Scrapping Welfare

[IWantGod]

War is big business. I have made a few trillion of the despair that War causes. People ask me, how do you sleep at night, and i tell them it’s just business, it’s nothing personal.

 

[guanophore]

Absolutely not…

You might want to consider putting a quote in your reply, or use the reply button from the post to which you are responding. Otherwise, no one will know what you are talking about!

 

[joeybaggz]

joeybaggz:

Business is not always an evil, greedy, monster.

Business is fine. Knock yourself out. Just don’t pick from my pocket to pay the cost of building your lemonade stand.
I don’t care how popular your lemonade makes our street - it’s still theft.

Not even when my lemonade stand is going to make money for you??

 

[guanophore]

If someone is able-bodied, then yes, they should so something. I do remember a senator from Illinois who said in reference to requiring a person to work a few hours a week helping to maintain the building where they were getting free housing, that it was akin to Nazi Germany.

Wow. I missed that somehow. In what world does a member of the household or community NOT help to maintain their own dwellings? Can you imagine, before there were so many urban areas, and people did not live in buildings made by others, what would happen if the family/community did not maintain their buildings? I have been studying early Puritan communities (my ancestors came over with the Pilgrims in 1620). Everyone pulled together to bulid, maintain, and expand the village.

You also need to consider the cost of living is different in rural MS vs urban Chicago or San Francisco. The idea of me (in Texas) paying to help keep someone housed in San Francisco, when they could live much more inexpensively somewhere else seems a bit wrong.

It also does not put people to work where work is needed. I keep thinking back to the WPA and how unemployed and totally discouraged people could have productive employment, contribute to the welfare of the country and get job skills while being fed, clothed, and housed. I realize the WPA is not a perfect solution, but we have so much infrastructure that needs work in the US, and people that need to do work. Surely there is a way to put it together!

 

[IWantGod]

but we have so much infrastructure that needs work in the US, and people that need to do work. Surely there is a way to put it together!

Why don’t the unemployed get paid like in a regular job with tax money and trained to maintain the environment and infrastructure?

The US could just create real Jobs out of Tax money, and then people who pay tax wouldn’t have an excuse to complain.

 

[feed_me]

Or evil people can do this, feed cloth and house people and make them work and once the work is done discard them back to the streets with no money or anything in their pocket to survive… just sayin.

 

[guanophore]

The US could just create real Jobs out of Tax money, and then people who pay tax wouldn’t have an excuse to complain.

Well I doubt that! But yes, people getting benefits should be working or training for work. The $ should go for vocational education. Even volunteer work such as AmeriCorps would be good experience and give recipients valuable skills.

There were also a lot of practical problems that weren’t addressed. One big one was my lack of ability to get to a job made it very hard to find one when I did get healthy enough to apply. The buses only really served the expensive neighborhoods well, so I was only available for work monday-friday 9-6 or so because that was when the buses ran, and for most entry level jobs that was unacceptable.

People who have never had to depend on public transportation underestimate the difficulty it poses.

 

[godisgood77]

You might want to consider putting a quote in your reply, or use the reply button from the post to which you are responding. Otherwise, no one will know what you are talking about!

Was responding to the original post and thread title… Absolutely not in favor of scrapping support for those at the low end of the economic totem pole.

 

[on_the_hill]

Again, I agree in many cases. There are still a few situations where I agree with the fed’s intervention.

For example, it works well, overall, for environmental protection. I live in an area with one of the worst air qualities in the U.S., not so much because of what’s happening in our state, but because of what blows in from other states.

Personally, I like the idea that the feds forced the drinking age from 18 to 21.

And there might still be states that permit segregated schools or racial voter suppression if not for federal actions.

But I do agree that there are many, many situations where the states locals should make their own decisions.

 

[BarreandBark]

Instead of of scrapping it completely, I think it should be revisited that way it’s harder to get around it and make it a “lifestyle” - - stricter standards, time limits, etc. I find that there are people who really need it and being the #1 superpower, supposedly first-world nation, I think some sort of “bridge” assistance should be available to the downtrodden - - that is my Catholic heart speaking

 

[Thorolfr]

California is an economic disaster of its own making. Unless you’re insanely wealthy, few can afford to live there. Seattle/a chunk of NW Washington is heading in the same direction if it’s not careful. I don’t think any amount of Federal funding will pull CA out of the hole it’s in. Most of Sacramento needs to go - that’s the only thing that’s going to fix CA.

