Bill O'Rights

Maleficent's thread, regarding the Somali refugee, got my blood boiling. So, rather than threadjack, I opted to initiate a seperate discussion relating to Public Assistance, as a whole.

As most of you know, my viewpoints run the graph. I do not consider myself a "liberal", nor do I consider myself a "conservative". Public Assistance is one issue, however, that brings out the "neo-con" in me.

In Mal's thread, she made the following statement;
To which brian1975 replied;
To which I say...if someone is unwilling to do for themselves, then why should I be forced to do for them? I'm not talking about the specific instance in mal's thread. I'm talking...in general.
Don't waste time telling me that there are people that need a help up. I'm perfectly aware of that. I was one of them. At one time I was half a paycheck away from being homeless. Yet, I never received public assistance. I worked, and I worked, and I worked until I slowly, gradually worked my way into better and better circumstances. I'm not well to do, but I'm...comfortable. I no longer need to worry about where dinner is going to come from the next day.

I see, first hand, people who are given free food, free healthcare (better than that which I pay for), and housing for little, or no, cost (a lot nicer homes than the one I lived in when I was on the skids). I see this, and I ask...why? Why am I forced to subsidize this...lifestyle? I see people at the supermaket checkout, buying steaks and crablegs with foodstamps, while I look at my own purchase of hamburger and generic froot loops. I see this, and I ask...why? I see people going to the Emergicare, over an injury that requires little more than bactine and a bandaid, paid for by Medicaid. I see this, and I ask...why? I see people sitting on the front porches of homes, that I help pay to subsidize, that far exceed the comforts of my first home, at any hour of the day. What's up with that?

I am fed the hell up. On the other hand, I don't have all the answers either. I do know that there are people that genuinely need help. But, I do believe that these people represent a very small minority of those collecting public asistance. One answer that I do have is mandatory drug testing. If you're too destitute to supply yourself with the basic necessities of life, then you are certainly too poor to afford drugs. If any trace of drugs are found in your system, then your assistance ends...NOW! Hey...if it's good enough for the work place...then, well. Yes, I know that goes against my Libertarian views. But, then again...so does Public Assistance.

I'm done ranting...for now.

__________________
"I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do because I notice it always coincides with their own desires." - Susan B. Anthony

"Hedonism with rules isn't hedonism at all, it's the Republican party." - JumpinJesus

It is indisputable that true beauty lies within...but a nice rack sure doesn't hurt.

Psycho Dad

The sense of entitlement people seem to have that Mal mentioned is a real problem. Were those that believe they are entitled to something walking around with a chip on their shoulder because of it, it would be one thing. But when it bleeds over into perverting the intent of public assistance it is another problem altogether. Public assistance should provide basic needs and promote self sufficiency for those who must resort to it. Instead in many cases it seems to provide too much of a crutch for people to prop themselves upon and never move beyond.

There are some success stories I know. A good friend of my wife was able to collect food stamps while she was going to school. This was before my wife was friends with this woman and my wife felt animosity towards this woman. Once the woman finished her education she got a job and I will wager will never be on assistance again. On the other hand, there are those who will never realize personal responsibility and ride the public assistance train off the tracks.

The ironic thing about my wife is that while she once felt resentment about someone who would later become a good friend getting food stamps, she now works for an agency that provides public assistance. Granted this agency is supposed to encourage a path to self sufficiency but I don’t see it working. This agency will pay for childcare for those looking for a job, working or going to school. I would bet that more money is spent for those “looking” for work than working or going to school.

Of course I have it better than those in my wife’s program with the things that I have worked for in comparison to what these people have had given to them. But there are still some serious cases of abuse out there I suspect. When I worked as a bagboy in a grocery store I overheard a lady discussing her husband’s upcoming hunting trip to Canada. She talked of the lodge he would be staying at and the new rifle he had purchased for the trip. She had so many groceries that I was still busy bagging them up when she paid for them… with food stamps. I took two carts of groceries out to a new Ford pickup in the parking lot. Somehow I suspect that two decades later whatever these people were doing to get food stamps is still possible to do today.

I’d like to keep public assistance programs available for those that need them but at the same time I’d like to see these people receiving benefits have to do something for what they get beyond going down and applying for benefits.

