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.
Good point. It is just much easier and nicer to take out anger on a person right in front of you and claim they are not ashamed enough, grateful enough or buying the correct things. Everybody wants a scapegoat. I certainly agree there are people abusing the system, but, the claims that people love to make about "they somebody who knows somebody" is just stupid.
I'm not angry at all. And I'm not commenting on people not being grateful enough.
I'm commenting that in all my sixty-seven years (and I worked for the government) I have never heard anyone say they are grateful at all.
I have personally heard numerous stories directly from recipients about how to scam the system, though. That always kills me. Who did they think they were telling?
It's made me pretty cynical even though I do know of people who need help. Mostly they are the elderly or seriously disabled.
First of all, there are plenty of good paying jobs that don't require a college degree. Get an apprenticeship with an electrician, plumber, mechanic, truck driver, etc etc. etc. Second for those who want one, then there are options for that, and of course they can work a job to pay for it too.
I worked to put myself through school. This included everything from unloading boxes out of trucks to call center work. Jobs are out there. You only need to look. So I'm not buying what you say.
As long as government pays people not to work, then guess what, you get a lot of excuses as to why they can't work, cat get skills, can't do anything but to defend that they are deadbeats.
I guess you missed the part that said I worked and supported myself for 35 years. Oh, and I paid taxes while I did that.
And I worked full time and almost completed my lower two years of a 4 year college degree as well. I had to quit when they raised the tuition so high, I couldn't afford it anymore. And yes, I did apply for grants and scholarships, but those went to high school students and people who could go to college full time.
I'm sorry, but no one in this country worked a full- or part-time job in the last 15 years that paid for all their living expenses and also paid for books and tuition. If you already have enough money for that, you don't need the education to get ahead. If they did work full-time and go to college, somewhere along the line they received grants or scholarships (welfare) or they had help (parentfare).
And yes, I'm sure there's jobs out there. However, with a degenerating disk in my back and an aneurysm 18 months ago, I guess you also missed the part where I said I was on disability.
And I think you are slightly out of touch. Those apprenticeship programs? A lot of them require at least some schooling. You can get a job as a trucker, but you better already know how to drive a truck. Want to be a cop? It used to be you could be hired and train on the job. Now, you have to put yourself through a police academy and finish that before you can even put in a resume to be a cop, and finishing the academy doesn't guarantee you a job. Try again.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WaldoKitty
Easy answer to that. They have a Mom who is irresponsible. She brought the bastards into the world with no regard for their upbringing. She shouldn't be raising them. Put them in foster care.
When Mom & "Baby Daddy" can come up with a plan to support their kids, they can get custody back.
My wife and I would love to have had more kids. But, we did not believe that we could afford more, so we stopped having kids. It wasn't difficult to do.
Of course. I'd rather people pay for their own birth control, too, if they do not want to have kids. How is this an issue?
Well that is wonderful of you and your wife, and if everyone did that, we wouldn't have a problem...but they don't and they won't, now or ever. Again, the operative word is "reality", not some idealized fantasy of the way things ought to be.
This argument to me is just about as stupid as the one for the "War in Drugs" another money waster based on the same short-sighted declarations of what people "ought to do" rather than what they actually do.
It's nice to think that if the taxpayers picked up birth control costs for people who can't afford it, those who can't afford it would stop having children.
I don't think birth control is the solution here. A lot of these people would continue to have children they can't support. The reckless would still be reckless, the indifferent would still be indifferent, the irresponsible would still be irresponsible.
The few who might actually take it to heart that they can't afford children and would take advantage of the free birth control are probably the same people who right now are skimping and saving to make sure they are protected.
It's nice to think that if the taxpayers picked up birth control costs for people who can't afford it, those who can't afford it would stop having children.
I don't think birth control is the solution here. A lot of these people would continue to have children they can't support. The reckless would still be reckless, the indifferent would still be indifferent, the irresponsible would still be irresponsible.
The few who might actually take it to heart that they can't afford children and would take advantage of the free birth control are probably the same people who right now are skimping and saving to make sure they are protected.
Well, Colorado until recently had a program where free long term birth control was provided to low income young women. It seems like it worked pretty well.
Obviously no birth control method is 100% effective (vasectomies and tubal ligations can fail, even women who abstain can be victims of rape and sexual assault), and there are still lots of low-income young single parents out there. But it seems to have helped quite a bit.
Once again, as a taxpayer, what do I prefer: paying an extra few bucks in taxes so people who aren't ready to have kids can get affordable birth control or paying tens of thousands to educate, house, clothe, and feed children who were born to parents that weren't ready?
That being said, once the kid is here, their welfare takes precedence. They deserve food, clothing, shelter, health care and the chance for a decent education. I will gladly help pay for these things.
************************************************** *********************************
Another thing that's a bit off topic, but to keep in mind: I spend my teenage years living with my great-grandmother. She kept us going on about $1200 a month in 1995 dollars in a rather crappy 2 bedroom apartment. We weren't on food stamps or public assistance, but we had a food stamp level food budget. And, yeah, we bought lots of Totino's pizza's and frozen meals and processed junk, and very little fresh fruit and veggies.
