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.
You are living in dream land. The only places with affordable housing do not have any good paying jobs. A modest fixer upper in San Jose costs at least $750,000 and even more in a good school district. A nice home is well over a $ million. Rent for a 3 BR apartment costs $3500+ /mo.
On the contrary, I'm living in the real world, not the world of cherry picked examples. Off-hand I have no idea about the housing costs in San Jose and whether or not housing is affordable there says little about the state as a whole. But I know of numerous areas throughout California that have good jobs and decent homes that people with decent jobs can afford. When people complain about this I find the source of the problem is inflated expectations, they want to be able to afford a huge McMansion on a relatively small income.
Also, you're focusing on buying a home. When real estate costs get inflated its typically cheaper to rent. Some people, such as myself, are perfectly happy saving money and renting instead of buying a home.
I don't think its arrogant to say something factual, its simply a fact that in general low income households eat worse than higher income ones. Much of this comes down to lower income households having, in general, less knowledge about nutrition.
As for as using the funds for other things, people should be provided the bare necessities and many alternate use of funds would go outside of that scope. But assistance should include basics like shampoo, etc.
This is the sort of thing I don't like, keeping your home at 80 degrees is a luxury and not true need. The state should only be providing basic needs.
If food banks are so lush with food that people can get food from them and spend government aid on luxuries then that points to the programs being too generous.
I didn't say anything about "monitoring", instead I suggested that only lower cost healthful foods should be available when one is using food aid. That both lowers the cost of the programs and also improves the health of the people on the program.
This isn't about trying to control people, instead insisting that people make good and efficient use of public assistance from tax payers.
So, poor people can't eat as well as rich people. No kidding!
But, it's not because they're poor and can't buy what the rich people can buy, it's because they aren't as well educated.... arrogant!
Okay, so now we will have the shampoo police? WAIT! You don't get to actually repeat after you wash and rinse! You must make this government approved shampoo bottle last the entire month!
80 degrees is a luxury.....arrogant! Right, poor people should also suffer. How dare they be poor. Let them eat cake.
Yes, we should definitely cut the government programs even further, since the charities have done such a good job of filling in the gap.
So, you aren't going to "monitor" but you're just going to control what they can eat......
And you're not going to "control" them, but you just want to make sure they do what you want them to do.......
Sheesh, believe what you want. As a wise man once told me, "You can't reason with unreasonable people."
Sorry, but your personal observations of a handful of cases do not constitute a national crisis. The amount of fraud in these programs is barely measurable statistically. Whereas the Chicken-Little hand-wringing and hyperbole creates a blinding dust storm of misunderstanding and prejudice.
How dare a diabetic find a way to get an insulin pump to ease his suffering! Worse than a Wall Street banker collapsing the world financial system. Entirely comparable, eh
Before you spread misinformation, why don't you actually research how much money is budgeted and disbursed to how many people. Learn about the fraud costs as a percentage of cases served.
And then come back and tell us how those truths compare to white collar crime. Hell, tell us about how welfare fraud compares to annual revenue lost due to ordinary, everyday "honest, hardworking citizens" just like you and me cheating on their taxes.
You are hard to please, if one gives you, as others have, statistics you say they are done by groups you do not agree with. If one says their information is based on personal experience then you say to look at statistics...
As far as looking at statistics to see the fraud levels, that would be totally useless as most fraud is not detected, only rarely is it detected and included in such reports. What happens outside my nearby grocery stores is not included in those reports, and never will be.
As far as the insulin pump, fine for him to get one. He was a diabetic since he was a toddler. BUT he lives in another state because it has lower state taxes, lower costs, and brags about that. He only comes to CA for medical procedures. Yep, leaves his job, comes to CA as unemployed and gets the procedure at MY cost. That is not ok to me. If he wants the free benefits, he should work here and pay into the system here to support his costs. When he does work, and pay taxes it is always in another state. Nope, I think that if he wants a pump and to live elsewhere, he should either save for it or gets a higher cost insurance to cover it. Not come to the state that will pay for it.
I am not spreading misinformation. I can back up everything I have said.
And I do not cheat on my taxes. Short form, one job, nothing that is not clearly accurate and correct. I pay my fair share. Obviously you do cheat and think that is fine. And BTW, that has nothing to do with the issues here.
You are hard to please, if one gives you, as others have, statistics you say they are done by groups you do not agree with. If one says their information is based on personal experience then you say to look at statistics...
As far as looking at statistics to see the fraud levels, that would be totally useless as most fraud is not detected, only rarely is it detected and included in such reports. What happens outside my nearby grocery stores is not included in those reports, and never will be.
As far as the insulin pump, fine for him to get one. He was a diabetic since he was a toddler. BUT he lives in another state because it has lower state taxes, lower costs, and brags about that. He only comes to CA for medical procedures. Yep, leaves his job, comes to CA as unemployed and gets the procedure at MY cost. That is not ok to me. If he wants the free benefits, he should work here and pay into the system here to support his costs. When he does work, and pay taxes it is always in another state. Nope, I think that if he wants a pump and to live elsewhere, he should either save for it or gets a higher cost insurance to cover it. Not come to the state that will pay for it.
