A question no one has ever answered for me

[Tapate50]

I have come to realize that this forum looks at politics way more than I do. I think a lot of the views on this forum are very idealistic though, not that there is anything wrong with that. I live in a part of the country where we have 2 and 3 generations of lifelong welfare recipients are common. I see perfectly capable workers sitting in their yard all day. I was getting a police report at the station when I overheard a woman tell what I can only assume is her daughter or son, to cancel her application at the local fast food place because it would affect her monthly check. I see people taking advantage of the system daily, and can't help but think expanding benefits is just more reason for people not to get to work. Before anyone starts yelling racist, this is an issue beyond race, because I see all types pulling the same program. But the problem is that it doesn't stop, they teach their own children the ins and outs of the system and it perpetuates itself.

My question is : How long til we have more people on the government dime then off it? I was always told growing up "If you got more people riding in the cart than pulling it, you won't get very far". Taxing productivity seems pretty counter productive to me. And no, I don't have a solution. If you get a firm population on the government dime, how long til they hold the country hostage in an polarizing election against someone willing to cut benefits?

[thethe]

Would you rather get paid 400 dollars a week to do nothing or 450-500 dollars a week to work 40 hours?

The government makes the decision pretty easy.

[sturg33]

I'm of the opinion that welfare is theft and should be abolished. It clearly doesn't work.

If you look at our "poverty lines", the number of Americans going under expands yearly.

More Americans go on food stamps every year, the number will likely never reverse

Unemployment benefits continue to rise- now nearly two years. TWO YEARS!!

I believe you if you remove the safety net, the laziness and lack of production decreases.

I've always been a big fan of Switzerland. But I saw the other day that they are voting on a bill that will guarantee every adult (not just working adults) a monthly salary of $2,800. I sincerely hope it passes so that their entire economy will collapse and nobody from the west will get any ideas.

[thethe]

I'm of the opinion that welfare is theft and should be abolished. It clearly doesn't work.

If you look at our "poverty lines", the number of Americans going under expands yearly.

More Americans go on food stamps every year, the number will likely never reverse

Unemployment benefits continue to rise- now nearly two years. TWO YEARS!!

I believe you if you remove the safety net, the laziness and lack of production decreases.

I've always been a big fan of Switzerland. But I saw the other day that they are voting on a bill that will guarantee every adult (not just working adults) a monthly salary of $2,800. I sincerely hope it passes so that their entire economy will collapse and nobody from the west will get any ideas.

I don't think its smart to use traditional logic with a country like Switzerland. Their countries demographics is homogeneous that results from their economic/social policies will not translate to other diverse nations.

[50PoundHead]

4/1% of the population is on welfare (not including food stamps or unemployment compensation), so I think we have a ways to go before the Bastille is stormed.

Link: http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

sturg, inequality in the country is at an all-time high, so yeah, I guess the lines of the poor are getting longer. Middle class incomes have been stagnant since the 1970s and the rich have gotten richer (and tax rates have been static or declining--especially post-Bush tax cuts--since that time).

Inequality (2013 article): http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3629

Taxes (2010 article): http://wallstreetpit.com/22914-average-u-s-tax-burden-at-40-year-low/

For all the complaining you do (and it is generally polite complaining), it looks like your side is winning. Taxes are low internationally and rich people keep getting richer. What's not to like?

PS--Speed limits are theft as well, because the more time I have to spend driving, the less time I could be working and making money.

[sturg33]

4/1% of the population is on welfare (not including food stamps or unemployment compensation), so I think we have a ways to go before the Bastille is stormed.

Link: http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/

sturg, inequality in the country is at an all-time high, so yeah, I guess the lines of the poor are getting longer. Middle class incomes have been stagnant since the 1970s and the rich have gotten richer (and tax rates have been static or declining--especially post-Bush tax cuts--since that time).

Inequality (2013 article): http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?fa=view&id=3629

Taxes (2010 article): http://wallstreetpit.com/22914-average-u-s-tax-burden-at-40-year-low/

For all the complaining you do (and it is generally polite complaining), it looks like your side is winning. Taxes are low internationally and rich people keep getting richer. What's not to like?

