So being a student is supposed to be WORSE than being a prisoner? Bread, water, no tv, no cigarettes, 6 people to a room and institutionalized meals?
If they're going to college they're going to have a lifetime of increased wages to pay you back for for a few sixpacks. You are not going to solve the national debt by ending the bar tab at community college.
How is "people on food stamps should not be allowed to buy beer" different from "You shouldn't get food stamps if you're buying beer"?
pfft what was I thinking?
Fine;
can you buy my kids food while I just use my hard earned cash for beer and an iphone?
I sure would like an iphone.
I want....I want apps. I got no apps.
And, I need a new leather jacket. The zipper's broken on mine, and....snif.....the people at work all make fun of me.....
BAWWWWWW!
I'm like the Twilight Samurai over here. I......really don't feel bad.
So being a student is supposed to be WORSE than being a prisoner? Bread, water, no tv, no cigarettes, 6 people to a room and institutionalized meals?
If they're going to college they're going to have a lifetime of increased wages to pay you back for for a few sixpacks. You are not going to solve the national debt by ending the bar tab at community college.
I'm not trying to solve the national debt. It would be nice, though, if all the people who need help could get help.
A pack of cigarettes whose purchase was offset by assistance money could really go far to ease the rumbling in an actually starving guy's stomach.
They would rather have me stuck on food stamps forever than pay temporarily for me to eat while I was using the GI Bill to go to college.
West Virginia has the exact same policy.
You cannot attend college and collect food stamps.
It does not matter if the GI bill is providing an income equal to what you would make without a degree. You have to quit school before they will help you.
Man. That is some s$~#. You just explained a lot about West Virginia, and I don't mean that in a pejorative way.
A pack of cigarettes whose purchase was offset by assistance money could really go far to ease the rumbling in an actually starving guy's stomach.
And how do you propose to micromanage those getting assistance on that level in such a fashion that you actually save money rather than costing more in surveillance and monitoring than you save?
Spanky, I'm a little confused. Are you upset that this guy had a beer, had food stamps and was getting a beer or was trying to use his beer to buy food stamps? Because I'm a bit lost here- I understand some people are being obtuse or baiting you, but I'm not doing that- I'm trying to see what the problem is from your perspective. I've seen things like this before, and from my perspective I really don't have a problem with it because you can't buy beer with food stamps around my way, and you NEED to use ALL your food stamps or you will be cut off, often without any advance notice. Now if your internal spanky-sense was saying this guy wasn't on the up and up, then I'll take your word for it, but one situation doesn't equate to all(not that I'm saying that's what you're saying). Maybe it's something unique to where you were(through this thread and my job and my friends in other states I'm seeing this A LOT with respect to any sort of public assistance), or maybe you were in a messed up situation at the time and it really made people taking advantage obvious. That said, I think you're coming across differently than how you mean to.
So being a student is supposed to be WORSE than being a prisoner? Bread, water, no tv, no cigarettes, 6 people to a room and institutionalized meals?
If they're going to college they're going to have a lifetime of increased wages to pay you back for for a few sixpacks. You are not going to solve the national debt by ending the bar tab at community college.
I'm not trying to solve the national debt. It would be nice, though, if all the people who need help could get help.
A pack of cigarettes whose purchase was offset by assistance money could really go far to ease the rumbling in an actually starving guy's stomach.
Why are you using anecdotes to inform your opinion on programs and budgets that are measured in hundreds of millions and even billions of dollars?
For example, if welfare programs to poor people with children (Family and Children + Housing) equals $176 billion, with a 2% fraud rate ($3.52 billion), how would you feel about GE that avoided paying $2.2 Billion in taxes the same year? Or ExxonMobile being the largest corporation in the world, posting the most profits of anyone and still receiving tax breaks?
The Pentagon estimates that $31-60 billion has been lost to contractor fraud and waste in Afghanistan and Iraq.
Anecdotes are neat. But they shouldn't be used to inform political choices. Yes, it sucks that people lie. This information is not news and shouldn't be considered surprising.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While the concern is touching and the lack of understanding of the real issues is still concerning, I need to clear a few things up.
