Excellent point brought up about it being generational because it certainly can be and is in some instances. Self-respect cannot abide inside those folks IMHO.
The only thing I'd add, Mo, is for us to consider the working poor. Our big Cooperations, for example Wal-Mart, offer such low wages and poor benefits as to cause their employees to get assistance on top of their jobs.
I know you are speaking of what I was raised with. Do SOMETHING! Find a way, get out there and show effort, show some scrap and fight. Not to mention the example that it shows children, seeing mom and/or dad working two jobs to keep the heat on and fruit loops on the breakfast table.
It's like manna from above, thanks lord for the gifts we have received here today......
Call it the musings of a madman if you want, yet the other side of the welfare system really sucks when you find yourself with strikes against you like being white, male and even worse your income is just above that level to qualify for any benefits. But while the shoes and the clothes me and mine wore were mainly hand-me-downs and thrift store specials, those ever well dressed welfare moms with designer cloths and bags and their designer clothed children checking out with carts over-filled with food better than what we ate(can you say beans and pasta?) and they would whip past their credit cards and debit cards to get to the food stamps and assistance cards for child nutrition. Dressed to the max single moms with babies would then take their bounty home to their brand new apartments, later known as the breeding grounds; to feed themselves, their babies and their ex husband or boyfriend that worked and brought home a check no one was suppose to know about the men or their income.
I have never been in the situation that just I had to change jobs, but have seen whole industries dry up and chose to work and get by, because I still think you never get something for nothing and the hidden prices are greater than the gain. A whole industry dried up almost overnight, one day a job and the next not; fine I went back to what I had known only to have the environmentalists with their legislation drive domestic competition out of the country. The government offered training programs and thousands signed up and took them, not me. I was the idiot and just changed careers again, but during this change I did small contract work, I mowed lawns I never said would you like fries with that but I did fry the fires. Anything and everything to keep afloat. I sold off cars and trucks and drove junkers and then relocated half-way across the country.
Now when I go back to "home" all those that took the offer from the government are either back on government programs or went back to the industry that dried up for a decade and came some what back. Because the training lead to jobs that never paid what the industry that died paid.
Dealing with hard times shows the real quality of a person and people and even though it really sucks at times, good people always come through shining and characters of questionable quality get exposed for their near criminal activities.
People in line to buy lottery tickets dressed to the nines having just gotten out of a Lincoln Town car and then follow them to the grocery store and see them whip out their food stamps.
there are a myriad of tasks in any town or city that just aren't getting done because either there is no funding for them or they are so far down the priority list as to be constantly over looked
No work no assistance
And before someone tells me that this is slavery
It isn't
we are talking about people whose Idle lifestyle would be to sit on their tushes until the cows come home
this is not an involuntary state
And anytime they feel that they are being taken advantage of they have an option--
Go get a real job and off assistance
:eusa_clap:
AWESOME IDEA, MO!!
Now, Rocky, how do we go about campaigning to have this brain child put in place?
AND, how do we fix the system so that folks who do, can and are working their tails off can make ends meet without needing assistance?
Krys, you made a point earlier in reference to mine that I neglected to address. I agree with you and had not thought about the points that you raised. I stand corrected. :)
Hahahahahahahaha laughing at myself here. Belle, I had to read your first sentence three times before I realized you weren't saying you were pi$$ed at Abi.
Sorry about that, Linda. I meant to put the "with" in bold hoping the emphasis would come out in the right place, but failed miserably.
Now, Rocky, how do we go about campaigning to have this brain child put in place?
AND, how do we fix the system so that folks who do, can and are working their tails off can make ends meet without needing assistance?
Krys, you made a point earlier in reference to mine that I neglected to address. I agree with you and had not thought about the points that you raised. I stand corrected. :)
Well Belle, first point to make is that this is NOT a new idea.
I remember when I was a kid, my dad told me about Public Works projects that were used to provide work for people who couldn't find work... that conversation took place in the 1960s. And the 1960s was the era of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.
