State assistance to low income families reduced to one year

[FirebirdCamaro1220]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

The nature of capitalism means there is competition. And unfortunately, not everyone is going to be able to get a great education and earn a high income. There will always be people who have to do blue collar low paying jobs. This is the United States of America. We stand for what is better. This is not China or India where the poor have no social welfare and starve and die on the street. We should do everything we can to ensure the poor have adequate food, clothing, healthcare and shelter. It is a human condition. We have an obligation as Americans to take care of the less fortunate. I would much rather my tax dollars go toward assisting low income families than paying for prisons and going to other wasteful expenditures.


What I fail to understand are the very people who support Republicans and conservative politicians are the very ones who would probably benefit the most from state assistance and Democratic policies in general. Dumb good ole boys are okay with their jobs being outsourced as long as gays can't marry and they can buy AR 15's without a background check at a gun show.

Well said 👍

[AZ Manager]

Originally Posted by azriverfan.

The nature of capitalism means there is competition. And unfortunately, not everyone is going to be able to get a great education and earn a high income. There will always be people who have to do blue collar low paying jobs. This is the United States of America. We stand for what is better. This is not China or India where the poor have no social welfare and starve and die on the street. We should do everything we can to ensure the poor have adequate food, clothing, healthcare and shelter. It is a human condition. We have an obligation as Americans to take care of the less fortunate. I would much rather my tax dollars go toward assisting low income families than paying for prisons and going to other wasteful expenditures.


What I fail to understand are the very people who support Republicans and conservative politicians are the very ones who would probably benefit the most from state assistance and Democratic policies in general. Dumb good ole boys are okay with their jobs being outsourced as long as gays can't marry and they can buy AR 15's without a background check at a gun show.

There is a difference between less fortunate and lazy. My sister's ex-husband is in the lazy category and we give him a couple thousand a month for it. He used to install countertops and before that he was a banker but when the economy crashed he gave up. He didn't lose his job or anything like that, my dad was his boss so it was perfectly secure.

He decided one day he didn't want to work anymore and gained 100 lbs in the process. He now gets disability, thanks to a clever and sleazy lawyer, among other benefits that he doesn't deserve. He isn't the only one that I personally know that is actively gaming the system. We have a duty to take care of everyone who is willing to earn it, the issue is liberals don't separate those two groups out. The new deal worked because it put people to work so they again earned their living not because it handed them money every month to sit on their butt and breed. If you separated the needy and the lazy out more people would be willing to support some of those liberal goals.

[elkotronics]

There is a difference between less fortunate and lazy. My sister's ex-husband is in the lazy category and we give him a couple thousand a month for it. He used to install countertops and before that he was a banker but when the economy crashed he gave up. He didn't lose his job or anything like that, my dad was his boss so it was perfectly secure.

He decided one day he didn't want to work anymore and gained 100 lbs in the process. He now gets disability, thanks to a clever and sleazy lawyer, among other benefits that he doesn't deserve. He isn't the only one that I personally know that is actively gaming the system. We have a duty to take care of everyone who is willing to earn it, the issue is liberals don't separate those two groups out. The new deal worked because it put people to work so they again earned their living not because it handed them money every month to sit on their butt and breed. If you separated the needy and the lazy out more people would be willing to support some of those liberal goals.

Very well said and I agree 100%, AZ Manager. I'm not against supporting the truly needy, but supporting people who are "playing" the system, no.

[Bummer]

Unfortunately, there is a huge difference between ASSISTING and ENABLING. Helping someone get "back on their feet" is a positive, however, creating a "lazy a$$" by making them dependent and permanently unemployed is definitely counter-productive.

According to many "knowledgeable experts," not the "arrogant bleeding hearts" who love to spend OPM (other peoples' money), too much "help" for an unending period of time is extremely harmful to the recipients.

Over the years / decades, a Lifestyle of Welfare has been proven to remove self-respect plus any and all incentives to become independent, productive and self sufficient.

Bottom line . . . for the sake of the recipients, all forms of welfare must have an expiration date.

[elkotronics]

I agree, Bummer. I have needed assistance before, but it didn't last long. And that was by design. We are built to get satisfaction by working to build a skill - a skill that will make us a living. And that ability to make a living will bolster our confidence in our ability to sustain ourselves. And then, in turn, we can gain real happiness by helping someone else attain what they need.

[Pretzelogik]

The dole stops here.