PS--Speed limits are theft as well, because the more time I have to spend driving, the less time I could be working and making money.

I'll check out those articles when I have some more time. But I am not thrilled with the inequality in this country. The rich are getting richer because the Federal Reserve is pumping trillions of play money into banks - and that is distributed directly to the top. As I'm sure you know, I'm very anti-fed so I'm not happy with the bubble it has created.

[Tapate50]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/18/who-receives-benefits-from-the-federal-government-in-six-charts/

Welfare is just one part of the equation. How many people would vote for a candidate that was willing to cut some of their benefits, ala directly affect them negatively if it was in the best interest of our country long term? I wager not many.

[50PoundHead]

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/09/18/who-receives-benefits-from-the-federal-government-in-six-charts/

Welfare is just one part of the equation. How many people would vote for a candidate that was willing to cut some of their benefits, ala directly affect them negatively if it was in the best interest of our country long term? I wager not many.

I always thought that Romney should have re-thought that comment. To me, it was a calculated comment aimed at dividing the country. I'm not going to scream that it was about race, but my guess is most everyone in the room in which he made that comment was white.

We are all "takers" to some extent. We all benefit from national defense. Our property is protected by the police. The value of the currency is ensured by the federal government. Most kids go to public schools. Homeowners get subsidized rent through the mortgage interest deduction. So, at a very basic level, we all benefit from the order created and the services provided through the social contract. We can argue about the scope (and the numbers since the housing bubble burst and subsequent economic downturn are inflated) of the benefit structure, but I see the system as becoming more convoluted as instead of more insidious. It needs to be more straightforward instead of all these little pools that people swim in and out of. I think then voters can make a more reasoned judgment about what they want.

[thethe]

Why would a person who receives government assistance in the form general welfare checks or food stamps ever vote for a candidate who pledges to cut those benefits? Most people do not look to the future, they worry about the now so when someone goes to the voting pool they will vote for the candidate that doesn't want to take money from them.

[50PoundHead]

Why would a person who receives government assistance in the form general welfare checks or food stamps ever vote for a candidate who pledges to cut those benefits? Most people do not look to the future, they worry about the now so when someone goes to the voting pool they will vote for the candidate that doesn't want to take money from them.

(1) How many of these people vote?

(2) If someone can get a job that provides them more money from their welfare check, why would the vote to remain where they are? Sure, there's the leisure/work trade-off, but I don't think most people on welfare are really enjoying themselves immensely.

[thethe]

(1) How many of these people vote?

(2) If someone can get a job that provides them more money from their welfare check, why would the vote to remain where they are? Sure, there's the leisure/work trade-off, but I don't think most people on welfare are really enjoying themselves immensely.

(1) is a good question. I would imagine in this current day of over information that those numbers would be out there. How accurate they are is a different story.

(2) is something I feel strongly about. More often than not the "abusers" of welfare do not have any discernible skills that will command a weekly paycheck that far exceeds their welfare benefits. What incentive is there for them to then find these amazing jobs at Walmart of McDonalds?

[Tapate50]

(1) How many of these people vote?

(2) If someone can get a job that provides them more money from their welfare check, why would the vote to remain where they are? Sure, there's the leisure/work trade-off, but I don't think most people on welfare are really enjoying themselves immensely.

I would wager a good many of them vote, at least around here they do.

I wager no 2 is wrong for a healthy % of the population. Couple that welfare check\food stamp\etc... with a random odd job that will pay you in cash, and you got a pretty decent deal going. I believe in the deep south we have a very unmotivated workforce. When these issues come up with folks from other areas, they simply can't fathom the culture that has been created.

[CK86]

A good friend of mine is on food stamps. She can't pay rent at the moment but gets a ton for food that she pays her rent by buying all the food for her, her child and my roommate. Despite the freebies, she finished college and now has just gotten a job doing what she wants to do. She has no desire to stay in her current economic status and is working to move up.

I believe part of that desire comes not only from having a kid but also she sees around her two successful young professionals working hard and getting what they want in life. I have two apartments ( she's staying in one of them), got promoted and am on the way up the corporate ladder. My roommate has gotten multiple promotions at work and is constantly trying to get the next job he can. I believe sometimes all someone needs is a positive example and attitude.