__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

Grasshopper Green

This is exactly what I was talking about in the other thread. Seeing people with carts loaded with expensive meat, lots of junk food and nothing healthy, people buying family members groceries because they had "plenty left on their EBT cards", women with manicures, leather jackets, new cars, and plenty of bling buying food on food stamps. The best though, was a woman who bitched me out because I refused her daughter's WIC coupon. She blamed me for the child going without milk, after she had purchased two cartons of cigarettes. There are serious abuse issues here, that every taxpayer pays for, and what I've mentioned just scratches the surface.

I think your drug testing idea is a great one, Bill. With your pull on Capitol Hill, maybe you should try to get it through

__________________
"They say that patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings; steal a little and they throw you in jail, steal a lot and they make you king"

Formerly Medusa

maleficent

anyone who knows me, knows I am a pretty hardcore conservative and have very little tolerance for public assistance programs (I've even argued convincingly that children should not be tax deductions that you should pay a tax for children, and have that tax fund public education -- rather than those who are childless -- but that's another thread)

Public assistance should be just that -- assistance... Not a way of life. Back when I was in my early 20s and living in NYC, barely getting by, I'd go to the grocery store for a box of spaghetti and a can of tomatoes and spend 2 dollars for dinner for 2 nights, and the lady in the fur coat ahead of me was using food stamps with her completely full grocery cart.

I know that not all people work the system, and it can be a help for some but it's really screwed up as it is - and too much needs to be fixed.

In my perfect world where I am King - if a person was having trouble and needed public assistance, fine - no problem, I'm a benevolent ruler, if you have children, you clearly aren't responsible enough to care for them, so I will take custody of them until you prove your worth (OK, Fix Foster care system) then, you will move into Mal's Dormitory, which would be like the dorm I lived n in College, a bed, a desk, a chair and a lamp. No television, no cable, an alarm clock would be your accessory, and some books. While you are living in the dorm, you will be drug tested regularly, you will not be allowed to smoke or drink (if you can't affort your life, you can't afford cigarettes or booze) Once you find a job - perhaps job training will be provided, perhaps not - that seems to be giving people an edge. you will pay back the money that was expended on your housing and training, and you when you are ready to get yur children back, you will pay back the cost of the child care. You have two shots to get it right, if you fail a third time, well then you become soylent green.

OK, so I have an active imagination... The system as it stands right now is broken, but yet we keep throwing more money and more people into it... It's a never ending cycle.

I'm all for human dignity and all, but when a person is on public assistance, I'm not sure that they are entitled to that --a job is a job, you do whatever it takes to support yourself... a person I think, maintains dignity, by doing for themselves and no letting someone else take care of them.

__________________

snowy

Don't get me started on abuses of public assistance. Students who qualify for work-study also automatically qualify for food stamps. For those of you who don't know, work-study is the easiest section of financial aid to qualify for. I've seen so many students abuse food stamps when 1) they didn't need them (they were/are making plenty of money from work-study or parental assistance), 2) they go to the grocery store and use the stamps to buy all the mixers for a party, 3) they use the food stamps to buy groceries for other people because they're getting so much in assistance. Some people get like $100 a person. I don't know about you, but I sure as hell don't eat $100 in food a month.

Recently my roommate told me that her next roomie, who's moving in in a few weeks, asked her to get food stamps. Because my roommate is on work-study, she qualifies. My roommate makes plenty of money and gets a good chunk of financial aid, but her future roommate has very little money. I told roomie if new roomie wants food stamps, she should go get them herself and not expect a free handout from roomie. Furthermore, I told roomie that people using food stamps who obviously don't need them really pisses me off. There are people out there who DO need assistance, and they have a harder time getting it than students on work-study who may or may not need the assistance. For instance, I had a friend that because his parents made too much money (though they weren't giving any to him) didn't qualify for work-study. Thus no food stamps--but he was so poor he had to end up going to the food bank on a regular basis. AND he was working a regular job on top of going to school full-time and serving in the Army Reserve.

To me, I understand why we have public assistance, but I think too many people abuse the system, and too many people raise their children to abuse the system. The system is there as a safety net and a temporary crutch, not a walker or wheelchair. Please.

