Layoffs coming...

[HeartlandHank]

Of course not all people on welfare are lazy moochers but there are some and more joining every day. When you see your neighbors owning nicer things than you while you slave away at a cash register all day after dropping off the kids at day care you have to wonder if it's worth it. If I could stay home and improve my lifestyle compared to working a job I hate it would be an easy decision.

You do know that "temporary assistance for needy families" (TANF), or welfare, goes to families with children, right? And you, Red?

I'm not saying that this excuses the abuse of the system, which does happen. But, I'm just making sure... It's a very commonly overlooked detail by many people.

I personally would lose my fucking mind sitting at home all day. So, no, I do not wonder if it is worth it.

 

[ginwilly]

Do you really believe this?

For some of the scumbags whose only goal is to maintain their power I do, but for most I think it's just an unintended consequence of good intentions. Some senile old guy once said that if you rob Peter to pay Paul you will always have the support of Paul. He may have been demented but this sentiment is definitely true.

Most of us vote for personal and selfish reasons. It's easy for us to say the Fat Cat voted for so and so because he wanted something out of it but it's wrong to say it about the poor. It really shouldn't even need pointing out. Of course there are people who will vote for their own welfare and of course there are politicians who will exploit this. Let's not forget that politicians rarely run their own campaigns. What is the percentage of campaign managers who would exploit this? Now with that thought in mind I ask you the same question you asked Red. You don't really believe the truth in his statement? intention or not.

 

[StevenSD420]

This thread has been plenty of proof that almost all the right wing nuts on this site don't have any sources, besides chain emails, to back up their claims.

 

[NoDrama]

This thread has been plenty of proof that almost all the right wing nuts on this site don't have any sources, besides chain emails, to back up their claims.

Umm Yeah, its hard to provide proof of things that haven't happened yet. Its like me predicting the NY Giants will win the super bowl next year and you telling me that I am wrong because I don't put up any proof of the giants winning the super bowl next year. Circular reasoning aside ( Pay attention here sammy seedwell if you are reading this).

 

[ginwilly]

You do know that "temporary assistance for needy families" (TANF), or welfare, goes to families with children, right? And you, Red?

And? How does this create success?

"Here, take this money until you make your own" might feel temporary but reality and history suggests different for the average recipient.

ftr Hank, I'm not speaking for Red or anyone else. I am for a safety net, but not the same one that has slowed the progress against poverty for the last 50 years.

I'll look for a chart I saw that shows how poverty was on a steady decline until we waged our "war on poverty". It's basically stayed the same percentage wise since.

 

[HeartlandHank]

And? How does this create success?

"Here, take this money until you make your own" might feel temporary but reality and history suggests different for the average recipient.

I didn't say anything about success. I was just making sure that you were aware of this. With all of the talk about lazy people abusing the system I started to wonder if some of you realized that welfare is a program for families. Not just for a guy who decides he doesn't want to go to work.

 

[StevenSD420]

Umm Yeah, its hard to provide proof of things that haven't happened yet. Its like me predicting the NY Giants will win the super bowl next year and you telling me that I am wrong because I don't put up any proof of the giants winning the super bowl next year. Circular reasoning aside ( Pay attention here sammy seedwell if you are reading this).

Um, that is not what has been happening in this thread.

But continue to see it as you wish. o.o

 

[HeartlandHank]

For some of the scumbags whose only goal is to maintain their power I do, but for most I think it's just an unintended consequence of good intentions. Some senile old guy once said that if you rob Peter to pay Paul you will always have the support of Paul. He may have been demented but this sentiment is definitely true.

Most of us vote for personal and selfish reasons. It's easy for us to say the Fat Cat voted for so and so because he wanted something out of it but it's wrong to say it about the poor. It really shouldn't even need pointing out. Of course there are people who will vote for their own welfare and of course there are politicians who will exploit this. Let's not forget that politicians rarely run their own campaigns. What is the percentage of campaign managers who would exploit this? Now with that thought in mind I ask you the same question you asked Red. You don't really believe the truth in his statement? intention or not.

No, I do not believe that...

• Tax dollars spent to help people in need" is just away to create a permanent underclass of captive voters
  
  
  
  ​
  
  
  
  

 

[NoDrama]

Um, that is not what has been happening in this thread.

But continue to see it as you wish. o.o

The thread is about impending layoffs now that Obama has been re elected, is it not?

 

[ginwilly]

This thread has been plenty of proof that almost all the right wing nuts on this site don't have any sources, besides chain emails, to back up their claims.

Since you exposed your bias to us, I'll share mine.