She will not be reliant on the government for much longer and couldn't be happier about it. I believe some safety nets in society should be there provided you are trying to improve yourself. Even requiring 10 hours a week of community service would be a step in the right direction. Make there be an incentive to get better. The economic reality sucks too much at this time to remove safety nets especially when the only ones that are having their income increase is those at the top.

[50PoundHead]

A good friend of mine is on food stamps. She can't pay rent at the moment but gets a ton for food that she pays her rent by buying all the food for her, her child and my roommate. Despite the freebies, she finished college and now has just gotten a job doing what she wants to do. She has no desire to stay in her current economic status and is working to move up.

I believe part of that desire comes not only from having a kid but also she sees around her two successful young professionals working hard and getting what they want in life. I have two apartments ( she's staying in one of them), got promoted and am on the way up the corporate ladder. My roommate has gotten multiple promotions at work and is constantly trying to get the next job he can. I believe sometimes all someone needs is a positive example and attitude.

She will not be reliant on the government for much longer and couldn't be happier about it. I believe some safety nets in society should be there provided you are trying to improve yourself. Even requiring 10 hours a week of community service would be a step in the right direction. Make there be an incentive to get better. The economic reality sucks too much at this time to remove safety nets especially when the only ones that are having their income increase is those at the top.

I just think there is this myth that people enjoy being poor and sponging off the government.

[Tapate50]

I just think there is this myth that people enjoy being poor and sponging off the government.

I see that "myth" every single day. Come down, ill be glad to show you around.

[57Brave]

I believe part of that desire comes not only from having a kid but also she sees around her two successful young professionals working hard and getting what they want in life. I have two apartments ( she's staying in one of them), got promoted and am on the way up the corporate ladder. My roommate has gotten multiple promotions at work and is constantly trying to get the next job he can. I believe sometimes all someone needs is a positive example and attitude. "
////

I'd like to add opportunity. There are whole swaths of this nation where you can have the positive examples aplenty and come out of college with the right attitude ( I think all but everyone comes out of college with the right attitude) but unless there is somewhere to ply your wares you are stuck. I too see a problem where someone can make as much on welfare as they do working at McDonalds / Wal-Mart.
McDonalds will pay as little as the "law will allow" - as did the factories of the 1890's.

[weso1]

Some become dependent on it and some don't. I don't really think that should be difficult to admit. It's not that those who become dependent on it enjoy it. It's more like for some people it's easier and safer than trying to do something else. I know people who are dependent on it, who could work but choose not to. I'm not a pscyhologist, so I don't want to get into the psychology, but it is what it is. To ignore it is irresponsible. At the same time I know there are those who get money, are embarrassed to get that money and want to work. We can go through all these individual stories, but it doesn't really prove anything.

What we want is for those who really need the help to get the help. It's in the best interest of people who want those to get that help to make sure the system doesn't become flooded with those who take advantage of the system.

[57Brave]

Can anyone tell me the rate of welfare fraud?
How many cases were prosecuted last year?
The hoops one has to jump through to become qualified to receive benefits?
How one stays eligible?

Is unemployment welfare?
Are food stamps welfare?
What states have the highest rates of welfare use and abuse?
Is disability welfare?

Betcha half the posters ranting on and on with obscure stories of how he knew a guy who knew a guy --- can't answer half the quetions above?

Try this one --- what is the average age of welfare recipients? and, how many children are involved?
What is the racial breakdown?
Latino rates?
Denominational rates?

My lord, 3/4 y'all don't know what you're talking about

[weso1]

Well, I was going to answer your questions until I understood that it was just a case of Steak Sauce from the internet trying to be smug. Steak Sauce and those he agrees with are the only ones who know what they're talking about guys. Continue to ignore the problems with the welfare system and watch what happens to it.

[ESP47]

We are all "takers" to some extent. We all benefit from national defense. Our property is protected by the police. The value of the currency is ensured by the federal government. Most kids go to public schools. Homeowners get subsidized rent through the mortgage interest deduction. So, at a very basic level, we all benefit from the order created and the services provided through the social contract. We can argue about the scope (and the numbers since the housing bubble burst and subsequent economic downturn are inflated) of the benefit structure, but I see the system as becoming more convoluted as instead of more insidious. It needs to be more straightforward instead of all these little pools that people swim in and out of. I think then voters can make a more reasoned judgment about what they want.