The public works dad was talking about took place, according to him at that time, in the years following the Great Depression (1930s).
Since then, we've had Ronald Reagan usher in Trickle Down economics, aka Supply Side economics. The idea was to cut taxes and reduce regulation ( ) to stimulate private investment, and therefore increase private sector jobs AND wages. The reality was that the idea was the bait but it eventually brought the switch to outsourcing jobs to lower costs (and hence wages) and offshoring jobs (shipping virtually ALL manufacturing to China and many if not virtually all customer service center jobs to India).
I wish it were as simply as initiating a campaign to get the attention of Congress. Unfortunately, it would take so much systemic change to our economic and government systems to even come close these days.
Since then, we've had Ronald Reagan usher in Trickle Down economics, aka Supply Side economics. The idea was to cut taxes and reduce regulation ( ) to stimulate private investment, and therefore increase private sector jobs AND wages. The reality was that the idea was the bait but it eventually brought the switch to outsourcing jobs to lower costs (and hence wages) and offshoring jobs (shipping virtually ALL manufacturing to China and many if not virtually all customer service center jobs to India).
Reducing taxes and regulation should make us more competitive with China and India, not less. Why do you say those things brought about outsourcing and offshoring jobs to other countries?
ok I was a supervisor in a large facility, and sometimes we were forced to hire "day labor" from agencys that had the roll from the welfare .
they stole. they showed up late, they left when they wanted to, they sat all day long. and I mean sat and refused to wrok.
we just couldnt have it! the employees who had to work with them refused to work with them. employees have drug tests to get the job, labor folks no way and they drank and they got high and they sat and they claimed they were one person and really another.. COME ON!
no business wants to be responsible for their showing up to make the already troubled day much worse with their "labor.
No way would I put them on a countyor city property to "work" they will get injured and now be able to SUE the taxpayers .
free legal service for the poor (paid by the tax payers)and they cost the city millions in court fees and legal fees for ONE lawsuit alone.
um NO !!!
they then can sit on the system untill they win or lose the case in court which is years long... NO NO NO.
WE have had two cases going to supreme court in which a woman had 8 children in foster care and now going to jail again pregnate with her 9th child. All are disabled and high needs children.. the jugde ordered her on birth control. it is going up in the courts!! the civil liberties are fighting it tooth and nail.
Im glad I do not want the state to force birth control BUT what is the solution?
you can not make people support their self much less the children they produce.
The primary thing those Reagan era policies brought about was the overwhelming disconnect between wages and the compensation of CEOs. In other words, what was supposed to trickle down, didn't. Instead, it flowed like Niagara into the "ownership class", despite the tremendous increases in worker productivity.
Then, with the more obvious factors -- billions of people in China available to work for pennies on the dollar of American workers' wages, and dramatic cost reductions and technology increases in telecommunications -- in the underregulated economic environment in the US, left the American working class as odd man out.
this post is a respons to rhino.
You see, the job of the American CEO, much like the individual entrepreneur, is to EXPLOIT opportunity. And for any of you who have degrees in any business administration related field know, that is NOT my wording.
Your answer is "because they did"? I don't think you showed any cause and effect there. Maybe there was something about Reagonomics that caused jobs to leave, but I don't see how cutting taxes and reducing regulation could have been the cause. As I said, that makes us more competitive, not less.
There is no reason those things would cause a CEO to exploit oppotunity in China, it would tend to make the US labor market more competitive. If jobs go to China and India, that happens more as the tax and regulation burden increases here. I don't have a degree in economics or business (do you?), but that seems fairly basic.
Now you are saying the US was underregulated, so I'm not sure what kind of regulations you are talking about. I thought you meant things like safety or emission regulations, which tend to make us less competitive.
Less governmental burden makes US more competitve. If the ownership class takes all those benefits, that will make that company less competitive with a company that reinvests those savings. Even Greenspan said the private sector uses capital more efficiently than government, so money is better left there than given to government to make up jobs.
