US banks would go under, and the US would go under. That massive debt that the US owes? The US borrowed money to pay off someone else’s debt.
Re: Homeless
You suggested that I’d hate Canada if it weren’t for the fact that that I don’t just look out for number one. When you ask me why that isn’t the case, you imply that either 1) I don’t just look out for number one, or 2) I hate Canada. Considering that I’ve been saying that I’m selfish, even the smallest suggestion that 2) might be true is an attack on my dedication to Canada, and just needs to be put down. Really, I do just look out for number one.
That I believe the balance of our society is pretty good has nothing to do with whether or not I care about certain people, who I feel are less valuable to my beloved Canada.
I never inferred that ONLY crazy people need help. I have no problem with those who are trying. I thought that was clear already. Those who try should get handouts. If you need me to specify over and over again which non-crazy homeless-but-trying people I’m talking about, I can. From now on, if they’re not crazy, and not trying, they’re lazy. I’ll label them lazy-homeless, aka parasites.
I’m against services that help parasites. Do I have a plan to stop parasites from taking advantage of my tax-dollars? Nope. It pisses me off when a social worker goes out to give food to a homeless person. Like, wow! They’re so lazy they can’t even line up for it like all the other trying-homeless people. That free room service costs a pretty penny, and I’d appreciate it if the parasites could get up off their asses. The money could be better used in programmes to help the crazy-homeless get his life together.
See, a trying-homeless person isn’t that bad. They’re providing a return contribution to society. Crazies and Lazies don’t. Crazies might be able to with some therapy, but Lazies just shouldn’t be helped. In the prisoner’s dilemma world, Lazies are the cheaters, everyone else is a cooperator.
So I guess homeless people just feel shame all the time. I mean, they live on the street, they require your pity to survive… I suppose if they really cared about shame, they would try to escape the homeless lifestyle. It’s true that everyone needs help at one time or another, but the condition is that they may one day provide help to someone else. It’s a contract. It benefits me, you, and them. That contract is exactly why I don’t just evade taxes, and I’m still serving number 1.
The group I’ve called parasite, I can paint with broad negative strokes. That group I’ve called gangbanger? Them too. I’m racist, sexist, atheist… and I CAN paint with broad negative strokes. I haven’t the slightest problem with that. I accept that there are exceptions to the stereotypes. For the most part, the generalisations really fit well.
I’ve gone over this before. Those people you’ve met, who’ve been trying, working, are educated, but homeless? I don’t believe it for a second. Something is wrong in that formula. If they claim they’re homeless for more than a week, they’re either: 1) not trying, 2) not working, 3) not educated, or 4) not really homeless. In a week, I found a room for $250 a month and $350 a month. Sure, it’s a shitty area, but it’s a home. Low-wage jobs are plentiful, constantly in demand, because nobody wants to work them. Desperate? Join the army. They’ll feed you, house you, pay you and train you. Those people you’ve met? Something’s wrong with them, but they still get help, because they’re contributing members of society. Like I said. I covered that already.
Regardless, I generalised in my last comment because I thought we understood that I was talking about the lazies. Mostly, I was answering the questions in your comment, just like I’m answering them now.
Of course Illegal immigrants make money illegally. They can’t make money any other way because they entered the country illegally. Duh. What’s your point? Oh I see. You’re implying that illegal immigrants get their money criminally, not just illegally. Who’s generalising now? All those low wage jobs I talked about earlier? Guess who’s driving your cab? Pumping your gas? Humping boxes from the Sony warehouse to the delivery truck? Making the “I love Canada” tshirts in the gift shop? Guess who’s willing to work their ass off for less than minimum wage to make it in this country?
”so in my book, that's even worse.” Not in mine. I’d rather have a contributing member of society than a parasite.
Oh yes, people try and people aspire. Token efforts. Just enough so that you sleep well at night. On your bed. In your home. Take all that sammich money and charity and put it towards a cheap suit from goodwill, a motel room for one night, a hearty breakfast, and a newspaper. I came up with that in about 10 seconds, and I’m not even a charitable guy. Oh yeah, but I need to buy a snowboard now, because all the sales are on, now that the season’s over.
Nevermind what Jesus would do I guess. Right, so let’s look at the big picture… nope, nope, I might get shot there. Nope, nope, I might get raped there. Come on! I know atheists who have done more humanitarian work in Afghanistan than the average Chinese Canadian Christian has in the city of Toronto. It’s so easy to help, isn’t it? Can’t you scrape up $7000 for that flight to the Sudan? Surely, you can, if someone paid $20,000 for your University education. Couldn’t you just… borrow the money?
