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)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-10-2019, 01:36 PM
 
1,967 posts, read 959,229 times
Reputation: 2601

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hppy123 View Post
I've always been curious what conservatives think is going to happen when you stop feeding tens of millions of people that are deemed "unemployable"..

You cut welfare and the problem is still there because nobody hires them you then lose face and at the same time have a crime crisis..
You will have a lot more homeless people as well.

I have multiple health problems. I see seven different doctors. I have to go to a doctor several times a month. I have to go into the hospital every six to eight weeks for IV treatment. I am on 14 daily medicines in addition to the IV treatment for other health problems. In order for me to work a job, the employer would have to be okay with an employee who:

-has to use the restroom every 30 minutes to an hour,
-run to the restroom without warning during a Crohn's flare up (to try and keep from having an accident), -have a change of clothes and pull ups to change if I do have another accident,
-understand that during a flare up I might be in the restroom for hours bleeding and other things into the toilet before the episode calms down,
-not mind that I need to sit for 20 minutes minimum before getting back to work while I wait for the inhaler to work if I have yet another asthma attack,
-allow me to sit for a while during dizzy spells which I have to take medications for as a result of a traumatic brain injury,
-have to take off work several times a month for doctors visits,
-cannot stand for long periods or times or sit for long periods of times due to pain (I am often having to alternate positions due to extreme pain),
-have to take off during times of severe migraines due to auras and pain

Employers have deemed me unemployable. The vocational experts for SSA said there were no jobs I could physically do. The SSA stripped me of my SSI anyway and I am left with no income. I have no chance of ever being employed. I have never been able to hold down a job. The ALJ ignored expert testimony and ruled against me anyway. I never had a chance to win my case because they already made up their minds. I have appealed, but I am highly likely to run out of money before the appeal is decided. I am required to pay rent, copays to see doctors, copays for medicine, and other basic needs like toothpaste, etc even though I have zero income. I have no chance of being employed to have an income without the SSI.

The government has basically given me a death sentence so far. Once the money runs out I will die in the streets. I am being as frugal as I can be. It didn't help that I was robbed and had someone steal a huge amount of money I'd saved up (contrary to the false accusers, I do not blow my money on booze, cigarettes, cable, etc so I was able to save money each month even on the measly $771 I was receiving when terminated), dishes, food, pots and pans, etc. I was basically looted on multiple occasions over past few months and the office has the attitude of 'oh well that's what you get for living in public housing' and threatened to put me out if I kept complaining about being robbed. I was robbed by at least two different people, because I know who one of the thieves are, but some of the stuff had to have been taken by someone with a key. I know this because I had gone away to doctor and came back to have the place searched and things missing. My door was locked. The looting of my place started after the office became aware of my disability being cut off and the office staff keeps making comments when I'd report it that "well, you can always move out." I literally have nowhere else to go but the streets. I think they are targeting me on purpose to try and drive me out.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oldglory View Post
I'm a conservative and I don't have a problem helping the truly needy who aren't employable because of physical or mental incapabilities. The rest, hell no!
Even after people are aware of all my medical problems, I am still told to "get a job, any job, even if it's flipping burgers" and "McDonald's is always hiring". I have applied to "any job" since I was 16 years old. I cannot force an employer to employ me. When vocational experts, after accounting for all of my health problems, cannot name a job I can do then I should be considered disabled. Society and the government tells me to 'suck it up' and insists I get a job anyway. I am powerless to force an employer to hire and keep me. I use several thousands in medical care each month at taxpayer expense. It's little wonder people want me cut off so I can die in the streets. I know I am likely to die before the appeal could ever be decided in my favor.

