Not my friend, merely someone I work with.
There are so many jobs out there that are not physically demanding, and there are laws protecting those with disabilities. Those with disabilities can get jobs and the employer has to make changes so that the individual can work.
For what its worth, I never said I was against all types of aid and those who receive them, I said that I hate to see the system abused and I believe there should be safe guards in place.
I know you don’t just get handed a check. I was asking ** KellyM ** if it would be easier for those who felt they needed aid to call and ask and receive without having to submit the proper forms.
“Many of us function almost purely on ATM/debit cards.”
“Many of us?”
Many of us are also fucking idiots.
I happen not to be one of them.
I get along quite well without a debit card, thank you very much. It’s a lot less likely that you will get fucked over if you pay with cash then by credit/debit card.
While you, living in California, may be able to use your debit card at McDonalds, do keep in mind that there is an entire country cosisting of 49 other states outside of your little candystand universe where this may not be the case.
And tell me, Donkey Fluffer, what does one do if you are not able to get a debit card no matter what bank you go apply to, as was the case with a woman I worked with last year?
What then, Mr. Fiscal Genius?:wally
Yeah, I ran into some really bad financial difficulties, that resulted in me being unable to get a bank account anywhere. I had to pay all of my bills through western union (talk about feeling like a deadbeat), money orders for my rent, ect. When I was finally able to get a bank account again, I couldn’t get a debit card.
I’m able to now, but choose not to have one. It’s just easier for me to control my spending without one. I’ve got two credit cards that I pay off fully and that’s how I budget gas, groceries, ect. I also withdrawl a certain amount of cash from the bank when my paycheck is deposited. This money lasts me until my next paycheck, period. And thus, I’m forced to adhere to a strict budget.
Just another story from someone who doesn’t have a debit card. Those things can get you into a lot of trouble if you’re not a diligent record keeper.
Ya know - I pay a lot of income taxes. A lot. I usually get a bill for about $2,000/year on top of what’s deducted from my salary.
And I know that that money goes to social programs. I know that there are people who have found themselves in dire straits because of poor planning. Or too much breeding. Or total and utter stupidity.
And you know what - I don’t begrudge these people one cent of the money that I pay to social programs. Do you know why? There but for the grace of God go I.
I was going to respond to your previous comments, but then I realized that I was exposing more of my personal financial life on a public message board.
Suffice to say you still don’t know all the details, not that they are any of your business.
Let me rephrase regarding your first point: It would have hurt my situation greatly to have a $20 per day limit imposed on me. Having the flexibility to withdraw $40 one day and $0 was something that I sometimes needed to do. The only benefit to such a draconian limit would have been to make you feel better about yourself. A bit of open-mindedness would have cost you nothing.
As to your second statement: Calling someone a crybaby is a poor way to uphold your end of the debate. It makes you look like the ignorant bully you are.
Sure, and it makes a great bumper sticker. But what you seem to be saying is “I know better than you what you need.” You do not. The reality is, most people can work out a budget on their own. If they cannot, they usually learn how pretty soon. If they want advice, they can ask you. But you have no right to legally impose such advice on them.
Let me guess – the Government? You?
What you call blowing the wad may be someone else’s way of getting a bargain in a timely manner. Or paying a due bill before late fees pile up. Or anyone of a million other things that you nor I can forsee.
Once again, the key word here is flexibility. By restricting how a set amount of money is to be spent, you restrict a person’s ability to spend that money wisely.
No, I won’t, tempting as it is to lord it over you just to say “I told you so.” If I am to give you a welfare check, my only right is to suggest you spend it wisely and trust you to do so. The rest is up to you.
True, but enforcing your advice as a matter of law is.
I wanted to repeat this for Shodan’s benefit. lezlers budgets for herself. She knows what works for her. She knows best how to control her own spending. She makes choices that work for her. I’d bet kroners to krullers that The Shodan Plan is not in her best interest.
