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: 7
20
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:48 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Totally agree get this damned government out of our business and let this country prosper !!!




posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: AboveBoard

Your right I agree with you but the question is do you want massive centralized burdensome programs or something more localized

If people have more money I'm willing to bet that they would be willing to part with some to help your son I know I'm ok with helping your son

But most social programs get abused


There is abuse in every system, hence all the fuss about corruption. Id say the most abused system is the military. I bought a latest and greatest smart tv for about 60x less than the military spent on a 10" lcd screen with junk software.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: amicktd

I hypothesize that the bigger and more complex the system is the easier it is to take advantage of



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   
a reply to: WonOunce




(look at disability- almost anyone can get it if they try hard enough.


Not quite. I was crushed as a coal miner, spent 2 years in the hospital getting put back together, 17 surgeries and it still took me 3 1/2 years to get disability. I'll be the first to agree that many people scam the system, but there are many of us who had to fight for it because of it and I despise every Godda** one of them.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:50 PM
link   
As one of the more conservative members here, even I cannot see axing all benefits. For better or worse, and mostly worse, we have created a dependent class. We spend a trillion dollars a year on welfare programs (more than we do on our military, which actually is in the constitution), yet the only thing we know for certain is that it does not reduce poverty at all. It's a failure.

But that doesn't mean it would be humane to just stop it. This isn't the 18th century where people still had the means to support themselves off the land and did not require electricity. People then who were illiterate, uneducated, or, frankly, just stupid, could work on a farm and live a perfectly acceptable life. Modern life requires more of people today, and replacing jobs with robots or sending them overseas means we have a surplus of unskilled labor. Oh, we're desperate for doctors, nurses, and engineers all right, and there are, again frankly, plenty of educational scholarships available for training, but the fact is not everyone is capable of learning the skills that we need. In terms of the workforce, we need smarter people.

So no, I'm not for cutting people off, but the fact is the present system is unsustainable.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:51 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Maybe you were looking in the wrong industry? Where I am at, it is rare to see a man in the office, but then facility with language is a woman's strength more than a man's, so it would make sense that the writing/editorial depts. of a publishing company would be dominated by women.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: dawnstar
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

oh, I can type on a computer, not very fast, but I can, but back in the 80's I went to college hoping to get into something more appealing than resturant and fast food. studied data processing even, got decent grades. but well, after two years of it I tried to get back into the workforce for that office job....
nope, didn't have experience, ect. and was flat out told that as long as there were men applying for a job, well, they weren't gonna be hiring the women... after all the men had families to support, the women had men to support them or danged well should have. so, I gave up on that nice office job and went into production instead, never did really make enough to support myself and my share of the kids though. and eventually ended up with physical problems that made it so I needed something more akin to that office job, but then again, nope, no can do, no experience.
so, well, I am disabled, live with it!!
they might be able to do something, but weather or not they will be given a chance to is an entirely different question..

by the way, my disability will be switching to social security survivor's benefits in a few days, the first time in my life I will be able to hold my own..
I halfway expect the whole system to crash any day now.



So what? You quit trying to find work? Live on disability as long as you have to, but if you are a capable worker, then its your duty to the rest of the tax payers to try and find some kind of work.

I find it hard to believe that absolutely no one will hire you. There are Temp Agencies looking for people with absolutely no education or training for part-time jobs that can become full-time with benefits.

Sorry, in the year 2016, I'm not buying 100% of your story.
edit on 27-4-2016 by BELIEVERpriest because: typos



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   

originally posted by: schuyler
As one of the more conservative members here, even I cannot see axing all benefits. For better or worse, and mostly worse, we have created a dependent class. We spend a trillion dollars a year on welfare programs (more than we do on our military, which actually is in the constitution), yet the only thing we know for certain is that it does not reduce poverty at all. It's a failure.

But that doesn't mean it would be humane to just stop it. This isn't the 18th century where people still had the means to support themselves off the land and did not require electricity. People then who were illiterate, uneducated, or, frankly, just stupid, could work on a farm and live a perfectly acceptable life. Modern life requires more of people today, and replacing jobs with robots or sending them overseas means we have a surplus of unskilled labor. Oh, we're desperate for doctors, nurses, and engineers all right, and there are, again frankly, plenty of educational scholarships available for training, but the fact is not everyone is capable of learning the skills that we need. In terms of the workforce, we need smarter people.

So no, I'm not for cutting people off, but the fact is the present system is unsustainable.


I agree with your post. One thing I wanted to point out though is that we spend that money as a safety net for over 300 million people the military is spending the same amount to track and spy on individuals and our own citizens.

Hell they don't even stop the terrorists half the time so it's all just money wasted in my eyes.
edit on 27-4-2016 by amicktd because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

I have a hard time believing that too even with a felony I can find work anywhere its just not always the work I'm looking for



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: SmurfRider

Well basic wage laws I think take care of themselves in a more competitive environment


What do you mean?
Would you support a government paid basic wage law if all social programs were eradicated?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:57 PM
link   

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: AboveBoard

Your right I agree with you but the question is do you want massive centralized burdensome programs or something more localized

If people have more money I'm willing to bet that they would be willing to part with some to help your son I know I'm ok with helping your son

But most social programs get abused


Programs may be centralized but Joe having $100 more in his pocket at the end of the year isn't going to get me any help at all, I'm afraid. The average individual isn't going to see a tax break as an opportunity to do good works as much as they are going to consume more goods and services for themselves. It is what it is.

