I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
Anecdotal stories aren't usable data. You're avoiding the actual subject (as you've basically been doing all through the thread every time someone has asked a direct question or called you out on your assertions).
I see women of Middle Eastern descent every day with hijabs, that doesn't mean that all women of Middle Eastern descent wear hijabs. I can not extrapolate whether the majority, a minority, 1% or 99% of all Middle Eastern women wear hijabs from what I see in my daily life.
|
Once again, the problem you are imagining - that of parasitic people living the high life on your dime - DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD. I won't even bother trying to convince you that you actually have no right to feel outraged if that really was happened, because it literally doesn't matter, since it's simply not happening now. This is like the voter fraud fears driving voter registration laws - it's all rumor and anecdote being passed around as fact.A minor disagreement: it absolutely does exist, but that does not mean that it is as prevalent as some people want us to think.I suppose it depends on what you mean - are there people who have given up because they can't see any realistic chance of improvement? Sure. Are there people who "game" the system by attempting to maximize their own personal benefit? Of course. The thing is, neither of those are really the same as "lazy takers" who are content to live as parasites, are they? The first are people who WANT more, but don't see any way to get it, so they don't bother to expend energy chasing after the dream anymore. The second, well, they're basically just doing what we celebrate in our wealthy captains of industry - cleverly taking advantage of the system to improve their situation.
The rate at which people who are simply unmotivated, "worthless" lumps actually exists might not be literally zero, but it's likely so low that you are more likely to be killed by an asteroid than you are to actually meet one.
DAILY i see people proud to take and work little if at all. DAILY i watch them abuse it
|
|
i have no isue with "the poor" i am the poor, it is how they choose to handle it that is the issueAnd I'm telling you that you do, in fact, have an issue with the poor. The things you are saying, the way you dismiss people as "takers" and "moochers" based entirely on your emotional disgust at what you mistakenly perceive to be their profligate spending habits, and the way you unquestioningly assume that poor people should be ashamed of being poor all speak to a screamingly obvious psychological need to reduce those people to a lesser status, likely either to improve your own self-image ("at least I'm not as bad as THEM"), or to justify not having to actually feel at all responsible to help them ("They don't deserve any of my hard earned money!"). Probably a bit of both, in fact. Whatever the case, though, it's simply not credible for someone to get upset that poor people might have the temerity to eat such luxury items as cookies, and then claim that they are not generally prejudiced against the poor. It simply doesn't compute.
Oh, and again, your daily experiences with people buying red bull and chips are not any kind of evidence of anything. For starters, you keep ignoring that there are good reasons for those purchasing patterns (or at least rational ones), as well as the pretty obvious fact that regardless of how often you see those "several" people, it's still only "several" people, and not any kind of large scale problem. Most importantly, the fact that you see people who buy things that you think indicates that they are not properly ashamed of being poor does not, in any way, indicate that those people are part of some "taker" class of sub-human, alien creatures who are content simply to exist as parasites forever.
Yes people that piss away stolen money meant to feed children are lesser. no they do not "deserve" my money. I do not mind making sure kids don't starve, i am insulted to suffer to work so trash can buy luxuries. not a mater of shame, a matter of responsibility and them lacking it
My experience? take the experience of every person in stores like mine.
Yes there is a growing class that is dependent and that is a huge issue, and the subclass that flat out games it is growing along with absolute acceptance of people choosing "aid" as cradle to grave care
|
The second, well, they're basically just doing what we celebrate in our wealthy captains of industry - cleverly taking advantage of the system to improve their situation.
Hah! I expected your first statement and intended to elicit it... But your second statement had not occurred to me even a little bit. Cheers again. Full point, that man!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't have much to add, because MrTsfloatinghead is doing a really solid job, though and this is a weakness, I just want to say I pity the fool.
But also it doesn't matter what you think you see Andrew, there are reasons why anecdotes are not data, beyond even the confirmation biases there are greater problems with trying to extrapolate their life trajectory from such incredibly limited interactions. Do you know their lives, did you ask them, "hey buddy, i notice you're buying foods I personally think you shouldn't have, are you trying to game the system and live a life devoid of work to live high on the money I contribute to taxes?" You see them for less 1% of their day, you know absolutely nothing about them besides what they are purchasing at that moment, nor do you have any clue what drove their purchases.