It has been proven that no one will ever employ me. Only someone who is delusional or a liar would say that I could ever be employed at this point. I've never even had a full time job. I have never been able to hold out at a part time job for very long, and this was years ago. I have not been employed in nearly ten years (try to overcome that kind of employment gap) and have no personal references. People kind of don't want to hang around someone who is sick most of the time. I have no social life in order to end up with personal references that I have known at least a year (which is required to even be able to put a personal reference on the application in the first place). My applications go in the trash now when they're turned in. There's nothing I can do about any of that. Society still blames me for being employed saying I "could get a job if you wanted to work" and similar statements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-10-2019, 01:53 PM
 
1,967 posts, read 959,229 times
Reputation: 2601
Quote:
Originally Posted by miquel_westano View Post
Medicaid, SSI, and other redistribution programs are not breaking the poverty cycle. In fact many experts say they are increasing it. They are not providing common defense or welfare for the states. It is pretty easy to see the welfare of the states would be much better served by ending all wealth redistribution. It is clear since Article I gives Congress this taxation power for defense and the welfare of the states, redistribution is not part of this conveyed authority.


I believe the welfare of the states would be better served by programs forcing the welfare recipients to work for their government checks. There are very few if any people who could not perform some task for their check. I have volunteered at centers for the disabled where people tied ribbons into simple bows, added a lollipop and put them in baskets to sell for donations to the center. They were proud of their efforts to help their own center. The poor could pick up trash at parks, on the highways and river banks, or clean public facilities like courthouses. Those getting government subsidized housing could mow their own lots, clean their own yard areas and provide their own security.


The cycle must be broken with changes. What sounds harsh would really be much more likely to be compassionate. The truly disabled are usually enthusiastic in helping out. It is the career welfare recipients we need to motivate to work. Baby birds would never learn to fly if they were not forced out of the nest.
These are jobs that pay minimum wage to those employed at those types of jobs. Forcing the poor to work these jobs in exchange for pennies on the dollar is quite the savings. And there would still be not enough volunteer jobs for the 20/hr per week minimum required of everyone. And then those with health problems will have the trips to doctors held against them by the employers. If someone has to work, then the person should at least be paid a minimum wage.

I've been turned down for volunteer positions because I was deemed to not be a proper "fit." Those like me who are too worthless to even give their labor away will be left with nothing. Around here some places even require you to pay for a background check in order to give your labor away. Where is someone with no income going to get the money for that? The local library requires $20 for the background check with no guarantee of a spot even if you pass. They turned me down for a spot because I wasn't a proper "fit" for the library. It was made clear to me they didn't want me to apply again. Had I got a spot, they are very strict just as if you were working for pay and can fire you at whim if you mess up. It was made clear to me that if I had to run to the restroom for one of the flare ups that wouldn't even be acceptable, even for a volunteer job. Society likes to penalize people for things that are beyond their control.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2019, 03:15 PM
 
5,907 posts, read 1,491,853 times
Reputation: 4567
Quote:
Originally Posted by yspobo View Post
These are jobs that pay minimum wage to those employed at those types of jobs. Forcing the poor to work these jobs in exchange for pennies on the dollar is quite the savings. And there would still be not enough volunteer jobs for the 20/hr per week minimum required of everyone. And then those with health problems will have the trips to doctors held against them by the employers. If someone has to work, then the person should at least be paid a minimum wage.

I've been turned down for volunteer positions because I was deemed to not be a proper "fit." Those like me who are too worthless to even give their labor away will be left with nothing. Around here some places even require you to pay for a background check in order to give your labor away. Where is someone with no income going to get the money for that? The local library requires $20 for the background check with no guarantee of a spot even if you pass. They turned me down for a spot because I wasn't a proper "fit" for the library. It was made clear to me they didn't want me to apply again. Had I got a spot, they are very strict just as if you were working for pay and can fire you at whim if you mess up. It was made clear to me that if I had to run to the restroom for one of the flare ups that wouldn't even be acceptable, even for a volunteer job. Society likes to penalize people for things that are beyond their control.
I think you are missing your calling. You have a vivid imagination so you should be a writer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2019, 06:00 PM
 
123 posts, read 23,215 times
Reputation: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by yspobo View Post
These are jobs that pay minimum wage to those employed at those types of jobs. Forcing the poor to work these jobs in exchange for pennies on the dollar is quite the savings. And there would still be not enough volunteer jobs for the 20/hr per week minimum required of everyone. And then those with health problems will have the trips to doctors held against them by the employers. If someone has to work, then the person should at least be paid a minimum wage.
I am happy to see them paid minimum wage, but I find this line somewhat interesting;


Forcing the poor to work these jobs in exchange for pennies on the dollar is quite the savings.

