Would you like to cut off welfare progrms? Why?
How would you go about doing this?
|
Would you like to cut off welfare progrms? Why?
How would you go about doing this?
There will always be poor, needy and less fortunate.
I do not think it should be cut but restructured so that not everybody is eligible just because they have a baby or because they are lazy.
One thing is teens need to be taught differently about sex ed so they are not thinking it is okay to just go around having sex and ending up pregnant then get on welfare. Where I live it is like a dog breeding factory for the past 10 yrs. Like this guy came here from down South. He is homeless so he sleeps with three different girls every night (Remember playing musical chairs? Now they play musical beds.)
The one just had a baby to another guy and is pregnant to another guy and now she is sleeping with this guy.
He doesn't keep it a secret that he has gf's in three different states.
[B]From boat21 and creekpeople welfare or not!! Explain this to us. To get a job at a Corporation you have to get drug tested. To get a job at a hospital, same thing. Working for the government, ditto. So explain why a Welfare recipient can get a paycheck from the government and not have to take a drug test!! Welfare, yes with a drug test. Welfare NO without one. Boat21 was going to ask on a thread why the government doesn't randomly test welfare recipients and yet most government employees have to get tested. That should be the answer to welfare yes... or no.
I would like to see either required government work programs, picking up trash at the park, cleaning fire trucks, anything, or training programs that they to actually go to before they will earn any welfare money.
And agreed, they must pass a drug test each month or week, since if they have money for drugs they don't need welfare
Some of the problem with putting the welfare recipient to work would be 'How do they get there?'
Public transportation is all good if your in a city environment,but what about those who are 10,15,or 20 miles out in the country?
The welfare system was brought to bare when?
And back then what were the criteria for receiving it?
WHO made the changes since then,ratifying the system till it got to the state it's in today?
I suspect those answers will be forthcoming from the political members who have the research and debating skills I sadly lack.
Good topic.
Welfare can not be cut but there should be more restrictions applied. They could be asked to work/volunteer for their money. This could 'break' the Welfare chain in families. They could gain more respect for themselves by being 'useful', accomplishing something, anything. There should be a cap on the number of children, sans fathers, that each person collects. This requirement would also profit the children as fewer would receive more attention from 'Mom'.
Something needs to be done because while welfare is a necessity for some too many abuse it
Today on the radio they were talking about a 29 yr old woman that has 9 kids and wants to be given a van. Then where is she going to get the money for insurance. She already gets charities to support her besides her welfare. She doesn't collect child support and who's to say she doesn't have more kids?
How welfare effects your taxes! The state of Delaware has NO NO sales tax because its not a welfare state that way. And no its not Dupont that suck it up to offset taxes. Even my property tax is cheap! Hear is another Major FLAW!! In the system. I found out from a police officer he arrested a person that had 3 welfare check stubs in his wallet! 1 N.Y, 2 N.J. 3 Pa. He called N.Y. welfare office and they said they can't do anything about that now times that by how many!! But yet the I.R.S will bust my chops of my business on audit and my taxes are way out of control. We cloud literally save 100s of millions If we check for fraud and how hard is that with a tied in computer system. We could pay off that system probably the first year or so on how much it will save the government. Lets clarfie that the "Goverment" Dha How much it will save the "people" police fraud on welfare recipients.
Too much of welfare has also become come a supplemental income for the drug dealers to get a check until the get paid for there deals they need to collect.
Signed I am mad money out of my families mouth to a thief's!!!!!!
P.S. It might cost more to jail them get this I looked up costs to jail a person for a year over $90,000.00 a year!!!! per person!
I think now with all the corp. bailouts and all the welfare recips. Are going to be a drop in the bucket. We ain't seen nothing yet!
I agree that any welfare recipents should be drug tested.
Now, I live in a section 8 kind of area. I'm not a section 8 guy, I pay all my bills and get no assistance, I just happen to live in "that side of town". And I see how the welfare class is, first hand, and my thought on welfare is it is a complete and total WASTE of tax payer money.
I would allow welfare for children only, as they can not be expected to fend for theirself. Of course, the parents would be the stewards of the money, but they had better do a darn good job of taking care of the kids. They need to at least TRY to work. I think it should be like unemployment, where you have to put in so many applications per week to keep the benifet.
