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.
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.
Are you a nuclear engineer? What if your company decided to lay you off,then what.
I guess this week its pick on the welfare recipients,last week it was the unemployed.
Pick your poor subgroup of the week threads. Let's see what's up next week?maybe the obese or the group without health insurance.
"The 28-year-old says her assistance from the D.C. government - $540 a month in cash plus $850 in food stamps - is just enough for diapers, deodorant and other necessities."
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?
The above poster is correct, "nothing has changed". The poor have always been 'looked down upon' & attention focused on them so the wealthy politicians & corporations can steal right under our noses......yup it's those millions of Americans who now need food stamps fault for everything, they are nothing but thieves.
Do you even realize how some of you who hate the poor, sound?
Hate has nothing to do with it. If a person legitimately requires help due to an accident or misfortune, I have no problems helping out. If that person takes no action to help themselves, why should I be expected to keep helping?
I am not wealthy, and many times end up living paycheck to paycheck. Is it because I owe a lot of money? no. I own my car, and have only 1 single credit card.
After 5 years of welfare, section 8, food stamps, etc etc ad nauseam, shouldn't the person receiving those benefits be held responsible for at least taking some kind of action so that other people don't have to support them? let's be honest. If they are working full time, turning burgers, at least they are trying, and I don't have a major issue helping them. I do have an issue though if they have 5 children, don't know who the father is, and the sperm donor isn't providing for the child, we are back to why am I expected to support the child?
If you have a child, you should be expected to support that child. If you don't know who the father is, get a list together and call Maury. Not only is the father expected to provide monetary support, the child deserves to know who their father is.
Bottom line, if you are receiving benefits, you should be doing something to better yourself so that you no longer require someone else to support you, even if that something else is starting out as a bagger at a grocery store, or a french fry cook at a fast food restaurant.
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 --.
Cut 'em off -- OK -- but you will still pay....
When one welfare mom has 5 kids the odds of those kids getting into legal trouble is pretty high. The odds of those kids themselves going on welfare is pretty high. We already have decades of data attesting to that.
So you WILL have the nasty crime, etc. because those 5 kids will grow up.
The poor population is expanding quicker than the other classes.
Today you keep 1 welfare mom "minimally happy".
Tomorrow you have to keep her 5 kids who've grown up "minimally happy".
How many kids do you think each of her 5 kids will have when they grow up ?
Has anyone criticized the womans choice to have as many kids as she desires, or is the criticism the fact that she needs us to pay for them? You can have 100 kids if you wish, and you can support them.. The minute you ask government, i.e. taxpayers to pay for them, expect the publics input.
The above poster is correct, "nothing has changed". The poor have always been 'looked down upon' & attention focused on them so the wealthy politicians & corporations can steal right under our noses......yup it's those millions of Americans who now need food stamps fault for everything, they are nothing but thieves.
Do you even realize how some of you who hate the poor, sound?
No one on this board has exhibited, even remotely, the kind of hate for poor people that you have have just shown for rich people.
"The 28-year-old says her assistance from the D.C. government - $540 a month in cash plus $850 in food stamps - is just enough for diapers, deodorant and other necessities."
$850 a month for food?
She's living better than me..my food budget is $70/week..$100 max.
I can't fathom spending over $200/week in food and diapers.
I just don't understand why people who are on welfare does not do anything else except making babies. Why don't they think about support them themselves instead of life support from others? I guess as long as you don't pay tax, big brother will help you out.
She's living better than me..my food budget is $70/week..$100 max.
I can't fathom spending over $200/week in food and diapers.
We have 3 cats, a dove, 3 adults, (Me, the grandpa, daughter, son in law and grand daughter), 1 child, and groceries, pet supplies, and assorted whatever elses for the 4 of use doesn't reach 850 for 2 months, let alone 1 month, and we eat both well, and nutritiously.
I am with you, I cannot fathom spending that kind of money on food in a month.
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.
hate?
