Don't forget, what we call social programs also includes benefits for the elderly, disabled, and veterans. The elderly have paid in for many years to a program that promised them benefits later. Veterans signed up for the military when they were offered specific benefits in return, after they completed their duty. Why would anyone want to act as if it's some kind of ultrasocialist handout to give them what they were promised? A deal is a deal. The government owes them.
That was my point. It is the Conservatives where you live and it will be the liberals in someone elses backyard. Blind Faith is all aroun and influences everyone. I have nothing against the political party people vote for but to paraphrase what IRQ42 said: it is sickening how easy it is to manipulate a people who claim we have individual thought. This current race is by far the most disgusting it has ever been; on both sides. On one hand you have a blatant lier and warmonger responsible for countless atrocities and genocide and avoidable deaths by her decisions; yes the refugee plague is on HRC and Obama. Then you have an unknown commodity that doesn't know how to handle the process and has this idea of free everything for everyone. On the other side: you have a loud mouth buffoon who has the lead in hand because of his simple minded tactics. In saying that, he takes advantage of the simpleness of peoples inner values and the easiness it is to sway them in his direction. Then there is the Texan who looks like a 1940's politician who insights protests and violence at Trump supporters and events, being trailed by a young up and comer who may very well get the VP nod by the top Rep candidate but in his own right has taken the route of Cruz and insight protests in some way to derail Trump. If it has declined to this point now then I greatly fear for the 2020 election.
I actually know a guy who chose welfare over going back to work. He got laid off at a window company he worked for, collected unemployment, went on welfare for a while. Then when the company picked itself back together a year or so later, they reached out to him to have is old job back, but he turned it down because he wanted to be on welfare. He was my cousin's ex. The guy was a total douche and should be fired from breathing. So to say that everyone on these programs desperately need help is a bit of an overstatement. If the welfare benefits weren't so great for him in his case, I highly doubt he'd turn down the chance to go back to work.
Does it ever cross your mind that some of the money goes to people who need it and deserve it? It seems like a common theme that conservatives like to repeat endlessly is that all government programs need to end because there's no way to prevent them from ever benefiting people we don't like.
What I gather what we are saying is there needs to be a rebuild of government policy. The reason people are on welfare is because they choose to do so but I also agree that some need it. Yeah maybe we have a bit of a different attitude in the beginning but eventually the easy way out,well is the easiest way out. Poverty is on the Government. It is their polices and actions that start the roll of the impending process. To the Government, poverty is good whether social or progressive or any other political avenue. It keeps people in line. They become dependent on the Government for their daily lives; the banks for loans to purchase stuff and the media for entertainment and what to believe. Poverty is a government cash cow. Not to mention revenue through fines both vehicular ( as most poor will not have INS ) and petty theft. Add to that Obamacares $90 annual fine for not enrolling; I mean how does a poor person afford $500 or more a month for health care. I know I would just pay the fine. You have to admit, over the last 60 years or so, politics has become and obscenity in the US. For those that don't like the agenda of a politician there is assassination (JFK and RFK); to the ones that want too much there is impeachment (Nixon) and for those that accept the roll they play there is re-election (Bush,Reagan, Obama, Clinton) The only way Government gets better is to have another JFK type that won't give in no matter the cost' no matter the political side. Hopefully he or she chooses the right VP.
So who was saying that? Maybe it was a generalisation and they didn't literally ment everyone? Yes, everything, every system will get abused by certain people (Yogi and the 'obamaphone'? ). This is known. So why are there still programs like this? Because any doofus can see a lot of people do not abuse it but use it in the way it was ment. You know, people for which programs like these came to be? Most people on it need it, and if it would appear differently in reality that doesn't immediatly makes clear that no welfare program is needed at all, or that less government money should go to it. You only know then that a lot of people are abusing it. It should then be found out first what makes this possible/is causing it. If it appears a majority on welfare is abusing it you can cut back on money or close the whole program (not likely ). What does it mean that you know a guy who abused welfare? Can you immediatly conclude stuff about the welfare program because of that? What does it mean that the far majority (no, not everyone ) has a need for the program and is making properly use of it? Can you immediatly conclude something out of that?
I'm all for making the qualifications more stringent to weed out people like this - for example, this guy should be providing proof that he is actively looking for work. This is an odd story to me - I've heard so many stories of people who need benefits having to jump a thousand hurdles to qualify for anything, yet this guy waltzes in and gets, what - food stamps? Housing? A monthly stipend? There are people who cheat the system, obviously, but I dislike the idea that we should just cut off benefits for people who need it because people who don't need it ruined it for them. This isn't fair. I also don't believe that the majority of people who receive benefits want to live this way forever. The man you mentioned above must have no drive, no motivation. I've seen what section 8 housing looks like, I'm sure we all have driven by projects or a shitty neighborhood full of section 8 rentals. It isn't pretty. It's depressing. I have a hard time believing most normal people wouldn't want to escape that situation as fast as they can.
