[QUOTE=jali]
I’ve never used any type of public assistance, and if I’d waited until I could “afford” a baby - I’d be childless.
[/QUOTE]
but you did “afford” your baby - maybe you didn’t buy them baby einstein tapes or organic Gerber baby food, but you made it without the assistance of the taxpayers.
[QUOTE=Annie-Xmas]
My present job involves interacting with the welfare office, and I’ve been informed that the state wants to get people on welfare who shouldn’t be on welfare and will get off welfare quickly. It makes their records look better.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t know where in New Jersey you are, but I applied in Hudson County.
On my first visit to the Hudson County welfare office, they refused to even let me apply.
On my second visit, I was able to apply but I was told that there was “no such thing” as emergency assistance. I was told it would take “about 3 months” for my application to be processed. I had to file a complaint with the FDA to get them to move their ass.
Over and over again throughout my welfare stint, I was flat-out lied to, misinformed, not told about benefits that I qualified for, and generally jerked around.
I don’t doubt that someone said that to you, but from my personal experience it would not be true.
I would have been (and was actually) a prime example of someone who was obviously not going to stay on welfare for any great length of time. I had a solid 20+ year work history, an education, marketable skills, and it was painfully obvious that I wasn’t taking my fall from middle class status very well.
The only difference between myself and the person in your statement is in what the definition of “shouldn’t be on welfare” is. “Shouldn’t be” as in doesn’t qualify or “shouldn’t be” as in not someone you would expect to find on welfare? I certainly qualified financially, but in general I am not someone you would expect to find on welfare.
From the amount of paperwork and documentation I had to supply, I would think that it would be very hard to fudge the financial aspect. I don’t doubt that someone somewhere has managed to do this, but from my personal experience this would not be very easy to do.
If they had swiftly provided me with everything I was truly qualified for, I probably would have been on welfare for an even shorter time than I was. For instance, that unlimited ride bus pass that they neglected to mention would have got me to a lot more interviews than my having to depend on irregular proceeds from the sale of miscellaneous items I owned for transportation money.
[QUOTE=Annie-Xmas]
Folks,we have a winner. Just from having to deal with these people once or twice a month, I believe nobody would want them around on a day-to-day basis, and they are not the type of people who would work with other people.
[/QUOTE]
If those two things were the criteria for being labeled “chronically unemployable”, I suspect that about 20% of the coworkers of every person who read this thread would qualify, lol. New Jersey has an actual guidebook to determine if someone is “chronically unemployable”, and it’s pretty stringent.
If you can push a broom, you are employable.
[QUOTE=fessie]
It appears to be exactly the opposite in human beings:
[/QUOTE]
Oh, poo 
But one thing my parents did do for me by waiting to have kids: breed a generation of kids who could get out of college with no student loan debt. I hope to do the same for my so-far hypothetical future children.
[QUOTE=jali]
People who can afford children:
(just some examples, folks)
Brittney Spears
Madonna
Angelina Jolie
Rosie O’Donnal
Michael Jackson
I’m 49 and have 4 children - I’ve never used any type of public assistance, and if I’d waited until I could “afford” a baby - I’d be childless. Does the OP feel that the people on the list above are better qualified as parents than those with limited incomes?
[/QUOTE]
I totally misread this and had to go back. I thought you were saying you had kids named Britney Spears, Madonna, etc., and I was thinking “Holy Christos, woman, how much of a pop culture junkie are you?” :smack:
Last year there were articles about congressmen living in their offices to shave expenses. If they had to have 2 homes and put kids in college they were in trouble. One I remember had 3 kids in college and he said he could not keep up. There are many levels of perceived poverty.
[QUOTE=tashabot]
Incidentally, my cousin and his girlfriend just had a baby a few days ago and they get everything paid for. It pisses me off to no end - They get WIC, a free apartment, and food stamps for being irresponsible with their birth control, and I, being responsible, can’t even get emergency food stamps when I fall on hard times briefly.
~Tasha
[/QUOTE]
I got my MS from a US university in August of '97, was unemployed until December of the same year. So for that year I made less than 10K - barely, but less. Note that for the previous three years I’d been living on 12K a year, so it wasn’t that much of a difference. I had 1K invested and spent about 1K going home once a year (definitely a “dispensable expense”, sorry family tuff luck). Next year I file my taxes and I’m told I’m eligible for food stamps by the volunteer who’s helping me at the IRS building. I explain that it would have been nice to have access to those when I actually was unemployed but that at this point it would absolutely feel like stealing, so I’m not applying, thanks.
A few weeks later I get a call from IRS. They want to verify some information. Oh, ok. They ask me a few questions, say “thank you”, hang up.
Within a month of filing taxes I get a check for some sort of aid (quite ridiculous, something like $11, I seriously thought about framing it) and instructions on how to apply for food stamps.
Wouldn’t it be important to make aid available to people who need it when they need it?