How are we all takers? I pay about $700/mo for national defense, police protection, public schools etc. If you're a worker, you're a giver. If you're receiving government benefits, you're a taker. Lets not make it more complicated than it really is.

[thethe]

How are we all takers? I pay about $700/mo for national defense, police protection, public schools etc. If you're a worker, you're a giver. If you're receiving government benefits, you're a taker. Lets not make it more complicated than it really is.

100% on point.

No personal accountability. People just think they can make bad decisions over and over again and have the rest of us support them.

[yeezus]

Yeah, I think it's in inaccurate to call people who work and pay taxes AND buy things and pay taxes "takers." The government isn't giving us this stuff for free, we who work and contribute pay for it.

[Tapate50]

Betcha half the posters ranting on and on with obscure stories of how he knew a guy who knew a guy --- can't answer half the quetions above?


What is the racial breakdown?

My lord, 3/4 y'all don't know what you're talking about

I forgot. The 57 answer to everything is " you don't know what you are talking about" .

The anecdotes you give in the Aca thread are way worse and less reliable, but it's pretty obvious you love calling the "knew a guy " defense . I've posted hard facts in that thread you have not responded to whatsoever, but you "knew a couple" that it was gonna help . Ha.

You are the only one at plays the race card, and it's becoming fairly plain for all to see. It also matters for dick what race is on the govt dole...

I think you are from RI you said? If so, you deal with some of the best SOL in the US, and that wouldn't be a decent barometer for making your opinions.

[50PoundHead]

How are we all takers? I pay about $700/mo for national defense, police protection, public schools etc. If you're a worker, you're a giver. If you're receiving government benefits, you're a taker. Lets not make it more complicated than it really is.

What I'm saying is we all receive government benefits in one form or another and believe it or not, everybody pays taxes as well. Just because you're poor doesn't mean you don't pay sales taxes or property taxes (and before you jump on me and say renters don't pay property taxes, landlords do and those property taxes are included in the calculation of rent).

If the poor have it so easy, go trade places with them and see how much fun it is.

[57Brave]

I forgot. The 57 answer to everything is " you don't know what you are talking about" .

The anecdotes you give in the Aca thread are way worse and less reliable, but it's pretty obvious you love calling the "knew a guy " defense . I've posted hard facts in that thread you have not responded to whatsoever, but you "knew a couple" that it was gonna help . Ha.

You are the only one at plays the race card, and it's becoming fairly plain for all to see. It also matters for dick what race is on the govt dole...

I think you are from RI you said? If so, you deal with some of the best SOL in the US, and that wouldn't be a decent barometer for making your opinions.

I live in So Georgia temporarily a part of the USA.

If you doubt the numbers or situations I've provided - go to the sites and run the numbers for yourself! That is what I did with the posters examples from Minn and Ala.
In both cases there were extenuating circumstances that I am pretty sure will disappear within the year. Regional Rates or something like that?? Cant remember

a) A self employed couple from Fla each between 55-60. Non smokers and no children living at home.
b) Self employed couple between 21-30 the male of the couple smokes - they have one child. Live in Fla. They were paying $1200 a month

Do your own leg work - then you will know what you are talking about

[weso1]

Nobody is saying being poor is easy. Why even bring it up? Just because they don't have easy lives relative to some people doesn't mean some should be allowed to continue to abuse the system. Like I said... ignore the problem and see what happens to the system for those who truly need it.

[57Brave]

I got called smug for asking for numbers / data on just how much or how rampant these abuses are.
Asking again,

Please, don't say any is too much -- because unless you show the numbers "any" is an urban myth

[50PoundHead]

Nobody is saying being poor is easy. Why even bring it up? Just because they don't have easy lives relative to some people doesn't mean some should be allowed to continue to abuse the system. Like I said... ignore the problem and see what happens to the system for those who truly need it.

I just tire of the demonization. Sure there are people that game the system and a lot of them are poor. There are frickin' rich f*cks who game the system for more money in one fell swoop than a welfare chiseler could pilfer in three lifetimes.

