U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
View Poll Results: Should people be required to submit to a drug screen before receiving unemployment benefits or welfa
Yes 118 65.19%
No 63 34.81%
Voters: 181. You may not vote on this poll

Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:27 PM
 
Location: Tallahassee
1,869 posts, read 847,451 times
Reputation: 299

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by andrea3821 View Post
I know allllllll about all of it, as I have family members who use these services and others. I have done more research than I ever would have cared to. I've also seen it with my own eyes. There is no data as to how many people milk the system, otherwise, the milking would have been stopped by now. I have no anger toward those who have a legitimate disability but I take issue with those who don't.

I claimed no falsehoods in my post and I stand by my words.

And race has nothing to do with it, there you go assuming things again. I'm white and Hispanic and I have family members of both races/ethnicities who are abusing the system. Good job there, buddy.

Just for the record, I have four family members on public assistance and two on SSDI.

ETA: Perhaps you missed where I said churches should take care of the needy. I never said I wanted to turn my back on anyone, much less children.
So you are PROJECTING the behavior of your FOUR family members on public assistance and two family members on SSDI onto "most" welfare recipients. Sorry, kiddo, but six people, or even six families, out of all the people who unfortunately have to rely on welfare benefits do not even come close to providing sufficient evidence of widespread abuse of the system. Since you are so upset about this fraud committed by your family members, have you turned them in for abusing the system? Have you EVER talked to anyone with authority in the system about these people?

Your issue with "welfare" seems to be a personal problem with specific family members. Try to be more objective.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:29 PM
 
19,081 posts, read 21,306,427 times
Reputation: 13396
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleatis View Post
People have to be employed to go to their friends house and catch a buzz?
If you're using my money to live, yes.

Quote:
Someone has to be employed to have a little unnecessary fun? These people shouldn't be allowed to go to the movies, buy a CD, eat at McDonalds etc?
See above.

Quote:
How should we enact and enforce that?

Not to mention, a job isn't exactly something that can just be found around every corner. It's not like people can just go get a job like they're as common as litter.

Sure, people shouldn't just get messed up all day - I can agree with that. But drug testing all these people is going to disenfranchise a lot of people who really aren't abusing what they're getting.

Let's imagine for a moment that ALL these recipients are hardcore druggies. What are we supposed to do with all these people when they get cut off - all these addicts without a job, without an income or a place to go - you (general) really expect that this will be a greater benefit to society to have all these junkies looking for a way to survive, in a place where they can hardly find a job. You think the drug problem is going to go down with a mass of people who now have nothing to live on - think they might sell some drugs? Do a few black market activities maybe?

Disenfranchising people from the mainstream doesn't get rid of their basic instincts to survive, it just makes them more willing to do whatever it takes. What do we do at this point?
Again, I don't think drug testing is the answer. I've put a few of my ideas on the table, for whatever that is worth. Further, I also do not support the idea of not working and receiving welfare. If a person has time to go to a friends house to catch a buzz, that person has time to be picking up litter, or doing some other temp job while on welfare. That's simply a matter of principle whether it can be enforced or not. And it certainly speaks to the caliber of an individual. As far as junkies go, half way houses are a good option. Further, I take no issue with the use of drugs. I take issue with using drugs while on welfare. It's beyond unethical.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:31 PM
 
Location: Atlanta metro
5,645 posts, read 4,003,201 times
Reputation: 982
The only hard facts I can cite offhand are that the expenditures on HHS programs rival the defense budget. I think both of those are problematic. I don't have time to look for the link b/c I have to go make dinner but anyone who wants to refute that is free to post a link.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:33 PM
 
Location: Atlanta metro
5,645 posts, read 4,003,201 times
Reputation: 982
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perlier View Post
So you are PROJECTING the behavior of your FOUR family members on public assistance and two family members on SSDI onto "most" welfare recipients. Sorry, kiddo, but six people, or even six families, out of all the people who unfortunately have to rely on welfare benefits do not even come close to providing sufficient evidence of widespread abuse of the system. Since you are so upset about this fraud committed by your family members, have you turned them in for abusing the system? Have you EVER talked to anyone with authority in the system about these people?

