Exchange Our Food Stamp Program for Welfare Stores? (county, elect, abuse)
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.
But either way, the children don't choose their parents.
Yes, children don't choose their parents, but if you teach the children of poor parents that they are doomed to and deserve a life of handouts, that's what they will do. If you teach the children of poor parents that they can escape poverty with character, hard work, and grit, then that's what they will do.
Stop underestimating the children of poor parents. They can be great if you let them.
I don't think I've ever seen anyone actually try to support, with statistics, the supposition that welfare recipients are lazy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bandon
Uh. We did. Squalmart rolls out the red carpet for Those People. We were all required to kiss their asses and they knew it. Want to try again ?
My worldview allows for people to form an attitude outside of WalMart.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pkbab5
Yes, children don't choose their parents, but if you teach the children of poor parents that they are doomed to and deserve a life of handouts, that's what they will do. If you teach the children of poor parents that they can escape poverty with character, hard work, and grit, then that's what they will do.
Stop underestimating the children of poor parents. They can be great if you let them.
Oh sure, poor children underperform because they get so much wonderful welfare. That makes perfect sense.
What we teach them is that no matter how hard they work, the kid who grew up in the rich household will make more than them.
Frank, you had said in a previous post, "The point is that it's completely pointless to talk about whether people "earned" anything, because nobody earns most of what they have. They inherit it from their parents and circumstances."
The first sentence is what I was mainly disputing.
However, as far as the second sentence, YES -- parents do inherit many things from their parents, good and bad. No one here is saying that the world if fair -- it ISN'T fair. Yes, some parents are better than others, and I do agree with you that children should not be punished for that. However, if you think that these children should be supported by more fortunate taxpayers for the rest of their lives if they do not rise above their unfortunate beginnings, that is where you and I disagree. I do disagree with the fact that you seem to believe that a bad beginning automatically excuses people from earning their own way in life once they are adults.
I actually think that you give poor people, as a whole, much less credit than I do. I know that just because people are poor does NOT mean that they are necessarily inferior to most other (more affluent) people and that they are incapable of overcoming an inferior beginning. I think to believe otherwise is actually demeaning and insulting to poor people.
And to say it again -- or maybe I didn't say it, but I believe the implication was clear when I wrote about my own definitely "working poor" parents and the fact that I was also part of the working poor in my 20's -- that many (and probably most!) working poor people work harder than more affluent people do. (And so yes, I do know a lot about the working poor, believe it or not, and I have great respect for them. I just wish you would stop lumping in the working poor with the poor who don't work but can And, yes, also believe it or not, such people do exist. I have unfortunately known several of them and I willingly admit that I have NO respect for them.)
Corporate entitlements - okay. That I can do. 92 billion for 2015.
Our current deficit (the amount of money we need to get from somewhere just to stop growing the debt, before we can actually expand any other government programs) is $439 billion. So 439-92 is 347, only $347 billion to go.
Pension double dipping is state only, doesn't factor into the federal equation.
War chest - $58.6 billion for 2015. That brings us to $288.4 billion left to go.
You need to find $288.4 billion more cuts before we can add fresh fruit and veg to the food stamp program. And.... go!
I am not knowledgeable enough to debate actual numbers, nor is it really on topic to do so. I would have to know every single budget number for every single department in both the state and federal governments to properly debate it in that way (as would you). If you're asking me if I believe the only place to trim is for programs for the poor, I would for sure call BS though.
As for excuses, at what point do we, knowing that poverty propagates crime, illness, divorce and so on, need to take responsibility for our role in permitting persistent inter-generational poverty? Even if we accept the premise that blaming poor children for growing up to be poor adults, at what point should we accept that blaming the poor has not solved anything after persisting for several thousand years? Which is to say, if preaching the Just World gospel and blaming the poor for their own status hasn't fixed anything yet, when do we admit failure?
What exactly are you advocating? Giving up on the poor, shrugging our shoulders, and shoving them out of the country? Decide that we won't permit it anymore and just get rid of it? Throw them all in jail? That's horrible.
The poor in this country are downright rich compared to the poor centuries ago. We have made great progress. And we will continue to do so. Goodness. Admit failure? Not on your life.
Yes, children don't choose their parents, but if you teach the children of poor parents that they are doomed to and deserve a life of handouts, that's what they will do. If you teach the children of poor parents that they can escape poverty with character, hard work, and grit, then that's what they will do.
Stop underestimating the children of poor parents. They can be great if you let them.
Do you understand where they are starting from? Often they grow up malnourished from the beginning, abused and born to teenage moms, often exposed to drugs and alcohol even in the womb, exposed to lead and mold and other toxic substances during their childhoods...these kids are already at a disadvantage by the time they start kindergarten, and many face life and death danger just to get to school and back...but they are equally capable of getting out of poverty as someone who was born in a middle class suburb? Sorry, again I call BS. Of course some kids can do this, but every sociological study ever done on class status concludes it is much harder and rarer to move up a social class and most people rich or poor end up being similar financially to those they are surrounded by.
For a kid in poverty to move up to middle class is just as much a climb as it is for someone average middle class to join the 1%.
I am not knowledgeable enough to debate actual numbers, nor is it really on topic to do so. I would have to know every single budget number for every single department in both the state and federal governments to properly debate it in that way (as would you). If you're asking me if I believe the only place to trim is for programs for the poor, I would for sure call BS though.
No, I think we should trim everywhere. Everything and everywhere. The problem is that handouts are the biggest chunk of spending, and that's the only portion of the budget that has NOT been trimmed yet in the past few years. Everyone else is trimming trimming trimming, and handouts are growing, faster than everyone else can trim. The handout people need to do their part too for the good of the country.
No, I think we should trim everywhere. Everything and everywhere. The problem is that handouts are the biggest chunk of spending, and that's the only portion of the budget that has NOT been trimmed yet in the past few years. Everyone else is trimming trimming trimming, and handouts are growing, faster than everyone else can trim. The handout people need to do their part too for the good of the country.
I still maintain it costs more in the end to trim upfront. Healthy people cost less to take care of over their lifetimes than diseased people.
I am not knowledgeable enough to debate actual numbers, nor is it really on topic to do so. I would have to know every single budget number for every single department in both the state and federal governments to properly debate it in that way (as would you). If you're asking me if I believe the only place to trim is for programs for the poor, I would for sure call BS though.
Also, if you are not knowledgable enough, then educate yourself. That's what I did, and why I have the opinions I do. Because I am in possession of the facts, and am not spouting what some politician or media outlet told me to think.
My worldview allows for people to form an attitude outside of WalMart.
So does mine. But when people are insisting that Welfare Queens don't exist, I think pointing out observations from those of us who worked the front lines and observed the Welfaeries in their native habitat is relevant.
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.