Getting a job might not be enough to get rich but if i work at mcdonalds and my buddy works at taco bell together we can get an apartment without stealing. Maybe we can rent a house and garden for some of our food, hunt and fish for some. is it living high on the hog? no but it is living honestly
Study: Low-Paid Fast-Food Employees Cost Taxpayers $3.8 Billion A Year
According to this, McDonald's employees receive $1.2 billion in "estimated annual cost of public assistance".
Yum Brands! (owner of Taco Bell) employees receive $648 million.
So... Can you do me a favor and start scaring The Man a bit more so He'll be willing to up the wages of class traitors such as myself?
For your sake, Usagi-san, I shall try harder.
|
|
Getting a job might not be enough to get rich but if i work at mcdonalds and my buddy works at taco bell together we can get an apartment without stealing. Maybe we can rent a house and garden for some of our food, hunt and fish for some. is it living high on the hog? no but it is living honestlyStudy: Low-Paid Fast-Food Employees Cost Taxpayers $3.8 Billion A Year
According to this, McDonald's employees receive $1.2 billion in "estimated annual cost of public assistance".
Yum Brands! (owner of Taco Bell) employees receive $648 million.
Business are part of the gaming the system, they know they do not HAVE to pay more because the gov will pick up the slack
|
|
I don't have much to add, because MrTsfloatinghead is doing a really solid job, though and this is a weakness, I just want to say I pity the fool.
But also it doesn't matter what you think you see Andrew, there are reasons why anecdotes are not data, beyond even the confirmation biases there are greater problems with trying to extrapolate their life trajectory from such incredibly limited interactions. Do you know their lives, did you ask them, "hey buddy, i notice you're buying foods I personally think you shouldn't have, are you trying to game the system and live a life devoid of work to live high on the money I contribute to taxes?" You see them for less 1% of their day, you know absolutely nothing about them besides what they are purchasing at that moment, nor do you have any clue what drove their purchases.
What i do know is that there is NO reason that they need to buy several energy drinks every day of the week at almost $3 a can. I DO know they do not need $20 in candy every night. Everyone that works retail sees this, some just see it as ok, many are doing it themselves
Business are part of the gaming the system, they know they do not HAVE to pay more because the gov will pick up the slack
"'Taxpayers do have a choice,' the research director at the Employment Policies Institute said in a statement responding to the NELP report. 'They can either provide partial support to less-skilled employees who have difficulty finding employment at higher wage rates, or they can provide a 100 percent subsidy when these employees lose their jobs due to an unrealistic wage mandate.'"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Getting a job might not be enough to get rich but if i work at mcdonalds and my buddy works at taco bell together we can get an apartment without stealing. Maybe we can rent a house and garden for some of our food, hunt and fish for some. is it living high on the hog? no but it is living honestlyStudy: Low-Paid Fast-Food Employees Cost Taxpayers $3.8 Billion A Year
According to this, McDonald's employees receive $1.2 billion in "estimated annual cost of public assistance".
Yum Brands! (owner of Taco Bell) employees receive $648 million.
I should have named my corporation Yum Brands! DiceCo sounds so clinical, whereas Yum Brands sounds, well, yummy. Plus that exclamation point is bit of genius level PR; it just makes you happy and excited to read the company's name.
I wonder if they'd be willing to provide some cut rate gruel for the goblin kennels . . .
Woops, it's Yum! Brands. Whether that excites you more or less, you vile trafficker in green flesh, I couldn't say.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
it must be nice to live in a world where everything you see can be extrapolated to everyone else in the same situation or from the same background and everyone who questions you or does anything different from how you would is wrong and deserves derision.
Woops, it's Yum! Brands. Whether that excites you more or less, you vile trafficker in green flesh, I couldn't say.
It excites me more! I can only hope that at corporate HQ they're required to say it with the appropriate emphasis. Something like: " (Brands)."
I so wish we could give you a state, say california, to turn into your socialist utopia. You can tax at 90% and claim all you want for the state. You can give as much as you want to anyone, without raiding the rest of the nation you are on your own. So you can just see how well your dreams work in reality. I can promise you anyone that wants to work and earn and have things would leave and the economy would be ussr in no time but hey you get your utopia. meanwhile free men that think we have the right to keep what we earn and do not like being used by leeches can go on in peace.
This is how I know you don't understand anything I say. You aren't debating me, you're debating some ghost in your mind that you think sounds like me.