Your issue with "welfare" seems to be a personal problem with specific family members. Try to be more objective.
I never said "most." Did I? If so, I should have said "a great many."

Here we go again with demanding that I turn in people who abuse the system. That is not my job! That is the gov't's job. They should be screening people better. Several of these moochers I know will be hitting rock bottom pretty soon, so I am praying they get it figured out so their kids don't have to suffer from their idiocy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:37 PM
 
Location: Boise
2,008 posts, read 2,920,189 times
Reputation: 729
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrea3821 View Post
Then perhaps we should stop taxing people to death, encourage church attendance and let the churches handle welfare.

I don't owe jack to society, I help charities and individuals where I can and live a productive life. What do you think I owe "society"?

I'm not a greedy person at all, you should really not say things like that when you don't know someone.

I'm not discussing the war here, that's another thread, but FWIW, I don't agree with the wars.
Where would the church get the money? Through tithes and donations (which is a lot like taxes, meaning that the masses would still be paying for it). How would the churches be regulated, how could we ensure that there was no bias based on religious reasonings? Would we have the government interfere with the church's operation?

We are all a part of society. Every single one of us, whether we like it or not. If you don't think you could make it strictly by yourself (like on a desert island) then you take part in society. You take part in society by driving on the roads that society built, going to the schools that society constructed, calling for help on 911 that society pays for going to the park that society paid for, the lake that society maintains...

You don't think society influenced you in any way - what you wear, what you think, what your morals are? Aall these things you could have managed individually? Maybe you owe society more than you think?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:37 PM
 
20,570 posts, read 26,730,670 times
Reputation: 13453
Well...

I think what we're seeing here is the hard wired instinct in human beings for Social Darwinism to kick in when we've got too many people competing for too few resources. That would account for the anger towards those who are "taking" from society and unable to give little back.

We're running out of room on the planet, that's all. When Europe was going through this type of problem, there was an entire new world to take away from the Natives, places for the disenfranchised to go.


Andrea--I've had a couple of drug tests for different jobs, and I didn't have to pay for them. I've never heard of anyone having to pay for one; why should welfare recipients have to if job seekers don't (now I'm sure that someone will pop in here with some subjective "knowledge" of a cousin of a friend et al who had to fork over the loot for a test while applying for a job but....)?

It just isn't fiscally responsible to start adding to the federal deficit, which is what would happen if we instituted this practise. That, more than the 4th amendment, is the real roadblock here (though the ACLU's already all over this one--you may not agree with them but do not underestimate them; they've got some of the best Constitutional attorneys in the country).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:39 PM
 
Location: Tallahassee
1,869 posts, read 847,451 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrea3821 View Post
Huh? We are not discussing DOD spending here, we discussing entitlements. Other than "tax money," there are no similarities.

I'm waiting for a response as to what I "owe" society.

I never said churches should take over our moral responsibilities. Churches are the vehicles that can help the needy through their connections and outreach programs. Tithing would provide the funds...which means we are fulfilling our supposed moral responsibility of taking care of the less fortunate by tithing and supporting these church programs.
Your own morals determine what you "owe" society. Apparently you've already said that you don't owe "jack" to society. It's not up to me to tell you exactly what you "owe" society. Most people know that on their own by the time they are adults.

When you say that you don't owe "jack" to society and that churches should take care of the needy, well, that sounds like an abdication of your moral responsibilities to society to the church. Not every tax paying member of society is a church member, but you would think it's fair to leave the churchs totally responsible for the needy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:48 PM
 
Location: Tallahassee
1,869 posts, read 847,451 times
Reputation: 299
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrea3821 View Post
I never said "most." Did I? If so, I should have said "a great many."