Who are you kidding, Meli!? We all know what the social in socialim stands for: providing government services for the lazy ones! It's not suprising to me. We have people like that here too. And also politicians who use it as an argument to cut back on welfare programs. I also took notice of stories here in the Netherlands, like a blind guy who didn't got any benefits because of some flaw in the paper work (if anyone was qualified to get financial aid it was him ) and others who managed to go through the loopholes of the system and leeched of it for years while they should have looked and applied for a legal job (some of them are not too shabby to work illegally like on a pot farm or something ). These peeps deserve the consequences they are facing when caught, and there are and should be enforced regulations for it of course. It doesn't mean welfare programs are a waste of money, or cater to the lazy opportunistic fellow citizen by default!
Like I said, I'm not in favor of abolishing them outright as it will pull the rug out from under too many. If there are actual people are living like this, why continue to pretend such people don't exist? TBH I don't know what all the benefits are that this guy is receiving, nor do I know his current housing situation but he most likely lives with his family members. I guess he hated his job and found a reason not to go back. I don't keep tabs on him and I haven't seen or heard of him in several years. He's a degenerate and a slob with lots of bad habits, and you'd wanna keep your kids away from him if you ever met him. I'm in favor of lowering the benefits and incentives of living off the state, if it means it attracts less people to do it. Yet I'm not in favor of cutting it off entirely, like I said. I think unemployment insurance is a much more reasonable program as it cuts off after a certain length of time. I suppose it's a bit of an exaggeration and a generalization from both sides. What I can conclude is there are people who WANT to live on welfare, and I know a real life example. Nobody should want to live on it. Here's an old video that's been on the web for 4 years now that I'll leave y'all with as food for thought. I'd say it's the result of politicians soliciting to their support base that they can vote themselves rich if they vote them in office. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9gU-Gsu1PUk
Today I read that Bill Clinton worked for a for profit university and accepted a $16 million salary for his work. And Hillary is supposedly going to ease the burden of student loan debt? Out of all her bullshit this one really hit a nerve for me. This is why hardly anyone under 35 supports her. I can't post a link but if you wanna check my source it was posted on rawstory.com and written by Ana longandhardtospelllastname from the Young Turks (who I highly recommend for a progressive alternative to mainstream pundits).
I'm not sure what point you think I'm trying to make? For profit colleges are a large chunk of student loan debt - I find it really unethical for Hillary to use student loan debt as a big part of her campaign when she and her husband have added to their fortune by working for a for profit school.
What if everyone who wanted a job could get one paying 15--20 bucks an hour. Welfare (in the main) , unemployment, section8, etc, would virtually disappear. There are a certain % of people who would NEVER work, even if they were givin a job sitting in a park counting birds. That's the way it is. Crank the economy up as it was in the 50s or the 90s and everybody would have money again. Traditionally, when the working class did well, the country hummed right along. No wonder people are pissed off.
raising minimum wage tends to cause larger unemployment .. this can be offset somewhat by an increase in inflation rate, but its not really solving the problem as the now increased wages are worth less due to inflation. The minimum wage hasn't increased to meet inflation though, so clearly there are some other variables at play. I point my finger at greedy corporations that control most of the wealth in this country and aren't paid to give a fuck about the "welfare" of their labor force, which for them is simply one of the factors of the production to be bought and sold on the world market for the best price.
Tax the crap out of Big Corporations and provide tax relief for upstart companies as an incentive to to stay and do business in the States. Hell give them a tax breaks for 5 yrs that is guaranteed and provides them some stability to grow; once they reach a certain annual profit or reach certain staff #s then the tax break is raised over three yrs to catch up to the current rate. That should provide ample time for a small business to grow and prosper. Offer clothing businesses to open their own garment factories; again at a reduce tax rate according to sales and orders. Provide more apprenticeships incentives to businesses if they hire them on as fulltime after training is complete. Offer a tax free threshold to open shop in a small towns or financially burden city (Detroit). Again as above once profits or staff limits reach a certain point then tax comes back into play, but a slow rise so the business doesn't have to worry about going from paying nothing to x% in tax. But all is moot if they decide to "rig" the #s to prevent that tax to come into effect. Offer no "free Money" to the welfare recipients if they decide to 'overpopulate' while on the benefit. Require them to report job searches weekly if need be. Pull benefits for criminals that acted in a crime while on benefits If the big corporations want to leave, let them but offer no reduction to come back, once gone stay gone. No more "Prison Sweatshops" in other words no more using them as cheap labour. Free trade, lol no such thing I am not a business person so if the above would not work, hey just ideas.
Nothing an old conservative man would have loved more then to talk about what as the time "the gay disease". I can't stand that women and am amazed people don't see her for what she is. She's like a used car salesman anything to get the sale/vote. Even if I don't agree with a politician I can respect them taking a stand on a issue. Part of that is being willing to be unpopular for that stand. Bernie Sanders has done that he has my vote.