__________________
If I am not better, at least I am different. --Jean-Jacques Rousseau

Psycho Dad

I doubt the grocery chains would ever let it happen, but now that food stamps are being replaced with a debit card like system, UPC codes on items could be used to approve only certain items with an assistance card. Of course the argument they would use would be that the cost of this would be passed on to consumers like that would be a greater evil than passing on the abuse to taxpayers.

__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

canuckguy

I don't understand, why is that everytime it seems that there is a discussion regarding something like this its always the extremes that are pointed out. Buying steak and crablegs with food stamps. Come on, I would add a comment but I am sure all people are going to mention is the small portion of people who get more than what others think they should get. If bill said that most are abusing I would like to see stats, but frankly i really don't care as I too believe that welfare is abused as a whole, but not as glamours as everyone here is witnessing every day apparently. I only know the canadian welfare system, and if you think a family of 7 is eating steak on there welfare check, there not. Not unless tube steak is what you ment.

MY statement was for people who are just trying to get food to SURVIVE but always people have to not use that, but no it looks like all people that are getting hand outs are eating steak, fish eggs, and fresh atlantic crab legs.

Everyone just seems so against helping anyone. If there is natural disaster and all the food crops were wiped out in north america would you not want other countries to help if they could? Or would you be to proud to eat some hand out and rather die? If you currently lived in a country, that you were born to, with no way of helping yourself, no land worth farming. no way to pay for schooling and if it was available. I would hope that we could help people that happen to be less fortunate. But i guess not, more burgers for us i guess. sorry for post, but peope are just to easy to dismiss something that they have never felt. Sure some of you have been poor, shit housing, ..etc but atleast you could get food stamps and walk to your local store, and come back and live in your government paid for house. But some people don't have that option as there are no programs, those are the people i refer to in my statement.

Marvelous Marv

One admittedly incomplete solution would be for people like your wife's friend to be required to pay back the assistance they received.

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
Margaret Thatcher

Marvelous Marv

Welfare is not a legitimate function of government. All cases of "need" should be handled by charitable organizations. That way, only people who WANT to contribute have their money taken away.

I'm having trouble coming up with a country that would hep us under those circumstances. Maybe Britain, but that's all I can think of.

That sure puts all of our foreign aid in perspective.

__________________
"The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money."
Margaret Thatcher

Psycho Dad

I see her as finishing school, working and making the most of her assistance as a return on the investment. I'd rather see those who pissed away everything that was given to them have to work off what they got.

__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

Psycho Dad

I think people are just opposed to helping those that won't help themselves. And people point out the extremes because those at the extreme are the bad apples spoiling the whole barrel. And even for those who need assistance, if someone gets $200 a month in food stamps and they only need $100 why not expect them to give $100 back? I really do think the system is abused and not just by those who are at the extreme ends of the spectrum but those who just take more than they need.

__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

Grasshopper Green

When I was a cashier, I witnessed it. EVERY DAY. No, not everyone that came in did outrageous things, but a lot of times it was a simple as someone who, quite frankly, was too overweight to be healthy, couldn't work because of health related issues, and then loaded up a cart with junk food. I saw this EVERY DAY. That is abuse, IMO, because it is a cycle that people get into, thinking that it's ok to keep killing themselves on my dollar.

Now, I do believe in helping people who need it. I have no problem with helping people get back on their feet so they can provide for themselves in the future. I *don't* believe in providing a freeloading lifestyle to people who have the potential and opportunity to do better for themselves, but choose not to.

__________________
"They say that patriotism is the last refuge to which a scoundrel clings; steal a little and they throw you in jail, steal a lot and they make you king"

Formerly Medusa

canuckguy

i agree, but again i was not saying that everyone is using the system correctly. just that everytime there is a discussion regarding any type of social system, it always comes down to people always saying the WHOLE system is some fat guy eating 2 thousand twinkies and not a mother of 4 trying to put basic food on her table.

Charlatan

So let me get this straight... no social saftey net whatsoever. People should fend for themselves or die trying?

I agree with Brian that inevitably the worst examples are trotted out when welfare is brought up. There are many more examples of people who do need assistance. One of the main ones is housing. In many places there is a sorry lack of affordable houseing. It is easy to say, just move somewhere cheaper... Cheaper isn't always available and it isn't always close to employment (i.e. sure housing is cheaper 100 miles from the city but then you are 100 miles from your job with no public transit). I see no problem with geared to income houseing and have benefitted from it when I was kid --my single, hard-working mother applied for and got into a coop with some units that were geared to income - it gave us a very good leg up. I have since lived in two apartments that had this sort of arrangement (only I was paying market rate rather than geared to income).