After so long of a time, the parent still doesn't get a job, then other measures need to be taken, it's time for social services to step in, because I believe the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, if the kid isn't placed in a "working family" environment, then we will breed a whole new generation of welfare moochers.
Girls that get knocked up:
Easy. Welfare is granted under the terms above, under the condition that the woman gets her tubes tied. The father of the child pays for the procedure. (not tax payers) the father of the child can avoid this if he agrees to have himself "snipped" as well.
As far as general welfare when no kids are involved. No kids, no welfare, get a job or stave.
And don't tell me there are no jobs. There is always a job to do, somewhere. It might not be a gravy job, or a high paying job, but a job is a job. Be it flipping burgers or digging ditches.
Personally, I respect the ditch digger and the casheir FAAAAR more than I respect the CEO's that are on Wallstreet.
BTW I don't mind anyone getting some assistance if they are at least working 30-40 hours per week... or doing the best they can do.
But this thing of people sitting on their lazy butt and collecting off me every month is for the birds.
Pardon me if these comments offended, frankly, I don't care, looking at my last paystub, I have paid over $6,000 in taxes this year, plus $6,000 in insurance premiums for MY FAMILY. Plus I have to deal with the annoyances of the "welfare class" in my neighborhood every day. Welfare? I'd be better off without it, and I can think of a few better things I could have done with that six grand.
Every dollar of welfare creates 1.50 of economic activity, so the "economic drain" argument doesn't fly. We're all better off if people who aren't working get welfare; it actually helps the economy. There are a huge number of people on welfare because they have serious medical problems that prevent them from working (many of them would love to work, by the way, since welfare doesn't afford them a particularly lofty standard of living). And while it's true that there are people on welfare because they are lazy, I'm not sure that starvation is an appropriate punishment for the vice of laziness. At the rate at which our economy is bleeding jobs, this is the worst possible time to cut welfare programs.
I agree that far too many people abuse the welfare system, especially too many taking advantage selling their food stamps for drugs.
BUT I do not agree that anybody can find a job.
I was married and had 4 kids THEN things didn't work and I ended up divorced. NOBODY would watch my kids. Children's Services couldn't even find anybody willing to watch them so I HAD to stay home with them and there was NO way I could work.
Then when they were in their teens. I got a job that was mostly during school hours. Children's Services said I had to quit because I was not home for them right after school. They said they were classified as 'special needs' so I couldn't do as other parents did. So I quit.
Then when they were older I tried to find work. I applied hundreds of jobs for 3 months and didn't get anything. My daughter applied many of the same places only kept the jobs a few weeks and quit. Within 5 months she worked at Kentucky fried Chicken, McDonalds, Burger King and some other places.
I really believe they hired her because of age. They told me I didn't have any experience whenever I had on my resume that I did work a bunch of restaurants in the '70's and she had never worked anywhere before.
Also you would be very surprised if you sat in the welfare office nowadays. SOOOO many of the people applying are very middle class looking office worker types in their early 50's that got laid off and can't get a job most likely because of their age.
Also you figure, if you shut down the welfare system how many jobs that is going to affect. The welfare workers --out a job.
Maybe they could go get a job at the day care centers to watch the welfare parents kids that would be working?
I really do not believe there are enough jobs no matter how little you are willing to work for an hour.
The bailouts to large corps are a bigger threat. They said all the bailout money so far exceeds all the money that we have spent on WW! WW!! Korean war, Vietnam war, Desert storm and this Iraqi war combined.
Hello:
I agree. Before we give any more CORPORATE welfare, the CEO'S should be drug tested.
POOR people, on the other hand, should receive help because they're POOR - NOT because they're wonderful people.
Should the help you receive, (like a deduction on your interest) be based upon how wonderful YOU are?? WHAT?? Deducting your interest isn't welfare to you because you own a house and I don't?? ). Oh, I understand. A deduction ISN'T welfare - it's the law. I got it now.
But, of course, any time the government opens up the cash window, the GOOD guys are going to call what THEY get something dignified, like "bailout", or "tax credit", or "subsidy"... But, the money the POOR receive is called welfare...