It was partially because a 15 year male and an 80 year old woman aren't going to be much into cooking. But it's also because those things don't go bad quickly. We had no car and there's only so much you can carry home from the Safeway that's a 25 minute walk away or on public transport.
(Oh, and this was the late 90's, so walking in with a big reusable bag or backpack to the grocery store was looked at not as "Good for you for being green!" It was looked at as "You're here to steal, aren't you?")
When you don't really know when the next time you can make a real grocery trip is, you make sure to buy stuff that if you have to pull it out of the freezer in 3-4 weeks, it won't be bad. It ends up being a huge part of your decision making. Which is why you see people with EBT cards stocking up on things like that. At the end of the month, it may be either "eat junk" or "starve."
Location: Sodo Sopa at The Villas above Kenny' s House.
2,492 posts, read 3,030,069 times
Reputation: 3911
Quote:
Originally Posted by jade408
One of my friends (also college educated) was on food stamps for a little while (a few weeks) a few years ago. When she got approved for the food stamps, she got the full monthly allotment of money and about a week to spend all of it.
She bought all of those things those republicans do not approve of. She bought salmon, steak, staples and all sorts of things to use up the money as it is user it or lose it with that first EBT card. I am sure she got judged at the store that day as someone abusing the system.
She ended up finding a job during her second cycle of food stamps, and she hasn't had problems since!
The balance carries over each month and isn't taken back even if benefits are stopped. Unless illegally obtained once it's on there it's on there. Your friend made a big mistake. That balance could of supplemented her grocery fund for months.
Well, Colorado until recently had a program where free long term birth control was provided to low income young women. It seems like it worked pretty well.
Obviously no birth control method is 100% effective (vasectomies and tubal ligations can fail, even women who abstain can be victims of rape and sexual assault), and there are still lots of low-income young single parents out there. But it seems to have helped quite a bit.
Once again, as a taxpayer, what do I prefer: paying an extra few bucks in taxes so people who aren't ready to have kids can get affordable birth control or paying tens of thousands to educate, house, clothe, and feed children who were born to parents that weren't ready?
That being said, once the kid is here, their welfare takes precedence. They deserve food, clothing, shelter, health care and the chance for a decent education. I will gladly help pay for these things.
Two things probably factored into the success of the Colorado program. One being that it was IUDs and not the pill, something that is more reliable for the less responsible.
The other being a decline in teen births in general.
I don't object on moral grounds, just skepticism on how helpful those programs really are. How many responsible low-income women find a way not to get pregnant with or without free contraceptives of any kind? I managed not to get pregnant no matter how broke I was, until I was ready for a child. And birth control is cheaper now than it was then.
Quote:
Originally Posted by blackmet
Another thing that's a bit off topic, but to keep in mind: I spend my teenage years living with my great-grandmother. She kept us going on about $1200 a month in 1995 dollars in a rather crappy 2 bedroom apartment. We weren't on food stamps or public assistance, but we had a food stamp level food budget. And, yeah, we bought lots of Totino's pizza's and frozen meals and processed junk, and very little fresh fruit and veggies.
It was partially because a 15 year male and an 80 year old woman aren't going to be much into cooking. But it's also because those things don't go bad quickly. We had no car and there's only so much you can carry home from the Safeway that's a 25 minute walk away or on public transport.
(Oh, and this was the late 90's, so walking in with a big reusable bag or backpack to the grocery store was looked at not as "Good for you for being green!" It was looked at as "You're here to steal, aren't you?")
When you don't really know when the next time you can make a real grocery trip is, you make sure to buy stuff that if you have to pull it out of the freezer in 3-4 weeks, it won't be bad. It ends up being a huge part of your decision making. Which is why you see people with EBT cards stocking up on things like that. At the end of the month, it may be either "eat junk" or "starve."
Actually, I think that's more on-topic than the birth control tangent. (Not saying you started the tangent, that's just where the conversation went.)
Ahh. So now you are concerned about the money. I thought it was supposed be about raising the kids properly. As for the problem, that was created by the two that spawned the kid in the first place. There shouldn't be financial reward from the taxpayers for it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Salmonburgher
I'd rather people pay for their own birth control, too, if they do not want to have kids. How is this an issue?
Congratulations. You both win tonight's "I Can't Believe I Missed the Point AGAIN" prize.
Well that is wonderful of you and your wife, and if everyone did that, we wouldn't have a problem...but they don't and they won't, now or ever. Again, the operative word is "reality", not some idealized fantasy of the way things ought to be.
Odd that you believe that self-restraint and personal and societal responsibility is some "idealized fantasy", despite the fact that millions of people are able to practice the same.
Oh well, if you argue for your limitations, you get to keep them. Have fun with that!
Congratulations. You both win tonight's "I Can't Believe I Missed the Point AGAIN" prize.
No, Ohiogirl. I didn't miss the point. I'm old enough that this is not the first time I've heard or discussed these issues. I'm simply looking at the issue from a different perspective and attempting to get you to see it, too.
Its you who failed to see that.
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.