I can’t see how my reasoning is illogical. I worked under the incorrect assumption that you knew what I was referring to, but hopefully I’ve cleared that up a bit. My original post was about how I see things, and how I see myself. All the comments afterwards are just me regurgitating the same things over and over again, sometimes expanding on a point or two. I care about what I’m saying, and I’m not just saying things to prolong an argument. Do I honestly believe we should do nothing to stop gang violence? Absolutely. Do I believe that parasites should be made useful, even going as far as killing them? Sure. I wouldn’t support government action in this respect, but I wouldn’t stop someone from killing a parasite. If bums started disappearing from my streets, I wouldn’t raise any alarms. I wouldn’t help it, but I’d tolerate it for sure.
Unless I were a homeless person myself, I would never help a homeless person. I always give them cigarettes because I know it harms them. It’s sick eh? When I said, “I’m a good person,” I mean it sarcastically. Because really, I’m not.
Re: Ed Yu
I stand by everything I said in my previous comment. It was his choice. He chose badly. I might or might not choose differently, but that would be my choice. You asked me to think about Edmund Yu, and I did. Every person takes responsibility for their own actions. His sister’s memory of him only serves to hammer that point home. Choose wisely, and be prepared to pay the price.
i do. not. understand.
what. you. are. arguing about.
you hate lazy homless people.
i hate lazy homeless people.
alls i am saying is not ALL HOMELESS PEOPLE are lazy.
and you have agreed with that already. so i don't even know what this is about anymore. please enlighten me what you think i don't get?
regarding loans, i'm not even going to get into that. safe to say, you can somehow try to rationalize it, but just look at the numbers through the years. the US is in debt because of irresponsible spending. thats it. bottom line. they have outstanding membership fees at the UN yet are on the security council.
they signed onto NAFTA yet they use WTO rulings as leverage, and disregard them when they go against them.
the US doesn't pay people back because they don't have to. to think otherwise is ignoring the facts.
i think if you could help a "trying" homeless person, given the right situation, you would.
and for the hypocrisy bit, i thought i went over this: I AGREED WITH YOU.
bitch some more about it, what do you want me to say? i'm not defending asian christians. i never did.
i'm simply saying however, you can't possibly think it is every christian's calling to work for the homeless do you? you're not that naive?
all i am saying is that there are always exceptions to your generalizations.
i've LITERALLY said that exact phrase 3 times now in 3 different posts.
if you choose to, you can write another 15 paragraphs about why that isn't the case -- be my guest. i just won't have the slightest clue what the heck you're going on about.
Match my comments up against yours paragraph by paragraph. I merely respond to the questions you've asked and the comments you've stated.
You've said a whole lot MORE than you now claim to have said, and I responded, almost paragraph by paragraph, and I even try to do it in the same order that you've laid it out for me. My 15 paragraphs line up approximately to your 18 or so.
I never said that every Christian's calling is to work for the homeless. When you say things like that, I feel the need to defend my words, and when you say things like that 18 times, I'll have to write 15 paragraphs on why that's not what I said or meant or etc.
From my perspective, all you're doing is skimming my comment, skipping over some important words, and spitting them back at me in such a distorted form that they really can't be called my words any more. And, when you then assign those lies to my name, I feel the need to defend. You've done it several times now, and I'm sure you'll do it again. It's pretty clear that you don't have the slightest clue what the heck I'm going on about.
So, I'm trying my best to clarify whatever it is you don't seem to understand.
Besides, you haven't yet said that exact phrase three times in three different posts. Therefore, you still owe me two.
the US is in debt because of irresponsible spending. Yes. Let's look at what made the US the largest debtor in the world:
1) Vietnam
2)Lyndon Johnson's great society
3) Military spending to keep countries like Germany, France, Britain, Canada from having to fear a conventional war by the Soviet Union.
4) Setting the rules for GATT, and watch other countries cheat.
5) funding the IMF
6) Paying for the majority of UN military missions
7) Bailing out 3rd world countries in the 1980's after they almost defaulted on their massive loans because they depended on their oil revenues to pay the interest.
8) Afghanistan - under the Aegis of the UN.
9) Harry Truman's policy of containment in the early cold war.
10) Kennedy's policy of placing military bases all over the world after the threat of the Cuban missile crisis, which resulted because Khrushchev thought Kennedy was weak.
11)Giving Europe and indirectly CANADA Marshall Plan funds. Yes Canada got Marshall plan funds. the US allowed Marshall Plan money to be spent in Canada. This saved Canada's industry - without it, Canada would have gone into a horrible recession post WWII rather than go into economic boom.
