The government should intervene (help) when people can't pay their bills.
"Liberals" or Democrats tend to believe that the government should be active in economics. "Conservatives" or Republicans tend to believe that the government should not get involved in economics.
Yes it should be taught
Side Score: 20
|
 |
No, laissez-faire (hands-off)
Side Score: 15
|
|
|
|
|
4
points
1
point
The goverment should help "some" people who are having a struggle. no that do not mean if someone just being lazy and not trying to get up and get a job to take care of theres, that they should get help. Simply cause they have the ability to do something. When on the other hand you have some people who cant take care of them selfs or hold down theres. thats how i feel.. and yes there are good and bad people out there. you just gotta watch out and be aware. Side: Yes it should be taught
1
point
1
point
Yes because some businesses raise the peoples bills by 100 or 200 dollars sometimes and then they cant pay their bills. Only reason why I say they should is because of that, other than that they shouldn't but when they get their bills raised for no reason, then yes they should help them. Side: Yes it should be taught
I think that the government should help people who can't pay bills under certain circumstances. I feel that if a person is not able to pay their bills then they should have a legitimate reason. This could range from people of old age to the disabled. Side: Yes it should be taught
1
point
The Government should intervene (help) when people cant pay their bills because we are the government people and if we can't get a job or we are in some type of trouble then they should at least try to help us get a job or just pay one bill that want turn off maybe the lights or water because you never know if that person have small kids in the home that have medical problems Side: Yes it should be taught
1
point
Yes i believe it should be taught because some people are not stable or physically stable to work and pay their own bills. Then with everything so high i feel that elders and the people unable to work should be taking care of far as bills and debt. Side: Yes it should be taught
|
4
points
2
points
I'm really in the middle when it comes to this argument, but I lean more towards "No." I'm indecisive about this topic because while I do believe the government should SOMEWHAT act as a crutch when people hit ROCK BOTTOM (aka have NO other options), I don't believe in people using government help as an easy way out. That's why the unemployment rate is as low as it is. It's not that there aren't job opportunities out there, people just want to be lazy and have their government provide for them. Let's keep in mind that the government get money from the working citizens who pay taxes. Forgive me if I'm not to fond of my money going to a bunch of bums who REFUSE to work for something and just want things handed down to them. Side: No, laissez-faire (hands-off)
1
point
the reaso the government is in debt is because they give away to much money if people arnt looking for a job then they shouldnt get and help at all if someone gets laid off and are activlly looking for a job then yes they should be able to recieve benifts until the are employed again Side: No, laissez-faire (hands-off)
1
point
The government should not interfere in a grown women or mans life if they do not ask for it. If they ask for the help and want it then, yea go ahead and offer some sort of help. But if a family does not ask for the governments help then the government should worry about there own problems and bills. Side: No, laissez-faire (hands-off)
1
point
1
point
I think the government should help when people cant pay their bills. In some cases i feel as if some people abuse the government. So therefore i think they should really invest in the ones that truly need the help. Not everyone that need help get help because of the ones that abuse it. Side: No, laissez-faire (hands-off)
|