And maybe I should have used the words "consumers" instead of "takers," but the point remains, everyone posting here is getting something from the government.

[weso1]

I just tire of the demonization. Sure there are people that game the system and a lot of them are poor. There are frickin' rich f*cks who game the system for more money in one fell swoop than a welfare chiseler could pilfer in three lifetimes.

And maybe I should have used the words "consumers" instead of "takers," but the point remains, everyone posting here is getting something from the government.

I'm tired of a bunch of crap liberals say if it makes you feel better. Doesn't mean it should be ignored though.

[weso1]

I got called smug for asking for numbers / data on just how much or how rampant these abuses are.


Now you're just being willfully ignorant... or at least I hope you are.

[57Brave]

Show your math Wes

[weso1]

Show your math Wes

I get the feeling you aren't interested in the other side based on your earlier comments and the fact that you could easily look it up yourself but watch this: link (http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=50156574n)

Read this: link 2 (http://apps.npr.org/unfit-for-work/)

Share of newly disabled workers 2011:

Back pain: 38%
Developmental disability: 20%

Don't tell me those 2 categories aren't ripe for abuse.

I believe disability should cover about 3-4% of the population. In a decent chuck of states it's more than 2 or 3 times that number.

In the past few decades, an entire disability-industrial complex has emerged. It has just one goal: Push more people onto disability. And, sometimes, it seems like the government is outmatched. This is especially true in the legal system.

[57Brave]

Of course there is abuse in entitlement programs. Just because a state has 9% of it's workers on disability doesn't mean 9% of those are gaming the system ! So, are you advocating throwing out the baby with the bathwater?
It is interesting the states with the highest rates are also the states at the bottom of any number of categories. Poverty, education, infant mortality and unemployment
Would you agree?

My thoughts go to this isn't so much an abuse of the system issue as simple poverty

[ESP47]

What I'm saying is we all receive government benefits in one form or another and believe it or not, everybody pays taxes as well. Just because you're poor doesn't mean you don't pay sales taxes or property taxes (and before you jump on me and say renters don't pay property taxes, landlords do and those property taxes are included in the calculation of rent).

If the poor have it so easy, go trade places with them and see how much fun it is.

Can you give me some examples of what benefits tax payers are receiving from the government for free? I might just be ignorant on the issue so I'd like to know what they are.

Also, if you don't have a job and are on welfare and other gov programs, how are you paying taxes? You might be paying sales tax when you go to the grocery store but you're paying sales tax with taxpayer money.

Why are you such a sympathizer? The poor do have it easy. What is so hard about not working? The rest of us have to spend 40+ hours a week at a place we don't want to be at while they stand in line a couple times a month and spend the other 99% doing nothing productive for society. No one attacks the guy who got laid off and has to go on unemployment or welfare to get back on his feet while he looks for another job. It's about the people that squeeze out multiple kids or do nothing to look for a job while spending their free paychecks on flat screens and smart phones. I don't want to trade places with them because I want a higher quality of life for myself and I don't want to be a leech on society.

In my opinion they need to be stricter on the people who are using gov assistance to live. It should suck so bad to be on gov assistance that you'll do anything to get a job. As of right now it's pretty easy. Especially for someone who's aspirations are to not work and still make money by not having money. Honestly it should be like when you're out of high school and still living at home with your parents where they are on your ass all the time about getting a job, going to school and moving out. Being on government assistance is like living at home with parents that just let you live in the basement while eating ho-ho's and playing xbox all day while never telling you that you need to go out and get a job or get a degree.

[AerchAngel]

Can you give me some examples of what benefits tax payers are receiving from the government for free? I might just be ignorant on the issue so I'd like to know what they are.

Also, if you don't have a job and are on welfare and other gov programs, how are you paying taxes? You might be paying sales tax when you go to the grocery store but you're paying sales tax with taxpayer money.

Why are you such a sympathizer? The poor do have it easy. What is so hard about not working? The rest of us have to spend 40+ hours a week at a place we don't want to be at while they stand in line a couple times a month and spend the other 99% doing nothing productive for society. No one attacks the guy who got laid off and has to go on unemployment or welfare to get back on his feet while he looks for another job. It's about the people that squeeze out multiple kids or do nothing to look for a job while spending their free paychecks on flat screens and smart phones. I don't want to trade places with them because I want a higher quality of life for myself and I don't want to be a leech on society.