How do I know? Because I don't want a "socialist utopia".
Your concern for the common is showing again.
I was speaking specifically of the culture of making sure that aid only goes to the "worthy" and those who aren't abusing the system, not aid for the poor in general.I think the current system is a result of compromises made to ensure that people "qualify" for aid. In our efforts to eradicate fraud and abuse, we've made the requirements stricter and tougher. People who are on the edge of qualifying end up having to lower themselves to meet the standard. People can't raise themselves up, because if they do they get into that zone where they're still poor, but no longer qualify for programs and their quality of life goes down.
That was one of the points about the article with just giving cash to homeless people.
1) It's cheaper. The cash is less money that you'd spend on aid programs per person.
2) The individual is able to address their direct needs. While those needs are similar between many people, the exact nature of those needs will differ.
The article isn't scientific, as has been addressed, but that isn't the value of it. Rather getting us to rethink how we give aid and distribute it.
A couple people have disagreed with this method though, saying we need strict requirements and controls on what people can do with the aid given. Which brings us right back to the compromises that have increased the culture of dependency.
Because the entire point of those strict requirements and controls is controlling those people. Isn't that exactly what a culture of dependency is? Making them jump through hoops to prove they're worthy of help? Making them beg for aid?
It is. I pointed that out a few pages ago and the discussion didn't go anywhere.
Pretty much, that's the entire problem with the current system; it is not about helping people. That's why it is the U.S. is throwing the equivalent of entire GDPs at the problem and not making one single bit of difference. The U.S. spending on aid in this area exceeds that of the total economy of entire nations; there is no excuse for the problem not getting better and for the fact it keeps getting worse.
The problem I have with that is that you seem to assume there is a difference between the two.
In my experience? There generally isn't. It doesn't matter if it's government-controlled or just a random group giving away stuff to the needy, there's usually a series of protocols and rules in place to make certain people are actually "worthy" of what they get.
More than just the system though. The fear of failure is pretty strong in American culture. Being allowed to fail is incongruent with the ideal of rugged individualism, even though logically it should be inherent to it. You see it all the time in sports analysis too, athletes can't be "great" unless they win.
The other aspect is power. If I have money and I just give it to you without restrictions, I'm not using the power that it gives me. If I give it to you but say you can only use it for certain things, I maintain my power. I don't necessarily think this is done maliciously to poor people, but people are loathe to give up power when they have it. Why just give poor people money, when you can make them jump through hoops to get it? In addition, because of our culture of rugged individualism, if they're poor they must have failed, therefore those who have money know more and should make the decisions for the poor people.
I think we're pretty close overall on this though, you and I.
I think we're very, very close. I agree with you utterly on power. And it's one of the things I do not like about how aid is currently handled.
The fear of failure, being cultural, is also something I see as systematic to how American aid programs work because the cultural influences also have decided the design of aid programs. Which is why it is I can't separate the two; I don't believe there is a separation and nearly everything I've seen suggests there isn't.
|
|
I want to go back to the dingo's original idea. While i think he wants to overspend there is some merit in his plan. Using a floor plan similar to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GLSxcLww2V4 but building with recycled plastics for outer walls and recycled paper as the primary insulation we could do it a lot cheaper. Make the roof of each east/west facing solar panels tied into the grid so as not to deal with batteries and whatnot but still make efficient use of otherwise wasted space. Put them on a standard city lot if not slightly smaller, giving room for a drive long enough for a car or two (or to use as a patio etc) and space that can be gardened for extra food. This would give a highly efficient low cost home that could be rented out to lower income or even provided free as the cost would be minimal. Maybe make a neighborhood of these in the now empty part of Detroit, with a grocer and gas station at it's center.
For people with kids you just replace the slide out bed with stairs to a second level and make a long narrow hall with 3 small bedroom and one of those panel heaters in each. I would suggest intentionally separating the single/couple units from the family units for 2 reasons first being the taller units not shadowing the solar on the smaller and second many single/couples without kids live on much different times (night workers) or simply do not want to be around kids. leads to less friction.
|
|
it must be nice to live in a world where everything you see can be extrapolated to everyone else in the same situation or from the same background and everyone who questions you or does anything different from how you would is wrong and deserves derision.I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
Not a matter of different, i love different. stealing and leeching are not "different" abusing aid money is not "different". The guy that lives in his pimped out bus is different,10 neo-hippies that buy mansion in detroit together are different, the guy in a log cabin is different. I think those are all great as long as they are being responsible adults and paying their way, even if they find very different ways o do it.