Of course this relates to the job market, but maybe not to welfare. Moving the unemployed into a productive private sector job is ideal, though some politicians believe the government offers many jobs for people that would otherwise not have jobs, which is why I used to see 12 sewerage and water board guys hanging out not working so often. It turns into a sort of "working" welfare, but they just put in their time, they don't have to compete with a better performing water board.
Those public works projects had their place in the Great Depression, and maybe even today it might be a good alternative to just handing out the checks. But again, the private sector is more efficient and has to compete, so seems to me a better alternative than lifetime tenured government jobs. (like most senators seems to have)
But you are talking about someone who isn't cheating he system
Not about the person with non reported income whose utilities are being paid by one church, who is getting rent help from another church, etc etc etc. I have watched it-if you play your cards right you can not only get food stamps cash and medical but also get churches and other groups to pay your rent and utilities and provide food. If your rent is paid, your utilities are paid you get free food and medical--that cash is free and clear.
I have been going over this thread, trying to find this post, because I've been wanting to respond.
I don't doubt there are people who cheat the system, people who are dishonest. But I wanted to point something out with respect to collecting welfare and getting charity help from churches at the same time.
First, I recognize the system is different from state to state, so I can only really speak to how things work in my state, because that is what I know.
If you live in Michigan on welfare, you truly are subsisting at best. The allotted food stamps will not feed your family for a month, especially if you want to feed your family nutricious meals to keep them healthy, instead of processed high carb foods which will cause health problems down the road. So, food banks and such go a long way toward helping people who are on the welfare system.
Likewise, if you receive cash assistance - unless you are living in subsidised housing (which usually has a waiting list of 1 - 2 years) you aren't receiving enough to pay the rent and utilities - so again, private organizations fill the gap. I don't see that as cheating the system, I see that as survival. It is not the same thing as not claiming wages or making money selling drugs while on welfare.
But while the shoes and the clothes me and mine wore were mainly hand-me-downs and thrift store specials, those ever well dressed welfare moms with designer cloths and bags and their designer clothed children checking out with carts over-filled with food better than what we ate(can you say beans and pasta?) and they would whip past their credit cards and debit cards to get to the food stamps and assistance cards for child nutrition. Dressed to the max single moms with babies would then take their bounty home to their brand new apartments, later known as the breeding grounds; to feed themselves, their babies and their ex husband or boyfriend that worked and brought home a check no one was suppose to know about the men or their income.
I have known a number of people on welfare. I've never known any who were living in brand new apartments. I have known some who are very resourceful and have found ways to get nice clothing, computers, tv's etc. But they weren't cheating the system - they were simply doing what you, I, or any other person working or not could do. They found good bargains at the salvation armies in the wealthier districts. They utilized freecycle and took the things someone else simply wanted to get rid of. Again, I don't view that as cheating the system. Nor do I think someone should be penalized and live without nice things if they are offered for free by someone who no longer wants them, simply because they are poor.
I have decent livingroom furniture for the first time in years, because someone else was giving it away for free and I happened to be fortunate enough to respond first to their offer. I now have a decent kitchen table via the same method. Likewise, I have been able to save lots of money in the past, and get very nice name brand clothing for my family, by waiting until the end of a season and buying the clearance items for 75% off. I just bought the boys two new winter coats for $10 each on clearance. One size too big now, but will fit them fine next winter. Now, I don't get welfare. But if I had managed to do such things while on welfare, I wouldn't call that cheating the system, I would call it spending wisely - something anyone can chose to do, or not.
I don't think you showed any cause and effect there. Maybe there was something about Reagonomics that caused jobs to leave, but I don't see how cutting taxes and reducing regulation could have been the cause. As I said, that makes us more competitive, not less.
This, IMO, is NOT a debate. Sure, obviously you'd like to pick a fight. But I just don't care what you do or do not see... AND I do not care whether you agree or disagree with me. I get no payoff either way. I have neither a need to prove you wrong, nor to prove ANYTHING to YOU.