I never said pennies on the dollar, but the way I see it, forcing taxpayers to pay them to sit at home is quite the racket. No one is entitled to free anything, except the opportunity to better themselves. I'd rather see them work and get paid than sit at home and get paid.


To each their own, but I just don't see the handout system improving their lives or the US economy. Let's put them to work. It may help the poor more long run.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2019, 07:48 PM
 
Location: Sunshine Coast, QLD
3,377 posts, read 2,350,433 times
Reputation: 4868
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chicano3000X View Post
So punish all for actions of a few...
you mean like the loony left hating virtually ALL white people for the actions of long dead Confederates?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2019, 08:30 PM
 
1,967 posts, read 959,229 times
Reputation: 2601
Quote:
Originally Posted by miquel_westano View Post
I am happy to see them paid minimum wage, but I find this line somewhat interesting;


Forcing the poor to work these jobs in exchange for pennies on the dollar is quite the savings.

I never said pennies on the dollar, but the way I see it, forcing taxpayers to pay them to sit at home is quite the racket. No one is entitled to free anything, except the opportunity to better themselves. I'd rather see them work and get paid than sit at home and get paid.


To each their own, but I just don't see the handout system improving their lives or the US economy. Let's put them to work. It may help the poor more long run.
How are they being paid to sit at home? You cannot get cash from welfare if you don't have dependent children.

They are requiring those on food stamps, for example, to work 20 hours per week. There are people who are unemployable who the government doesn't deem to be disabled who will be penalized because employers refuse to employ them. They will have to work for free, if they're lucky enough to have an employer allow them to volunteer somewhere. The maximum benefit for a single person on food stamps is $192/month. They receive no cash for this. They get a whole 2.40/hour in food stamps if they're lucky enough to be given the opportunity to comply with the work requirements. Minimum wage is $7.25/hour and it is in cash that can be used on anything. The food stamps can only be used for certain things. The employer requires you to behave as an employee getting actually paid for would, very strict, and can be fired easily. They know the person is dependent on working for about nothing for survival, so they can be treated any way the employer decides to treat them. Employers have been having jobs that used to pay minimum wage now only filled by those needing to meet work requirements so they save a lot of money not having to pay wages. Society doesn't see them as worth much of anything, so the treatment will reflect that.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-10-2019, 08:40 PM
 
Location: Living rent free in your head
31,680 posts, read 14,078,054 times
Reputation: 22703
Quote:
Originally Posted by mirage98de View Post
I would love to know what percentage of SSDI recipients have a history of obesity or drug abuse. It has to be incredibly high. These slobs shouldn’t be stealing from the productive individuals who are funding the system.
It's pretty tough to get SSDI, and you can't get it because you are a drug addict.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 09:30 AM
 
2,729 posts, read 915,628 times
Reputation: 1911
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Incorrect. "...general welfare of the United States." States, not individuals. Whenever the US Constitution refers to individuals, the terms used are specifically "people," "citizen/s" or "person/s," not "states."

Again... The welfare referred to is that of the states, not of individuals.
If Congress decides that the welfare of the states is served by assisting individuals in poverty, then it has the power to do so, according to the rather broad interpretation of the clause by the Supreme Court.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 10:33 AM
 
123 posts, read 23,215 times
Reputation: 268
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58 View Post
If Congress decides that the welfare of the states is served by assisting individuals in poverty, then it has the power to do so, according to the rather broad interpretation of the clause by the Supreme Court.
The broad interpretations of the court may be law, but they are not often accurate. The court system has become o joke of activism rather than a protector of the Constitution.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-11-2019, 02:48 PM
 
67,294 posts, read 30,894,905 times
Reputation: 8837
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leo58 View Post
If Congress decides that the welfare of the states is served by assisting individuals in poverty, then it has the power to do so, according to the rather broad interpretation of the clause by the Supreme Court.
No, it does not. That's a power relegated to each of the states, per the US Constitution. You're miscomprehending the term "states." It does NOT mean "people," "person/s," or "citizen/s."
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

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
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

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