Not a matter of different, i love different. stealing and leeching are not "different" abusing aid money is not "different". The guy that lives in his pimped out bus is different,10 neo-hippies that buy mansion in detroit together are different, the guy in a log cabin is different. I think those are all great as long as they are being responsible adults and paying their way, even if they find very different ways o do it.it must be nice to live in a world where everything you see can be extrapolated to everyone else in the same situation or from the same background and everyone who questions you or does anything different from how you would is wrong and deserves derision.I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
Do you mean to say that only people who have money can afford to be different?
|
|
Do you mean to say that only people who have money can afford to be different?Not a matter of different, i love different. stealing and leeching are not "different" abusing aid money is not "different". The guy that lives in his pimped out bus is different,10 neo-hippies that buy mansion in detroit together are different, the guy in a log cabin is different. I think those are all great as long as they are being responsible adults and paying their way, even if they find very different ways o do it.it must be nice to live in a world where everything you see can be extrapolated to everyone else in the same situation or from the same background and everyone who questions you or does anything different from how you would is wrong and deserves derision.I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
By "have money" do you mean work in some way to earn money? Because i have seen shade tree mechanics that live in RVs and folks living in apartments making rent collecting scrap, neither taking from anyone and both as respectable to me as any cubical button pusher
Yes the person that works hard and doesn't do stupid things to dig their own grave is betterI pay taxes, i pay to use the roads and police. People that are on welfare take and take and many pay nothing into the system so no not alike at all.
You want a defense? here is the defense, you are not entitles to a life of luxury off someone else's labor. Free men have a right to earn without the government owning them and taking at whim to give (mostly as a vote earner) to people that refuse to work. We need to help people earn for themselves, incentive to WORK not incentive to laugh at the suckers paying for them. We need to fix this while we CAN.Andrew, you are not actually responding to me, nor are you actually defending your claims. What you are doing is regurgitating slogans that rely more on their emotional resonance than their actual rational reasoning to drive their persuasive power. Do you understand the difference?
Once again, the problem you are imagining - that of parasitic people living the high life on your dime - DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD. I won't even bother trying to convince you that you actually have no right to feel outraged if that really was happened, because it literally doesn't matter, since it's simply not happening now. This is like the voter fraud fears driving voter registration laws - it's all rumor and anecdote being passed around as fact.
Really? There is no one in the US living "the high life" on "free money." Funny, I know a guy that refuses to get a job. He claims disability, but has 'worked' as a volunteer receptionist at a charitable organization. He gets Section 8 housing, SNAP, Social Security, and any other money he can weasel out of the Government. He has had major surgery, (stomach bypass of some sort for his obesity), full dentures, etc. He mooches off his better off friends, and generally does nothing. When a mutual friend was diagnosed with diabetes he suggested that she quit her job (a job she has a Master's degree for) and go on Social Security. All this, and he pays no income taxes, he does pay sales taxes, and other taxes that are unavoidable. All not because he can't work, but because he doesn't want to. He is living as good a life as many and not working at all for it.
So why exactly should the rest of us pay for his housing, food, car, utilities, and everything else?
For all that, before the 20th century, the government didn't take of these people, charities did, mostly religious ones. What ever happened to that?
PS. Someone can receive Section 8 housing allowances of over $10,000 a year more than more than Federal Minimum Wage. The maximum allowed voucher is $2,200 a month.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Wow. An apartment and TEETH! Surely something must be done about this!
Really? There is no one in the US living "the high life" on "free money." Funny, I know a guy that refuses to get a job. He claims disability, but has 'worked' as a volunteer receptionist at a charitable organization. He gets Section 8 housing, SNAP, Social Security, and any other money he can weasel out of the Government. He has had major surgery, (stomach bypass of some sort for his obesity), full dentures, etc. He mooches off his better off friends, and generally does nothing. When a...
Hee hee!
I know a guy like that. He's a total mooch, lived with my local comrade buddies, actually. After a couple of years, they really couldn't stand him, and they're both communists. I never really pried into the details of his arrangements, but he got something like a grand a month from the state. Every now and then the state would get him a job, but they never seemed to stick. At one point, I believe, he was running some kind of Kickstarter to fix his car, doing odd jobs off Craigslist AND volunteering at a local gaming store and getting paid in store credit which he would then use to satiate his Magic: The Gathering addiction. Last part's funny, actually: the gaming store owner is some kind of secular, pot-smoking, Libertarian small business owner, and I guess he's got three or four of these "volunteers," at least one of whom is a welfare leech.