And, you people buy into this crap.
Bwa, ha ha ha ha.
excon
I also haven't mentioned that many people can not get jobs because of transportation issues. Some are homeless with no phone and no way for someone to contact them for an interview.
In fact, some homeless wouldn't even have a way to get a shower and a clean change of clothes for an interview.
Many have mental illnesses and would be unable to follow up responsibly to get and keep work.
Many it is of their own doing but the fact is that is where they are now and not much can reverse their bad mistakes especially when they can't even see they have a problem.
It would be great if somebody could follow lives of people on welfare to deem if they are truly in need of welfare or if they are just playing the system for all they can get. But I don't see that happening. Kids make mistakes and have a bunch of kids by the time they are 21. As I said earlier what should be done about that? It is the system failing these kids to make them glorify kids having kids. The sex education needs to take a different approach to deter kids from wanting kids. I see it all the time 14 and 15 yr old girls idealizing having a baby and then they get bored with it and pass the baby onto their mom. Their mom (grandma) can't afford to feed another mouth and makes daughter go get on welfare. Dad is off the hook because she didn't want to make him pay child support so she put Father: unknown on birth certificate. Now it is the taxpayers problem.
The taxpayer is paying hundreds of dollars per day for each student to get a faulty sex education. Then the taxpayer is paying into the welfare system to pay for the student to feed the baby. Then some moms sell the food stamps to pay for drugs and beg the neighbors to feed their child.
So you're trying to tell me, that everyone should be on welfare? (Akoue), I'm not going to put a "red box" on your profile, because this is a political debate and I just don't think it proper on a self help website, but I do, "dissagree".
If EVERYONE was on welfare, what tax dollars would fund the system? If I were on welfare, the government would be almost $12,000 poorer.
No, I take that back, since I pay for my own insurance, if I were on welfare, and the government paid for my insurance, as well as the cost of the actual insurance (what they cover), then given the surgeries my wife had, we would have probably cost the system $50,000 this year. In addition to what they would have paid me.
Now, I understand the problem with this countries finanical system, to many people not working, and drawing welfare, and too few paying into the system.
Out of the $4,000 I paid the federal government this year... what did I get for that money? Nothing.
And FYI - I dissagree with the whole economic stimulous plan! Granted, they send me another check, I'm going to cash it, but I would have been just find had they have not. The government can not afford it, and I really don't need it.
Child tax credit?
Please, any money I get back from the federal government, I have to turn around and pay the state with it. There might be $400 or so left over. Hardly enough to offset the expenses of having a child.
At one time, I would have agreed with you all, I would had a kind heart.
Not any more, not after I made the mistake of moving into this neighborhood without researching the surrounding homes first. Not after living 5 years in this welfare abundant, unemployed town. I see the level of disrespect these unemployed people dish out daily. Drugs, fussing, cussing, partying all night. And why not? Do they have to work the next day? Hardley. Running a fan all night drowns out much of the noise, but does little to drown out the occasional thumping car that drives by at 3AM.
Now DISSABILITY is a whole different subject. Of course, if you are disabled, then I have no problem with someone drawing social security, same goes for retirement.
That is a separate (in theory) fund that everyone who has worked has paid into while they were working. If someone wins a dissability claim, then they will receive no grief from me. I do think it's assinine that you could amputed ams and legs, blind as a bat, can not hear, or speak, and you still have to hire a lawyer to win a case.
I respect your thoughts and opinions, but I do dissagree with them.
But in reality, it really makes no difference, welfare ain't going nowhere... Perhaps someday I will cross the financial threshold and be able to afford the high taxes I have to pay as well as a nicer place to live away with this wannabe ghetto. I could have afforded it a long time ago, two years of taxes paid would have made a nice downpayment.
Anyway, to put it simpler, as I said before, welfare for children only. All others fend for theirself.
Oh, and by the way, Nohelp4u. I consider staying at home and raising a family a full time job. I understand the difficulties of finding affordable daycare and a job that can pay for it. Our family is having this same problem.
