What, me Welfare?

page: 4
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join

posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 05:23 PM
link   
Yeah like welfare recipients vote.

Drug testing won't solve the problem that welfare attempts to cure...and that's poverty, joblessness, ill-education. Welfare to work programs are helping abandoned women and children. We need to get aggressive on dead beat parents. We need to get aggressive on drugs. The focus should be on the real problems that causes these situations not the effects.




posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 05:32 PM
link   
I personally think welfare is a wonderful service for those people who need it.

1. I don't think people should live/rely on welfare.
2. I think part of being on welfare should include mandatory schooling.
3. There should be a time limit.

Welfare is for those who NEED it. Not for drug dealers/users to buy/sell their next fix. Or for lazy people who don't want to work. For those VERY FEW people who use it to just get on their feet I think it's great, and should be used....NOT ABUSED.



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 05:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Saphronia
Yeah like welfare recipients vote.

Drug testing won't solve the problem that welfare attempts to cure...and that's poverty, joblessness, ill-education. Welfare to work programs are helping abandoned women and children. We need to get aggressive on dead beat parents. We need to get aggressive on drugs. The focus should be on the real problems that causes these situations not the effects.


Yeah, Saphie, they do vote. They are intentionally sought after in the south as they are shoo-in dems. I know, its hard to imagine the same ones who want to keep them poor and in need of assistance would actually use that to gain votes.
Joblessness problems can be helped if people would try and make themselves marketable. Education makes that happen. Sometimes one might have to take loans, others might have to work and school, others (like me) might have to do both. They'll survive and less than eight hours of sleep for a few years. And even yet, one might even consider joining the military for the education benefits.

Most of the chronic ills we see, from drug usage to slovenliness, is not something that can be fixed by the clinical means, but by the "Get back to tradition" means. But nobody wants to hear that. Everyone would rather be a victim and demand that society pay the price. That mentality, too, must be fixed, if society can ever be fixed.



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 05:45 PM
link   
TC: I'll give you that when poor people vote they usually vote Democrat...but I'm not ready to say that they are hitting the polls in large numbers. I just don't think that's the case. I grew up around these women and I remember my mother trying to get many of them to vote, and most of the time it didn't work. As for the community reach out programs...I've worked in a view and no one is telling people to vote democrat or republican. The most imporant thing is for them to participate in the political process.

Welfare to work--works, that's all I can say. I've seen it work in my family and around the community. It's a good program offering education, training, and job placement.



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 05:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by MidnightDStroyer

Originally posted by Dreamstone
Military spending is large because it is the military that protects the rights of people like you.

Just exactly what Rights are the military protecting?

The vast majority of the military has been stationed in *other countries* for decades & our Rights are being killed off faster than a .50 cal shoots!

Or haven't you noticed that?



here you go

It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag who allows the protesters to burn the flag."
Father Denis O'Brien, USMC



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 05:54 PM
link   
I'm glad to hear that the welfare to work program is working from your viewpoint, Saphie. Even if it means taxpayers footing the bill for an associates degree for someone, that does make them a productive citizen, and that is much cheaper.

As far as the other woes, it'll take good old fashoined conservative morals to put this country back on course. It'll take removing the government out of the everyday handout role and put the community back in the driver's seat of that bus. It'll take communities becoming just that - communities again. Social pressure and peer pressure, the very things that has been the object of liberal attack, must be worked back into the culture, so that the drug addict, the slacker and the deadbeat parent will face the disapproval of the community. At the same time, the community, the people, can prove themselves, once again, to be caring and compassionate people, who will be there in times of need. That's the only way to shut pharasees like Colonel the Hell up!!



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 06:26 PM
link   
"the problem that welfare attempts to cure...and that's poverty, joblessness, ill-education. "

We already have a solution to those problems. The public school system.

Welfare was designed to buy votes for Democrats from losers.



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 06:27 PM
link   
Krazy Ivan, that is a terrific quote, and it is so true.

TC hit upon a terrific vote, part of the reasons us republicans are conservative is because we conserve the values that made this country great in the first place. People need to work together using good ol' christian values, not accept handouts as a way of life. Jesus did indeed preach on helping the indigent, but the old maxim must be remembered, "God helps those who help themselves"



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 07:18 PM
link   
I don't think that's in the bible. Either way, it is imporant for the church to continue the work of Jesus. It isn't being done on a large scale at least not large enough to even put a dent in the problem. The government should step in where society and the church has failed. Welfare is important, and it's not going anywhere as long as it's working. And I personally believe it's working better than the church.

Researcher: I'm going to attempt to address your obviously flawed, deluded perception. It is my position, and I assume the position of most people who support welfare, that welfare was created to ease the effects of poverty. Higher education is the key to success in this country not just public education. And while you refuse to support it--welfare will continue to put women on the path to independance.

I understand your hate and mistrust of all things liberal, but this has nothing to do with partisan politics.