Anyway, he's since moved on--local comrade buddies started being icier when the moochy time of the month started, and he found another person to go live off (I think they're getting free landscaping out of him or something)--and we sometimes indulge at jokes at his expense, but I guess he used to work in a nursing home and was almost beaten to death by a mentally ill patient, was in a coma for a while, and is diagnosed with ptsd.
[Shrugs]
I think in a just and sane world, society would give him some useful function, like working retail in a gaming store or as a receptionist at a charitable institution and assure him access to, as Comrade BeeNee put it, the high life of an apartment and teeth. But, of course, we don't live in one of those worlds.
By "have money" do you mean work in some way to earn money? Because i have seen shade tree mechanics that live in RVs and folks living in apartments making rent collecting scrap, neither taking from anyone and both as respectable to me as any cubical button pusherDo you mean to say that only people who have money can afford to be different?Not a matter of different, i love different. stealing and leeching are not "different" abusing aid money is not "different". The guy that lives in his pimped out bus is different,10 neo-hippies that buy mansion in detroit together are different, the guy in a log cabin is different. I think those are all great as long as they are being responsible adults and paying their way, even if they find very different ways o do it.it must be nice to live in a world where everything you see can be extrapolated to everyone else in the same situation or from the same background and everyone who questions you or does anything different from how you would is wrong and deserves derision.I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
By "have money," I mean "are reasonably wealthy." Many of the items you talked about, including the "pimped-out" bus, actually require a pretty significant amount of money to have.
For all that, before the 20th century, the government didn't take of these people, charities did, mostly religious ones. What ever happened to that?
Most of the charity organizations in the United States are religious. They're also the ones doing most of the work in handling out food, helping people find jobs, running homeless shelters, etc.
Unfortunately, Thejeff is right; their efforts are not working. Nor did they ever work. That's part of why the poverty problem is growing so massively. It's also a pretty heavy contributing factor to a good portion of the U.S.'s domestic terrorism problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really? There is no one in the US living "the high life" on "free money." Funny, I know a guy that refuses to get a job. He claims disability, but has 'worked' as a volunteer receptionist at a charitable organization. He gets Section 8 housing, SNAP, Social Security, and any other money he can weasel out of the Government. He has had major surgery, (stomach bypass of some sort for his obesity), full dentures, etc. He mooches off his better off friends, and generally does nothing. When a...
Yes the person that works hard and doesn't do stupid things to dig their own grave is betterI pay taxes, i pay to use the roads and police. People that are on welfare take and take and many pay nothing into the system so no not alike at all.
You want a defense? here is the defense, you are not entitles to a life of luxury off someone else's labor. Free men have a right to earn without the government owning them and taking at whim to give (mostly as a vote earner) to people that refuse to work. We need to help people earn for themselves, incentive to WORK not incentive to laugh at the suckers paying for them. We need to fix this while we CAN.Andrew, you are not actually responding to me, nor are you actually defending your claims. What you are doing is regurgitating slogans that rely more on their emotional resonance than their actual rational reasoning to drive their persuasive power. Do you understand the difference?
Once again, the problem you are imagining - that of parasitic people living the high life on your dime - DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD. I won't even bother trying to convince you that you actually have no right to feel outraged if that really was happened, because it literally doesn't matter, since it's simply not happening now. This is like the voter fraud fears driving voter registration laws - it's all rumor and anecdote being passed around as fact.
He's got a roof over his head, and he's recovering from surgery along with busted teeth. If you call this guy's life the high life, then what's the low life? This doesn't sound like he's living too well.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
For all that, before the 20th century, the government didn't take of these people, charities did, mostly religious ones. What ever happened to that?Most of the charity organizations in the United States are religious. They're also the ones doing most of the work in handling out food, helping people find jobs, running homeless shelters, etc.
Unfortunately, Thejeff is right; their efforts are not working. Nor did they ever work. That's part of why the poverty problem is growing so massively. It's also a pretty heavy contributing factor to a good portion of the U.S.'s domestic terrorism problem.
