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.

 

End all social welfare programs immediately

page: 10
20
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

So get a job that allows you to sit down. Or work from home taking customer service calls. Or google "sit down jobs for the injured". I'm sorry that you're suffering, but its part of life. They don't call it work because its easy.

Try again??


edit on 27-4-2016 by BELIEVERpriest because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

there is no way in hades that I will take a job that requires me to be on my feet all day long, I like b...






If you were in Hades, you might be prompted to change your mind.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   
The ignorance is large in this thread. I would agree that corporate welfare needs to end, I would agree that fraud and corruption should end, but no one wants to address that. All of the problems this country faces are the fault of the poor, Koch brothers have got their message out.
edit on 4/27/2016 by BubbaJoe because: I needed to



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:45 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

But how will shutting welfare down improve the life of the American people? You didn't answer my question.


That has been discussed in the first five pages.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: stabstab

Yeah let's add more taxes because that's helped.

Actually I'd rather empower individuals and small businesses by forgiving the tax burden they already carry and the amount of money they have to spend on hiring people so we could have more entry level jobs for everyone who can't find work.

This is real basic


Tax rates have zero effect on quality of life, literally zero. Look at Singapore and look at Norway, their tax rates are at opposite ends of the spectrum and both have among the highest quality of life in the world.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:55 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

You're assumptions are correct that I don't understand small business and that's because I don't own a small business nor am I an accountant. So what makes you the all knowing? Do you qualify for any of the above or are you just a know-it-all?

You lack a basic understanding of compassion and empathy, amongst other things.
edit on 27-4-2016 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:56 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

Try googling "10 happiest places on Earth" and start from there.

Spoiler Alert! America ain't in the top 10
edit on 27-4-2016 by Swills because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: BubbaJoe
The ignorance is large in this thread. I would agree that corporate welfare needs to end, I would agree that fraud and corruption should end, but no one wants to address that. All of the problems this country faces are the fault of the poor, Koch brothers have got their message out.


Lovely strawman.

I don't believe anyone has said that.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 08:57 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest
tell ya what, when I see the little 30 something lady next door who is drawing disability because of her "anxiety" , ya know the one that is walking to the store a half a mile away when she can't find anyone in the neighborhood to bum cigs off of, well I will consider it.
and look, I managed to get on disability without any recent doctor's records, and no doctor's backing up my claim. It was a doctor contracted by social security that validated it, so take a nice long hike!
anything with phones is a bad fit for me, since I end up having to ask people to repeat themselves too often, I can't drive that far, without my feet cramping up, and I am so close to retirement age, that the date they set my recertification is past that time. oh, then there's the doctor's warning about getting myself to the doctor because my blood pressure was so high ( probably the stress from all the crap that had gone down in the past year.)

do I still look for an out to this, ya, but it certainly isn't gonna involve me standing on my feet for eight to ten hours a day in a print shop that's for sure! and like I said, I was unemployed before my husband died, I applied for every job that I thought I could do, even took a couple I my doubts about and then lost them when I was wrong. retail, office, convenience stores (which my kids told me I probably wouldn't be able to do because you have to stock the coolers and I can't lift that much weight), I tried, but when my husband died, I was left with very little money and absolutely no income and I've been living on what I could sell for most of the past year along with what my kids could help with.

so, no, I've finally accepted that I am disable, unable to get a job worth working, and no, I am not gonna kill myself trying to earn enough to live working a job that is gonna leave me crippled or worse.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Aazadan

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: stabstab

Yeah let's add more taxes because that's helped.

Actually I'd rather empower individuals and small businesses by forgiving the tax burden they already carry and the amount of money they have to spend on hiring people so we could have more entry level jobs for everyone who can't find work.

This is real basic


Tax rates have zero effect on quality of life, literally zero. Look at Singapore and look at Norway, their tax rates are at opposite ends of the spectrum and both have among the highest quality of life in the world.


Norway. You can earn a living a dealer of modern art and forget everything else. It's a land full of opportunity, where everyone is happy. You can be one of the 5 people who own a coffee shop. The weather sucks balls, immigrants are taking over, and everyone else is f!#/^. But they all own cooking shows and ride boats around and everyone loves those Nordics.