I’m from California and I’m not rich. Not everyone here lives in San Francisco or Los Angeles. There are still affordable places to live in California.

 

[feed_me]

Whhhhhhaaaaaattttt. let me pick up my jaw.

 

[Pup7]

I’m from California and I’m not rich. Not everyone here lives in San Francisco or Los Angeles. There are still affordable places to live in California.

I know - but your cost of living statewide is still very very high compared to many places - even compared to here in Washington. And SF and LA aren’t helping. Shame, really, because I love northern California, but the COL is prohibitive and a big factor in a lot of people choosing to not live there.

 

[Theo520]

Not even when my lemonade stand is going to make money for you??

If I chose to invest in your stand, then you didn’t pick my pocket RIGHT?
Otherwise shouldn’t I be allowed to decide where I spend/invest my money.

 

[DarkLight]

Wow. I missed that somehow. In what world does a member of the household or community NOT help to maintain their own dwellings? Can you imagine, before there were so many urban areas, and people did not live in buildings made by others, what would happen if the family/community did not maintain their buildings? I have been studying early Puritan communities (my ancestors came over with the Pilgrims in 1620). Everyone pulled together to bulid, maintain, and expand the village.

I mean, I don’t really maintain the building I live in other than basic cleaning. The tradeoff is that I don’t get any return on investment that a building owner would - I spend money every month on housing but I don’t see any sort of return on the money spent. The change in a welfare situation is that you’re not spending anything either.

 

[joeybaggz]

joeybaggz:

Not even when my lemonade stand is going to make money for you??

If I chose to invest in your stand, then you didn’t pick my pocket RIGHT?
Otherwise shouldn’t I be allowed to decide where I spend/invest my money.

Talking about public funding of stadiums. Your statement as to you being allowed to decide where you spend/invest your money was done when you voted the politicians in office to begin with. If you don’t like their decisions, you need to take it up with them.

 

[Theo520]

Talking about public funding of stadiums. Your statement as to you being allowed to decide where you spend/invest your money was done when you voted the politicians in office to begin with. If you don’t like their decisions, you need to take it up with them.

Agreed, we can vote them out if they haven’t already left when the real numbers become apparent.
Stadiums are also complicated by the emotional fan appeal, especially among the rich residents.

 

[joeybaggz]

joeybaggz:

Talking about public funding of stadiums. Your statement as to you being allowed to decide where you spend/invest your money was done when you voted the politicians in office to begin with. If you don’t like their decisions, you need to take it up with them.

Agreed, we can vote them out if they haven’t already left when the real numbers become apparent.
Stadiums are also complicated by the emotional fan appeal, especially among the rich residents.

Agreed. Often the “do we or don’t we fund the stadium” decision includes the rationale of what tangential benefits accrue to the city because of the presence of professional sports teams. You would not begin to believe the demands the owners of the NFL present the leaders of the jurisdiction in which they locate their Super Bowl. And the cities pony up every time. Why, because of 70 to 80 thousand people who will spend an obscene amount of money to attend one of their extravaganzas and the prestige the city gains by that exposure.

 

[upant]

Social Security may or may not be “welfare”. If someone pays in, and receives back what they paid in (plus some reasonable interest), then its not welfare. If someone pays in and receives back more than what they paid in (plus reasonable interest), then yes, they are receiving welfare.

think of it as an annuity, pay so much to collect for a term.

Point being: Welfare in its various forms, is more than just a way to help people who cannot help themselves, its also a vote-buying tool for certain politicians, which is why its so hard to reform.

also why welfare extends into the middle class and corporate world, votes or money.

 

[QContinuum]

Nope. You claim it makes more money, but all it does is being increased traffic on my street, costing me in terms of increased security, increased noise.

Regardless, stealing is stealing. Catholics always like to say that one can’t commit an evil to bring about a good. So stealing my money while claiming I’ll get an excellent return is wrong.

Again, don’t talk to me about cutting off the poor until you’ve first stopped the robber barons from stealing.