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.
Liberals don't have a very high opinion of their welfare dependent class obviously. They expect the welfare types to just start rioting, mugging, looting, burning and going on rampages. They obviously believe that that people living off the many welfare handout programs are really nothing more than lazy criminals.
To liberals, the welfare dependency is really nothing more than a kind of extortion -- give us lots of free food, free healthcare, free housing, free daycares, free cell phones and cable television or we're going to pitch a fit.
I actually expect many would start looking for jobs, even all those jobs in fast food, construction, factories, and agriculture that the polliticians say Americans won't do.
The problem is that liberals think work is a negative. It's mean to expect anyone to have to get up in the morning and work for what they want. This is where liberals are wrong -- work is good.
I agree with you that conservative demo rats took the workfare out of the WPA program in 1941 along with the ( re pub i can't ) you can't do anything in washington d. c. without a coalition of the two parties. work gives people that need charity theirs self respect back something that was totally lacking in the anti - poverty program known as welfare.
criminals aren't lazy they break into houses and stand on street corners selling drugs in the rain and snow , run countless schemes and con's against the straight hard working population.criminals just aren't good stand up people with good morals and rational love for theirs local communities ( some because of the environment ) and other because of genes and family blood lines.
terminating workfare is a pipe dream in which no main stream ( re pub i can't ) or ( demo rat ) is going to attempt anyway. everyone in washington d. c. know that the construct
-ion of new state and federal prisons and the need to place police state measures on the books is going to far out weight the benefits of that action. you can either keep it like it is or demand more work factored into it " community level " and state and national work require
-ments. maybe america could have a peace corp for america development in area that are crumbling and falling apart , at the very least let keep the streets clean and empty building and houses from being stripped down to theirs bare bones.
Last edited by Howest2008; 10-20-2012 at 12:36 PM..
Thing is the tweedle dum & tweedle dee political duopoly would fight tooth & nail against it & the mainstream media will flat out ignore or dismiss such notions.
Best chance of pushing programs like this through is working at the local & state level; supporting 3rd parties & increasing the number of registered Independents.
Good post.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Howest2008
when welfare disappears we will have a more perfect form of workfare where people that receive charity give back to theirs communities destroying the society leeches description used by some mean spirited people in ours society today. " re pub i can't " will resist and fight this tooth and nail as they did with the
until they formed a coalition with conservative " demo rats " to once and forever end the WPA program in 1941 i believe. food stamp program can be replaced with " national " " state" farms where able bodies person could raise their own food ( and ) also earn wages where they could buy wholesale and retail food from commercial outlets.
the section 8 federal housing program could pattern itself after the habitat for humanity program founded as a christian non profit for the population with sub-level housing or those at risk of homelessness
the people that put sweat equity into building their own homes will maintain them and not tear them down which is the case in the majority of section 8 housing.
One thing--in the days long before Welfare, more people lived on farms and could grow their own food.
Lack of jobs hadn't forced families to move all over the country, separating them, instead of keeping them together so they could help each other.
Before Welfare jobs weren't outsourced to China and India.
Before Welfare there were still poor people who struggled. There were children and old people who didn't get enough to eat. You'll always have that no matter what. I think the Bible said "The poor will always be with us." It's not a perfect world.
You'll always need some way of helping the poor and it's worse today than in the old days.
I've said it before: the problem is: can we or HOW can we distinguish between the truly needy and the moochers who decide to make Welfare a way of life?
I agree with you that conservative demo rats took the workfare out of the WPA program in 1941 along with the ( re pub i can't ) you can't do anything in washington d. c. without a coalition of the two parties. work gives people that need charity theirs self respect back something that was totally lacking in the anti - poverty program known as welfare.
criminals aren't lazy they break into houses and stand on street corners selling drugs in the rain and snow , run countless schemes and con's against the straight hard working population.criminals just aren't good stand up people with good morals and rational love for theirs local communities ( some because of the environment ) and other because of genes and family blood lines.
terminating workfare is a pipe dream in which no main stream ( re pub i can't ) or ( demo rat ) is going to attempt anyway. everyone in washington d. c. know that the construct
-ion of new state and federal prisons and the need to place police state measures on the books is going to far out weight the benefits of that action. you can either keep it like it is or demand more work factored into it " community level " and state and national work require
-ments. maybe america could have a peace corp for america development in area that are crumbling and falling apart , at the very least let keep the streets clean and empty building and houses from being stripped down to theirs bare bones.
Yes -- even ole liberal FDR didn't just hand people a life of handouts. He had those inefficent work programs but even Conservatives can appreciate the work accomplished by some of those work projects.
For example this past summer, there were a lot of bad forest fires. One work project could be planting trees for reforestation. There is all kinds of work that needs to be done. Inner cities need cleaning up.
Even if someone has to show up and ends up leaning on a shovel all day, he's probably going to get a little bored after hours of leaning on a shovel and may begin to actually do something. At the very least it gets people getting some idea of having to work, gets them out of bed in the morning, out among working people and maybe a little productive at least.
I've said it before: the problem is: can we or HOW can we distinguish between the truly needy and the moochers who decide to make Welfare a way of life?
Under age 55 or 60? No severe heart disease or terminal cancer? 2 arms and 2 legs that can move? An IQ over 70? --- on welfare instead of working? -----> LAZY
We did not always have all these welfare programs, and we were not a third world country when we didn't have them.
True but my mom grew up in the 50s in a hard working poor family they went weeks at a time w/o eating a typical story in the Deep South in that time period so I don't think it should be completely ended just more difficult to get, which yes technically Clinton and the Repub. Congress made it more difficult to get but there's still ways to get around it which should be stopped
Under age 55 or 60? No severe heart disease or terminal cancer? 2 arms and 2 legs that can move? An IQ over 70? --- on welfare instead of working? -----> LAZY
you can have say schizophrenia and only be able to work 20 hours a week and still meet all of your criteria so yes there's exceptions to your rule.
Under age 55 or 60? No severe heart disease or terminal cancer? 2 arms and 2 legs that can move? An IQ over 70? --- on welfare instead of working? -----> LAZY
or rejected " the underclass " fit more snuggly in that category than the lazy. if personal managers don't
want you in theirs workforce there's no way that you can muscle in on theirs territory .
Yes -- even ole liberal FDR didn't just hand people a life of handouts. He had those inefficent work programs but even Conservatives can appreciate the work accomplished by some of those work projects.
For example this past summer, there were a lot of bad forest fires. One work project could be planting trees for reforestation. There is all kinds of work that needs to be done. Inner cities need cleaning up.
Even if someone has to show up and ends up leaning on a shovel all day, he's probably going to get a little bored after hours of leaning on a shovel and may begin to actually do something. At the very least it gets people getting some idea of having to work, gets them out of bed in the morning, out among working people and maybe a little productive at least.
those are the type of liberal that I look up to , but FDR inefficient work programs were after all productive work being done , and increased the productivity of the United States of America didn't it ?
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.