You got me I don't know much about Singapore.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:06 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Ok. I apologize for being overly blunt and insensitive. You have to understand that in my line of work, I have to bend over backwards for one undeserving and lazy Medicaid recipient after another (just like your 30 year old neighbor) for 40 hours a week. On top of the I have to force myself to smile while doing it. Then I get to watch retirees who put into the system all their lives get screwed by the system.

You can work. It might not be a job you like, it might not pay the best, but its something and its honest.
edit on 27-4-2016 by BELIEVERpriest because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:07 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

Ending social welfare "immediately" is dumb. I can agree on putting certain limitations of its use as far as time unemployed versus number of applications put in, etc., but to completely get rid of it "immediately" is a disaster waiting to happen. That is the title of your thread and your title is a bad idea.

Welfare should be available to those who truly need it, as long as they aren't leaching off the system for as long as they can then they should be able to live off of it until they get back on their feet. Completely ending it because of the bad apples is doing a disservice to the ones who truly need it and are trying to better themselves. You don't cut down an entire apple tree when there are still good apples growing on it. Every tree will have some bad fruit, that doesn't make the tree bad though.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:11 PM
link   
a reply to: dragonlover12

Because we don't live in a perfect world and not every kid has a parent to care for them. So it's either they live on the streets, in a state institution, or adoption/guardianship/group home. We've tried all of the above and currently are at the last 3 options.

Do you say we should take a step backwards and have MORE homeless people on the streets or perhaps lock them up in an institution like Willow Brook? You do know what happened at Willow Brook don't you?



What would Jesus do?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:12 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko

originally posted by: BubbaJoe
The ignorance is large in this thread. I would agree that corporate welfare needs to end, I would agree that fraud and corruption should end, but no one wants to address that. All of the problems this country faces are the fault of the poor, Koch brothers have got their message out.


Lovely strawman.

I don't believe anyone has said that.


Apparently my "I hate the poor radar" is greater than yours. Based on your replies in another thread, I will guess that we live within 20 miles of each other, I would guess you South, North, or JC. It wasn't a strawman at all, it was in the OP, he obviously hates the poor, and believes they should die. How else would he explain cutting all social programs.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

The problems with social programs and welfare is that they have become a way of life, no longer filling in the gaps for those in financial troubles to be able to advance in their time of need.

Even with all the billions that are paid into these programs we still have poverty, hunger and unemployment.

Then the question is no about why, but the way that our government failed policies regarding welfare has become the norm, is this intentional or unintentional.

The more people are dependent on government hand outs the easier for the government to control certain sectors of the population.

If everybody in America were working, productive and well fed, the government would have not purpose to exist.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:13 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: onequestion

Ending social welfare "immediately" is dumb. I can agree on putting certain limitations of its use as far as time unemployed versus number of applications put in, etc., but to completely get rid of it "immediately" is a disaster waiting to happen. That is the title of your thread and your title is a bad idea.

Welfare should be available to those who truly need it, as long as they aren't leaching off the system for as long as they can then they should be able to live off of it until they get back on their feet. Completely ending it because of the bad apples is doing a disservice to the ones who truly need it and are trying to better themselves. You don't cut down an entire apple tree when there are still good apples growing on it. Every tree will have some bad fruit, that doesn't make the tree bad though.



I think he is just blowing off steam, and that everyone if they were to think about it, knows where the frustration comes from. Besides, the situation doesn't effect me even if he was talking about ending it all immediately, which I don't think is really going to happen.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
Why don't you tell me how much it cost a company to employee you full time and come back at me


Zero, if you work for a company you're making them a profit even after paying your wages.


originally posted by: olaru12
No Social Security, no medicare for the elderly? Just rely on charity?

That's cold...



The OP also wanted to tax retirement investments at 90% in a previous thread.


originally posted by: onequestion
This is what's stopping millenials from entering the workforce in entry level positions


No it's not. It's a multifaceted problem:
You have globalization which has encouraged out sourcing of less essential jobs which are typically the entry level ones.

Then you have the fact that there's simply not as many entry level positions, this again is due to multiple reasons. One is that wages have stagnated and people are working multiple jobs. Another is that life expectancy has increased and the retirement age has gone up. This keeps people in the work force longer, which causes positions to not open up. Another is that productivity is up, one worker has the same output today that three workers had in 1985.

