The Free Store

[metro]

Interesting....

The Free Store: A Concept for Recessionary Times : TreeHugger

[so1rfan]

erggg... I just threw up in mouth a little.

An art project funded from a grant from the September 11 fund? How is this a statement on greed? It's a statement on waste. A waste of money.

Are the people bringing in items supposed to feel good about donating to this place? Then donate to a real charity! Get a tax break. Or sell your crap at a garage sale and respend the money.

Free is not going to fix our economy.

I just don't get it and I don't care if I am in the minority here. Maybe I missed the point.

[fuzzytoad]

erggg... I just threw up in mouth a little.

An art project funded from a grant from the September 11 fund? How is this a statement on greed? It's a statement on waste. A waste of money.

Are the people bringing in items supposed to feel good about donating to this place? Then donate to a real charity! Get a tax break. Or sell your crap at a garage sale and respend the money.

Free is not going to fix our economy.

I just don't get it and I don't care if I am in the minority here. Maybe I missed the point.

you missed the point


people who have the means to donate to these "free stores" should and MUST donate to them regardless of tax breaks..

that's why removing the tax breaks for donations is a good thing.

if you have the means to help another family, then it's your patriotic duty to do so. you shouldn't have to be rewarded.

if things go the way they should, then *every* person who can donate goods or money to these "free stores" *will*

it may mean that a bunch of families will have to donate at gunpoint, but if they were patriots to begin with, there's no need for forceable donations.

[metro]

I don't think it's a "patriotic" duty as much as a moral or ethical one to donate to those less fortunate.

[GWB]

you missed the point


people who have the means to donate to these "free stores" should and MUST donate to them regardless of tax breaks..

that's why removing the tax breaks for donations is a good thing.

if you have the means to help another family, then it's your patriotic duty to do so. you shouldn't have to be rewarded.

if things go the way they should, then *every* person who can donate goods or money to these "free stores" *will*

it may mean that a bunch of families will have to donate at gunpoint, but if they were patriots to begin with, there's no need for forceable donations.

Good thing you don't believe in guns.

[fuzzytoad]

Good thing you don't believe in guns.

?? I don't?

[so1rfan]

Here's what I don't get:

It is an art project.... OK fine.

It was funded with a grant from the September 11 fund. I have a tough time here, it is an ART PROJECT. Shouldn't the 9/11 funds been used for the victims of 9/11?

If anyone can walk in there and get whatever they want, who does it benefit? If I am going to donate something, I want to make sure someone actually less fortunate is going to benefit.

Oh well, I guess this one is way over my head.

[GWB]

?? I don't?

"What do you suddenly need guns for now anyway? If you're a person who is into guns, wouldn't you already have one? Is there some reason to try and scare people who otherwise had no use for one before into buying one now?"

Seems that way. Look familiar?

[Karried]

If anyone can walk in there and get whatever they want, who does it benefit?

Maybe the person in need?

Consider yourself lucky that you don't understand this concept.

Those who can't clothe their kids with warm jackets or shoes might grasp it.

[fuzzytoad]

"What do you suddenly need guns for now anyway? If you're a person who is into guns, wouldn't you already have one? Is there some reason to try and scare people who otherwise had no use for one before into buying one now?"

Seems that way. Look familiar?

explain how it seems that way? that's from a discussion where another poster was explaining his urge to tell people to hurry up and buy guns.

in what way does my reply say "I don't believe in guns."?

I see them in stores, i see them on the news, i see them on non-fiction television shows, etc..

Furthermore, what does this even have to do with the topic-at-hand??

[GWB]

Furthermore, what does this even have to do with the topic-at-hand??

Maybe it has something to do with your ridiculous comment in this very same thread, "it may mean that a bunch of families will have to donate at gunpoint, but if they were patriots to begin with, there's no need for forceable donations". Anymore questions?

[PennyQuilts]

you missed the point


people who have the means to donate to these "free stores" should and MUST donate to them regardless of tax breaks..

that's why removing the tax breaks for donations is a good thing.

if you have the means to help another family, then it's your patriotic duty to do so. you shouldn't have to be rewarded.

if things go the way they should, then *every* person who can donate goods or money to these "free stores" *will*

it may mean that a bunch of families will have to donate at gunpoint, but if they were patriots to begin with, there's no need for forceable donations.

