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.
I have other problems with the "poor police" -- but take it up a bump. Let's say the anti-Santa takes all benefits away from anyone the poor police judge to be morally, mentally, or heaven know what, unqualified to receive their weekly primo lotto winnings. What happens to YOU when that happens. ? Will you become richer? safer? anything beside self-satisfied? What happens to the country? richer? safer?
Honestly -- you will still be paying. You will pay for prisons, police, foster care, home security, private schools [unless you are also kicking any welfare kids out of school].
The poor police just don't get it. I don't agree with your depiction of the poor, but if I did - I would reason it out far enough and selfishly enough to know I have to pay for my quality of life one way or the other. Keep 'em minimally happy & I don't have to have all the nasty poverty, crime, hungry kids etc in my face every day. I don't have to put in a home security system, pay for more police & prisons. I probably won't spend every day of my life worrying about getting jumped, car jacked, robbed --.
Off topic. Also, you do not know that these same folks are not outraged about the war.
Oh, it's OK for YOU to be off topic(you just admitted it) but no one else can...are you related to Napolean?
"""""" you do not know that these same folks are not outraged about the war."""""
Yes, I DO know that the tiny people who make themselves feel better by trouncing on the poor are NOT outraged by the cost of the war. Just look at how many posts and threads are directed at stirring up hate for the poor(as Jesus directed, I guess)....and how few of these Fascists bring up the fraud/abuse/expense of a never-Ending war....
Ahh enough blame but the problem is no one but me has offered any solutions. An no,telling someone to get a job isn't a solution if there actually were any jobs.
But let's test the theory. All of these people,if throwed off welfare,would be among the actively seeking work crowd.which means they could compete with you for your job. In all actuality,they would most likely be cheaper than you.
I say you should be allowed ONE child out of wedlock while on public assistance; if you turn up pregnant a second time, mandatory sterilization, no more welfare as long as you live, and the one child you have gets taken away.
5 years is the limit they are trying to impose in the DC article, a law that is supposedly already in effect but it not being enforced. I know for a fact that at least in FL, food stamps and Medicaid are not limited to five years, TANF is. Have you not read the article or the other posts?
This from the person who said people on welfare do drugs & the woman open their legs.
I distinctly remember you saying this on another thread about the poor.
Yes, I said many on welfare do drugs and many open their legs. That is often a big reason why people are on welfare.
Quote:
You remember don't you? the one where you stated you have a family member who abuses the system & you just couldn't do anything about it because YOU didn't want family repercussions. On a different thread you spoke of how you are a Christian.
How Christian-like of you.
Wow, so you're tracking all my posts now? Kinda creepy. No, I do not want family repercussions, as I stated before, it's the gov't's job to be able to catch people who defraud the system. That is part of why the system is so screwed up, they're not doing their job.
I am a Christian. What does me wanting people to try to do for themselves have to do with that? Since you have been tracking my posts, you would know that I do support welfare temporarily for people who need it, and that I also think the church should handle charity and get the gov't out of it. How Christian-like.
Quote:
I welcome the opinions of others & sometimes will even change some of my views because I get a different opinion that is more factual & makes more sense to me but, I also can also recognize those filled with hate.
Deny it all you want but, all someone has to do is read all of your posts & those of other 'regulars' to see.
What you define as hate is probably passion. I am passionate about this topic, b/c I have seen firsthand how it ruins families and how it ruins children's lives before they can even get started. As I have said numerous times, I hate no one. You should know that, you are tracking all my posts.
Quote:
Not once did you ever hear me say I thought it a good idea to be on welfare for life. I have stated many times we need to train these people who get into a specific mindset & get "stuck".
Taking away their children is NOT a good idea.
That is your right to state your opinion. I disagree, which is my right. Taking away their children and giving the kids a good life in someone else's home is better not only for the children, but for the taxpayer.
Quote:
BTW you don't know what you are talking about as far as some states & their foster programs. There are different programs in different states.
I know nothing of state programs aside from Florida. I was referring to FL in my previous post. We looked into becoming foster parents, I have done volunteer work with child welfare agencies, and my dad works for the state, so I am just a tiny bit familiar with things of that nature.
Quote:
Andrea I am NOT a hater of anything or anybody, but, I don't just lie down when attacked either.
Who attacked you? I believe you were the one doing the attacking, stating that everyone who feels no sympathy for the poor not holding up their end of the bargain is a hater. I simply turned the tables so you can see how it feels to be told that you hate someone all the time. Doesn't feel too good, does it? Your entire post is evidence of that. And most of it is off topic and a personal attack on me.
All of these people,if throwed off welfare,would be among the actively seeking work crowd.which means they could compete with you for your job. In all actuality,they would most likely be cheaper than you.
That's assuming that these people have the same skills and knowledge and experience as those now working.
I don't think nuclear engineers are much at risk of a former welfare recipient replacing them, even if said former recipients were willing to work the 80 hours a week those jobs demand.
I won't guarantee nuclear scientists, but you should check the resumes of some of those people lining up for jobs at minimum wage right now. And yes, minimum wage employers will take a former welfare recipient over a degreed experienced worker 99% of the time.
I won't guarantee nuclear scientists, but you should check the resumes of some of those people lining up for jobs at minimum wage right now. And yes, minimum wage employers will take a former welfare recipient over a degreed experienced worker 99% of the time.
Thank you as that what I was trying to say. In some areas of the country minimum wage jobs are the only companies hiring. If a company is desperate enough to save money,then yes id bet they would hire a welfare recipient over a phd.
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.