In my opinion they need to be stricter on the people who are using gov assistance to live. It should suck so bad to be on gov assistance that you'll do anything to get a job. As of right now it's pretty easy. Especially for someone who's aspirations are to not work and still make money by not having money. Honestly it should be like when you're out of high school and still living at home with your parents where they are on your ass all the time about getting a job, going to school and moving out. Being on government assistance is like living at home with parents that just let you live in the basement while eating ho-ho's and playing xbox all day while never telling you that you need to go out and get a job or get a degree.

I wish I had the gif of the guy dropping the mic after landing this bomb.

Post of this thread and DEAD on.

[Gary82]

I don't know what the answer is for those that choose not to work and try in this country or anywhere for that matter. A lot of these people are just dumbasses. They were raised poorly and they can't hold a job.

They have no skills. Unskilled workers are a dime a dozen, and there's no reason for businesses (in their mind) to pay them a decent wage.

I don't think a large percentage of those that rely on the government are these people. I think it's rather a small percentage, but it's been exaggerated by those who want to get ahead in politics; those who are racists; and those who rely solely on anecdotal evidence.

Now what should we do with those who take advantage of the system? Kick them off? Is that morally justified? It's one thing if these moochers are single and have no one that depends on them.

I certainly don't think charity is the answer. I don't think charity can take on so many. Plus, I don't want religious organizations to gain anymore power than they already do.

[Tapate50]

I live in So Georgia temporarily a part of the USA.

If you doubt the numbers or situations I've provided - go to the sites and run the numbers for yourself! That is what I did with the posters examples from Minn and Ala.
In both cases there were extenuating circumstances that I am pretty sure will disappear within the year. Regional Rates or something like that?? Cant remember

a) A self employed couple from Fla each between 55-60. Non smokers and no children living at home.
b) Self employed couple between 21-30 the male of the couple smokes - they have one child. Live in Fla. They were paying $1200 a month

Do your own leg work - then you will know what you are talking about

I've done the leg work. It is what I do for a living every day. Our life health dept has about 200 years of experience between our top few guys. I have found it hilarious that you think you know what is happening, when it's obvious to everyone else what's reality.

BIL just posted his letter for his Aca compliant rate on Instagram ...up to 450 from 180 a month. Deductible up as well. But those numbers aren't real right? Obviously doesn't understand it right ?

[zitothebrave]

Can you give me some examples of what benefits tax payers are receiving from the government for free? I might just be ignorant on the issue so I'd like to know what they are.

While you're right that you're not taking solely, everyone benefits from the tax system. Now to what degree you benefit? That's to be determined. But in general there isn't a soul out there who doesn't benefit from paying taxes. Sure some benefit more than others (typically the really rich and the really poor) but what 50 said is more or less right. And while the poor don't pay into federal taxes they help on the local side.

[ESP47]

While you're right that you're not taking solely, everyone benefits from the tax system. Now to what degree you benefit? That's to be determined. But in general there isn't a soul out there who doesn't benefit from paying taxes. Sure some benefit more than others (typically the really rich and the really poor) but what 50 said is more or less right. And while the poor don't pay into federal taxes they help on the local side.

I'm not sure what you're getting at zito. Taxpayers benefit from the tax system because they pay into it. You pay for a service and then you get that service. You won't many that disagree with that system. The poor (I'm talking unemployed on gov assistance) absolutely do not help on the local side at all other than the fact that they just exist as human beings. Just because they pay sales tax at 7-11 doesn't mean they're a taxpayer. The taxpayer in that instance is the rest of America that worked a 9-5 job and was forced to give that unemployed person their money. You're basically giving a thief a pat on the back for stealing $100 off your dresser and then going into Wal-Mart to buy $100 worth of junk they have to pay taxes on.