Another is the fact that we have too many workers. A bunch of people went the college route in order to gain skills to hopefully land an entry level job, but with the internet many people also develop their own skills as they're growing up, pick up a couple certifications and then the two compete. This creates a huge glut of entry level positions. People shooting for entry level corporate positions make up 45% of the work force today but only 15% of the jobs.

Last comes the fact that our economy has changed. Most of the jobs we're doing these days don't have any room for advancement, because they're service sector oriented like sales, cashier, burger flipper, and so on. Companies have expanded these jobs considerably, and the average manager today watches more people than they did in the past. This results in a pyramid structure with a much wider base. With that wider base comes increased competition.


originally posted by: onequestion
The reason everyone has to go to college is because businesses can't afford entry level positions.


People go to college because corporations have zero incentive to train employees in the basics of their job function. If you owned a company, would you invest $25,000 into each new hire annually in order to train them, keep them on staff for a year in a learning position, and then hope they stuck around after they learned the job? Companies don't want to take risks, hence they shifted the cost of learning skills to the individual.


originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: syrinx high priest

Oh please quantify that mathematically and prove that's true.

The private banking system managing our economy is equally as much of a joke


Tax rates suck $X out of the economy every year. The government spends $X purchasing services every year. The point of entry and exit for the tax dollars isn't the same, but it ultimately all circulates back into the economy and creates work at zero expense.

As for the banking system, are you even aware of how it works?


originally posted by: breakingbs
You got me I don't know much about Singapore.


Singapore is a small nation with no minimum wage and low taxes. They have a low poverty rate and virtually no social safety net. They do however subsidize education heavily (fully pay for college, give students a living stipend). 1 in 6 people in Singapore is the US equivalent of a millionaire, but cost of living is such that it's like being a millionaire in San Francisco. The nation has a huge tech sector, and some of the best health care in the world which is provided to citizens free of charge. They're also a rather strong regional military power.

They're probably the most capitalistic country on Earth.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:19 PM
link   

originally posted by: BELIEVERpriest
a reply to: dawnstar

So who are you trying to convince? Me or yourself?

Because what I see is a lot of excuses. Please forgive me for not feeding you sugar coated lies about how sympathetic I am to your unwillingness to work. So maybe since you don't want to work, I'll just find a doctor to declare me disabled due to "anxiety" too and I'll spend the rest of my days living off of other tax payers while I down Xanax bars with a 40 ouncer. Then you and your neighbor can party at my place.

Im not opposed to you getting help, but you need to find a way to get on you're own two feet again. This system will not support you forever.


You are pretty much being a dick, I worked for 30 years, got hurt on the job, lost 75% use of my right arm. Was off work for two years, drawing workman's comp, don't get hurt in Florida. Moved back to Missouri, and went to work for my sister. You have been the fortunate one, never being hurt, never having issues, I hope you are more than one paycheck away from bankruptcy, because it can happen to anyone at anytime.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:21 PM
link   
a reply to: BubbaJoe

You're right, I went way over the top there. I edited my comment. Thanks for calling me out.

I get the you probably cant work hard labor, but does that mean you cant work at all?

Cant go to school and learn a new trade? Something?


edit on 27-4-2016 by BELIEVERpriest because: typo

edit on 27-4-2016 by BELIEVERpriest because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 09:22 PM
link   

originally posted by: Swills
a reply to: dragonlover12

Because we don't live in a perfect world and not every kid has a parent to care for them. So it's either they live on the streets, in a state institution, or adoption/guardianship/group home. We've tried all of the above and currently are at the last 3 options.

Do you say we should take a step backwards and have MORE homeless people on the streets or perhaps lock them up in an institution like Willow Brook? You do know what happened at Willow Brook don't you?



What would Jesus do?



It's going to happen anyway, the system is going to buckle in and implode with so many people, and I think "the homeless" are going to wind up being shipped off regardless and it's not going to be by who you think. This will be by, yes the government, probably due to last minute efforts to quell the riots after institution of probably some form of high tech martial law. They're going to go somewhere. Big pass the popcorn moment. Meanwhile I'll sit back and enjoy the fireworks.

Oh yeah, and democrats mentioning religion when they themselves don't even believe in it...



new topics

top topics



 
20
<< 7  8  9    11  12  13 >>

log in

join