Gunpoint?

Okay, the sentiment you are expressing is so offensive that you join the two others on ignore. I refuse to waste another second on you.

[Prunepicker]

... it may mean that a bunch of families will have to donate at gunpoint, but
if they were patriots to begin with, there's no need for forceable donations.

That is the most inane thing I've ever read on these threads. It's absolutely
absurd.

[so1rfan]

Maybe the person in need?

Consider yourself lucky that you don't understand this concept.

Those who can't clothe their kids with warm jackets or shoes might grasp it.

But anyone can take whatever they want, regardless of whether they need it or not. They don't know if they cater to anyone in need.

When I donate used clothing, I give it to a group that caters specifically to people in need, that way I am pretty sure that what I donate goes where it is needed the most. I don't just set it by the road and say "free to whoever wants it."

And that still doesn't explain the whole 9/11 funding.

[Prunepicker]

But anyone can take whatever they want, regardless of whether they need
it or not. They don't know if they cater to anyone in need.

I had to read that article a couple of times and it still didn't make sense.
It's apparent that it's something that helps them feel good. This sounds
like the new age garbage I was into in the 60's and 70's. Nothing but feel
good.

When I donate used clothing, I give it to a group that caters specifically to
people in need, that way I am pretty sure that what I donate goes where it
is needed the most. I don't just set it by the road and say "free to whoever
wants it."

That's what everyone should do. Donate where you know it will do someone
some good. We donate to the ROC almost monthly.

And that still doesn't explain the whole 9/11 funding.

That's stupid. Real stupid.

[fuzzytoad]

Gunpoint?

Okay, the sentiment you are expressing is so offensive that you join the two others on ignore. I refuse to waste another second on you.

That is the most inane thing I've ever read on these threads. It's absolutely
absurd.

really?

how so?

all of you right-wing nutjobs pontificate about how you're always "helping" people, but when you are told you are losing Tax breaks for doing so, you clam-up and start talking about how there will be no help for the needy unless some monetary compensation is used to prompt people into donating.

A movement in which people are forced to help those in need *must* be introduced.

It's not fair that those more fortunate than others must only help the less fortunate by means of enticement.

You'll only help someone if you get a tax benefit?? are you kidding??

If you make over 60k per year, you *must* donate at least $10,000 to those who can't earn as much in order for them to survive.

Human beings need each other to survive in this world. There's absolutely no good reason to let a person starve when you can keep it from happening.

If there's a way for our government to make sure that those people who CAN support the less fortunate do so, then it's every patriotic american's duty to not only let the government perform its duty, but to HELP the government to perform its duty.

If that means reporting on neighbors/parents who refuse to help, or who speak badly about the current administration, then so be it..

If that means taking up arms against those who want the poor, unregistered immigrants, or socially unacceptable to wither away, then so be it.

We The People.... not We The Rich

[GWB]

really?

how so?

all of you right-wing nutjobs pontificate about how you're always "helping" people, but when you are told you are losing Tax breaks for doing so, you clam-up and start talking about how there will be no help for the needy unless some monetary compensation is used to prompt people into donating.

A movement in which people are forced to help those in need *must* be introduced.

It's not fair that those more fortunate than others must only help the less fortunate by means of enticement.

You'll only help someone if you get a tax benefit?? are you kidding??

If you make over 60k per year, you *must* donate at least $10,000 to those who can't earn as much in order for them to survive.

Human beings need each other to survive in this world. There's absolutely no good reason to let a person starve when you can keep it from happening.

If there's a way for our government to make sure that those people who CAN support the less fortunate do so, then it's every patriotic american's duty to not only let the government perform its duty, but to HELP the government to perform its duty.

If that means reporting on neighbors/parents who refuse to help, or who speak badly about the current administration, then so be it..

If that means taking up arms against those who want the poor, unregistered immigrants, or socially unacceptable to wither away, then so be it.

We The People.... not We The Rich

Man, you are out of your mind!! I mean that seriously! Do you really think it's the government's role to force people who make over $60k per year to donate at least $10k to the poor, and take up arms against them if they fail to do so? You seriously want people to report to the government anyone who speaks badly about "The One" or his administration? I thought liberals were all about free speech, no? What are you, a communist? Talk about a"nut-job"--unbelievable!