[zitothebrave]

I'm not sure what you're getting at zito. Taxpayers benefit from the tax system because they pay into it. You pay for a service and then you get that service. You won't many that disagree with that system. The poor (I'm talking unemployed on gov assistance) absolutely do not help on the local side at all other than the fact that they just exist as human beings. Just because they pay sales tax at 7-11 doesn't mean they're a taxpayer. The taxpayer in that instance is the rest of America that worked a 9-5 job and was forced to give that unemployed person their money. You're basically giving a thief a pat on the back for stealing $100 off your dresser and then going into Wal-Mart to buy $100 worth of junk they have to pay taxes on.

Tax system benefits everyone. I bet if you did the research you'd find that you get more in government benefits than you pay in. Even the people that it doesn't, still benefit in a way.

[57Brave]

thought i'd pass this along
//

Elizabeth McClellan ‏@popelizbet 27m
If you're a Christian, Christ said your treatment of the poor equaled your treatment of Him. Without qualifiers about "deserving". #ebt
///

just sayin

[thethe]

thought i'd pass this along
//

Elizabeth McClellan ‏@popelizbet 27m
If you're a Christian, Christ said your treatment of the poor equaled your treatment of Him. Without qualifiers about "deserving". #ebt
///

just sayin

Does this same person believe that abortion should be illegal?

Do you?

[57Brave]

the discussion has gone from Obamacare to moochers to abortion?
Why not wonder what the writer thought of the DH and whether it should be part of the NL game.

[thethe]

Its pretty foolish to bring up that comment and not expect to be picked apart.

[Tapate50]

the discussion has gone from Obamacare to moochers to abortion?
Why not wonder what the writer thought of the DH and whether it should be part of the NL game.

Might give you a chance to be correct for once. Maybe take advantage?

[57Brave]

picked apart? what does abortion have to do with anything related to this thread?

Oh, I invoked Jesus ....

[50PoundHead]

Can you give me some examples of what benefits tax payers are receiving from the government for free? I might just be ignorant on the issue so I'd like to know what they are.

Also, if you don't have a job and are on welfare and other gov programs, how are you paying taxes? You might be paying sales tax when you go to the grocery store but you're paying sales tax with taxpayer money.

Why are you such a sympathizer? The poor do have it easy. What is so hard about not working? The rest of us have to spend 40+ hours a week at a place we don't want to be at while they stand in line a couple times a month and spend the other 99% doing nothing productive for society. No one attacks the guy who got laid off and has to go on unemployment or welfare to get back on his feet while he looks for another job. It's about the people that squeeze out multiple kids or do nothing to look for a job while spending their free paychecks on flat screens and smart phones. I don't want to trade places with them because I want a higher quality of life for myself and I don't want to be a leech on society.

In my opinion they need to be stricter on the people who are using gov assistance to live. It should suck so bad to be on gov assistance that you'll do anything to get a job. As of right now it's pretty easy. Especially for someone who's aspirations are to not work and still make money by not having money. Honestly it should be like when you're out of high school and still living at home with your parents where they are on your ass all the time about getting a job, going to school and moving out. Being on government assistance is like living at home with parents that just let you live in the basement while eating ho-ho's and playing xbox all day while never telling you that you need to go out and get a job or get a degree.

I grew up about two notches above white trash in Minnesota in the 1960s and I've seen first hand how mental illness, ignorance, and substance abuse can keep families in a multi-generational cycle of poverty. Granted, poverty was a bit different then in that one could scrape by (barely) on an 80-acre farm, but even in a society that was more mobile then than now, it was difficult for many to extricate themselves from that cycle. I have done well for myself, but there was help for me at several junctures. I benefited from a strong family structure and the lack of that structure among today's poor is very troubling to me and I agree that it has to improve or we'll likely never see things get consistently better for the underclass in this country. But there were several junctures in my life when a helping hand was extended (not so much in terms of financial help--although college was a lot cheaper and those 3% loans from the federal government were truly gravy) and while I've always worked fairly hard, I've equally been lucky in that I was tapped on the shoulder or a door opened at just the right time. So I guess that's why I sympathize.

Regarding more strict treatment of welfare recipients, I think it's been tried several times and it's always been my impression that private industry really doesn't want to play (and I'm not going to blame them at a level) because the paperwork required of bringing on people can cause problems.