But all the same, we are still not on assistance. My hands bring the food to the table and keep the lights on. And that's not because I landed a good job. Sure it helps, but we have been poor before. When my wife won custody of her child, I was bringing home about $13,000 per year. The only assistance we had, was her child was on Medicaid. (as I said, for children only)
Impossible to do without welfare? Well, consider we we lived a simple life, we don't drink, smoke or do drugs. I drove to work in a beat up nissan sentra that I got for $300. When the furnace blew up, we heated on kerosene heaters. We took a calculator to the grocery store, we didn't buy snack cakes and junk food, we purchased beans, rice, simple foods, breads, flour, I grew a garden. We didn't have to have all the newest things. This was only 5 years ago, we didn't have a DVD player, game console. Our TV was purchased at a thift store and still had dails, two channels didn't work. There were times we just coulnt make the ends meet. I would do odd jobs when I could, once in a while, literally worked for food. But we made it. And damn proud of it!
That is great that you are able to do that. I wish every mother was in your circumstances.
Welfare in and of itself is a program for needy families and it is a life saver for many people.
In a failing economy many people have found they must turn to food stamps and also help with paying their heating costs (HEAP)
The people who abuse the system are where the problem lies.
In New york there is a jobs program and if you want to be on public assistance you must work for it if you are physically able.If not you must have a statement from a doctor.
The problem of welfare is multi-faceted.
When we cut programs that help people to gain employment and cut head start programs for needy children we are leaving these people behind.We need to keep these programs open and thus end the cycle of dependency.
Yes the abusers are the problem.
With welfare reform you can only get so many years of cash asst.
If you and the dad live together they make one of you go out and work or they cut you off. They even will make some single moms go get jobs too. One lady had just had a baby, fresh out of the hospital and they were making her go to the classes before cutting you off. She had no way to get her kids to any daycare and then make it to a job. Yet the lazy abusers seem to never get 'sanctioned'. I think more people need to turn in the abusers but that doesn't seem to work either.
Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
I'm not a mother, I'm the father. We are barley able to do that, money is still tight. Especially now that overtime is down. In fact, if you had read my introduction thread, you would have learned this is my second account here. I never really got into why I had left AMHD a few years back, but the simple truth is, we had to cut back, and the internet was the first to go.
But to be fair, when gas hit $5.00 per gallon last summer, and the cost of groceries doubled, I'm not sure how we would have done it if I were still at my old job.
artlady:
I'll concede my argument to cut all welfare... well I never actually said cut all welfare, I just said it be for children only. And also, in an earlier post, I also said I don't have any problem with someone who is working, (doing the best they can) getting a little help. What I Don't like is these people who wouldn't know an eight hour day if it landed on their shoes.
Simply put, I feel drug testing applicants would eliminate the abuse, and probably welfare cost by at least 75%.
Unemployment:
This is an insurance your employer pays for. If you are working, and get laid off, of course, draw unemployment. Some of these factories shut down on no notice at all. In fact, we had one here last summer, the workers came in one Friday without a clue, the plant manager handed them their last paycheck and sent them home. Locking the doors on his way out However, I'm not sure if this is nation wide, but here in VA, you have to apply for I think two jobs per week to retain the benifet, and even at that, it is only good for so many months. (I think 18 months, but I'm not sure)
If I got laid off, naturally, I'd file for unemployment, but if I know me, I'd have the job replaced in less than a month, even if it were't as high paying a job. It's just the way I am, I can't stand to "not do anything" for to long. I start to get real irrirable. In fact, I've been on vacation this week, using some old time I had to draw, and it's not even the weekend yet and I can't wait to get back to work. I'm climbing the walls over here.
If you can't find a job in 18 months, then I think the problem is the applicant.
Nohelp4u:
I didn't read your last post until after I had posted above. But I can live with the idea you presented.
You all seem like reasonable people. And I'm glad that no one is "flaring", as this tends to be a sore subject for some.
It's debates like this that tempers can easilly flare, especially if one of the debators is on welfare and defending their position.
But I think we can all agree, that the problem with the "abusers" is they hide behind the ones who are not abusing the system. Making them hard to target. Back when food stamps came on paper coupons and not a card, I've seen people sell their stamps for liquor. How is this helping their kids?
