It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Robert Macdonald, Maine mayor, wants to publish names of welfare recipients:

page: 3
16
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 09:38 AM
link   
a reply to: neo96

What does publishing gun owners names have to do with publishing welfare recipients names? Gun owners paid the fees and purchased the guns with their own money. Welfare recipients are receiving free money from the state paid for by the working tax-paying citizens. I don't see how this is the same. I have no issue with people who qualify and NEED welfare to survive, but too many people work the system to get as much as they can from it. I used to drive from CT to Flushing, NY once a month and I'd take a shortcut through some back streets to get to my destination. I'd pass several public housing projects during that trip and I'd see pimped out Mercedes, Cadillac's and BMW's parked in front of these places. WTF!? If you're living in public housing, how the # do own a Mercedes?!

In most instances, these state agencies don't have the manpower or resources to police it, so each of us as citizens should be responsible on how our money is spent. If your neighbor is on welfare and just bought a new Mercedes, they should be reported and investigated.

Just my two cents.




posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 09:51 AM
link   

originally posted by: BubbaJoe
What I think is amazing, is that when folks that quote 100 out of 300 million number on welfare. Please think that about 1/3rd of those are senior citizens on Social Security and Medicare, something they have paid into all of their adult lives. Not quite the welfare state it is made out to be.

Hurray someone who gets it. The whole point of welfare is that the vast majority put into the system THROUGHOUT THEIR WORKING LIVES more than they take out . But it is there as a safety net. I was beginning to think nobody in the US understood the concept of TCO since TLA's are quite popular on ATS.

There will always be some who sponge off the state but they are a very small minority. AS I once asked someone if you had the choice of these which would you choose :

A. Force, through welfare removal, a lazy person to do a job they didn't want to do which would be a low paid job like a lollipop man at a school crossing.
OR
B. Force, through welfare removal, a lazy person to resort to crime, break into house with the distress that causes, have a court case (costing tens of thousands) and then send them to jail where it costs 10 times more than welfare to keep them
OR
C. pay them less than a minium wage to sit at home out of harms way

No system is perfect.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 10:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: hammanderr
This is a great idea. Better still would be that non disabled welfare recipients should be given maintenance and public area beautification tasks. They say they wanna work, they're being paid......why not put them to work? If they don't like it,..no welfare check.

American governments, local, state and national, should not be in the business of paying people to lay about and do nothing.


You know when the Country was indeed great we to say things like "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Now we are a Nation of Money Worshippers, lacking in humanity.
I'm surprised you didn't go a step further and suggest killing off the handicapped.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 10:24 AM
link   
.
edit on 29-9-2015 by Motorhead because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879


The Republican mayor of Lewiston, Maine, wants to publish the names of the state’s welfare recipients, arguing that it’s the public’s “right to know” how its money is being spent.




He does have a fair point about the public's "right to know" how public money is being spent.

In which case, as I believe his wage also comes from the public purse, I trust that he'll be willing to give a regular monthly breakdown of exactly how that wage is spent?









edit on 29-9-2015 by Motorhead because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 10:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: Motorhead

originally posted by: Spider879


The Republican mayor of Lewiston, Maine, wants to publish the names of the state’s welfare recipients, arguing that it’s the public’s “right to know” how its money is being spent.




He does have a fair point about the public's "right to know" how public money is being spent.

In which case, as I believe his wage also comes from the public purse, I trust that he'll be willing to give a regular monthly breakdown of exactly how that wage is spent?



How he spends his income is irrelevant. What his income IS from the taxpayers is.

Edit: Provided he uses his income in legal ways.
edit on 29-9-2015 by eluryh22 because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   
If the public has a right to know who is getting their tax money then don`t stop with welfare recipients publish the names of EVERYONE and EVERY corporation who receives any tax payer money.
More openness on how tax money is spent is always a good thing.

They claim that X amount of money is being used for welfare but how do we know they are telling the truth?
without knowing how many people are on welfare and how much they collect we have no way of knowing if the government of someone else is skimming money from the welfare system before any money is given out to the poor.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 12:04 PM
link   
Maybe while he's at it, he should stage some bum fights, too. You know, where you pay two homeless people a couple bucks to knock each other out. What other ways can we abuse the downtrodden? Also, I don't see any shame in someone receiving food stamps, so it is not like the name on a list would be a big deal, at least to me, but I can think of many other reasons besides shaming that the list could cause problems. One would be able to market and capitalize on folks that are desperate, possibly even convincing them to do illegal activities, that they may do out of desperation. The pensioners and such would not have this same problem (although I'd bet they get marketed too, because of it). My main point here is that it would be much more shameful for us all to let anyone go hungry, than providing a small (it is not a whole lot, from what I hear, under $200 per person a month...try living on that) resource. Hell, they bail out banks to the tune of billions, and receive nothing in return, yet when they actually do something to help a citizen, these political pigs see it as money they can't pocket on the sly and get all pissy about it. These folks are far from following ethics, civility, let alone Christianity, and I can only hope that they burn in the hell they pretend to believe in for these kinds of mindless, selfish, acts!