Housing that is affordable and in the right place is often *very* hard to find.

I grew up in a very poor area and I saw both the good and the bad elements of government assistance. I saw hard-working people who just needed that little extra to be able to live with dignity and I saw people who abused the system and stayed at home laying on the couch smoking pot.

I don't what the answer is. I just know that scapping the whole system is not the answer. There are people who have need of assistance and I would rather help them and risk having a few layabouts who abuse the system than the alternative.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

maleficent

so you think it's ok that you bust your butt to provide for yourself and your family, and Louis down the street can coast along and not break a sweat?

Yeah, a few bad apples spoil the bunch, but you seldom hear of the good things that come out of welfare...

I equate it to the homeless guy on the street who yelled at me because I gave him coffee and a bagel, he wanted the money for it... Now, he claimed he was going to use it to buy food... I supplied the food, he didn't like it. I see that a lot with welfare cases (and I've lived in some pretty crappy areas...) I've done a lot of volunteer work with soup kitchens that are run by either religious or charitable organizations, I have no problem with that... People can get a hot meal, maybe it's not in their own home, but ah well -- get a third job...

I'm not sure whyit is the responsibility of the government for feeding the masses?

__________________

canuckguy

who said it was okay for louis to slack off? did you even read the above responses? I don't understand. Yes mal people are against abuse of the welfare system, but a third job? give me a break. Please, so let say a single mother of 2 has a full time job 8-5, her kids are school aged so there in school while she works. What does she do with the kids when she goes to her second job? no social programs to watch her kids according to you, how does she work? or is she to just leave her kids home alone and hope they'll be okay?

I hope you never get to a point that you require assistance, oh wait your thoughts that we don't need those programs. So will you starve? go to a life of crime? kill yourself, remember no government, nobody to watch your back incase life deals you spades. People need to get off there mansions and out of there hummers to see that there is a real world out there with real issues that may not be as cut and dry as typing on some internet forum. delete if this is a flame.

canuckguy

and these poor people who's house, jobs and food supplies are wiped out by Hurricane Katrina........who needs to help them eh. eff'em, its there fault for living in those areas eh????/

maleficent

it's sort of flame but -- whatever....

I don't drive a car because I can't quite afford one, I don't own a house, let alone a mansion, because I cannot afford one. I DO NOT expect anyone to take care of me, but me...

Come down to NYC and watch the people on welfare driving around in their cars, or sitting on their porches drinking beer, talking about the latest show on cable... When you are on welfare, you do not get those benefits. I've spent enough time volunteeering in the NYC public school system, hearing pregnany 16 year olds tell me to my face that they want one more kid because it means a larger apartment... nevermind the fact that the father pays no child support for the first kid...

The system could possibly work, just not the state it's in right now... and for the single mother of two kids, where the heck is the dad, and why isn't he paying child support? Why is it my responsibility to pay for her kids when she should have kept her legs closed.

__________________

maleficent

Natual disasters are not the same as not taking personal responsibility for your actions.

__________________

Psycho Dad

Helping a victim of a natural disaster in a time of need is not the same as an able bodied person not accepting a job instead of assistance because mowing yards or bussing tables is beneath them.

__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

canuckguy

....again i think its safe to say that everyone is against abuse of any government program. I am glad that you are able to take care of yourself, but not everyone is like you. Some people do need help, whether it be someone who WAS supporting there family pay check to pay check and just lost there job, or people with mental issues that are not able to work. What do we do with the those people, just hope they starve off and die? Or is the person with the mental disablilites own fault for being born that way? I don't mean to attack, but i will as all you are doing Mal is ripping the people who are abusing and ignoring the people who might actuall need it or they might die.

canuckguy

my god! again, i every effing post i've typed is about the people who need the assistance not people who choose to bleed the system.

Psycho Dad

Perhaps because politically what candidate is going to go out on that limb? A too liberal media will likely take any attempt at reforming welfare and turn it into a [insert candidates name here] wants to target minorities/homeless/poor/lower class/etc. issue.