I do feel for the couple that is trying to make it. They are often making too much to get assistance but not enough to make it.
I wish I had had a husband/father it would have made it much easier for me emotionally.
My sister complained that she wished she could 'have it easy' like me yet between her and her husband they made $60, a year and bought their kids anything they wanted. I believe that no matter what your income you can budget to manage. Struggle yes but you can manage. I had 4 kids and with assistance only had around $10, to $15, a year. I feel we managed about as well as my sister even though my kids didn't have everything they had.
Too many people want all the latest most expensive things and don't buy second hand and manage their money well.
I don't have the internet or cable. I use my kids (they are grown and on their own now) internet and watch VCR tapes.
I bought a DVD for $30. But I never got around to buying many DVD's yet.
Being poor taught me to be resourceful and trade with other mothers... hand me down clothes, rummage sales, flea markets, yard sales, junk stores, working and trading for things,
I don't have a temper I just see things from many perspectives.
I have known wasteful rich people, rich people that work hard and help others, poor people that really don't desire most of what they have, poor people that were never given a chance that they do deserve, people that can't see past their nose, people that are too ignorant to see past their nose, etc...
I appreciate people that can see it isn't all black and white with no room to budge.
They still sell their food stamps with the card. Welfare claimed they were going to the card to cut down on abuse.
Now they just give the card to whoever and then call it in stolen if they don't give it back before the next month.
Or they go to the store with the person they sold the amount to. Like I said they sell the card and then cry for the neighbors to feed their poor starving kids.
This our problem to a tee. I've made good money this year, of course last summer I pulled quite a few 80 hour weeks. My last paystub reveals about $47,000. Or course, my net pay was only $26,000. Still we had a good year.Quote:
Originally Posted by N0help4u
Why so low off almost 50 grand?
Because my wife, who has a mental dissability (and is on dissability for it) did not qualify for medicaid when she first one her case.
Why? Because at the time I made $12 per hour, and that was considered too much. So I had to put her on my plan at work, which came with a biweekly deduction of almost $240. (about $500 per month), and a $2,000 deductable to boot, 80% there after. She only makes about $600 per month on her dissability. So in effect, the family household was only advanced by $100 per month.
I don't want to list what I make now because this is a public forum, but I will say it's more than $12, and less than $20 per hour.
Now get this. Because I WORKED so many hours, I find out that she is pretty much going to have to pay taxes on her dissability. (which by the way, they do not withhold from)
So any child tax credit we would have gotten will be eaten up! As I said earlier, what little we do get from the federal, will go to pay the state income tax that we will owe.
In fact, I even told her last month she'd be better to just drop dissability, because last year, almost everything she made we used to pay for medical bills, what insurance didn't cover.
So again, I apologize if I offended some, but it seems, on my side of the fence, all they do to me is tax tax tax tax tax... and I look around, and see people living the good life for free! It bothers me, and I can't help but be a little biased.
This country is set up to reward laziness, and penalize working people. The simple fact is, if I QUIT my job, my wife and child would qualify for medicaid, and she could get SSI. It wouldn't match what I bring home, but it'd be a nice sizable income for me doing nothing.
Then I could just sit around and be a lazy sorry __sed man (the kind we were discussing earlier) who is just mooching off his wife.
Thank God I'm not like that, my daddy raised me better. I will continue to work, as long as my hands will let me. And the government will continue to give it to me up the ____, as long as they can.
How's this for a compromise?
Keep the welfare under the post you mentioned on the last page Nohelp4u, but make the rich (over $100k per year) pay for it.
And I get to keep some of that money they took from me on my pay.
In fact, let's just do away with the income tax all together. I'm all for the fair tax. But I'm starting to get off topic here, so I'll stop there.
But you have to admit, it would be a way to get rich people to pay taxes, as they buy the most "stuff".
Trust me if I were President of the USA it would be a lot different.
I heard Puerto Rico, or was it Costa Rico, has the best system.