I have been going over this thread, trying to find this post, because I've been wanting to respond.
I don't doubt there are people who cheat the system, people who are dishonest. But I wanted to point something out with respect to collecting welfare and getting charity help from churches at the same time.
First, I recognize the system is different from state to state, so I can only really speak to how things work in my state, because that is what I know.
If you live in Michigan on welfare, you truly are subsisting at best. The allotted food stamps will not feed your family for a month, especially if you want to feed your family nutricious meals to keep them healthy, instead of processed high carb foods which will cause health problems down the road. So, food banks and such go a long way toward helping people who are on the welfare system.
Likewise, if you receive cash assistance - unless you are living in subsidised housing (which usually has a waiting list of 1 - 2 years) you aren't receiving enough to pay the rent and utilities - so again, private organizations fill the gap. I don't see that as cheating the system, I see that as survival. It is not the same thing as not claiming wages or making money selling drugs while on welfare.
Let's take the Reaganomics / deregulation debate to "Politics and 'tacks" rather than derail this thread about welfare. I think it would spark a lively debate there.
Let's take the Reaganomics / deregulation debate to "Politics and 'tacks" rather than derail this thread about welfare. I think it would spark a lively debate there.
I wanted to make sure that my comment about the folks in Florida wasn't meant to say that folks can't be frugal and have nice things even in a welfare situation. The folks I was talking about deliberatly don't have legimate jobs and they have income coming in under the table or sell drugs so they don't have to pay federal and state taxes (hmmm, maybe not state in Florida, I forgot).
But I would agree that folks that have had to use these state and federal services due to hard times probably are very careful with their money. I have seen young mothers in the grocery store line telling their children no to candy and toys there on the checkout shelves and I respected and felt some pain for them also, knowing they most likely didn't have the money to buy such things even if they wanted to. Not that children should just automatically have it but you know what I mean.
Bless your heart about having some nice things for the reasons you do. (((((you)))))
Let's take the Reaganomics / deregulation debate to "Politics and 'tacks" rather than derail this thread about welfare. I think it would spark a lively debate there.
My point isn't about reagonomics, it is about what works for providing more jobs. The socialist view is government needs to take more from successful people. Rocky wrongly stated that less government sent jobs overseas.
I'd say big government makes for a weaker economy ... as Linda noted, the waste from favoritism in her office wasted a lot of money. I see that as the big problem. Government has no one competing, so when bureaucracy gets too heavy, they just raise taxes to cover for incompetence/fraud, and squelch private industry. A little help to get people into the private sector works better than socialism, as I see it.
As I skimmed over the last 2 pages, a very good point was made.
A couple of the huge problems problems we face (as related to welfare) is: The out sourcing of jobs outside the U.S. and companies paying a living wage. I think the government needs to do more to bring these jobs back to our soil.
As Rocky mentioned, the state min. wage is increasing (yes, I voted for this as well). I think that as the lower and middle class workers are paid better, that does more to stimulate the economy than over inflated bonuses to the top wage earners in the country.
Part of this out sourcing thing IMHO is an attitude some of our American workers have taken on and it resided in the wc on the field also because it was fed to them from hq. That being when they first went back to working folks rather than being paid field folks they were told to only go after the cream of the crop positions and not even apply at lower level positions because they were above that. These were not the exact words but the jest. Then when so many of them couldn't find a job and were still being supported by hq the direction changed to take anything you can get.
This attitude resides outside of their thinking as well, just like young people today go into debt up to their eyeballs to have what mom and dad worked for 50 years to have. Then what is the result but bankruptcy by these young families which just buries us all.
I am home from my annual update appointment with our local human service agency to keep Kelly's medical coverage going. That is all we qualify for and it's cool with me that I can take her for medical needs w/o having to stress about how to pay for it.
I asked the lady how to cheat the system, how should I have filled out the paper work.