Regarding charity, incidentally, I didn't see a response from you on my earlier point. Charity only happens when people are able to contribute. The moment Wall Street dashes us into another crisis, big or small, charity dries up. I know that for a fact.

I understand you are trying to work out a problem, but it is not simple, it is a vast and interconnected web and social programs exist because historically, without them, we are at the mercy of Robber Barons and other greedy folk who laugh while we starve at their feet.

Anyway. I appreciate that you are trying to find a better way. I would certainly offer that large bureaucracies come with a ton of problems. Some of the problem is in the infrastructure - if more emphasis were to be put on upgrading the tech involved, streamlining and better tracking could happen, thus making a leaner machine, so to speak. But that takes funding and people willing to do that. We don't even fix our bridges...



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   
a reply to: dawnstar

Do you think you will live to see 2026. I hope so, but I guarantee you that Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and Obamacare will not. So what will you do then?



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 06:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: AboveBoard

You missed my first point: the programs are created for people who truly cannot do for themselves.

I would assume that your son might fall into that category rather than the will not or cannot because life choices are inhibiting them categories.


Thanks for the response. I had a feeling I didn't read you correctly at first!!



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:05 PM
link   
wow....large topic

NO. 1

Cutting programs (welfare, military spending...etc.) causes a domino effect. Those that work in the welfare system would lose their jobs, not all, just some. Cutting military spending affects Tier 1, 2 and 3 suppliers to the military industrial complex which, you guessed it, puts more people out of work....and I can go on with each cut we want to make. Letting the large businesses, such as General Motors or Chrysler go bankrupt and fail also causes a huge loss of jobs.....so cutting the support of welfare....of ALL kinds not just to individuals can have an even more damning effect for many more people...so its just not as easy as you think.


No. 2....being on unemployement benefits or welfare was supposed to BRIDGE THE GAP between jobs and was not intended to be a sole source of income nor to be exploited as it has become.

No. 3 - some people truly need and deserve those benefits, however, you will always get the riff raff in any system that will try to exploit it.

I personally believe that people should be honest with themselves and the systems in place. Be an adult and take some responsibility to be a better person and contribute to you community. Be and active participant in you life and not just along for the ride. Don't ride the coat tails of those that do the work and put in the time. Don't be a drain on the system and don't defraud the system. Be a good person and be responsible.

The world doesn't owe you a damn thing.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:06 PM
link   
I'm usually on board with your ideas onequestion, but this is a terrible idea. If welfare was strictly voluntary then there would be a lot of people out of homes and their livelihoods would be competely crushed.

Let's face it, Americans are by and large greedy. Look at the amount of people who pass by those in need on the street without a second look. People are not going to give money out of their pockets voluntarily, that much should be clear. I'm glad that you would, and so would I, but we are part of the minority and thousands if not millions would suffer from the idea you've presented here.

If getting rid of welfare would somehow make jobs pay their employees more (which is highly unlikely in itself), what would they ultimately end up doing? They would cut jobs and send them overseas even more than they already do.

You cannot make greedy people generous by taking social welfare out of the equation, the idea doesn't even make sense in the slightest.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: SmurfRider

originally posted by: onequestion
a reply to: SmurfRider

Well basic wage laws I think take care of themselves in a more competitive environment


What do you mean?
Would you support a government paid basic wage law if all social programs were eradicated?


I haven't thought about it I don't know.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:13 PM
link   
a reply to: onequestion

So your idea isn't as well thought out and articulated as you claimed earlier? If you haven't thought of the alternatives then your idea is pretty much dead in the water at this point.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   
a reply to: 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Let's face it, Americans are by and large greedy. Look at the amount of people who pass by those in need on the street without a second look. People are not going to give money out of their pockets voluntarily, that much should be clear.


1.) How many do that now because they say, "I voted for the government to take care of everyone via social programs." This creates the "I gave at the office" effect letting people pass off their responsibility because they feel that simply filling out their tax forms annually is analogous to personal charity.

2.) How many people pass by because they give to charities already in terms of time and money despite taxes as it is?

3.) How many people look at those they pass and feel they are not in immediate need, but would stop to help someone bleeding or in obvious distress?

Case in point, a young woman who stood at a street corner for a while holding a sign saying she had a broken car and two young kids ... if she had time to stand their and beg for money, why wasn't she out at one of the several small stores in the immediate area that were looking for help? Granted a clerking or waitressing position isn't much, but it was something more than panhandling.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: onequestion

So your idea isn't as well thought out and articulated as you claimed earlier? If you haven't thought of the alternatives then your idea is pretty much dead in the water at this point.


At least Onequestion opened up a very important conversation. Its a shame that it has to happen on a conspiracy theory forum, when it really belongs in Town Hall meetings and Congress. Onequestion simply revealed a revelation. The least you could do is try to contribute in finding a solution.



posted on Apr, 27 2016 @ 07:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: 3NL1GHT3N3D1
a reply to: onequestion

So your idea isn't as well thought out and articulated as you claimed earlier? If you haven't thought of the alternatives then your idea is pretty much dead in the water at this point.


Seriously dude, I mean was my question so in depth you can't even give us a gut reaction on how you feel? wow




top topics



 
20
<< 4  5  6    8  9  10 >>

log in

join