I do get your frustration--I lived in a neighborhood like the one you describe. But no, I don't think (and I don't think I came anywhere close to saying) that *everyone* should be on welfare. Even setting compassion, etc. to one side, I do think that everybody loses if it goes away. And I've known too many people over the years who were or are on welfare and are nothing like the people who live in your neighborhood, people who have worked and want to work but aren't able to work, at least not with any regularity. If it weren't for welfare, many of those people would starve to death. My conscience isn't okay with that. (My conscience isn't okay with anyone starving to death, even if they are lazy.) But, as I say, I don't mean to trivialize what you're saying: It does make sense to me, even though I don't agree with the conclusions you draw.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewc24301
You're absolutely right. And they make it really hard for non-abusers who need welfare to get it (in some states the wait for--at least some types of--benefits is measured in years, not months). To me, the saddest things about these kinds of discussions is just how much pain there is all around: Nobody has the market cornered on suffering, of course, and as I've grown older I suppose I've become more of a softy. But I'm okay with that!Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewc24301
Fair anough Akoue:
And I understand your point, but to be clear, those who "can't" work, I don't have a problem drawing money off the government. By definition of "can't", meaning they have some sort of physical or mental reason that can not work. This is where social security supported dissability comes in, which I have stated earlier, I have no problem with.
Those who CAN work, should work. And I do support cutting off those who CAN work. Able body adults who are capable of working, should work. Hands down. If they don't work, then I have no sypathy for them, should they choose to starve, remember they chose this, the COULD work, but chose not to.
But something tells me, that when they have to make the choice, work and eat, or don't work and starve, most of those will find work somewhere. The simple fact is, they have never had to make that choice, because they know in the back of their mind, someone will take care of them.
Now lets take Nohelp4u's scenario, of the single mother of 4 children who's husband, or father run oft. As I have said, raising children, especially 4 of them is a full time job. And as such, I don't have a problem with the woman in question receiving help. But I DO think the system should go after the father. At least make him pay a sizable child support payment.
And vice versa, if the woman runs off the man, leaving him with the kids, then he too will need help. But I think that who ever the kids are left with (man or woman), they need to try not to have more children until they are financially prepared to support all children with no support.
Even if both parents were unfit. Then, the children would be placed in foster care, where tax dollars would pay their custodian anyway. So if the actual parent of the child is fit, then naturally, I have no problem with them receiving help.
HOWEVER
Just as in foster care, if you are receiving help from the government, I do feel social services should apply all the same rules they would in the case of a foster parent, to verify you are raising the kids right, not abusing them, living in a drug free home, etc.
I am in complete agreement with you. There needs to be oversight.Quote:
Originally Posted by andrewc24301
Scapegoating on the Poor...
I really wonder where these figures come from. Aside from the cost of building the prison, can anyone tell me what costs... $90K to keep ONE person in prison? That means for every 11 inmates it costs appro. $1 million?. Every 110 costs $10 million?Quote:
Originally Posted by 21boat
Prison inmates also do some of the work involved running the prison, so that cuts down on employee salaries. So how many inmates does an "average" prison hold? (I don't know this answer) Add it up.
The point I'm trying to make is there is fraud and theivery going on at all economic and social levels of our society. Cheat just a little on your taxes? Your deserved it, you say to yourself! If it weren't for all them "welfare bums", you'd have more money.
Never mind that billion dollar corporations are sucking your tax dollars for bail-outs then taking $500K vacations. Or the govt. has totally mismanged our whole economic system.
Just blame it all on the poor. After all, they're the low-life of society. They're the single MOTHERS with CHILDREN who don't work. They're the baby producers. Their children grow up to be the future minimum wage earners of tomorrow or join the military to protect your asses. Sure, some end up on drugs. The poor aren't the only ones. What's that you're taking? Or your kid(s)?
A poor person knows how to make do with what they have and not waste. Every dollar counts, and "used" is the word. Therefore they are the re-cyclers of yesterday, today, and tomorrow.Many don't own cars; they use public transportation. They don't contribute that 6 TONS of carbon monoxide per year from a car.
Well! Says the middle income wage earner. The work ethic still stands. Staying at home with your children is a luxury, a lot of fun and no work at all. They're all little angels.
"So go get a job". Go put your kids in an overcrowded daycare and find yourself a minimum wage job. Just get off welfare. (How much does day care cost, by the way?)