[USG '60]

Now, now, GWB, please stop and think. Most people do believe that it is the gov't's job to rescue people. Our schools have been very successful in promoting the idea. It does not help our side to belittle "good students." You and Prune seem to be hell bent to make "conservatives" seems cruel and cold hearted. You can't influence anyone by making fun of them. I have to assume that you AREN'T actually trying to influence anyone, anyway, you are just expressing anger because our side lost the election. Rise above it and someone might actually pay attention to your underlying message.

[GWB]

Now, now, GWB, please stop and think. Most people do believe that it is the gov't's job to rescue people. Our schools have been very successful in promoting the idea. It does not help our side to belittle "good students." You and Prune seem to be hell bent to make "conservatives" seems cruel and cold hearted. You can't influence anyone by making fun of them. I have to assume that you AREN'T actually trying to influence anyone, anyway, you are just expressing anger because our side lost the election. Rise above it and someone might actually pay attention to your underlying message.

Did you even bother to read what this fuzzyhead said in his/her post? This is all you can come up with? I'm not making fun of this radical leftist, I'm simply pointing out how ridiculous his comments were. My gosh, you said not one word about his/her asinine comment about taking up arms against people who don't think like him. When you decide to get a little more fair and balanced in your criticisms, I'll be glad to have a discussion with you. Totally ignoring the idiotic things fuzzyhead said and focus only how I worded my post makes no sense. Go back an read his/her post then come back and tell me what you think of his/her brilliant socialist ideas demanding that people who earn $60k pay $10k the poor. I stand by what I said. I'm not here to influence radical leftists. People like them, along with fuzzyhead, have no ability to be influenced by logic and common sense.

[Karried]

Now, now, GWB, please stop and think. Most people do believe that it is the gov't's job to rescue people. Our schools have been very successful in promoting the idea. It does not help our side to belittle "good students."

You and Prune seem to be hell bent to make "conservatives" seems cruel and cold hearted. You can't influence anyone by making fun of them. I have to assume that you AREN'T actually trying to influence anyone, anyway, you are just expressing anger because our side lost the election. Rise above it and someone might actually pay attention to your underlying message.

That's the best post I've read since the election began.

[USG '60]

I'm sorry, GW (shortened to a nickname), I guess I just expect (or hope for) higher standards from "our" side. Fuzz was, indeed, WAY out there with that one, for sure. WAAAYYYY out there.

[Prunepicker]

You and Prune seem to be hell bent to make "conservatives" seems cruel
and cold hearted. You can't influence anyone by making fun of them...

you are just expressing anger because our side lost the election...

If being responsible for yourself is cruel and cold hearted, then so be it.

As far as being angry because our side lost is not true by any stretch of
the imagination.

While I make fun of the inexperienced pop culture president who's policies
stink, I have never made fun of, i.e. belittled or demeaned, anyone on
these threads. Attack their message? Yes. Attack them? No. Which is quite
the contrary as to the behavior of the leftists toward anyone who dares to
disagree with them.

[GWB]

I'm sorry, GW (shortened to a nickname), I guess I just expect (or hope for) higher standards from "our" side. Fuzz was, indeed, WAY out there with that one, for sure. WAAAYYYY out there.

Thank you for acknowledging that his comment was out there. I'm sorry to disappoint you with my answer to Fuzzy, but people like him are not persuadable. You know that as well as I do.

I'm still stunned by his comments. Liberals here love to talk about the crazy, right-wing wackos, and yet, they are amazingly silent when their own spews out garbage like Fuzzball does. It's shocking that there are people who actually believe the way he does. Seriously!

[Prunepicker]

... but people like him are not persuadable...

I've think fuzzytoad is a young girl (20's). It's the way the hate is doled out.

[USG '60]

I gotta admit, after reading it yet again, that Fuzzy's thinking is even fuzzier that my leftist friends with some education. Prune, I sorta see what you mean in your assessment. But STILL even though you don't directly insult the "liberal" posters, you give me (at least) the feeling that there is venom in your voice. Maybe it's just me and if so I'm sorry. Ya'll go on now.