Thinking of this with scientific reasoning, I've seen people who have presented a theorem, and backed up theories with reasoning. Others have chimed in after digesting that reasoning and concurred.

The left wing nuts say "nut uh" "you big poopypants".

See? wasn't that fun?

 

[ginwilly]

No, I do not believe that...

• Tax dollars spent to help people in need" is just away to create a permanent underclass of captive voters
  
  
  ​

Yeah, my bad, re-reading that I don't either completely. I phrased it poorly. Let me ask this instead. Do you believe it's a side-effect?

 

[Red1966]

Do you really believe this?

We've had a welfare state for 50 years, give or take, and it hasn't reduced poverty at all. It wasn't designed to do this, but that's what it has done.

 

[HeartlandHank]

I still feel very strongly that you (Red, Gin, you know) are disconnected from what sort of situations people are in, in the US.

 

[StevenSD420]

Since you exposed your bias to us, I'll share mine.

And what exactly is my bias? I'd love to know. And while I can't speak for the extreme lefties, I at least have provided links, or as I call them, SOURCES, to everything I've brought to the table.

The thread is about impending layoffs now that Obama has been re elected, is it not?

Yeah, it started that way, but then through about three other conversations, we are where we are now. Are we not?

Sometimes I don't even know why I play along with the troll games.

 

[Red1966]

How about you admit that you were way off in your response to me regarding BRAZIL?

Funny how you can't even do that.

OK, I used you to stab UB in the eye. Sue me. As to Brazil, I concede they aren't a basket case like much of S. America, I don't remember the rest of the conversation. Brazil is blessed with rich resources, but the interior is largely undeveloped and the people in what we would call poverty. The coast is modern and prosperous, tho I seem to recall they have a high crime rate, but I'm not sure about that.

 

[ginwilly]

I found the graph Hank. Notice the trend before our "war" began.

I've seen it plotted back another 50 years but I guess the author of this one thought it was more dramatic since the sharpest decline was all he showed.

 

[Red1966]

I can tell you, its a lot better than being a machinist who works 8-5 every day.

Hey! I resemble that remark. Damn farmers. I'm voting to lower the threshold and increase the rate for the inheritance tax, and make it retroactive.

 

[StevenSD420]

OK, I used you to stab UB in the eye. Sue me. As to Brazil, I concede they aren't a basket case like much of S. America, I don't remember the rest of the conversation. Brazil is blessed with rich resources, but the interior is largely undeveloped and the people in what we would call poverty. The coast is modern and prosperous, tho I seem to recall they have a high crime rate, but I'm not sure about that.

Lol, UnlceBuck had nothing to do with your reply to me; or are you just obsessed with him? Just admit that you were wrong, that you made a mistake. The world isn't going to end because of that, you are human after all.

And that undeveloped part, I hope you're not referring to the Amazon?

I believe you aren't, but sometimes you just have to make sure. I do know though, that in an effort to move of the population inward, Brazil did move it's capital from the coast to where it is today.

 

[Red1966]

You do know that "temporary assistance for needy families" (TANF), or welfare, goes to families with children, right? And you, Red?

I'm not saying that this excuses the abuse of the system, which does happen. But, I'm just making sure... It's a very commonly overlooked detail by many people.

I personally would lose my fucking mind sitting at home all day. So, no, I do not wonder if it is worth it.

Yes. I'm aware of that. The "temporary" part of it seems to have been forgotten. The funds for it come from families with children, too. Those people don't sit at home all day. They party more than you or I.They tend to be pretty poor about taking care of their children,too. Quit often, the mothers dump the children off on the grandparents and it is they who raise the children. I lived among them for years and saw the poorest excuses for motherhood you can imagine.

 

[ginwilly]

I still feel very strongly that you (Red, Gin, you know) are disconnected from what sort of situations people are in, in the US.

Not true at all as far as I'm concerned. I work in healthcare and worked direct patient care for 20 years. As a PT I was up in people's personal space for 1 hr, 3 x a week for sometimes months. I have a very up close and personal feel for all sorts of situations people are in doing home health. I do my best to help those in need. I'm not a rich person so my most valuable commodity to these people is my time and skills, not money.

It's you who I feel is disconnected when can't do people are compared to won't do people. For the vast majority of people on assistance the best solution is to teach self sufficiency, not just giving them what they need to make us feel better. Assuming these people can't take care of themselves is dickish and elitist really. It's the lazy path we have chosen. Take from this group, give to this group, with no plans or even thoughts on even diminishing let alone eliminating the need for it, which would truly be the best solution for everyone. And doing it in the name of "fairness" which is based on feeling, not logic is just the icing on the cake.