Oh yes, the program needs to be restructured. We should just get rid of it. That way we can put millions of State employees out of their $2500 (plus benefits) jobs. When I worked for the Welfare it was an extremely stressful job. Nowadays they just push a few keys on a computer.
And if one of your blood kin needs help, you make sure you step up to the plate. After all, it's your blood. You are partly responsible--why shove it on the taxpayers? Shame on you!
Why didn't you teach your daughters and sons about birth control? Did you think they wouldn't "do" it?
Blah blah blah...
There is no answer. We can improve the program and educate our children but who's going to serve you your next Big Mac?
Day care rates can vary anywhere from $35. To $75. Per day.
The average welfare person who manages to get a job averages about $35. To $80. Per day leaving them with maybe $300. To $600. Per month for other expenses (rent, utilities, work expenses such as transportation) after day care expense.
I stand by my position.
But as I've said, it's clear welfare isn't going anywhere.
It really burns my butt to see how some of these people take their benefits, stand in line, getting their assitance. Yet when you meet them on the street, they turn their noses up to you.
Maybe it isn't like that in ya'lls part of the country.
But all's I know is, when I leave for work, I have to meander around a bunch of welfare people loafing in the streets, giving me dirty looks. They move out of the way, scuffing their feet, smoking their cigarette.
If I come home for lunch, they are still there.
When I come home on time, they are still there.
If I work late... guess what - they are still there.
Hell, these men ain't even trying to find a job. It's so much easier to sit around a sap money off their knocked up girlfriends.
I'm sorry, I can not defend that. Perhaps in your part of the country, the system works, and everyone is in real hardship situations, but around here, it ain't like that.
Not only do many of them turn their noses up but they have an entitlement attitude. Like so many welfare moms in my neighborhood act like YOU OWE them a ride to the store, a cup of sugar, a few dollars or whatever. Then when you say NO they get all attitudey with you! They will even tell you ''My baby is on its last diaper and it is poopy'' to make you feel bad for the kid. You take them to the store for diapers. They come out with a carton of cigarettes and a half gallon of ice cream (NO diapers)and tell you they had to use the couple dollars they promised you.
For those of you posting here defending welfare who happen to be on some kind of assistance, or have in the past, I'm not trying to criticize you personally. I'm not saying there aren't people who really are doing the best they can. And I don't have a problem helping people out, I give to charities all the time.
I am saying, that I know how the greater majority of them around here live, and it's stomach turning. A friend of mine is a realtor/property manager who deals in section 8. I've done some side work for him from time to time, cleaning out some of his rentals when someone moves out.
I have seen some crazy, nasty stuff in some of these homes, I've actually gotten choked up when told about how some of these children had to live.
Because people who are to sorry to work, (note I said "to sorry to work", never said "can't work") are more often than not, to sorry to raise kids right, keep a house clean, or even do the dishes.
There's no excuse for it, and that's your tax dollars at work.
There needs to be a great deal of reform. And if a sorry man is shacking up with his girlfriend, then the system needs to be made aware of that. There are logical reasons why the (woman) who is tending 7 kids can not work, however there is no reason why a man, who is living with the woman can't find a job.
If I work, and have to pay taxes on my wife's dissability just because "we live together" then it stands to reason, this same logic should apply to welfare.
Nohelp4u:
Sorry, our post criss-crossed each other.
As I said before I understand because I DO see both sides of the fence. I see the needy greedy that are wasteful and unappreciative and I see the ones like myself...
As you said a hand UP NOT a hand out!
I stumbled across this topic at random and admittedly I haven't read through all 4 pages but I feel compelled to sound off. I am all for helping people but I do feel it is getting out of hand. I get up and go to work every day, I pay my taxes and essentially these peoples bills. Don't get me wrong, I am all for helping people but when tax time rolls around welfare recipients receive a nice refund while I either break even or end up paying.
I believe that welfare should be limited to 5 years. That is more than enough time to get a degree or learn a trade and there are certainly enough resources to help pay for tuition. This should be a requirement, not an option. You have to be willing to help yourselves. As they say, give a man a fish etc etc etc.
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:50 AM. |