Eric Takabayashi wrote:
> Kevin Gowen wrote:
>
>> Eric Takabayashi wrote:
.
>>> This woman is apparently one of those many people, almost always
>>> women, I've known who thinks they are entitled to receive hundreds
>>> of thousands, perhaps even millions of yen, and enjoy a vacation of
>>> up
>>> to 330 days (perhaps even traveling and shopping abroad), because
>>> they've paid a few hundred yen a month in unemployment insurance,
>>
>> Starting to understand why I hate entitlement programs?
>
> No, because this woman is not a victim. If she were denied employment
> opportunities for being a woman, or "too old", like my wife
> explicitly has been (and other women I know continue to experience)
> despite her education and years of relevant experience, as opposed to
> being simply lazy or selfish, she would deserve to receive the money
> during those times they cannot find work.

Yes, since she (I presume) paid into the system, she deserves it. Of course,
she only deserves it for a limited time.

> You mean entitlement programs like those which benefited (only) males
> and whites or white male property owners, or explicitly EXcluded
> women or blacks, contributing to much of the inequality existing
> today?

Sure. I don't like any entitlement programs. Of course, the commentary you
quote below is so ridiculously slanted that I cannot believe you are wasting
my time with it. Here's one example of its many flaws:

"When President Bush weighed in with the Supreme Court against the
University of Michigan’s affirmative action policy, he was acting within
this long tradition of the federal government promoting the advancement of
white Americans. There has been no legal challenge to Michigan’s preference
for “legacy” applicants (children of alumni), or to the preference given
to low-income white students. Only the boost to qualified applicants of
color was attacked."

Has it occurred to this goofy bitch why there has been no legal challenge to
legacy/low-income preferences? Could it be because the Constitution doesn't
apply to either of them? The Constitution does apply to racial preferences.

She also contradicts herself. She whines about preferences to low-income
white students above, but then says:
"What would it take to eliminate the racial wealth gap? Race-based
affirmative action in college admissions, hiring, and promotion is just one
of many elements needed to assist all low-income Americans to build basic
assets."

So, she does care about low-income folks, but only if they aren't white. And
of course, her argument has one glaring, fatal flow that she does not even
touch. If the federal government has a "yea whites!" policy of promoting the
advancement of whites, how does she account for the fact that Oriental
Americans have a higher net worth than whites? Same for education. Why is
this alleged federal pro-whites policy keeping down blacks but not
Orientals? Could it be...cultural? I don't see Orientals committing a
disproportionate amount of crime, having 2/3 of their children out of
wedlock, or listening to music that talks about penises and gold knives.

> http://www.commondreams.org/views03/0625-02.htm

[snip]

Eric, please don't do this when replying to me. Just post the link and quote
a teaser paragraph or two.

>> I know of a woman,
>> divorced with one child, who is now living with a man whom she
>> appears to love very much. Guess what her stated reason for not
>> marrying the man is.
>
> Welfare?

Yes. This welfare program is called the Earned Income Tax Credit. She plans
to use her check this year to put in a pool.

> If so, recall the actual nature or state of welfare recipients as
> cited by Pangas, as opposed to Reagan's publicized fictions.

Actually, it was Reagan who expanded the EITC.

>>> while other people even in a small place like Fukuyama, like another
>>> woman I know, are only allowed to have ONE discretionary holiday per
>>> year at Boon. This other woman was told this was the first and last
>>> time she would be able to have such a day off.
>>
>> What's Boon? Was it an annual company practice of bestowing a nice
>> thing (boon) upon an employee?
>
> It's Obon, sent through the automated spell check.

I know. I was simply being humorous.

-- 
Kevin Gowen
"When I'm president, we'll do executive orders to overcome any wrong
thing the Supreme Court does tomorrow or any other day." Dick Gephardt
(D-MO), presidential candidate