I ate out of trash cans for a month. I then found a job and have continued to do what I did before, work my ass off to get through school. I'm lucky. I had an address, and I managed to get a job on the spot rather than a call back. Plenty of people I met in similar situations didn't have those things, and the bar rises significantly for them to find work.
To the loudmouth who has so tritely suggested I simply abandon my own dreams for the apprentice program and become an electrician instead, I will celebrate the day your evil thoughts are seen as aberrant and disgusting. I've left three pints of my blood in foreign countries and was doing so while you were huddled under a desk on 9-11 wondering if your world was going to end, so if it's too much trouble for you to stand behind the troops when they want to educate themselves and excel in the civilian world the same way they did in the military, you may feel free to go stand in front of the ones still fighting, bleeding and dying for your liberty. The American Dream I fought for is where every man and woman in this country can become productive citizens and live a life that allows them to pursue what they find good about life. And quite frankly, I deserve it. I've done more for this country than you'll ever dream of, and I don't find 'eating while in college' to be too much to ask back from it. You managed to sit down while I was standing up for your freedom, you can keep on doing so with your disrespectful and ill informed opinions.
My point was not to suggest that I have failed in life because they wouldn't feed me. My point is that I can now easily see why someone might decide, "whelp, better hit an under the table job and food stamps than try to force my way through college on an empty stomach". The policy is sick, and the policy will cost you anti-welfare numbies more tax money in welfare, which is why all the arguments of not being able subsidize someone's laziness don't pan out. They are subsidizing laziness, while at the same time refusing to subsidize industriousness.
While the concern is touching and the lack of understanding of the real issues is still concerning, I need to clear a few things up.
I ate out of trash cans for a month. I then found a job and have continued to do what I did before, work my ass off to get through school. I'm lucky. I had an address, and I managed to get a job on the spot rather than a call back. Plenty of people I met in similar situations didn't have those things, and the bar rises significantly for them to find work.
To the loudmouth who has so tritely suggested I simply abandon my own dreams for the apprentice program and become an electrician instead, I will celebrate the day your evil thoughts are seen as aberrant and disgusting. I've left three pints of my blood in foreign countries and was doing so while you were huddled under a desk on 9-11 wondering if your world was going to end, so if it's too much trouble for you to stand behind the troops when they want to educate themselves and excel in the civilian world the same way they did in the military, you may feel free to go stand in front of the ones still fighting, bleeding and dying for your liberty. The American Dream I fought for is where every man and woman in this country can become productive citizens and live a life that allows them to pursue what they find good about life. And quite frankly, I deserve it. I've done more for this country than you'll ever dream of, and I don't find 'eating while in college' to be too much to ask back from it. You managed to sit down while I was standing up for your freedom, you can keep on doing so with your disrespectful and ill informed opinions.
My point was not to suggest that I have failed in life because they wouldn't feed me. My point is that I can now easily see why someone might decide, "whelp, better hit an under the table job and food stamps than try to force my way through college on an empty stomach". The policy is sick, and the policy will cost you anti-welfare numbies more tax money in welfare, which is why all the arguments of not being able subsidize someone's laziness don't pan out. They are subsidizing laziness, while at the same time refusing to subsidize industriousness.
More garbage. Paying attention to what is being stated would clear some of this up.
There was no suggestion you should abandon your dream.
Merely the accurate point that a safer alternative existed that could be taken advantage of was made. There is no reason to complain that the risky avenue taken where money would come later rather than sooner made it hard because the money is to come later rather than sooner when one had the option to tale a path where the money would come sooner. Nothing unfair about that at all.
The point that others have failed cause they won't feed you is an inaccurate one cause they had a path that would have done so but another was chosen. Not their fault if you don't have food.
Is beer a necessity? Are iPhones?
I'm ok with providing assistance for BASIC NEEDS.
Beer does not fit that bill. If you can afford to purchase and pay the monthly bill for an iPhone or any smart phone for that matter, you do not need assistance. You need to set priorities. You need to budget. If you can't get through a day without a beer, you may need AA as well.
EDIT: For the record, I do not have a smart phone of any kind, I still use an old flip phone. I have had to cut all kinds of non-essentials like cable tv over the last year or so to pay for medical bills. I do not eat out anymore, and the groceries I probably spend 50 bucks a week on for two people. Beer, I like. Beer has to wait until I can afford to spend grocery money on it. Cable has to stay disconnected until I can afford it. Any apple device I want has to wait until I can afford it.
