Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Great Debates
 [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)
 
Old 04-05-2009, 01:28 AM
 
1,271 posts, read 4,022,661 times
Reputation: 596

Advertisements

I don't think anyone should be rewarded for being irresponsible. Who decides what that is though? A family decides, when things are good, that it's ok to have more kids, crisis strikes the economy takes a turn for the worse and all of a sudden their seen as irresponsible parents?

I've never had any problem knowing my tax payer dollars go to a household where the children are being properly taken care of, infact, I just read somewhere that more and more people are applying for foodstamps( which I directly correlate with the economy).

While I can understand the apprehension (when dealing with someone who is taking advantage of the system) I believe it is our duty as human beings to "help" each other, not turn our backs on each other simply because people aren't living their lives like we think they should.

Quote:
Originally Posted by afoigrokerkok View Post
Do you think our government should provide handouts to those who cannot work, do not make enough to support themselves and their families, or simply choose not to work? What about to those who have been laid off?

Should the government reward women for repeatedly having children as a means of getting more benefits...or do we have an obligation to provide the benefits for the sake of the kids?

I'm interested to hear everyone's thoughts. Under what circumstances do you think handouts are acceptable, if any? And what type of assistance should be provided?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-05-2009, 06:09 PM
 
422 posts, read 649,174 times
Reputation: 497
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bjones1976 View Post
I don't think anyone should be rewarded for being irresponsible. Who decides what that is though? A family decides, when things are good, that it's ok to have more kids, crisis strikes the economy takes a turn for the worse and all of a sudden their seen as irresponsible parents?

I've never had any problem knowing my tax payer dollars go to a household where the children are being properly taken care of, infact, I just read somewhere that more and more people are applying for foodstamps( which I directly correlate with the economy).

While I can understand the apprehension (when dealing with someone who is taking advantage of the system) I believe it is our duty as human beings to "help" each other, not turn our backs on each other simply because people aren't living their lives like we think they should.

I believe adults have the right to live as they please. But NOT once you ask me to foot the bill.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2009, 06:15 PM
 
Location: Texas
14,975 posts, read 16,454,913 times
Reputation: 4586
Quote:
Originally Posted by Purple_Princess View Post
I believe adults have the right to live as they please. But NOT once you ask me to foot the bill.
Drug testing for anyone receiving any type of welfare.

Plus either taking kids away if they are using kids to abuse the system or requiring sterilization if they've had more than 2 kids and have been on welfare for XXX number of years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2009, 06:18 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,554 posts, read 86,936,034 times
Reputation: 36644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ohiogirl81 View Post
Every person handling that food must be trained in food safety, from the person at the restaurant scooping the food into portable containers, to the driver, to the person accepting the food at the charity.
You have just hit on the crux of the problem. What is wrong with America? That word MUST in your comment. Perfectly good food cannot be given to hungry people, because there is no well-trained qualified professional expert on duty to hand it to him while wearing approved safety equipment, under the watchful eye of an army of government inspectors. Supermarket legal affairs departments recommending chain link fences around dumpsters, with security lights and guard dogs, to make sure no homeless person sues the supermarket after eating day-old bread.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-05-2009, 06:37 PM
 
Location: Portland, Oregon
7,085 posts, read 12,051,528 times
Reputation: 4125
Quote:
Originally Posted by jtur88 View Post
You have just hit on the crux of the problem. What is wrong with America? That word MUST in your comment. Perfectly good food cannot be given to hungry people, because there is no well-trained qualified professional expert on duty to hand it to him while wearing approved safety equipment, under the watchful eye of an army of government inspectors. Supermarket legal affairs departments recommending chain link fences around dumpsters, with security lights and guard dogs, to make sure no homeless person sues the supermarket after eating day-old bread.
Sue happy America for you, better to waste it then feed the hungry.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2009, 06:34 AM
 
7,357 posts, read 11,754,732 times
Reputation: 8944
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cliffie View Post
In many countries, raising children is considered work. Mothers get paid for staying home with their children. Go figure!
Somebody commented personally to me, in response to this post:

Quote:
Raising children IS WORK Pig
Maybe my tone didn't come across properly. I am totally in support of women being paid to raise their children...

...Pig.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2009, 06:48 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,761,940 times
Reputation: 24863
I traditional society where women did not work outside the home, women were paid to raise children, cook supper, do dishes, clean the house, provide sexual relief, have more babies, etc. etc. They were paid room, board and cloths for their labor. Sometimes they had to deal with dangerous drunks. In most cases they had no choice about who they lived with because the "marriage" was arranged by their brothers and fathers. What a wonderful life of slavery.

I think women should be paid to raise babies and not necessarily live with the father. The man should pay for his kids but there are some men that should never be around women and children for any longer than the mating. Some are too darned dangerous physically and psychologically.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2009, 09:46 AM
 
36,499 posts, read 30,833,646 times
Reputation: 32753
Quote:
Obviously you didn't read my entire post, or you wouldn't call distributing perishable food as "simple." There's nothing simple about it. Oh, and ... any creditable soup kitchen will feed anyone, and not discriminate based on whether someone is eligible for food stamps or not.
You did see the smily face after "simple". It very well could be simple. As jtur88's post points out, its the gov. that makes something simple so complicated and impossible thus creating their own problems. This is exactly what is wrong with the welfare program. What was established as a temporary safety net for people down on their luck during hard economic times has morphed into a way of life. This situation was caused by the government itself. Enforce time limits, investegate abuse, verify documentation. Id bet if it were a private run organization there would be less abuse and fewer people living off the system.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2009, 12:12 PM
 
Location: Up in the air
19,112 posts, read 30,619,505 times
Reputation: 16395
Quote:
Originally Posted by subsound View Post
Sue happy America for you, better to waste it then feed the hungry.

Off topic, but of interest....

I worked at Home Depot for a couple years as a manager and we used to throw away a ridiculous amount of perfectly good doors, windows, molding, appliances etc etc because we weren't allowed to donate them. Apparently a family a few years back sued Home Depot because a donated window they installed wasn't sealed properly and gave their kid pnemonia. Mind you, this window was given free of charge and was not installed by anyone affiliated with HD.

Maybe if people didn't sue at the drop of a hat more things could be donated.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-06-2009, 12:40 PM
 
36,499 posts, read 30,833,646 times
Reputation: 32753
Quote:
Maybe if people didn't sue at the drop of a hat more things could be donated.
This is true. The judge should have put his/her foot up their behind as they were escorted out of the court room.
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 > Great Debates
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 36, 37 - Top