Source: Palm Springs Desert Sun.
One of the risks of democracy is that sooner or later special interests figure out how to vote the public purse into their own pockets. This story is an example of that.
It is an example of something more, as well: It is an example of the kind of perversity that attends end-of-empire moments in history.
Consider the irony. In a world where sexual reality is subjective, does it not make sense for there to be a civil rights lobby that channels government funds (uniquely) to sexual non-conformists, to help them pay their rent?
Of such things is justice made.
Tidewater News and Opinion Forum 
Discrimination on the basis of sex is unlawful. This clearly discriminates against cisgender citizens.
Of course, government has no business providing an income to anyone. But any time we tolerate the expansion of government, it will be abused. The only real solution is to rigidly keep government in its limits.
LikeLike
“Discrimination on the basis of sex is unlawful. This clearly discriminates against cisgender citizens.”
Do you bother to think before bloviating? This is nonsense given the facts of this story. Hopefully you would not have written something this dumb if you had actually read it?
Follow the logic of your rant – A social welfare charity seeking grant money to support to unwed mothers is “unlawful?” What about the boy scouts? “Unlawful?” Age discrimination is unlawful. That must mean a social welfare charity helping only old people is “unlawful” too.
LikeLiked by 1 person
“Of course, government has no business providing an income to anyone”
I hope you understand that this is purely a matter of opinion and an anachronistic opinion at that.
In any case, that dog has already left the kennel. We all know that there is a dog’s breakfast of subsidies, payments and supports to help people maintain safe and healthy lives. You and your wife probably enjoy the benefits of some of those programs.
Universal Basic Income is seen by many analysts as possibly being a more effective and less expensive way to achieve the same goals as that dog’s breakfast. These pilot programs in Arizona seem a reasonable and prudent way to test that hypothesis.
LikeLiked by 1 person
It isn’t a Universal Basic Income, it is mob theft.
LikeLike
You say the same thing about taxes.
Which means your bloviating is in a word, bupkis.
LikeLike
No, it is simply true.
If you took my money by force to give it to another person, that would be robbery, Assembling a mob of 51% does not change what it is.
“When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men living together in society, they create for themselves in the course of time a legal system that authorizes it and a moral code that glorifies it.” Frderic Bastiat
LikeLike
We already know your childish and anachronistic opinions about what living in a modern organized society entails. Time and again you have referred to government spending on things you do not personally approve of as “theft.” Since you ignore what words mean (“theft” for example) it is pointless to discuss with you how best to keep our society safe and functional. But, hey, thanks for sharing again.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Bastiat anticipated you 170 years ago.
LikeLike
“Bastiat anticipated you 170 years ago.”
Yes. I was aware of that when I chose the word “anachronistic” to describe your opinions.
anachronistic : “belonging or appropriate to an earlier period, especially so as to seem conspicuously old-fashioned.”
LikeLiked by 1 person
I understand why you provided this story to this forum. All of you people are inordinately interested in stories about gender issues. And that’s fine. Different strokes for different folks.
However, there is no excuse for distorting the story presented in the link you provide. You emphasize in the re-telling that these “sexual non-conformists” are “uniquely” getting funds to pay the rent. That is simply not true. You left out the context which is made very clear in the article. . .
“The $200,000 allocation would pay DAP and Queer Works staff to put together an application for a share of the $35 million the state has budgeted to provide grants for entities looking to set up guaranteed income programs around the state.”
The state is investigating guaranteed income programs as a more effective and less expensive way to provide an economic safety net for struggling people. The state has invited social welfare organizations of every stripe to submit grant applications. This money discussed in the story is to help local groups tap into that approved state budget, not to “pay the rent” of anybody.
One final point of order – in my opinion, referring to people dealing with gender issues – both psychological and physical – as “sexual non-conformists” is both inaccurate and disrespectful. And if they band together to advance their interests in the public square, who are you to refer to their efforts as an example of “perversity” that does not make sense?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Ain’t it awful when EVERYONE gets a fair shake and those who don’t like them get their panties in a wad?
LikeLiked by 1 person
How is providing public funds to trans people not available to others in similar circumstances a fair shake?