Merely the accurate point that a safer alternative existed that could be taken advantage of was made.
It was safer IN YOUR OPINION. Thats no the same thing.
|
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its always a pleasure to see other people told that their lives should be a joyless grind.
It's the bootstraps principle usually, people looking down on others for not having the combination of accumen, fortitude, resolve, fortune and opportunity that they had.
It is amazing how many people pull themselves out of a hole and then, on reflection, decide to roll a boulder over the hole rather than letting down a rope.
That has changed. New rules.When? The guys I know were cut within the last couple of years.
They weren't laid off.
If they were cut, they were fired or failed out.
Either is quite an accomplishment.
I just verified with the NNSY apprentice office that no apprentices have been released (other than above) since '95. It was axed and restarted in 2003. "No reduction in force" has happened to the apprentice program since it was disbanded in '95 and reformed in 2003.
Note: Protection is not complete protection from being laid off. It includes, but is not limited to, exemption from the typical layoff pattern where apprentices would be the first to go because they were the lowest WG with the shortest time in service. You know, the way that union layoffs actually occur. An act of congress shutting down the entire shipyard would circumvent that.
I'm done with this thread now.
Too much nonsense to track down and straighten out.
I don't have time to spend explaining to people basic facts (not opinion) they should know as adults: what is or isn't a medical excuse, or how unemployment works in their home states (a different state than mine), explain to people the existence of things such as workforce development cabinets and offices of vocational rehabilitation, explain to the people the shortage of skilled labor in the US, or have people (I assume unintentionally) tell me factually incorrect things about the apprentice program that I personally graduated from and then take the time to track down the administrators to verify the claims.
Its always a pleasure to see other people told that their lives should be a joyless grind.
It's the bootstraps principle usually, people looking down on others for not having the combination of accumen, fortitude, resolve, fortune and opportunity that they had.
It is amazing how many people pull themselves out of a hole and then, on reflection, decide to roll a boulder over the hole rather than letting down a rope.
More useless platitudes.
Now I'm done.
Now I'm done.
Thank goodness.
I'll take platitudes over useless vitriol any day.
I don't know what you all are talkin' about, I think this thread is great!!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My personal perspective on the matter of welfare is invariably determined by my religious beliefs, and such I cannot bear a system that does not have the dignity of each and every person as the ultimate goal. Now, the complexities arrise when trying to define what said dignity implies, but I have come to the conclussion it must include, at least, an asurance of physical, mental, and spiritual tranquility, as well as a situation where every citizen is given the same opportunities (which is different from the same material conditions).
Thus, I favour Subsidiariety over Assistentialism. Under the former, the State plays a role of ensuring everyone gets access to the necessary means to both keep the aforementioned level of dignity and grant a leveled playing field in terms of opportunities (which includes not only a proper legislative body, but also access to the tools required for said equitative terms, such as education), but only if the person is unable to provide them him or herself; under the latter, the State provides the same things, regardless of the person's capacity to do it.
Therefore, I think the State should always provide free healthcare and education to its people, while at the same time leaving room for private initiatives for those who can afford it. I've never fully understood the particulars of the US system, but I still have issues trying to figure out why the largest economy in the world doesn't have free healthcare for its poorest citizens, particularly when I live in a middle-class country -Chile- where such a thing is not even a matter of discussion, and we're not exactly the richest of the bunch.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Is beer a necessity? Are iPhones?
I'm ok with providing assistance for BASIC NEEDS.Beer does not fit that bill. If you can afford to purchase and pay the monthly bill for an iPhone or any smart phone for that matter, you do not need assistance. You need to set priorities. You need to budget. If you can't get through a day without a beer, you may need AA as well.
EDIT: For the record, I do not have a smart phone of any kind, I still use an old flip phone. I have had to cut all kinds of non-essentials like cable tv over the last year or so to pay for medical bills. I do not eat out anymore, and the groceries I probably spend 50 bucks a week on for two people. Beer, I like. Beer has to wait until I can afford to spend grocery money on it. Cable has to stay disconnected until I can afford it. Any apple device I want has to wait until I can afford it.