12) Iraq, or Gulf war II.
Other than the last bit there, I don't really see how this is irresponsible spending. To me, it looks like the cost of waging the Cold War - and winning. The United States is the largest debtor in the world not because of a sustained pattern of irresponsible spending, but because it paid the bill for the Cold War. It paid to protect Europe from the 150 divisions deployed along the iron curtain. It paid to contain communism in Asia. Not just in Vietnam, where it failed, but in South Korea, where it succeeded, and in the straits of Taiwan, and Hong Kong. Western Europe exists as a free and democratic society because of the American nuclear deterrant. Period. NATO had 50 divisions lined up against 150 Warsaw pact divisions. Without the massive amounts of money the United States spent on defense, Western Europe could and probabaly would have been overrun in the 1950's, 60's, 70's and 80's. You can argue there was detente in the 70's, but that's only because of nuclear weapons - which cost money. The simple fact is that most of the US debt is defense spending - which at the time was FAR from irresponsible. It allowed the economies of western Europe to rebuild behind the American defense shield. Without that shield, there would have been no 'economic miracle'. So why then shouldn't the Western world forgive THEIR debt? I guess security doesn't cost money.
As for their outstanding fees at the UN and their status on the security council, they're the military arm of the UN. They're a great power. Their security council veto is part of the Charter. If we were to pick countries that deserved vetos, I don't think France would rank as an important world power anymore either. THe point is moot, it's a flaw in the UN charter. If you think that not paying your dues means you shouldn't have a constitutional right, then I guess people who default on their student loan should lose their rights under the charter of rights and freedoms. Please.
As for NAFTA and WTO rulings, they have a point, and Canada's softwood lumber is a loophole. A very legal loophole, but c'mon. If the United States had rediculously low stumpage fees that damaged our softwood lumber industry, we'd be pretty peeved too. It's like someone getting off on a technicality. It's not illegal, but it still leaves a very bad taste in your mouth. It's no wonder the US tries oh so hard to get around that.
The United States has very very good reasons for being the largest debtor in the world. Just because George Bush Jr. practices voodoo ecomomics doesn't mean that the US, throughout its entire economic history has been plagued by irresponsible spending. A VERY large portion of that massive US debt was so that you and I could live in a free world, and not a) a communist one or b) in a nuclear wasteland.
i agree, a lot of their debt was necessary, and i don't take it for granted. but to see my perspective, lets take a look at the post-gulf war 1 time frame -- even though that was a UN sanctioned war and they didn't foot the entire bill for it. i think it's pretty safe to say they haven't had to pay for too many saving the world missions (or cold wars) since 2000. not the expensive kind of war anyways.
in 2000, the us national debt was somewhere around 5.6 trillion. currently it is 8 trillion.
that's like a 33% increase in 6 years. i never stated ALL of their debt was due to wasting money, but i said that through the years they have wasted an awful lot of money.
maybe it's relative, but to me, 3 trillion dollars is a lot of money. so maybe we're doing the apples to oranges thing, i dunno, but that was my original point and i think it's pretty fair. the fact that they're continuing to dig themselves deeper by the billions per day only makes me less sympathetic to their deficit.
anyhow, about dustin's comments, i'm not going to bother because ultimately we agree that there are two types of homeless people -- those that try to improve themselves, and lazy ones.
we agree that the lazy ones are bad.
that was my point all along, and i've said it in every single comment i've posted that overgeneralizations are dumb because non-lazy homeless people DO exist in reality and are not some sort of mythical creature like unicorns and submissive wives.
since dustin agrees with me, i don't know what the point is of continuing, and i feel at this stage that we've misinterpreted each other about as badly as we would a girl explaining her feelings to us, so i'm going to bed.
good night.
What?!? Submissive wives DO exist. They need social progammes though. Broken bones don't heal well without medical attention.
nice dustin . . . and i think i'd have to say i agree with you fully . . .
the good thing about hell is that we will never have to free while smoking our cigars, nor will we have to ever worry about finding a light . . . but then again i dont believe in hell . . . but whatever
the weathers turning nice now, when you wanna smoke something carcenegenic?
as soon as you drag your ass uptown. we'll go to moxie's and bug gemma.
As a complete stranger, if I would guess - Simon is a flaming homosexual, possibly Asian.
My first instinct was to censor that, but I've decided that I'll only censor spam. Bigotry and hate have a place in our world.
Anyway, stranger, you're probably wrong. Just because he's a socialist doesn't mean he's gay.
More than likely, you'll have to say something meaningful to pick a fight.
-d
Post a Comment