The only way this gets done is with a real and lasting commitment to education and the tying of education to other social services like Geoffrey Canada has done with the Harlem Children's Zone. But unless there is something "at the end of the rainbow" for those who show initiative and talent, the results of these efforts may also come to naught. Corporations can run things as they see fit. This is American and although some of you might doubt it from some of my posts, I am a capitalist. Minorities hold 16% of the seats of the corporate boards on the Fortune 100 and Fortune 500 companies while making up 37% of the population. I want to make it clear that I'm not for affirmative action on corporate boards, but the minority presence on those boards has to be more than window dressing. That would give kids in poverty, especially those in minority communities, role models and a view of a possible future.

As for government benefits you get for free, if you own a home and itemize, you receive a subsidy from the government equal to your marginal tax rate times your home mortgage interest deduction. In other words, if you have $10,000 in home mortgage interest and have a marginal tax rate of 28%, you receive a subsidy of $2,800 from the government. There are also tax credits in many states where the tax amount by the amount of certain purchases. We have a tax credit for educational expenses in Minnesota where if a family buys a computer for their kids education and they meet certain income guidelines, there taxes are reduced by that amount. I could go deeper on tax expenditures and some other notions as to how taxpayers get things from the government that they couldn't afford on their own, but I don't want to bore everyone and my guess is that those who won't agree with my original premise simply wouldn't be convinced by more examples.

When I started writing this response, I was tempted to get all wound up and let it fly, but that ain't my style. In other words, I won't be "dropping the mic." I'm old and I have truly benefited. I wouldn't want to be a young person or be raising a young family today. Things are very difficult right now and I want you to know that I can understand--and I'm not saying this in a patronizing way--why a lot of people are angry and frustrated. The country isn't working that well right now. I just think the poor get to be everyone's whipping post too often. Until we take a long look at Social Security, Medicare, and defense, we'll be treading water to a great extent. Other domestic spending, whether it's right or wrong, well-run or run by imbeciles, isn't central to the problem in my view. I agree that doesn't mean we shouldn't work hard to make sure those who are receiving assistance are truly worthy and that there are on-going efforts to improve people's lives as opposed to simply allowing them to remain in place. And I agree that no amount of money delivered to people can truly improve their lives on its own. I was a supporter of the Simpson/Bowles effort, but that landed like a lead balloon, largely because it required someone to make a decision and that doesn't appear to be happening in this environment.

[AerchAngel]

I applaud you on that post 50, I didn't want to copy and paste it.

As an African American we have issues with role models vs street cred vs babies out of wedlock. Democrats exploit this issue by demagogic principles and herding us to this conceptual inequality. They really do not want upstanding blacks unless they play in their system. This is why they try to destroy any Republican black that has success because it hurts their base. Those of us who are neither Democrats nor Republicans, which I am no party of either, we want the best for our kind but both sides get in the way and the Democrats are worse. They depend on our vote substantially so they make the system more likable if they keep these concepts in place.

I have seen generation of blacks on welfare with able body and smart people. They pump out kids like no other because like Hispanics, more people on welfare, the bigger pot for the family as a whole. Finally my generation (those born in the 60's) are finally getting it, abstaining from Democrats, not voting Republican either, and are willing to wait for a viable 3rd party to hear our voice and help our people as neither side will do it for us. One side want to exploit for votes a long as welfare is there while the other side want to exploit our wages if we do work.

Now, street cred issues is going to be much harder to get rid of. Again, media (liberal) thinks street cred is our culture. It is not, it has evolved to a culture of the wrong kind. My parents, Democrats but turning, said they had no issues like this in the 40's, 50's or even 60's, it was the 70's and the movies, media focusing on the inner city that started that crap.

Baby out of wedlock babies can be simple to fix, but I do not want to be called names on going that route.

[sturg33]

Just read through this thread...

Everyone seems to misunderstand the issues at hand. We have a policy issue that breeds the welfare state. The government WANTS more dependent on them.

[AerchAngel]

Just read through this thread...

Everyone seems to misunderstand the issues at hand. We have a policy issue that breeds the welfare state. The government WANTS more dependent on them.

Democrats will put their hands to their ears and stomp saying "This is not true, this is not true!"