My ex was a CNA. No disrespect to CNA's, they are hard-working, underappreciated people, but a CNA is not a medical professional so much as a domestic for people whose disability precludes them from taking care of their own residence. Couple observations she made to me:
The overwhelming majority of her clients--probably 95%--were in fact medically capable of taking care of their own residence, or lived with an unimpaired adult relative, but were on some bogus disability that qualified them for a taxpayer-funded housekeeper. Some of them were simply too obese to leave the house.
She had one client who lived in a house that the floor was so deteriorated that you had to step around holes you could see the ground through. There was no indoor plumbing--she actually had an outhouse. Although she couldn't afford an indoor toilet, she could sure afford satellite TV.
Although she couldn't afford an indoor toilet, she could sure afford satellite TV.
Not to pick on you, but this sort of thinking seems indicative of my esteemed opposition. To wit: "If MY tax dollars are going into YOUR pocket, I'm for damn sure going to dictate how you live every second of your life!"
For your specific grievance, the installation of plumbing services can easily cost in the tens of thousands of dollars. With mini-satellites, the installation is often free and subscription cheap.
In conclusion: people are dumb. If we're all going to agree that dumb people shouldn't get public assistance of any kind, I think we can safely dismantle the social safety net in total.
Is beer a necessity? Are iPhones?
I'm ok with providing assistance for BASIC NEEDS.Beer does not fit that bill. If you can afford to purchase and pay the monthly bill for an iPhone or any smart phone for that matter, you do not need assistance. You need to set priorities. You need to budget. If you can't get through a day without a beer, you may need AA as well.
EDIT: For the record, I do not have a smart phone of any kind, I still use an old flip phone. I have had to cut all kinds of non-essentials like cable tv over the last year or so to pay for medical bills. I do not eat out anymore, and the groceries I probably spend 50 bucks a week on for two people. Beer, I like. Beer has to wait until I can afford to spend grocery money on it. Cable has to stay disconnected until I can afford it. Any apple device I want has to wait until I can afford it.
My ex was a CNA. No disrespect to CNA's, they are hard-working, underappreciated people, but a CNA is not a medical professional so much as a domestic for people whose disability precludes them from taking care of their own residence. Couple observations she made to me:
The overwhelming majority of her clients--probably 95%--were in fact medically capable of taking care of their own residence, or lived with an unimpaired adult relative, but were on some bogus disability that qualified them for a taxpayer-funded housekeeper. Some of them were simply too obese to leave the house.
She had one client who lived in a house that the floor was so deteriorated that you had to step around holes you could see the ground through. There was no indoor plumbing--she actually had an outhouse. Although she couldn't afford an indoor toilet, she could sure afford satellite TV.
So why are we trying to force indoor toilets on people? So if your wife say has a medical disability that means you should have to do all the housework would some of the relative that live with these people leave if they had to do all the housework is another question. Since someone is on goverment assistenence does that mean you get to go through and cherry pick their expenses as waste. Also how many people in this thread drink bottled water?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16
|
Lol. I made no assertions about what should be done. I am surprised it took all of 20 minutes before other posters starting putting words in my mouth.
But, if you want to attribute something to me, you can attribute this. Assistance should be for basic necessities, not luxuries. If you can afford luxuries but you're asking for handouts for basic necessities, the help you need is not a handout, it's help with prioritizing expenses, setting a budget, and sticking to it.
And this: if you share a residence with a disabled person and you're too sorry to help with housework, shame on you. The rest of society shouldn't have to wash your clothes and take out your trash.
Assistance should be for those who lack the ability to take care of themselves, not those who lack the motivation to take care of themselves.
Bella Sara Charter Superscriber
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Here's what I don't understand. Assuming that the government can easily, quickly, correctly, and efficiently differentiate the "worthy poor" (those we think "deserve" aid for some reason - Charlie from the Chocolate Factory, if you will) from the "unworthy poor" (the no indoor plumbing, beer swilling, no-good-nicks), and we can immediately eliminate the benefits the unworthy poor are wasting, what happens next? Are these people going to finally realize the world won't keep writing them a check and get a job? Will anyone hire them? Will they be able to keep the job, or will they get fired because the same qualities that make them incompetent at receiving and using government aid also make them terrible employees?