__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

Psycho Dad

Then what did disaster assistance have to do with the cost of admission to the Juarez Donkey show?

__________________
Don't always trust the opinions of experts.

maleficent

Maybe in canuckistan it's different, but in the US those are the ones that get all the attention, and I am not going to give them a pass... If a person truly needs help, let them prove it, and if they need help, then the soup kitchens and other charities set up should be good enough... It gives them the assistance they need.

__________________

canuckguy

I'm sorry but did your read any of my responses or just choose to pull out a few words here and there? Mal had made a point that we don't need government assistance. and a natural disaster is a perfect example of a governemnt HELPING PEOPLE who may not be able to help themselves.

canuckguy

wow, Prove your mentally challenged or disabled? I don't care to add anything else to his thread. The high horse has gotten to high for me and i'm scared of heights!

cyrnel

Brian, I don't see FEMA/red-cross and welfare as being in the same category. I think of them as an insurance supplement to bolster affected regions, and since it comes and goes with disasters it's much less ripe for continued abuse.

I don't believe all govt assistance should be removed but it could sure use an infusion of tough-love.

__________________
There are a vast number of people who are uninformed and heavily propagandized, but fundamentally decent. The propaganda that inundates them is effective when unchallenged, but much of it goes only skin deep. If they can be brought to raise questions and apply their decent instincts and basic intelligence, many people quickly escape the confines of the doctrinal system and are willing to do something to help others who are really suffering and oppressed." -Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky and the Media, p. 195

Charlatan

That's hardly fair.

Where the Dad is is entirely beside the point.


Let's assume for a moment that Dad *is* paying support and isn't in prison or dead. Are you suggesting that the state dictate how many kids we are allowed to have? I don't think so.

I know when my Mom had me she was in a very nice suburban house -- two kids, a house, a husband and a car in the drive. When their marriage ended it was tough. My Dad paid support. My Mom worked hard and didn't go on welfare. That said, she did take advantage of government subsidized daycare. Having a full timejob is difficult if you are single and have a kid. You can't always rely in a neighbour (Mom tried that route it was a disaster) or relatives (none in the area). Daycare is expensive.

Now... for all the "handouts" my Mother recieved I would say the following: she has paid back the system many times over in the taxes she pays and moreso from the tax base I represent.

You wanted to hear some good stories about how government support works... there you go.

The point isn't that she wasn't busting her butt while some other family was... she busted her ass regularly. She made *many* sacrifices to see me grow up well. She received the leg up she needed to make it happen.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

guthmund

I'm sure it's possible that there are other reasons a single mother could be raising two kids. I mean, 'slut' is just one of many avenues to explore, isn't it?

I'm not surprised by what I've seen so far in this thread. We live in a country of cynics. Not that that isn't a good thing, but it's important to remember that unwavering cynicism is just as dangerous as blind optimism. And you're right, we don't hear the 'good' stories too often. It doesn't mean that they aren't out there it just means that bad news travels farther, faster.

Personally, I totally agree, the system isn't perfect. It's too easy to abuse, there's very little oversight, and all that jazz, but despite it's current 'unperfect' state, the system does do some good. And as long as it continues to give aid to those that need it, I'll gladly support it, even if it means giving aid to those that abuse it.

__________________
No signature. None. Seriously.

filtherton

Even if there is some anecdotal evidence that some people abuse public assistance programs, they still serve a purpose.
In many ways, public assistance is merely a bone thrown to those who have benefited the least from the status quo. It was probably conceived with the notion that everybody should be able to eat food, drink water, and get shelter. It's not that radical a notion. In fact, i would wager that most of you benefited from a similar arrangement up until you were about eighteen years old. After this arbitrary point in time you were expected to move out and become a full fledged cog in the american economic machine.

Unfortunately, there seems to always be some portion of the human race who is content to live off the work of their fellow human. Due to the fact that the lower class lost the class war long before george washington was ever born, i think we generally only consider poor people when we visualize your typical economic parasite. I think that most of the richest people are just as parasitic and just as lazy and just as apt to benefit from what could be considered the squandering of your tax dollars(or the avoidance paying them all together).

maleficent

wow everything looks so small when I'm up on my high horse...