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 07:49 PM
link   
I never said it was in the bible, i merely said it was an oft used phrase or a MAXIM, look it up.

Where did this become about women's lib? No one is debating over whether or not women should have rights. While welfare is most often supplied to needy mothers, these needy mothers often get trapped into a vicious cycle of welfare and joblessness. If welfare was really working, like you liberals say, all poverty should have been banished by now, after all, welfare, or some form of it, has been around since the Depression.

Liberals often say that conservatives are trapped in the past, well we don't cling to a system that has obviously had little to no effect since the 50's.

Unless you want to switch to socialism, or dare I say it, communism.



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 08:10 PM
link   

The government should step in where society and the church has failed.


The "Church" being the members of Christ has NOT failed, and never will. Religion being all the denominations that have risen after the "Church" have failed. Society will ALWAYS fail. And anyone looking to the government for a resolution will continue to LOOK.

That's my thoughts

Glan



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 08:29 PM
link   
You are absolutely correct, Glan, but I don't think the intent was to say that the Church has failed.

Fact of the matter is, the community, including the churches of the community, expects the government to do most of the work. A nice chunk of tax dollars are being spent on that. Also, the community has been conditiopned not to "judge" others, not to look down upon or view harshly others' problems, even if it does effect the health of the community as a whole. In other words, were are not expected to use the peer pressure of the community to show slackards that they are expected to be productive members of society. All of the community controls, from money to peer pressure, has been taken over by the government. Therein lies the problem. It isn't compassion that keeps the system as it is, it is the ability of the government to control segments of the population, and other segments indirectly by causing divisions among the population. It can also be used to cause class warfare, middleclass against lower, lower and middle classes against the upper income.



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 09:08 PM
link   
You could NOT have hit the nail DIRECTLY on the head if you had a Ziess scope!

Recently, in my office, we had a young buck who has done VERY well for himself in my division who had a "Youth Moment" (that would be the inexperienced opposite of a Senior Moment) wherein his honor was called into question based on a situation he created.

Rather than bust out with the "Full Bird" pinned perfectly to my collar I allowed the "Fellas" to handle it via Peer Pressure...

Never made a better "Leadership Decision" in my 20+ years of leading guys around.

By EARLY this morning it was resolved, NOBODY lost their job, and the "BOYZ" ( as I affectionaltly refer to my "DOGS" [Direct Origination Group]) had worked it ALL OUT to a very satisfactory end game...

IF ONLY we could do the same damn THING in society like they used to.

I know for a FACT that in the "Neighborhood" days if a guy was a bum his wife would talk to the other wives and one of the husbands would talk to the bum and SHAME him into doing right by the family HE CREATED.

Additionally, if a guy was DOWN on his luck he KNEW his "peeers" would BE there for him to carry him over the low spot...

Now it seems to me as though it has become SO "every man for himself" that NEITHER of these things happen anymore as a rule...

Sad... PITIFUL really... We have disconnected from eachother under the BULL# Banner of Political Correctness. Nowadays you FEAR insulting someone if he's a bum and you tell him so. You fear getting sied or slandered or whatever...

There is NO "Manliness" left in this country. Wherein one man could tell another man THE TRUTH to his face without fear of anything more than an asswhipping if he was way wrong... PITIFUL...

PEACE...
m...



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 09:30 PM
link   
Thomas, and Springer

I guess I was taking the question/statement the wrong way.

I'm glad I'm not the only one that feels the same way.

I just got back from driving from ID to CA and I'm tired as hell, and guess I'm not in the most aware state of mind if you will.

Thanks for clearing it up for me.

TIME FOR BED



posted on Nov, 11 2003 @ 09:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by Researcher


Welfare was designed to buy votes for Democrats from losers.



WE HAVE A WINNER!



posted on Nov, 12 2003 @ 12:06 AM
link   
You guys are living in a dream world. The society you envision is not the reality...and feel good speeches about the good ole days aren't going to feed one child. News Flash: The good ole days never existed. Wow, I get to be the one saying wake up.

The reality is that welfare to work has cut the number of children recieving benefits in half by employing and educating the parents. Every year since 1996 the rolls have decreased by double digits. And even in these bad economic times we've seen decreases--which means access to education creates permanent results.

