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.
Time to end this taxpayer rip off and let private charities funded with private money through voluntary giving handle the feeding of "the poor". I guarantee they'll watch where the money goes much closer than the bureaucrats in Washington.
The German concentration camps have nothing to do with the discussion. We're talking about the U.S.'s CCC Job Corps. It provided jobs, housing, and food for unemployed American men, and 80% of the men's salaries had to be sent home to help their families.
Let me refresh your memory.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OotsaPootsa
I believe there were such facilities at one time. Didn't one of them proclaim "Work makes freedom" or something on the gate?
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent
No, it was the CCC. It provided jobs for unemployed American men/fathers. 80% of the wages they earned had to be sent home to their families.
The CCC planted nearly 3 billion trees to help reforest America, constructed trails, lodges and related facilities in more than 800 parks nationwide and upgraded most state parks, updated forest fire fighting methods, and built a network of service buildings and public roadways in remote areas
Actually, the phrase being referred to was "Arbeit macht frei." It is German, it means "work sets you free," and it was, indeed, prominently displayed at the entrances of concentration camps. Look it up.
I cast no aspersions on the CCC, which was wonderful (and voluntary). I would like to see where you find the expression "work makes freedom" anywhere on the CCC link.
If you were referring to the details of how the program worked, you should have said so.
Because he's 70, lacks some self control, and makes bad decisions. Have you seen him when he was younger?? He wasn't overweight then. He's not that overweight anyways.
If they got a lot more than $125/month, it was for a family, not one person. As for the $2,000, I am going to violate one of my personal rules of conduct on here and say, flatly, I do not believe you.
It depends on household size. Up to 8 people get $1169 for SNAP per month, plus for each additional person $146 per month.
How many here are against food stamps being used to purchase junk food but were outraged about Michelle Obama's efforts to get healthy lunches, that are federally funded, into our schools?
I don't think anyone objects to the concept of healthy lunches. The two main problems I have seen discussed were that kids were not eating the food and it ended up in the trash and for some kids who were very active, such as athletes, the calorie restriction was unrealistic.
Often overlooked, is the fact that the one thing poor people can do that doesn't cost money is have sex. At least while having it. That's why there are so many babies.
Repubs want to shut down planned parent hood because of the whole abortion thing
At the same time, they don't want to support those babies.
I don't think anyone objects to the concept of healthy lunches. The two main problems I have seen discussed were that kids were not eating the food and it ended up in the trash and for some kids who were very active, such as athletes, the calorie restriction was unrealistic.
Yeah the typical govt "one size fits all" approach
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.