I'm sure some will succeed. I'm sure some will do what people like that have always done - sponge off those who love them (probably making the lives of those loved ones worse and possibly jeapordizing their financial security in the process). But, what about the others who don't have loved ones (or those whose loved ones finally get fed up and abandon them)? Are they homeless? Do they turn to crime? Do they turn to greater addictions?
Give a man a fish, you feed him for a day. Teach a man to fish, you feed him for life. Unless he's too incompetent to fish or doesn't live near water. In that case, I vote to give him some fish and minimize the damage he does by even attempting to fish. Or, I suppose, kill or deport him away from where I am attempting to fish. That solves my problem and, given that we have a government that can easily, quickly, correctly, and efficiently differentiate various types of poor people, we don't have to worry about killing/deporting the wrong type of person.
Of course, this doesn't fix the potential reverse problem - if everyone's entitled to a free fish, why should anyone fish at all? And, if no one fishes, where is all this free fish going to come from. I doubt there's a solution that everyone will like, and I doubt even more that there is a perfect solution, but I am certain that there is no easy solution. That's the problem with reality - it's messy and rarely conforms to our ideals of what other people should do.
But, if you want to attribute something to me, you can attribute this. Assistance should be for basic necessities, not luxuries.
Which is all I was attributing to you.
The problem, to me, is that many people (not you, necessarily, but others in this very thread have been rather harsh) seem to have a very low bar for what is a necessity. What? You're spending your unemployment check on toilet paper? Wipe your ass with your hand LIKE A MAN! What? You're spending it on birth control? Keep your legs closed! What? You're spending it on juice? Drink water you lowlife!
Etc.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
News flash: Not everyone in a bad situation is there because he or she made bad choices. If, just because *you* aren't in that situation, you're convinced that it can't happen to you, then congratulations: Not only are you mistaken, but you're entirely devoid of compassion.
It is amazing how many people pull themselves out of a hole and then, on reflection, decide to roll a boulder over the hole rather than letting down a rope.
Well said.
Lol. I made no assertions about what should be done. I am surprised it took all of 20 minutes before other posters starting putting words in my mouth.
But, if you want to attribute something to me, you can attribute this. Assistance should be for basic necessities, not luxuries. If you can afford luxuries but you're asking for handouts for basic necessities, the help you need is not a handout, it's help with prioritizing expenses, setting a budget, and sticking to it.
And this: if you share a residence with a disabled person and you're too sorry to help with housework, shame on you. The rest of society shouldn't have to wash your clothes and take out your trash.
Assistance should be for those who lack the ability to take care of themselves, not those who lack the motivation to take care of themselves.
Yes but it is harder to get housework done with someone with a mental disability in the house. One person might not always be enough to get all the housework done and take care of two special needs children for example.
I personally think cable tv isn't a luxury but bottled water is waste. I would rather have a person on welfare get cable tv than bottled water.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, but you should be using that loose change to buy food. If you've got any loose change left, you don't need my tax dollars!
Unless you're hungry enough to EAT the loose change as soon as it gets into your hand -- to supplement your usual daily alotment of dirt -- then you're nowhere CLOSE to being needy enough to deserve my tax dollars!
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wish I were part of the special group that has never benefited from any sort of public money. Never driven on a road built by taxes. Never eaten food kept safe by tax-funded inspection or regulation. Never used the fire department, or the police, or public schools. Never gone to a library, or a park. Then I could go on to start a business (that would presumably also never use any of these things) and legitimately gripe about all this misuse of "my" tax dollars, and about how I'm a victim of outright theft!
I must just be very unlucky, because judging from most public comments on the matter, whole swaths of the country are a part of this elite group. Oh well.
As far as I understand, Lilith's Thrall, Food Stamps and Unemployment (the only two welfare services I've looked into qualifying for) are both managed by the state, at the state level.
So I do not agree with you that such would fix anything.
I don't know about Chile these days, but I know there are and have been Latin American countries where the basically the whole government is corrupt. Actually, Chile during the Pinochet regime would be a good example.
Making a short tangent here, but for precision's sake, Chile consistently ranks among the top 20 least corrupt countries in the world. And the Pinochet era saw even lower levels of corruption (for all its issues, the regime was very keen on maintaining security, economic stability, and rooting out state corruption).