It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by solarstorm
Ok guys...stroll back to a bit of history. Here is what I posted early last year. Anyone thinks this might be engineered?
It may be all "subjective" but it seems to have some merits.
Originally posted by Bhadhidar
To what end?
Even if they acquire the skills and/or the will to work, that is no guarantee that they will Get Work! unless somebody hires them!
Would you, as an employer, be likely to hire some one who was essentially coerced into applying for a job with your firm because they risked losing thier family?
Would you trust such an employee?
And if an employer objected to this kind of "Affirmative Action" policy, would the Government be acting in the best interests of the taxpaying citizens by Requiring employers to give hiring preference to welfare recipients ahead of all other applicants?
Whether the support is direct, in the form of welfare and General Assistance, or indirect, as in additional costs for police, emergency medical assisatence and prisons, the taxpayers, such as yourself, will pay for such a program.
And seriously, you would have the State remove some one's children because they couldn't meet an employment standard?
Furthermore, such action would be counter-productive to the cost-cutting purpose of your plan. Who would then pay for the support of the children so impounded?
Originally posted by apacheman
The problem that faces many on welfare is that they can't find a job that pays better than welfare: no small consideration when you have children. Losing welfare means also losing medical coverage: would YOU take a pay cut AND lose medical AND have no guarantee that the job you are taking will last more than a few weeks or months AND risk being denied when you re-apply for assistance? If you had children would you put them at risk for a minimum wage job?
Originally posted by TheColdDragon
reply to post by Alpha_Magnum
Since you exquisitely missed my point, I will not go into the fact that I think the people should be taxed less.
Next time, try not to bring your own biases into the words I type.
Originally posted by interestedalways
Originally posted by NuclearPaul
It's all going to plan.
Disorder = martial law.
Yes, I am afraid that you are right on.
And to the poster who said there are better things to spend money on than students I have to ask, did you miss the part about the blind and disabled? What about all the families with children?