She said one can't cuz they cross check it against government and state information (my income is social security death benefits) and they verify what I'm putting down as well as copy the proof of income stuff as well as double check my utility, medical, other receipts I bring in.
I leaned in closer and said 'do you really check all that'?
She leaned a little herself and said "no, there is not enough time, resources or warm bodies to do that"
I knew this, of course, but I wanted her to say it. And my case is very simple with just medical for my child. And how could I mess with the paper SS sends me that states the monthly amount, how could I play with the electric bill or invoice from my doctors?
I hear all the time from others " let me help you fill all that out, there is a way" but I chicken out and am sure I'm the one that will get caught. And I don't want to mess up my child getting the medical she needs.
Dang, the first year I was receiving death benefits and medical coverage from the state I was still green to the way it all worked and took a weekend job. I didn't tell human service about the income and got creamed!!! They send me a pleasant letter stating that they had become aware that I had additional income and they stated the place of employment where I was working 10 hours a week. I had to pay a huge fine, lost her coverage for a quarter and got a nice little note stuck in my file.
So in other words they would save us money if they hired more staff to actually check these things rather than just give it out because they are under-staffed.
Recommended Posts
Top Posters In This Topic
20
9
14
12
Popular Days
Feb 5
36
Feb 4
28
Feb 3
15
Feb 8
11
Top Posters In This Topic
ChattyKathy 20 posts
Abigail 9 posts
CoolWaters 14 posts
templelady 12 posts
Popular Days
Feb 5 2007
36 posts
Feb 4 2007
28 posts
Feb 3 2007
15 posts
Feb 8 2007
11 posts
ChattyKathy
Excellent point brought up about it being generational because it certainly can be and is in some instances. Self-respect cannot abide inside those folks IMHO.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shellon
The only thing I'd add, Mo, is for us to consider the working poor. Our big Cooperations, for example Wal-Mart, offer such low wages and poor benefits as to cause their employees to get assistance on top of their jobs.
I know you are speaking of what I was raised with. Do SOMETHING! Find a way, get out there and show effort, show some scrap and fight. Not to mention the example that it shows children, seeing mom and/or dad working two jobs to keep the heat on and fruit loops on the breakfast table.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Ductape
It's like manna from above, thanks lord for the gifts we have received here today......
Call it the musings of a madman if you want, yet the other side of the welfare system really sucks when you find yourself with strikes against you like being white, male and even worse your income is just above that level to qualify for any benefits. But while the shoes and the clothes me and mine wore were mainly hand-me-downs and thrift store specials, those ever well dressed welfare moms with designer cloths and bags and their designer clothed children checking out with carts over-filled with food better than what we ate(can you say beans and pasta?) and they would whip past their credit cards and debit cards to get to the food stamps and assistance cards for child nutrition. Dressed to the max single moms with babies would then take their bounty home to their brand new apartments, later known as the breeding grounds; to feed themselves, their babies and their ex husband or boyfriend that worked and brought home a check no one was suppose to know about the men or their income.
I have never been in the situation that just I had to change jobs, but have seen whole industries dry up and chose to work and get by, because I still think you never get something for nothing and the hidden prices are greater than the gain. A whole industry dried up almost overnight, one day a job and the next not; fine I went back to what I had known only to have the environmentalists with their legislation drive domestic competition out of the country. The government offered training programs and thousands signed up and took them, not me. I was the idiot and just changed careers again, but during this change I did small contract work, I mowed lawns I never said would you like fries with that but I did fry the fires. Anything and everything to keep afloat. I sold off cars and trucks and drove junkers and then relocated half-way across the country.
Now when I go back to "home" all those that took the offer from the government are either back on government programs or went back to the industry that dried up for a decade and came some what back. Because the training lead to jobs that never paid what the industry that died paid.
Dealing with hard times shows the real quality of a person and people and even though it really sucks at times, good people always come through shining and characters of questionable quality get exposed for their near criminal activities.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
In Florida it is very common to see this:
People in line to buy lottery tickets dressed to the nines having just gotten out of a Lincoln Town car and then follow them to the grocery store and see them whip out their food stamps.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Belle
AWESOME IDEA, MO!!