I have always had a problem with people who think it's OK to get something for nothing, this includes people who sue for their own stupidity, as well as people who accept handouts. There's no such thing as a free lunch, even at work, if they buy lunch for the day, it means we are sitting thru an excruiciatngly dull meeting.

I'm left with no choice but to support the system as it is, though I will never stop ranting about it until it's fixed. If people choose to accept welfare for whatever reason, they have to give something back, whether it's painting a school, cleaning up on the highway, passing out cookies at a blood drive... you don't get something for nothing -- community service should be mandatory.

Section 8 housing is where I draw the line, I started ranting about it in the other thread, but it's wrong, it's unfair to the people who pay full price, and it's got to end.

__________________

Vincentt

Alright guys. From the perspective of someone who can’t afford college.

I cannot afford college, but I am going to college, hell I’m even studying abroad in Japan.

I get financial aid from the government, I also get lots of subsidized loans. I am now getting some scholarships, although, I have been forced to decline some… because accepting them would result in loosing my aid (almost double the scholarship).

With this I am able to go to college, and theoretically change my ‘class.’

So I must defend this system, because without it, where would I be?
With these programs, everyone can go to college, and I think that is great.

Here is my question. Why didn’t you get food stamps, when you could have gotten them? Is it because you have pride? Are you better then those people that use them?

What if you could have eaten fruit and got a well-balanced meal… over eating a pack of noodles?

I work, not in work-study, and didn’t know that I might have the option of food-stamps. I doubt I would use them, because I really don’t need them, now. But when I was first in college, and didn’t have a car so I couldn’t work… I was eating ramen all the time, and selling my blood … I think I’d have taken what was handed out.

There are people that abuse the system, I’m sure. Maybe you feel I abuse it, whatever.

__________________
.

Sage

Now, normally I don't reply to these sorts of threads. Discussions of this type, to me, usually end in everyone not agreeing. But I have been thinking about this for the past hour, and have decided to at least share my opnion, in the hopes of sparking some thinking on the issue.

Vincentt already posted some of what I was thinking about. If, for a moment, we all choose to say (and I think some of you have been saying) that "handouts" are "bad," that everyone should work for what they have, and no one should be given anything for free, then we have to go on to define what actually gets categorized as a "handout."

If there are people (such as Vincentt and I) who wish to go to college, but who cannot afford to pay for college out of our own pockets (and if you dig a little, you'll see that most of the population cannot afford, without SERIOUS pre-planning, to send their kids to college) we must rely on federal student aid for college. This, to some, is a "handout" because it means we are going to college on someone else's dime, with no gaurenteed return on the investment. I know that the reason the goverment likes to give money for people to go to college is because it's an investment in that person, as people who go to college are more likely to have higher paying jobs, therefore paying more taxes and boosting the economy in the long run. Still, that doesn't help the fact that I am going to college "for free." (granted, I have to pay the money back sometime, but that is a very, very lienient system).

I have health insurance, but it costs a lot, and based on my income for the past year Martel and I get free health care at the county Health Department. I am, in essence, getting a "handout." Granted, the quality of service isn't as high as at a private practice (in my opnion), but it's still keeping me from being sick.

I took sociology in college, and one of the things I learned from it is that, when you are poor, it is very, very hard to get out of the cycle of being poor. "The System" has some very hard cut rules about how much money you can make at a job before they deem you making enough to "live without assistance" and unfortuately, that amount isn't enough to find a house, feed yourself and any children you might have, and afford healthcare.

Now, being the Libertarian that I am, I firmly believe that people should take care of themselves, but I ALSO realize that it's very, VERY bad for a country if everyone is walking around homeless and destitute (which would be very near to reality if the goverment pulled the plug on "The System"). I also think that a frightfully good many of you are way, way too cynical. You seem like the type of people who bitch about things and then never take five minutes to think of what to DO about the things you don't like. No, you can't change the goverment, and no, you can't single-handedly fix every social problem that exists, but you CAN do small things that make a difference.