They may be doing most of the work handing out food and running shelters and the like, but they're not supplying the bulk of the aid. That's the various "welfare" government programs that keep people from needing the food pantries and shelters in the first place.
More largely, as I've said before in this thread: Charity, whether public or private, can't fix the problem of poverty. All it can do is help out the poor, which is definitely worthwhile. Poverty is far more structural than helping the poor can address.
The problem, especially in the wake of the Great Recession, is the lack of jobs.
Saw another way to think about how the aid doesn't address the problem: it doesn't change the opportunities to pull oneself out of poverty.
Section 8 and SNAP are great for making a poor families budget stretch further, but it doesn't inherently create opportunities for them to get better jobs or be entrepreneurs.
Focusing more on free education and infrastructure (like better broadband access) would probably go a long ways toward providing better opportunities.
Equality is also good for growth. It means that the economy has the highest number of talented and motivated workers as possible. Everyone gets a chance. The problem is that an efficient economy tends to produce inequality, which then erodes that efficiency. A tax system that pushes us towards equality ensures that the highest number of workers are available, while a market system that rewards success encourages growth.
It's getting that balance, which we've pretty obviously failed the past couple decades. Areas of the country are falling into nearly third world status. If it wasn't for the wealth created from previous decades, they'd have almost nothing at all.
...Really? There is no one in the US living "the high life" on "free money." Funny, I know a guy that refuses to get a job. He claims disability, but has 'worked' as a volunteer receptionist at a charitable organization. He gets Section 8 housing, SNAP, Social Security, and any other money he can weasel out of the Government. He has had major surgery, (stomach bypass of some sort for his obesity), full dentures, etc. He mooches off his better off friends, and
Yes the person that works hard and doesn't do stupid things to dig their own grave is betterI pay taxes, i pay to use the roads and police. People that are on welfare take and take and many pay nothing into the system so no not alike at all.
You want a defense? here is the defense, you are not entitles to a life of luxury off someone else's labor. Free men have a right to earn without the government owning them and taking at whim to give (mostly as a vote earner) to people that refuse to work. We need to help people earn for themselves, incentive to WORK not incentive to laugh at the suckers paying for them. We need to fix this while we CAN.Andrew, you are not actually responding to me, nor are you actually defending your claims. What you are doing is regurgitating slogans that rely more on their emotional resonance than their actual rational reasoning to drive their persuasive power. Do you understand the difference?
Once again, the problem you are imagining - that of parasitic people living the high life on your dime - DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD. I won't even bother trying to convince you that you actually have no right to feel outraged if that really was happened, because it literally doesn't matter, since it's simply not happening now. This is like the voter fraud fears driving voter registration laws - it's all rumor and anecdote being passed around as fact.
Both the teeth, which rotted out of his mouth, and the surgery were years ago.
I do find it odd that no one can give me a reason why taxpayers should be supporting this leech.
BTW, saying that charities won't solve poverty is true, neither will the Government redistribution of wealth, unless of course you eliminate poverty by making everyone poor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...Really? There is no one in the US living "the high life" on "free money." Funny, I know a guy that refuses to get a job. He claims disability, but has 'worked' as a volunteer receptionist at a charitable organization. He gets Section 8 housing, SNAP, Social Security, and any other money he can weasel out of the Government. He has had major surgery, (stomach bypass of some sort for his obesity), full dentures, etc. He mooches off
Yes the person that works hard and doesn't do stupid things to dig their own grave is betterI pay taxes, i pay to use the roads and police. People that are on welfare take and take and many pay nothing into the system so no not alike at all.
You want a defense? here is the defense, you are not entitles to a life of luxury off someone else's labor. Free men have a right to earn without the government owning them and taking at whim to give (mostly as a vote earner) to people that refuse to work. We need to help people earn for themselves, incentive to WORK not incentive to laugh at the suckers paying for them. We need to fix this while we CAN.Andrew, you are not actually responding to me, nor are you actually defending your claims. What you are doing is regurgitating slogans that rely more on their emotional resonance than their actual rational reasoning to drive their persuasive power. Do you understand the difference?
Once again, the problem you are imagining - that of parasitic people living the high life on your dime - DOES NOT ACTUALLY EXIST IN THE REAL WORLD. I won't even bother trying to convince you that you actually have no right to feel outraged if that really was happened, because it literally doesn't matter, since it's simply not happening now. This is like the voter fraud fears driving voter registration laws - it's all rumor and anecdote being passed around as fact.