Now, Rocky, how do we go about campaigning to have this brain child put in place?
AND, how do we fix the system so that folks who do, can and are working their tails off can make ends meet without needing assistance?
Krys, you made a point earlier in reference to mine that I neglected to address. I agree with you and had not thought about the points that you raised. I stand corrected. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Well Belle, first point to make is that this is NOT a new idea.
I remember when I was a kid, my dad told me about Public Works projects that were used to provide work for people who couldn't find work... that conversation took place in the 1960s. And the 1960s was the era of Lyndon Johnson's Great Society.
The public works dad was talking about took place, according to him at that time, in the years following the Great Depression (1930s).
Since then, we've had Ronald Reagan usher in Trickle Down economics, aka Supply Side economics. The idea was to cut taxes and reduce regulation (
) to stimulate private investment, and therefore increase private sector jobs AND wages. The reality was that the idea was the bait but it eventually brought the switch to outsourcing jobs to lower costs (and hence wages) and offshoring jobs (shipping virtually ALL manufacturing to China and many if not virtually all customer service center jobs to India).
I wish it were as simply as initiating a campaign to get the attention of Congress. Unfortunately, it would take so much systemic change to our economic and government systems to even come close these days.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Link to comment
Share on other sites
pond
put them to work???
ok I was a supervisor in a large facility, and sometimes we were forced to hire "day labor" from agencys that had the roll from the welfare .
they stole. they showed up late, they left when they wanted to, they sat all day long. and I mean sat and refused to wrok.
we just couldnt have it! the employees who had to work with them refused to work with them. employees have drug tests to get the job, labor folks no way and they drank and they got high and they sat and they claimed they were one person and really another.. COME ON!
no business wants to be responsible for their showing up to make the already troubled day much worse with their "labor.
No way would I put them on a countyor city property to "work" they will get injured and now be able to SUE the taxpayers .
free legal service for the poor (paid by the tax payers)and they cost the city millions in court fees and legal fees for ONE lawsuit alone.
um NO !!!
they then can sit on the system untill they win or lose the case in court which is years long... NO NO NO.
WE have had two cases going to supreme court in which a woman had 8 children in foster care and now going to jail again pregnate with her 9th child. All are disabled and high needs children.. the jugde ordered her on birth control. it is going up in the courts!! the civil liberties are fighting it tooth and nail.
Im glad I do not want the state to force birth control BUT what is the solution?
you can not make people support their self much less the children they produce.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
Because they did.
The primary thing those Reagan era policies brought about was the overwhelming disconnect between wages and the compensation of CEOs. In other words, what was supposed to trickle down, didn't. Instead, it flowed like Niagara into the "ownership class", despite the tremendous increases in worker productivity.
Then, with the more obvious factors -- billions of people in China available to work for pennies on the dollar of American workers' wages, and dramatic cost reductions and technology increases in telecommunications -- in the underregulated economic environment in the US, left the American working class as odd man out.
this post is a respons to rhino.
You see, the job of the American CEO, much like the individual entrepreneur, is to EXPLOIT opportunity. And for any of you who have degrees in any business administration related field know, that is NOT my wording.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
Your answer is "because they did"? I don't think you showed any cause and effect there. Maybe there was something about Reagonomics that caused jobs to leave, but I don't see how cutting taxes and reducing regulation could have been the cause. As I said, that makes us more competitive, not less.
There is no reason those things would cause a CEO to exploit oppotunity in China, it would tend to make the US labor market more competitive. If jobs go to China and India, that happens more as the tax and regulation burden increases here. I don't have a degree in economics or business (do you?), but that seems fairly basic.
Now you are saying the US was underregulated, so I'm not sure what kind of regulations you are talking about. I thought you meant things like safety or emission regulations, which tend to make us less competitive.