Also, I am sure the statistics for welfare are already available, so the taxpayer can see how the money is distributed. Why would anyone have need to know the actual families names, and such? I cannot think of any GOOD reason (but a few very BAD ones) to do this.

And someone mentioned that these folks were receiving 'free money'. Well, that being mentioned, what do you call the money they pay to every ex senator, on his regularly scheduled payday until the day he dies (then it goes to his wife/husband til they die) from the time he leaves office? In fact, it is said that if you were to abolish this ex senator pay and welfare programs, alone, you would have enough to give every citizen in the united states enough for all their basic necessities (food, place to live, transportation, etc) to be met. No one could scream 'unfair ' about that. And, if you wanted to do nothing with your life, you could just sit at home and play video games (or get on ATS...LOL) all day, OR you could still go out and get a job, not out of need, but out of really wanting to do the job, or go to school, or sit and invent the next tech breakthroughs (since eventually, a majority of jobs should be eliminated by mechanization and robotics, requiring fewer humans to toil needlessly, yet still needing to survive). We are living in new times, but with old, tired worn out ideas regarding labor, value, and economic distribution, and I believe the current high unemployment rate, and the creation of fewer jobs a definite sign of the trend. Eventually, we as a country, and society, are going to have to do something, and redistributing the 'free money' that these old codgers retiring from politics get, along with the welfare programs (which I am guessing a large portion goes to administrative costs, anyway) and giving it to every legal US citizen might be a step in the right direction. Who cares if someone doesn't want to work. Let them stay at home so someone that actually enjoys the job gets it, and hence provides higher quality. We will eventually have to do something unless your idea of the future is starvation, crime, and all the other nasty stuff that happens when your mindset does not adapt as quickly as the environment demands. Maybe some should not be working so much that they lose touch with what is really going on, their humanity, and reality, in general. Office cubical s are not the real world!
edit on 9/29/2015 by eatbliss because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 12:19 PM
link   
Come to think of it, Medicare and Medicaid are MUCH bigger than basic welfare and riddled with fraud. Let's publish a list of everyone receiving either of those along with what medications and procedures they are having so we know if people are screwing the system by having procedures and/or RX that are unnecessary.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 12:22 PM
link   
a reply to: jtma508

Hipaa laws prevent dissemination of specific patient information (types of treatments, ailments, etc). However, I have no issue with adding a general line item to the list of public records indicating dollar value.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 05:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: ugmold

originally posted by: hammanderr
This is a great idea. Better still would be that non disabled welfare recipients should be given maintenance and public area beautification tasks. They say they wanna work, they're being paid......why not put them to work? If they don't like it,..no welfare check.

American governments, local, state and national, should not be in the business of paying people to lay about and do nothing.


You know when the Country was indeed great we to say things like "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"

Now we are a Nation of Money Worshippers, lacking in humanity.
I'm surprised you didn't go a step further and suggest killing off the handicapped.


So, by your estimation, this message was intended to attract people to our extensive welfare benefits? So no one intended for anyone to work? Just live off of entitlements? What is your concept of the way that an economy functions?



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 05:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: novem
Whoa there,
If you feel like you would like to have that privacy should you be on "PUBLIC" assistance, doesn't mean I would ! I really would not care if others knew if I was. They could probably find out in short order if they wanted to anyway...................... There are too many in this country that have made it their livelihood(and culture) to take from the coffers.

The too many is not most or all, it is nothing but mean spirited and an attempt at further demeaning the poorest among us.


that is one of the missions of the republican party...has been for along time....remember the term "welfare queens" Ronald Reagan's code phrase for black mothers who didn't have enough money to take care of their kids.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 07:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: jimmyx

originally posted by: Spider879

originally posted by: novem
Whoa there,
If you feel like you would like to have that privacy should you be on "PUBLIC" assistance, doesn't mean I would ! I really would not care if others knew if I was. They could probably find out in short order if they wanted to anyway...................... There are too many in this country that have made it their livelihood(and culture) to take from the coffers.