I'm more interested in what you would have be done to him instead. You have painted a picture that really slants towards your line of thinking- and absolutely nothing outside of it, which makes me suspicious. What are you leaving out? How well do you know this person? Have they EVER had a job? Why are they obese? Do they just sit around all day eating all day(not to put words in your mouth, but I'm confident that is what you are going to suggest) or another reason? Do they have a degree they aren't using? Do they have a degree at all? Were they born in this country? I know nothing more than what you have put forth, and considering your bias against the person, I'm not going to condemn them based on that alone.
|
|
By "have money," I mean "are reasonably wealthy." Many of the items you...By "have money" do you mean work in some way to earn money? Because i have seen shade tree mechanics that live in RVs and folks living in apartments making rent collecting scrap, neither taking from anyone and both as respectable to me as any cubical button pusherDo you mean to say that only people who have money can afford to be different?Not a matter of different, i love different. stealing and leeching are not "different" abusing aid money is not "different". The guy that lives in his pimped out bus is different,10 neo-hippies that buy mansion in detroit together are different, the guy in a log cabin is different. I think those are all great as long as they are being responsible adults and paying their way, even if they find very different ways o do it.it must be nice to live in a world where everything you see can be extrapolated to everyone else in the same situation or from the same background and everyone who questions you or does anything different from how you would is wrong and deserves derision.I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
Not at all, i have seen an old bus sell for $500 and just need a bit of work, maybe a grand in materials. Can be done easily. Groups can pool even minimum wages into a decent house.
|
|
...
Really? There is no one in the US living "the high life" on "free money." Funny, I know a guy that refuses to get a job. He claims disability, but has 'worked' as a volunteer receptionist at a charitable organization. He gets Section 8 housing, SNAP, Social Security, and any other money he can weasel out of the Government. He has had major surgery, (stomach bypass of some sort for his obesity), full dentures, etc. He mooches off
Someone earlier said that he deserves it and if we have to pay it then screw us.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For all that, before the 20th century, the government didn't take of these people, charities did, mostly religious ones. What ever happened to that?What happened to that? It didn't work. It never worked.
Until the mid-19th century the frontier, with farming land for the claiming, helped alleviate the worst of the problem. By the end of 19th century with that gone, lifespans were dropping.
People lived in poverty we just don't consider acceptable today. Even most of the working poor. They died. They didn't get medical care. They begged for food. They lived in hovels. Even the working poor lived in great hardship.
Charities, religious or otherwise, were only a band aid on the problem.If people are going to complain about government not being able to fix the problem, charity couldn't fix it either. Did far worse, in fact.
And just in case Vod Canockers doesn't believe you, I'd love to see him argue against photographic evidence.
Not at all, i have seen an old bus sell for $500 and just need a bit of work, maybe a grand in materials. Can be done easily. Groups can pool even minimum wages into a decent house.By "have money," I mean "are reasonablyBy "have money" do you mean work in some way to earn money? Because i have seen shade tree mechanics that live in RVs and folks living in apartments making rent collecting scrap, neither taking from anyone and both as respectable to me as any cubical button pusherDo you mean to say that only people who have money can afford to be different?Not a matter of different, i love different. stealing and leeching are not "different" abusing aid money is not "different". The guy that lives in his pimped out bus is different,10 neo-hippies that buy mansion in detroit together are different, the guy in a log cabin is different. I think those are all great as long as they are being responsible adults and paying their way, even if they find very different ways o do it.it must be nice to live in a world where everything you see can be extrapolated to everyone else in the same situation or from the same background and everyone who questions you or does anything different from how you would is wrong and deserves derision.I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
There's a large, large difference between "old bus" and "mansion." There's also a large difference between "old bus" and "log cabin." And definitely a pretty measurable difference between "old bus" and "pimped-out bus."
$500 doesn't buy any of those. And, in fact, it can be relatively difficult for a poor family to pull that much money together. Poor individuals can have just as much bad luck. And that's even assuming it's legal for them to use it as a residence in the first place; it's not in some areas.