Less governmental burden makes US more competitve. If the ownership class takes all those benefits, that will make that company less competitive with a company that reinvests those savings. Even Greenspan said the private sector uses capital more efficiently than government, so money is better left there than given to government to make up jobs.
Of course this relates to the job market, but maybe not to welfare. Moving the unemployed into a productive private sector job is ideal, though some politicians believe the government offers many jobs for people that would otherwise not have jobs, which is why I used to see 12 sewerage and water board guys hanging out not working so often. It turns into a sort of "working" welfare, but they just put in their time, they don't have to compete with a better performing water board.
Those public works projects had their place in the Great Depression, and maybe even today it might be a good alternative to just handing out the checks. But again, the private sector is more efficient and has to compete, so seems to me a better alternative than lifetime tenured government jobs. (like most senators seems to have)
Edited by rhinoLink to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
I have been going over this thread, trying to find this post, because I've been wanting to respond.
I don't doubt there are people who cheat the system, people who are dishonest. But I wanted to point something out with respect to collecting welfare and getting charity help from churches at the same time.
First, I recognize the system is different from state to state, so I can only really speak to how things work in my state, because that is what I know.
If you live in Michigan on welfare, you truly are subsisting at best. The allotted food stamps will not feed your family for a month, especially if you want to feed your family nutricious meals to keep them healthy, instead of processed high carb foods which will cause health problems down the road. So, food banks and such go a long way toward helping people who are on the welfare system.
Likewise, if you receive cash assistance - unless you are living in subsidised housing (which usually has a waiting list of 1 - 2 years) you aren't receiving enough to pay the rent and utilities - so again, private organizations fill the gap. I don't see that as cheating the system, I see that as survival. It is not the same thing as not claiming wages or making money selling drugs while on welfare.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Abigail
I have known a number of people on welfare. I've never known any who were living in brand new apartments. I have known some who are very resourceful and have found ways to get nice clothing, computers, tv's etc. But they weren't cheating the system - they were simply doing what you, I, or any other person working or not could do. They found good bargains at the salvation armies in the wealthier districts. They utilized freecycle and took the things someone else simply wanted to get rid of. Again, I don't view that as cheating the system. Nor do I think someone should be penalized and live without nice things if they are offered for free by someone who no longer wants them, simply because they are poor.
I have decent livingroom furniture for the first time in years, because someone else was giving it away for free and I happened to be fortunate enough to respond first to their offer. I now have a decent kitchen table via the same method. Likewise, I have been able to save lots of money in the past, and get very nice name brand clothing for my family, by waiting until the end of a season and buying the clearance items for 75% off. I just bought the boys two new winter coats for $10 each on clearance. One size too big now, but will fit them fine next winter. Now, I don't get welfare. But if I had managed to do such things while on welfare, I wouldn't call that cheating the system, I would call it spending wisely - something anyone can chose to do, or not.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
This, IMO, is NOT a debate. Sure, obviously you'd like to pick a fight. But I just don't care what you do or do not see... AND I do not care whether you agree or disagree with me. I get no payoff either way.
I have neither a need to prove you wrong, nor to prove ANYTHING to YOU. 
You make excellent points, Abi. Thanks.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
oenophile
Rocky and Rhino,
Let's take the Reaganomics / deregulation debate to "Politics and 'tacks" rather than derail this thread about welfare. I think it would spark a lively debate there.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rocky
good idea :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Abi,
I wanted to make sure that my comment about the folks in Florida wasn't meant to say that folks can't be frugal and have nice things even in a welfare situation. The folks I was talking about deliberatly don't have legimate jobs and they have income coming in under the table or sell drugs so they don't have to pay federal and state taxes (hmmm, maybe not state in Florida, I forgot).
But I would agree that folks that have had to use these state and federal services due to hard times probably are very careful with their money. I have seen young mothers in the grocery store line telling their children no to candy and toys there on the checkout shelves and I respected and felt some pain for them also, knowing they most likely didn't have the money to buy such things even if they wanted to. Not that children should just automatically have it but you know what I mean.