LikeLike
Uh, did you read the story? Any and all social welfare organizations are invited to submit grant applications to receive funds from the state. These two groups apparently sought help from the city in preparing a grant application. As could any other group with serious intent to participate in the state program. What do you see that is unfair in these facts?
LikeLiked by 1 person
Absolutely, maybe even worse, only those is similar circumstances who are covered by a special interest group will be considered.
LikeLike
So, you read the story and still make such dumb accusations? Okay. I tried to give you a way to get the egg off your face but you seem happy to leave it.
“Absolutely, maybe even worse, only those is similar circumstances who are covered by a special interest group will be considered.”
More nonsense. As I understand it from actually reading the story, any and all social welfare groups providing help to various categories of people are welcome to apply for these grants to further their work of aiding the less fortunate. Where is the “special interest group” in that?
LikeLiked by 1 person
It is available to ALL, INCLUDING trans people. Your idea of a fair shake seems to be only people YOU approve of personally.
LikeLike
RE: “This money discussed in the story is to help local groups tap into that approved state budget, not to ‘pay the rent’ of anybody.”
Nope. The money discussed in the story is “$200,000 [provided] to two local organizations that are aiming to launch a pilot basic income program that would provide money to transgender and non-binary residents.”
RE: “who are you to refer to their efforts as an example of ‘perversity’ that does not make sense?”
I am someone who believes — like Plato — that democracy enables corruption.
LikeLike
Nope?
The city is not funding rent. They are funding a grant application so that some local people can set up a pilot program under the existing state budget. These pilot programs are NOT “uniquely” for “sexual non-conformists.”
Oh, you are like Plato? Who knew?
But given the absence of an all-knowing and all just Philosopher King, Constitutional democracy still seems to be the best form of government as Winston Churchill famously put it in 1947. . .
“Many forms of Government have been tried and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”
And, by the way, the fascist government of your dreams is far more prone to “corruption” than any Constitutional democracy. Just look at Putin’s Russia if you have any doubt.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “These pilot programs are NOT ‘uniquely’ for ‘sexual non-conformists.'”
The pilot program the story reports IS.
RE: “Constitutional democracy still seems to be the best form of government as Winston Churchill famously put it in 1947. . .”
Churchill reprises Plato when he notes, “Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government.” Churchill, of course, would include a republic in his definition of democracy. But this is why the quotation has pith. In Platonic terms, a republic is ruled by an elected aristocracy. As an aristocrat himself, Churchill must have enjoyed his subtle joke very much.
LikeLike
You leap from a supposition about Churchill’s definition of democracy (“it would include a republic”) to the fact that the word “republic” is in the title of Plato’s book to conclude that Churchill was slyly referring to rule by aristocrats such as himself when he extolled democracy.
I do not think so.
Winston Churchill was a master of the English language. He would not be confused in the same way you were by not knowing that the word “republic” does not imply any particular form of government but only that a country is not a hereditary monarchy. He most certainly would not include Plato’s Republic as a form of democracy. He knew very well that it is more a model for fascism and than it is for democracy.
LikeLiked by 2 people
RE: “You leap from a supposition about Churchill’s definition of democracy (“it would include a republic”) to the fact that the word “republic” is in the title of Plato’s book to conclude that Churchill was slyly referring to rule by aristocrats such as himself when he extolled democracy.”
ROTFLMAO.
LikeLike
ROTFLMAO.
Go ahead and laugh.
It is what I did when I was able to decipher the insane dots you were trying to connect in order to prove that when Churchill was extolling “democracy” he really (and secretly) meant his praise for “aristocracy.” Now THAT was funny.
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is weirdly disgusting. Weird in that why do men dressed as women need free income for being perverts. Disgusting in that some wackos are seriously considering giving free income to perverted men dressed as women for no other reason than being perverts. You can’t make this stuff up.
LikeLike
You psychological analysis is, as usual, hate filled and idiotic.
The only perversion I see here is your constant whining about people who don’t live or love the way you do.
LikeLike
I calls em like I sees em. Factual…
LikeLike
Your “facts” are rarely FACTUAL… And I calls ’em thata way every single time.
LikeLiked by 1 person