By "have money" do you mean work in some way to earn money? Because i have seen shade tree mechanics that live in RVs and folks living in apartments making rent collecting scrap, neither taking from anyone and both as respectable to me as any cubical button pusherDo you mean to say that only people who have money can afford to be different?Not a matter of different, i love different. stealing and leeching are not "different" abusing aid money is not "different". The guy that lives in his pimped out bus is different,10 neo-hippies that buy mansion in detroit together are different, the guy in a log cabin is different. I think those are all great as long as they are being responsible adults and paying their way, even if they find very different ways o do it.it must be nice to live in a world where everything you see can be extrapolated to everyone else in the same situation or from the same background and everyone who questions you or does anything different from how you would is wrong and deserves derision.I see it every day. DAILY i sell redbull and chips often over $20 every day to the same person, multiple same persons. We have one that every month comes in and buys over a hundred dollars in 20 oz pop bottles when the money hits the cardOkay, enough.
Please provide solid evidence that this apparent huge number of people on welfare are just actual "moochers" with no intentions of doing anything but game the system. That they constantly refuse training, education in an effort to live a "life of luxury" on other people's dime.
Until you can do that you're just talking out of your ass, spouting personal opinion with nothing concrete to back it up. As to why you're doing it, well, the floating head has touched on some possible reasons.
So, put up or shut up.
Shade tree mechanics? What the hell is that?
Collecting scrap? I've seen people arrested for that in NY. It's considered vagrancy.
What is rag-picking?
There's a large, large difference between "old bus" and "mansion." There's also a large difference between "old bus" and "log cabin." And definitely a pretty measurable difference between "old bus" and "pimped-out bus."
$500 doesn't buy any of those. And, in fact, it can be relatively difficult for a poor family to pull that much money together. Poor individuals can have just as much bad luck. And that's even assuming it's legal for them to use it as a residence in the first place; it's not in some areas.
It's not uncommon for someone who's recently lost their job to still have decent stuff when they go on assistance. Should we make them sell everything before they get any help, including those things that might help them find work again? (House, car, computer, cell phone)
Or even those who've lost the house, might still have a decent car to sleep in.
Do you see me complaining about people having decent stuff when they go on assistance?
Also, sleeping in a car is illegal around here, last I checked. Illegal in quite a few other places, too.
There's a large, large difference between "old bus" and "mansion." There's also a large difference between "old bus" and "log cabin." And definitely a pretty measurable difference between "old bus" and "pimped-out bus."
$500 doesn't buy any of those. And, in fact, it can be relatively difficult for a poor family to pull that much money together. Poor individuals can have just as much bad luck. And that's even assuming it's legal for them to use it as a residence in the first place; it's not in some areas.
It's not uncommon for someone who's recently lost their job to still have decent stuff when they go on assistance. Should we make them sell everything before they get any help, including those things that might help them find work again? (House, car, computer, cell phone)
Or even those who've lost the house, might still have a decent car to sleep in.
sleeping in a car in NY is very chancy. You could easily be arrested.
Collecting scrap? I've seen...Why do I suspect anyone making even a lousy living collecting scrap is doing so illegally. Things like stripping metal from vacant houses.
Or, taking the other angle, shall we go back to having people make a living rag-picking?
Thanks jeff, I completely forgot about that.
You could also easily be killed(legally) by a homeowner if you're collecting scrap from their home or on their property. I've known people who almost killed someone collecting the copper from their gutters.
For all that, before the 20th century, the government didn't take of these people, charities did, mostly religious ones. What ever happened to that?Most of the charity organizations in the United States are religious. They're also the ones doing most of the work in handling out food, helping people find jobs, running homeless shelters, etc.
Absolutely not. There is no way these organizations are more than a blip on section 8, HUD, free lunch programs, etc.
The problem is too big for these charities by multiple orders of magnitude. Thats why we have government.
That's part of why the poverty problem is growing so massively.
Compared to what?
It's also a pretty heavy contributing factor to a good portion of the U.S.'s domestic terrorism problem.
Well, the newburgh 5 were mostly poor people hired by a government provocateur (either because he was told to or he needed to show some results to justify his existance) in exchange for food and cash, but other than that most of the domestic terrorists are either eco nuts (who's terrorism is less dangerous than pencil erasers), or anti government right wingnuts that are doing ok ish. I don't see any relationship between domestic terrorism and poverty.
I'm not a doctor, but I'm going to say that if the dude got beaten into a coma, there's a good chance of some long lasting brain damage thats going to make holding down a 9-5 job a little rough. Not to mention any time a year goes missing on your resume, employers assume you were jailed or something and toss your resume into the bin.