Bless your heart about having some nice things for the reasons you do. (((((you)))))
Link to comment
Share on other sites
rhino
I'd say big government makes for a weaker economy ... as Linda noted, the waste from favoritism in her office wasted a lot of money. I see that as the big problem. Government has no one competing, so when bureaucracy gets too heavy, they just raise taxes to cover for incompetence/fraud, and squelch private industry. A little help to get people into the private sector works better than socialism, as I see it.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Zshot
As I skimmed over the last 2 pages, a very good point was made.
A couple of the huge problems problems we face (as related to welfare) is: The out sourcing of jobs outside the U.S. and companies paying a living wage. I think the government needs to do more to bring these jobs back to our soil.
As Rocky mentioned, the state min. wage is increasing (yes, I voted for this as well). I think that as the lower and middle class workers are paid better, that does more to stimulate the economy than over inflated bonuses to the top wage earners in the country.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
out sourcing...
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Part of this out sourcing thing IMHO is an attitude some of our American workers have taken on and it resided in the wc on the field also because it was fed to them from hq. That being when they first went back to working folks rather than being paid field folks they were told to only go after the cream of the crop positions and not even apply at lower level positions because they were above that. These were not the exact words but the jest. Then when so many of them couldn't find a job and were still being supported by hq the direction changed to take anything you can get.
This attitude resides outside of their thinking as well, just like young people today go into debt up to their eyeballs to have what mom and dad worked for 50 years to have. Then what is the result but bankruptcy by these young families which just buries us all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
coolchef
to my amzement i was told by a friend who works in some sort of welfare office
that my yearly income intitles me to:\heat assistance
food stamps
tax relief
and maybe a few other things too
i live in a nice little house
drive a nice little car
am i ekeing a living on my not so large retiremen check?
no,not ekeing but not starving
if the day comes when i need assistance i will go for for it
but i just can't see getting something for nothing IF you don't need it
the welfare thing is a vicious circle.
third generations at least and that suc0s
i can remember long ago when i was a tc and a good friend of the mother of children was visiting
the girl scouts came by selling cookies
of course i bought a box
we loved them even though they were expenisve
i repeat i ordered 1 box
they lady visiting bought 5 boxes and had never worked a day in her life
she still hasn't!
and she breed a brood who still work the system
damn it if you need it go for it
but don't abuse it
Edited by coolchefLink to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
Bingo!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Shellon
I am home from my annual update appointment with our local human service agency to keep Kelly's medical coverage going. That is all we qualify for and it's cool with me that I can take her for medical needs w/o having to stress about how to pay for it.
I asked the lady how to cheat the system, how should I have filled out the paper work.
She said one can't cuz they cross check it against government and state information (my income is social security death benefits) and they verify what I'm putting down as well as copy the proof of income stuff as well as double check my utility, medical, other receipts I bring in.
I leaned in closer and said 'do you really check all that'?
She leaned a little herself and said "no, there is not enough time, resources or warm bodies to do that"
I knew this, of course, but I wanted her to say it. And my case is very simple with just medical for my child. And how could I mess with the paper SS sends me that states the monthly amount, how could I play with the electric bill or invoice from my doctors?
I hear all the time from others " let me help you fill all that out, there is a way" but I chicken out and am sure I'm the one that will get caught. And I don't want to mess up my child getting the medical she needs.
Dang, the first year I was receiving death benefits and medical coverage from the state I was still green to the way it all worked and took a weekend job. I didn't tell human service about the income and got creamed!!! They send me a pleasant letter stating that they had become aware that I had additional income and they stated the place of employment where I was working 10 hours a week. I had to pay a huge fine, lost her coverage for a quarter and got a nice little note stuck in my file.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
ChattyKathy
So in other words they would save us money if they hired more staff to actually check these things rather than just give it out because they are under-staffed.
Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside. Eh!
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.