Like what you ask? Well, Mal has already stated that while she is cynical about the whole thing, she voluenteers at soup kitchens. Perhaps you can make the sacrifice of one Double Grande Mocha Latte a week (hell, every TWO weeks even) and donate $10 to a charity every month (it's tax deductible!). Go through your closets, which are bulging with clothes that you never wear, and donate what you don't need to Goodwill (that's tax deductible too- hell, the goverment is offering you INCENTIVE to donate to charity). No, I am not in favor of helping those who just want to bleed the system dry and not do anything in return. People who aren't contributing to the greater good of humanity (in the sense of sitting on the couch smoking pot all day on goverment assistance) don't command my respect. But, what makes me even MORE mad, what really fries my noodle, are those who constanly complain about the system, the goverment, the president, and the world and then never DO anything, much less educate themselves as to WHY things "aren't working."

My take on the whole thing- ignorance is the path to cynicism, but knowledge and understanding are the path to change. Go educate yourself, and be one step further from being the guy on the couch.

__________________

Charlatan

This is the side of the coin that too many people ignore when they are quick to jump on the, "let's blame the poor for living off the public teet" bandwagon.

Thank you for bring this up filtherton.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

Charlatan

I don't see why this is a problem. I don't know exactly what Section 8 housing is (nice name to give it by the way ) but if it is anything like the geared to income housing we have here it seems to serve a reasonable purpose.

You make a building where some of the units are market rate and others are geared to income. Ultimately you provide decent (not top end just decent) affordable houseing for people who could otherwise live in shit holes or on the street.

I suppose we could rely on either landlords to keep their rents low enough for people afford or the government or some charity could build more shelters for families that can't afford the rent (I don't know about where you are but there is an extreme shortage of affordable housing in Toronto).

With this system a number of units in an otherwise ordinary apartment building are earmarked as geared to income. The idea is that it isn't a permanent location but if it is, so what? They are getting by. It isn't like they rolling dough and laughing all the way to the bank if they were, that would be fraud and they would do some time.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

maleficent

you've never been in a building that has section 8 units then
ANY apartment can be a section 8 unit, they get an identical unit to what i pay thru the nose for... i have to jump thru hoop to move into a place - including meeting a specific income requirement and other bullshit, when a person moving into a section 8 unit just has to be poor.

I'll never be able to convince a liberal why this is a bad thing - you'll never be able to convince me that this is a good thing. Same reason why it irks me that the asshole kicking the seat on the plane behind me got his seat for half of what I am paying -- it irks me that the asshole who only knows super loud volume wise lives under me and pays less than what half of what I pay - it's not right.

__________________

raeanna74

I do believe that Wisconsin has installed a few things in their foodstamp program that are very helpful to weed out the freeloaders from the ones who need help.

Four years ago hubby was seriously injured, unable to work for three months and when he was physically able to return to work he had no job. So ultimately he was out of work for 6 months. We had gotten on food stamps during the time that he was out of work. I had an infant at the time and worked part time. Once he was able to return to work the welfare rules kicked in. He was required to go to some training sessions where a public assistance worker helped him refine his resume, taught him tricks to help him in an interview, and gave him information on job opportunities in the area. He was required to apply to a certain number of jobs each month and report on the names of the places and contact persons for each place. I know a number of people who do abuse the system but I know very few who have managed to accomplish it for long.

I believe that the drug testing idea would be excellent. Even something that would test for alcohol and tobacco use. Those things irk me so much to see someone using the food stamps to save their cash for junk like that.

__________________
"Always learn the rules so that you can break them properly." Dalai Lama
My Karma just ran over your Dogma.

Charlatan

I can see that it is a very different system from the one we have here.

1) There is an extreme shortage of affordable housing. The market isn't meeting the demand for affordable housing (and why should it?). It is only natural that owners should want to charge as much as they can get... and they do.

2) As there is a shortage, what do we do with the poor who need a place to live and have the choice of a) the street or b) a place you wouldn't want an animal to live that isn't even close to where they need to be for their employment.

In the past governments created public housing. This was a BAD idea. You end up with ghettos and projects that isolate and exacerbate the situation.

Mixing geared to income and market rate units makes a lot more sense in terms of having an integrated society.


Here is something to chew on... If those who are against these sort of "legs up" or "handouts" think those who are on the receiving end have it so good, why not live the life yourself? Trust me, it isn't a great life and you don't want to be there.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

maleficent

Wouldn't happen with me - I take care of me - I would never expect anyone else do do that for me - I couldn't live with myself if I was accepting handouts... everything comes with a price -- for me to accept a handout - woudlbe for me to sacrafice self respect.

__________________