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.
So you're one of the people that get screwed while others abuse the good ol Oregon Trail system.
I feel neither. I don't feel like I am getting screwed at all. I am very thankful for every penny I get.
I also do not abuse the system. I buy food with my card and never sell them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griffis
That is interesting because according to the average monthly SNAP benefit per person, you would receive $1.42 per meal per person in your state.
I'm certainly not saying you are wrong or are lying; there could be all kinds of variables in your specific case I know nothing about.
Or are you saying the $3.92 is for the both of you together? That would seem to be more in line with the reported state average.
I just did a quick divide. Yes that $3.92 is for both of us. We get the maximum minus a few dollars.
We eat well because I am able to stock our cupboards and fridge with free food three days a week. I have enough dried beans and rice to feed a school!
Single mothers that can't pay the bills must have welfare cut after the first birth, any more kids then no extra cash - and if they can't pay then the kids must be put into an orphanage
I think that is the way to go, right?
I think we should offer single mothers a bigger welfare check in return for some kind of long term contraception (like the ones you insert under the skin or an IUD or or depo shots or even sterilization if they want it) to prevent more children on the welfare roles. Even paying half the difference they'd get if they had one more child and paying for the contraception would be cheaper than paying for another child. This would encourage fewer children being born on the welfare rolls.
Give them a choice. Stay on the plan that lets them breed or pay them to not breed until they are financially stable. Those who are just careless and those who have kids just to get more welfare will take it. Those who just want to have kids and have someone else pay for them will keep on having kids and letting someone else pay for them.
At the very least, contraception should be free when you're on welfare.
Uh, not even close.
When someone is living off the avails of someone else there are rules to be followed. A sense of entitlement shouldn't enter into it for the one who is holding out his hand.
It's just hypocritical to disparage government bureaucracy everywhere but turn around and think it will somehow fix problems with welfare. I don't like people cheating the system but the types of solutions pushed by conservatives and some liberals (drug tests, etc.) are not cost-effective.
That's precisely how you know these people aren't conservatives. Not at all.
DISCLAIMER: This is not an endorsement of so-called liberals or Democrats. I hate them too.
But with regards to "conservatives" we need to keep in mind: there are none in American politics anymore.
The GOP completely abandoned conservative principles back sometime between the end of the Vietnam conflict and the beginning of the Disco era.
Conservativism in American politics is dead. Dead as Dillinger.
The last three Republican presidents we've had have been among the LEAST conservative leaders this nation has ever seen.
What we got now are neo-con, moral watchdog "social conservatives." Not the same thing.
The Republicans of the last 40 or so years have proven time and again they are every bit 100% as incompetent and irresponsible with money and resources as the Democrats and every bit 100% as invasive and intrusive into the private lives of citizens as the Democrats.
Anyone who can't see this, or who refuses to acknowledge this, is nothing but a blind, duped, hypocritical, myopic partisan hack imbecile, regardless of their party affiliation.
I understand completely. Usually when I use the word conservative here I'm specifically referring to the Rush Limbaugh types that populate this forum.
And not every liberal like me likes Obama or trade unions or welfare.
Sorry Griffis, I see you replied with likely another juvenile retort but, as I mentioned in the other thread, you're now part of my quantum singularity.
Actually, he gave a very thoughtful and detailed response. That's probably why you didn't understand it.
And if they have more, you want to hurt the child?
Let me get this straight.
C's don't want birth control, abortion, to support anyone born...
I have no problem with women being forced to use the norplant or other subcutaneous birth control if on any benefits (welfare or unemployment) since they can't take care of themselves, how can they take care of others. Once they're able to take care of themselves, the bc can be removed.
But to deny support for those born, who have a hard enough time of it is disgusting.
It's always so good to deny support to those who need it most.
Do they do that in the country where you live?
And tell me, are you christian?
Seems that they frequently go hand in hand.
When you pay these women every time they pop a kid out, they will abuse the system and the kids are nothing more than cash cows, If they are for warned that they will be paid for one child only, you watch how fast they get on birth control. It's called "Tough Love". As it is now, we are allowing these people to breed even more welfare recipients who will never be productive members of society. Or are you blind?
When you pay these women every time they pop a kid out, they will abuse the system and the kids are nothing more than cash cows, If they are for warned that they will be paid for one child only, you watch how fast they get on birth control. It's called "Tough Love". As it is now, we are allowing these people to breed even more welfare recipients who will never be productive members of society. Or are you blind?
It's the same situation in Africa and Asia, where poor women have lots of kids so they can take advantage of the generous welfare found in economically destitute countries.
Single mothers that can't pay the bills must have welfare cut after the first birth, any more kids then no extra cash - and if they can't pay then the kids must be put into an orphanage
I think that is the way to go, right?
Why do you think and where in the US Constitution does it say you take rights away from people just because they are poor or single or have a non-white skin color?
Single mothers that can't pay the bills must have welfare cut after the first birth, any more kids then no extra cash - and if they can't pay then the kids must be put into an orphanage
I think that is the way to go, right?
How utterly stupid. People like you want to forbid abortion, then if a woman has more kids than she can afford, take them away. Keep your mind and laws away from a womans body, it does not belong to anyone but herself.
no, they can stay at home - but if they can't pay then it's orphanage or foster home for the brats.
can't see anything wrong here,as this should teach these women to keep their legs closed, unless they can pay or bag a decent man who will do
So typical, they are humans that should not be aborted, yet once born, they are brats that should be put in adoption or foster homes. SO sick, so screwed up.
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.