I am not spreading misinformation. I can back up everything I have said.
And I do not cheat on my taxes. Short form, one job, nothing that is not clearly accurate and correct. I pay my fair share. Obviously you do cheat and think that is fine. And BTW, that has nothing to do with the issues here.
I am not a bit hard to please. All's required is truthful representation. Personal, anecdotal experiences are colorful fun and lively spice to conversation. They are not, however, valid metrics. Neither are specious "statistics" drawn by special interest cabals for the purposes of creating ideological smoke screens to obfuscate reality.
Bottom line is: what happens outside your local grocery store is not a valid measure of the efficacy of the welfare system. Neither are fantasies created by Libertarian think tanks.
As for no one but lae60, and other neighborhood grocery store parking lot watchers like you, being aware of these fraudulent transactions - uh, do you really feel you are out-sleuthing the community of professional investigators and statisticians who are very highly compensated to watchdog welfare systems? There are some very clever detectives out there. Fraud levels are well evaluated. And the amount of fraud runs at less than 5% - 7% of budget. That is a very high rate of efficiency, leaving about 95% of funds applied as designed.
Now, the reference I made to cheating on taxes. Um, I used the phrase: "people like you and me" generically. It was neither a personal accusation (of you) nor an admission (of me) cheating specifically. The point is, and how it relates to your comments, you are having a hissyfit about nickels and dimes being swiped by poor people who haven't hardly a pot to pee in, while ignoring serious crime and losses all around you perpetrated by ordinary, everyday friends and neighbor citizens. And, especially, ignoring white-collar crime by the elite at the most respected levels of society. Welfare fraud doesn't even register on the scale by any comparison.
Quote:
Last year’s tax gap report estimated that Americans (individuals and corporations) underpaid their taxes by $450 billion in 2006—that’s equal to a 17% noncompliance rate. The problem with the estimate, the new report says, is that it’s out-of-date, it doesn’t break out estimates for the informal economy or offshore tax evasion, and the methodology to estimate corporate cheating – for big businesses and mom and pop operations — is faulty. How Much Tax Cheating Is Really Going On? - Forbes
Now you go do a bit of research. Look up what the welfare budget is. Look up information on losses. Compare to the tax-losses number above.
On the contrary, I'm living in the real world, not the world of cherry picked examples. Off-hand I have no idea about the housing costs in San Jose and whether or not housing is affordable there says little about the state as a whole. But I know of numerous areas throughout California that have good jobs and decent homes that people with decent jobs can afford. When people complain about this I find the source of the problem is inflated expectations, they want to be able to afford a huge McMansion on a relatively small income.
Also, you're focusing on buying a home. When real estate costs get inflated its typically cheaper to rent. Some people, such as myself, are perfectly happy saving money and renting instead of buying a home.
You can live in your dreamland if you want. I really don't care. The facts speak for themselves and if you choose to ignore them, then so be it.
So, poor people can't eat as well as rich people. No kidding!
That isn't what I said, I said that lower income people tend to eat more poorly in part due to having less knowledge about nutrition. In terms of health, food costs aren't the issue as there are many healthful foods that are very cheap. As such food programs that point low income families towards healthful foods can make a positive contribution to these families health.
And, like I said, there is already program like this (e.g., WIC) and they are a big success. Women and children on WIC are healthier for being on the program.
Quote:
Originally Posted by NoMoreSnowForMe
80 degrees is a luxury.....arrogant! Right, poor people should also suffer.
Yes, that is a luxury.....and unless someone has a serious medical condition they can easily deal with temps above 80. I routinely work in temps that are above 80.....I don't consider it "suffering".
You can live in your dreamland if you want. I really don't care. The facts speak for themselves and if you choose to ignore them, then so be it.
The facts do speak for themselves, there are numerous areas in California where families can afford homes. Can you get cheaper housing in some other states? Sure.
The facts do speak for themselves, there are numerous areas in California where families can afford homes. Can you get cheaper housing in some other states? Sure.
The problem is that those areas do not have decent paying jobs.
I've lived in California for a little more than 6 months now and so far my impressions are:
-California with it's varying geography and landscapes may be the most beautiful place in the entire country and perhaps one of the most beautiful in the world.
-The weather here in So Cal is all its cracked up to be. I don't ever notice the weather and that is a good thing. Sometimes where I live (eastern Chula Vista) gets a bit too hot for my Minnesotan blood but that's okay.
-Watching the sunset on the beach is an experience everyone should be able to have at least once in their life.
-There is anything and everything to do in California.
However all of this comes with a price:
-It is expensive to live here but that is the price you pay for all of the above listed things. A lot of people want to experience California, particularly Southern California which means more traffic, more demand for housing, etc.
-The state government sucks pretty hard and I detest the overwhelming liberalism of California.
But I've lived in 3 states long term now and they all have their share of issues, problems, etc. On the balance I love California, though some days more than others. I can see why so many people fall in absolute love with it, yet I can also see why it is not for everyone. Nothing is for everyone and California is no exception.
another example of how California's well-intentioned government turns against common sense and promotes mediocrity. A black student from a high-income family will be admitted to UCLA before a low or medium income white or Asian student.
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.
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.