The too many is not most or all, it is nothing but mean spirited and an attempt at further demeaning the poorest among us.


that is one of the missions of the republican party...has been for along time....remember the term "welfare queens" Ronald Reagan's code phrase for black mothers who didn't have enough money to take care of their kids.

Sure do they like divide and conquer tactics to achieve their ultimate goal screwing us all for their own benefit, that particular lie has been long exposed they'll move on to another.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 07:10 PM
link   
a reply to: hammanderr




So, by your estimation, this message was intended to attract people to our extensive welfare benefits? So no one intended for anyone to work? Just live off of entitlements? What is your concept of the way that an economy functions?

Immigrants do not typically go on welfare, THEN again in bold UNLESS U ARE DISABLED U CANNOT GET WELFARE UNLESS U HAVE SOME KIND OF EMPLOYMENT! reference Bill Clinton.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

I like the way this man thinks. I'd be 100% in support of this and take it a step further, offer an "opt out clause" for those who wish to remain private and not be on the list... Opt out of having everyone else take responsibility for your care and feeding and don't appear on the list!



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 07:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: burdman30ott6
a reply to: Spider879

I like the way this man thinks. I'd be 100% in support of this and take it a step further, offer an "opt out clause" for those who wish to remain private and not be on the list... Opt out of having everyone else take responsibility for your care and feeding and don't appear on the list!

I don't, he is being a dick, listen I have never been poor or anyone of my extended family been on public assistance but I have known people who got divorced the income dropped and there were kids involved ,after going through a traumatic event like that the last thing she needed was shame to add to her humiliation, and frankly this is not a pressing issue I am sure there are tmuch more urgent things need taking care of like ah donno..climate change, fixing the failing infrastructure (a jobs creator)
public shaming for being poor and needing assistance??..naaw not even close.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 07:55 PM
link   
Making more jobs is not the answer for the majority of the problem ........ITS MOTOVATION ! Any and all civil means to provide that motivation should be taken and individuals subsequently rewarded once past the minimum threshold for getting out of the public assistance catch 22. Presently there are loopholes to allow more compensation not being self sufficient than there is just at the level when breaking out of it.......

There is also a lot of us who look at this through their own eyes......... Take me for example, I have no fear of being ridiculed or demeaned. Put my name on the list for all I care. Being concerned that this is somehow anything monstrous or evil just makes me wonder if it is not a personal fear rather than a societal concern for some of the naysayers !!!!!



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 08:12 PM
link   
a reply to: StoutBroux

Dude. He's the freaking Mayor and knows HIS community and constituents and more about what they're dealing with in relation to criminal activity and the local demographics of his City. It's not often a Mayor will react like this, so I'm assuming there is stuff going on there and good people in his town who are worried about what they see happening in their community.

If he really thinks publishing names will make people accountable, then that's his decision and the vote of the constituents in the region will determine whether or not such an initiative will pass.

My opinion is for the safety and security of Good Law Abiding Americans that want a safe and secure town. I could really give two wits less about anyone receiving welfare who is sitting around collecting checks and making problems for ANY community.

Let the people vote on the measure.

And that's all I have to say about that.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 08:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: novem
Making more jobs is not the answer for the majority of the problem ........ITS MOTOVATION ! Any and all civil means to provide that motivation should be taken and individuals subsequently rewarded once past the minimum threshold for getting out of the public assistance catch 22. Presently there are loopholes to allow more compensation not being self sufficient than there is just at the level when breaking out of it.......

There is also a lot of us who look at this through their own eyes......... Take me for example, I have no fear of being ridiculed or demeaned. Put my name on the list for all I care. Being concerned that this is somehow anything monstrous or evil just makes me wonder if it is not a personal fear rather than a societal concern for some of the naysayers !!!!!


I kinda get what you mean, but if this dude really wanted to tackle welfare issue then he should support an increased minimum wage, about a yr or so ago Walmart was paying their workers low wages and have the state pick-up the tab for those on Welfare this being arguably one of the most profitable non energy company in America, Costco a similar company paid their employees a decent wage.
www.forbes.com...
This cut down on higher turn over rates than Walmart and job performance and satisfaction increased, now not everyone is cut out to be a I.T engineer or have a three letter title following their given names or they may not be inclined to be an entrepreneur but given a fair chance they can and will produce.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 08:36 PM
link   
Increased minimum wage is certainly a motivator, and how about getting folks out of the tenant/barracks style housing and all of its downfalls...... Spread them out to the land in which to raise a garden, a chicken or whatever. A house and land of their own. Better than the fenceless prison concept in inner city "projects" any day !
edit on 29-9-2015 by novem because: punctuation




top topics



 
16
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join