Here we go again with demanding that I turn in people who abuse the system. That is not my job! That is the gov't's job. They should be screening people better. Several of these moochers I know will be hitting rock bottom pretty soon, so I am praying they get it figured out so their kids don't have to suffer from their idiocy.
As they say, "put your money where your mouth is".........if you're NOT willing to try to stop the abuse committed by your own family, then doesn't seem that complaining so much is justified. I personally would NOT turn in people, however, I don't begrudge anyone for getting the help they need. It seems to me that it would not be possible for your family members to scam the welfare system if they were living a life of luxury. You even say in your post that "several of these moochers I know will be hitting rock bottom pretty soon".......so how is it they should not be receiving welfare benefits? However, if all of your family members are indeed living a nice life and lying to get extra money from welfare, then why won't you put a stop to it? And, btw, yes, it is your job, if you are going to complain so loudly and bitterly about it. Would you prefer that even more money be spent to "screen" out the few bad apples than is spent on the benefits themselves? On the one hand, there are complaints about government spending too much money on welfare programs like food stamps and disability, then on the other hand there is complaining about the "govt" not doing its job by not screening well enough. What is it you want?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:52 PM
 
Location: In the desert
2,485 posts, read 1,873,166 times
Reputation: 1101
Quote:
Originally Posted by cleatis View Post
Where would the church get the money? Through tithes and donations (which is a lot like taxes, meaning that the masses would still be paying for it). How would the churches be regulated, how could we ensure that there was no bias based on religious reasonings? Would we have the government interfere with the church's operation?

We are all a part of society. Every single one of us, whether we like it or not. If you don't think you could make it strictly by yourself (like on a desert island) then you take part in society. You take part in society by driving on the roads that society built, going to the schools that society constructed, calling for help on 911 that society pays for going to the park that society paid for, the lake that society maintains...

You don't think society influenced you in any way - what you wear, what you think, what your morals are - society hasn't influenced you in any way, all these things you could have managed individually? Maybe you owe society more than you think?
I couldn't rep ya again so I'll do it here

Some believe that the churches & charity is the answer knowing full well that it could not possibly be enough to even help with feeding all the children of the poor.

They honestly do not care one single bit about the 'poor' & do not consider them members of society because they aren't paying taxes if they have to collect benefits & this includes their innocent children.
Oh they will lie & say they care but, if you read through some of the threads & you will see the attitude of some.

They do not consider themselves lucky to be in the positions they are in by not being ill, losing their job, having a chronically ill child or any other of the numerous reasons that people who need help have experienced.

THEY have earned it & don't believe they owe society anything but their opinions.
If you don't think or believe exactly like they do, you are 'wrong'.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-20-2010, 08:56 PM
 
Location: In the desert
2,485 posts, read 1,873,166 times
Reputation: 1101
Quote:
Originally Posted by Perlier View Post
As they say, "put your money where your mouth is".........if you're NOT willing to try to stop the abuse committed by your own family, then doesn't seem that complaining so much is justified. I personally would NOT turn in people, however, I don't begrudge anyone from getting the help they need. It seems to me that it would not be possible for your family members to scam the welfare system if they were living a life of luxury. However, if they are indeed living a nice life and lying to get extra money from welfare, then why won't you put a stop to it? And, btw, yes, it is your job, if you are going to complain so loudly and bitterly about it. Would you prefer that even more money be spent to "screen" out the few bad apples than is spent on the benefits themselves? On the one hand, there are complaints about government spending too much money on welfare programs like food stamps and disability, then on the other hand there is complaining about the "govt" not doing its job by not screening well enough. What is it you want?

I have stated this very thing before & firmly believe that if you hate abuse of social programs that use your tax dollars, then it is your duty to report fraud, even if it is your own family members & you may have to face repercussions. Otherwise it's all smoke........
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top