Lisa Benson by Lisa Benson

Lisa Benson

Comments (38) (Please sign in to comment)

  1. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, about 2 years ago

    The Dems have figured out that if they can make more Americans part-timers and thus poor, they can guarantee future generations of Americans dependent on government handouts.
    And we already know how those people vote.

  2. braindead08

    braindead08 GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    @ConserveGov

    “And we already know how those people vote.”
    -
    Gosh, if only we could somehow keep those people from voting…

  3. ConserveGov

    ConserveGov said, about 2 years ago

    @braindead08

    No, they have the right to vote just like any other American.
    What we need to do is to give these people the opportunities to lift themselves out of poverty and to reject the Democrat mantra of government being the answer to their problems.

  4. Respectful Troll

    Respectful Troll said, about 2 years ago

    @ConserveGov

    Except for the jab at Dems in general, I agree with your second comment entirely.
    Rand Paul recently said congress was full of ‘dinosaurs’ with big hearts and small brains.
    The big hearts want to help people raise themselves out of poverty and have a chance at the American dream. The small brains, on both sides of the aisle, don’t know how to accomplish this while at the same time promoting themselves so they can keep their jobs in DC and get better ones when they leave office.
    I agree that gov’t is not THE answer to the problems, but it is ONE of the MANY answers to which both parties and those with the money to be job creators must provide.
    I really liked your reply to braindead, except for the jab at Dems. That was just gratuitous and argumentative since both parties contribute to the problems.
    Respectfully,
    C.

  5. greyolddave

    greyolddave said, about 2 years ago

    Its those “job creators” we keep hearing about. They all know that they can’t make serious money paying full time wages to full time employees. So they divide up the work in small pieces to keep costs down. We all approve of that by going to their fast food shops and all. The republican talkers act like these are all republicans but there are democrats in that group too. Keep up the good work guys.

  6. neatslob

    neatslob said, about 2 years ago

    Except the conservative idea of how to best help people is to not help them at all.

  7. STAN

    STAN GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    The conservative idea is to help people help themselves, not keeping them in welfare bondage.

    The current welfare system keeps people in poverty discourages them from helping themselves.

  8. narrowminded

    narrowminded said, about 2 years ago

    Why do people need help? Why can’t people be self reliant? I believe that folks rarely need aide, that the solution resides in each of us. If I am self reliant then I can help others out of my abundance. Govn. limits my ability to prosper so my freedom to help others is limited.
    Conservatives believe in helping others after they have exhausted their own avenues of solution. We believe individuals who are unable to be productive, self reliant, responsible citizens are extremely rare. We believe, more often than not, that Govn. impedes the individuals opportunity to prosper.
    This accusation that Conservatives are uncaring and hateful is hurtful and dishonest at best, an outright lie at worst and is pure political propaganda.

  9. SpicyNacho

    SpicyNacho GoComics PRO Member said, about 2 years ago

    The ACA will drive up costs for business, unless they are exempted by President Obama. Most business’ can’t absorb that huge expense and have several options. They could raise their prices, but if their competition is already part time based or goes to part time base employment they can’t do that. They could reduce the number of employees in total and spread the work around. They could also convert full time people to part time (less than 30 hours). Most businesses that I know would rather have the full time people because there is less turnover and a more stable base of employees to make the business run smoother.

    Big Corporations are going to make up the additional cost, but most of the job creators (small business) are going to have to determine if it is worth it to stay in business if they have to absorb the additional costs. The only reason this is a Dem/Rep issue is because it was passed with only Dem support. Really it is basic economics. This should be called the “jobs killing bill” or “get me to single payer quicker bill” not ACA. The C stands for Control not Care.

  10. furnituremaker

    furnituremaker said, about 2 years ago

    Flattener, that makes no logical sense at all…can you explain?

  11. Darren Blair

    Darren Blair said, about 2 years ago

    part-time (less than 20 hours a week) would be 9 – 1, 5 days a week, or less.
    []
    9 – 2, 5 days a week, is 25 hours, which is technically full-time under the law.

  12. ivison.bedard

    ivison.bedard said, about 2 years ago

    @ConserveGov

    Maybe, it has more to do with making sure we (the slaves) have enough to survive but not enough to advance…out of this taco stand.

  13. denis1112

    denis1112 said, about 2 years ago

    @braindead08

    If the dems could actually keep people who work and pay taxes from voting ,the dems could take all the tax payers have and give it to those that vote for the dems.Except their biggest donnors who give millions to the DNC in return for government contracts so that they really are only give tax money to the dems.

  14. Tax Man

    Tax Man said, about 2 years ago

    @braindead08

    That is a good idea. If you only got to vote if you paid taxes, the government would spend our money better.

  15. I Play One On TV

    I Play One On TV said, about 2 years ago

    @narrowminded

    Excellent points. I fully agree.

    A lot of this is perception, but perception is based on facts. As you properly state that it is not the intent of conservatives to keep everyone in poverty, I feel it is not the intent of liberals to create a welfare state. I could be wrong.

    I think most of us would agree that people sometimes get into trouble, whether by making poor decisions, or by just bad luck. These people could use a helping hand until they get on their feet. And I, for one, have no problem helping them.

    On the other hand, this doesn’t mean I want to support that person for the rest of his/her life, nor future generations, as a result of a temporary need for help.

    I believe that was the intent of Mr. Johnson when he created the Great Society. However, he was distracted by the VietNam war, and did not follow through on working out the details, creating some loopholes big enough to drive a supertanker through.

    I would welcome a program where all laws resulting in government assistance—not only to individuals, but corporations and even industries—would be reviewed with an eye to making them last only long enough to create the desired result. Oil companies, for example, are fed billions in government aid while still showing record profits. Welfare is available both for rich and poor, and it is no better for either.

    If you keep feeding the pigeons, the pigeons will continue to come back for food. Until you stop feeding them, they will not look for food on their own.

    And I’m often called a liberal. Can we stop relying on broad, blanket stereotypes?

  16. Load the rest of the comments (23).
Calvin and Hobbes 30th Anniversary