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: 4
16
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 08:51 PM
link   

originally posted by: novem
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 !



A guy from California is trying to do just that.




posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: Stan71




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?!

More than likely these are drug dealers and not welfare recipients, they may in fact not even be living in the neighbourhood but do business there.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 09:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Spider879
Public shaming of the poor!! way to go big man, class warfare?? what is that??? keep kicking the poor and folks who are down and out if even for a moment like ah donno..medical bills, your company shut its doors, all kinds of reasons why people became poor and need a hand up, I bet this Christian didn't know he was anti-Christ like.
Btw he is also against minimum wage or attempts at making poor folks less likely to be on welfare .


I actually hope he does it. That's easily referenced data that can show just how little people are actually costing compared to other expenditures.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 09:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Gothmog

People either have a right to privacy or they don't.

Doesn't matter who it is or what it is.


I argued against both publishing the names of gun owners, and that pharma CEO's name but the fact is there's no right to privacy in the constitution. Additionally there are no constitutional protections between corporations and people. Once they have your data it becomes their property and they are free to use it in whatever manner they see fit, aside from medical data which has some restrictions on who they can share it with.

So to sum it up, there is no right to privacy. There should be, I would very much support that but that's not the current law.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 09:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

Well then if there is 'no' right to privacy. I don't see why people been crying over the last 7 years about the Patriot Act.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 09:50 PM
link   
a reply to: neo96

The Patriot Act is about more than privacy. It's also about due process, if you're Muslim and buy 40 pounds of fertilizer the government gets to know about that, and then they get to investigate you and determine if you might do something, and ultimately if they decide that you might they can arrest you and charge you under terrorism laws even if you've done nothing wrong (yet) or had no plans to do anything wrong. It's about the fact that a person can stand trial for a crime, but lack the security clearance for them or their lawyer to hear the prosecutions evidence. It's about the fact that the government can target a person without a warrant.

The government has always been able to obtain all of this information, but it required probable cause and a judge to sign off on it. That is no longer the case.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 09:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Aazadan

I highly suggest reading the 4th amendment.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 10:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: Aazadan

I highly suggest reading the 4th amendment.



The 4th amendment has to do with unreasonable search and seizure.


The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.


Ever since the 1860's or so the government tapped telegraph lines in order to discover information that was otherwise protected by the 4th amendment. They used the argument that the 4th doesn't refer to electronic communications, and for the last 150 years the battle has gone back and forth over this point. We're currently in a position where electronic communications are not protected, there were a couple big court battles over this a few years ago.

With digital communications inparticular, often times the document isn't seized but rather is copied. The original still belongs to whoever owned it, unlike a physical item that gets taken for evidence.

When it comes to searching, it's a bit of a loophole. Your data largely goes through your ISP so it's communications between you and a corporation, something that's not under the domain of the constitution. The government since the Patriot Act then asks the ISP's to turn over all of their data which is between the government and the corporation which again circumvents the constitution. There's no state-individual interaction until after they go through the data.

It's a perversion of the intent of the law in my opinion, and yet another example of how deeply the Constitution is flawed, but what's being done isn't against the letter of the law.



posted on Sep, 29 2015 @ 10:13 PM
link   
a reply to: Spider879

Do it-

It will be another exhibit that can be entered into evidence against the CON-serve-A-tive nazi like psychopathy-----in the heavenly realm where it counts not in a Vatican $aturni chamber bull# show



posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 01:32 AM
link   
a reply to: GENERAL EYES

Really? Because this is what he wants on the web page:

www.youtube.com...

names, addresses, length of time on assistance and the benefits being collected....

And if your were a child born into a poor and needy family you can never be allowed public assistance.................................. By God and by Gracious.....wait..no.

Welfare needs reform but this isn't the way to do it. I'm conservative but this man is going too far! I might have gone a little far in calling him a dick. He's a SUPER dick.



posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Ain't gonna happen honey!



A proposal from Lewiston’s mayor to create an online database of Maine welfare recipients generated significant debate late last week but will not move forward because no lawmakers were willing to sponsor the legislation.

www.pressherald.com...




posted on Sep, 30 2015 @ 02:36 AM
link   
What next,?... Stars on Jackets.



posted on Nov, 23 2015 @ 08:21 PM
link   
Swipe the card. Do we really need to know about rustoleum or that a full size pizza is twelve inches?
edit on 23-11-2015 by BenBLevins because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
16
<< 1  2  3   >>

log in

join