This is a woman's issue whether you like it are not. The majority of parents recieving welfare are women with dependant children. WWJD??? huhn-huhn? He would support welfare.

in a number $154 million--that's all we spend on federal funding for welfare/TANF. It's not our biggest problem. If you ask me it's not a problem at all. I don't mind my money going to feed needy children. Plus, $154 million is chump change for a government that is spending 4 billion dollars a month on a sandlot that happens to have a lil oil under it.



posted on Nov, 12 2003 @ 02:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by KrazyIvan
It is the soldier, not the reporter, who has given us the freedom of press. It is the soldier, not the poet, who has given us the freedom of speech. It is the soldier, not the campus organizer, who has given us the freedom to demonstrate. It is the soldier who salutes the flag, who serves beneath the flag, and whose coffin is draped by the flag who allows the protesters to burn the flag."
Father Denis O'Brien, USMC

I've spoken to military priests before...Also military lawyers & doctors; Thye've always been "military career first, primary profession-skill second". I know this because I was in the military & I made an express point of talking in-depth with these types of people. Did he write that before or *after* the passing of the Patriot Act?...With that one stroke of Bush's pen, Freedom of Speech is suppressed (all they have to do is call you a "terrorist" even if you're telling the truth), Freedom to Protest is being repressed (Or haven't you been keeping up with news about how even the peaceful protesters are treated?) & it's *always* been a crime to burn the flag. It's not really the flag burning that you smell...It's the government burning the Constitution.



Originally posted by Researcher
We already have a solution to those problems. The public school system.

Unfortunately, the school system has been a part of the problem for a long time already. The Fed Government literally has dictatorial influence (via grants, direct funding, the courses made to produce teachers, etc) over what can & cannot be taught in *public* schools...Isn't that supposed to be the job of the *public*, not the government?...Correct me if I'm wrong, but I never saw *where* in the Constiution that the federal government is supposed to have that level of control over a *public concern*.


Originally posted by Saphronia
The government should step in where society and the church has failed.

No the government should *not* step in where it has no authority...Where does the Constitution say that the government should take control of society? Promoting a welfare system that does *not* get the majority of those on it back into mainstream society (& hasn't been for 50 year) is *not* one of their Constitutional duites. Granted, it was started with the right kind of regulation, but it degraded over time to the point where I was paying taxes out of my paycheck & driving a used compact car so that I could finance the guy down the street who always drove a brand new cadillac. Granted, enough public outrage at that point *did* make a lot of positive ghanges in the system...But it was then made to be so complex that everybody was finding ways to "loophole" around its faults. It still needs to have a lot of the regulations face a complete overhaul if it's to work as originally intended. You might start by shooting any lawyer that makes his career working in the political arenas...And lobbyists too.


Everything the government does that has fallen *outside* of the duties described to them by the Constitution, they've screwed it up & screwed The People over. It's not a function of one party or another...Both of the major parties have been guilty of overstepping their duties & authority time & again...This is the source of teh "ills of society" that *must* be stopped. Anyone who stubbornly clings to one party over another is just as blind as The People who *don't* take responsibility to exercise & maintain their Rights & Freedoms.


Originally posted by Saphronia
This is a woman's issue whether you like it are not. The majority of parents recieving welfare are women with dependant children. WWJD??? huhn-huhn? He would support welfare.

Not only that, but everyone has seemed to forgotten the category of permanently disabled people who *can't* work...Has this particular thought ever crossed your minds when you decided to form your opinions on welfare issues?



posted on Nov, 12 2003 @ 05:51 AM
link   
WDGS? (What does Dod Say?)

One who does not work, does not eat.



posted on Nov, 12 2003 @ 05:16 PM
link   
I had two sisters on welfare. Both married SOBs to get out of the house we lived in. Both divorced the SOBs. Each was on welfare 6 months, tops. Which, In my hardly humble opinion, was a good use of my tax money.

That said: I have known dozens of welfare recipients. 98% lily-white, like me. 10% were the wives of construction workers, using welfare as a money laundry. Husbands were paid $20/hour, no taxes, under the table. Wife was on welfare to have a legal visible means of support.

The rest were lazy, shiftless, greedy skankasaurus rexes. Get up at 10, wanted the world handed to them on a silver platter. Couldn't get a job, but could spend all day digging up bottles at the old mining town dump. And math skills - they could divide up an ounce of speed based on who kicked in how much by sight.

Some observations about welfare mothers, and the convict trash who hung around them:

The neighborhood I lived in had one way in, one way out. Wide enough for 2 motorhomes. Working and retired people would stick to the right, wave at each other with all five fingers as we passed.

Welfare weenies would drive right down the middle, giving all the 20%, one finger, economy wave.

This neighborhood also harbored illegal aliens. An example of the difference between domestic and imported poverty:

If I put my clothes in the dryer, then fell asleep, the illegals would knock on the door. Say; "Por favor, senor. The Dryer. We need". Give you a gracias when you emptied it out.

The welfare weenies would send their foulmouthed thug children, who would say "Hey old motherfrogger, you fat frog, get your frogging clothes out of the frogging dryer, froghead".

The children of illegals would offer to wash your car, follow directions, do a fine job. Thank you when you paid them.

The offspring of welfare weenies would demand protection money, holding a can opener in their hands.

LIke I said: Drug test welfare mothers. In fact, I think I'm going to have some bumper stickers made.



posted on Nov, 12 2003 @ 06:21 PM
link   
An excellent personal account. It's interesting how many of those against welfare tend to have real world experience, I have not heard many personal accounts for welfar, given that its a theory in action that can't work in the real world






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2  3    5 >>

log in

join