My father in law is unable to do any job, physically demanding or not. Yes, I am aware of the americans with disabilities act. Believe me. To give you an idea, the workmans comp people spent a lot of money sending all kinds of experts around and sending him to schools to try and find something that he could do to earn a living. Every one of the experts said that he was unemployable. Nobody is going to hire a guy that might only be able to work 1 or 2 days a month, or maybe a week if he was totally doped out of his mind on pain killers. But again, you wouldnt know that from just being around him socially. I lived with him on a couple of occasions, so I know what his life is really like. I suspect your coworker is probably like that, because they generally don’t give you any kind of disability payments if you are not too messed up to work.
No. Rice and beans should be served only for meals. Cake, regardless of how it’s made, is still a luxury. Your mother should have solicited a cake from a charity if you needed one that badly, Care Bear girl.
Exactly. I’ve done absolutely nothing to deserve the good fortunes in my life. Those who are doing all this self-righteous judging need to stop. God don’t like ugly. He doesn’t hold it against us when we spend our blessings on material items. Why shouldn’t we do the same thing for our brothers and sisters who receiving blessings from us?
sigh
typos, typos EVERYWHERE!
misstee, so all the innocent people on welfare have to pay for the misdeeds of a few malcontents? You have a strange notion of social responsibility.
Those verification requirements don’t prevent fraud. People who are determined to commit fraud do so anyway despite those verification checks, which are easy enough to evade for the dedicated fraudster. What those things do is make welfare harder to get and to keep for people who really need it. This is by design. The way welfare reform got thousands of people off welfare was by kicking them off, often for technical violations of byzantine rules and regulations that are only explained to you after you’ve violated them. These are not safeguards. They are obstacles.
Setting up procedural obstacles is a great way to reduce welfare spending. But it doesn’t help people.
By the way, misstee, I would not be that bothered if you could just fill out a form and have them start depositing your benefits in your bank account. I have no objection to universal welfare, at least at a basic level. The United States is a rich enough country that nobody in it should have to starve or go cold at night.
Yea, kind of a Jonathan Swift-esque parody of the kind of assholery that makes people start saying that self-determination and personal sovreignty are somehow linked to financial status. The kind of asshole who says that people are entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness but tack on the qualifier “as long as they can afford it”. I can’t stand these self-righteous assholes. I’m firmly in line beside alice_in_wonderland. I don’t begrudge a penny of my money being spent on welfare. I’ve been there and I understand that part of the social contract in this country is that if one of us should stumble and need a hand up that it is the duty of each of the rest of the population to help them. In exchange we know that if our positions were reversed, they would be extending their hand to help us.
To take it to a physical metaphor, imagine people walking along a road. One person may be skipping and goofing around and accidentally twist their ankle and be unable to walk on their own for a bit. Assholes who want to stand there while someone lies on the ground with a twisted ankle and put conditions on the aid they’re begrudgingly offering really piss me off. It pisses me off more when it wasn’t even an event that could be attributed to carelessness or irresponsibility that caused the fall. There are plenty of hidden pitfalls on the road of life. If a person becomes ill, or disabled through an accident that is no fault of their own and they start living on welfare these jerks want to rub lemon juice in their injuries and make them jump through hoops to continue to recieve aid.
Most of it boils down to greed. They’ve got their piece of the pie, but they want to maximize it. To do that they need to cut back on the portions they share with others. Fuck that whole “being part of a civilized society means you share your resources with those who need help” hippie-crap. My belly is full and that’s all I give a damn about.
Assholes.
Enjoy,
Steven
You’re forgetting one thing. You are not the “typical” welfare recipient. These “oppressive” practices are being put into practice because of those that abuse the system.
NOT abuse meaning going to the movies once in a while, or indulging in steaks instead of mac n cheese, but those that defraud the system. Those that use it as a lifestyle rather than that of a temporary assist.
Nothing is inherently wrong with helping people who need it. The problem is what the welfare system has turned into. A shameful trap for those for whom it was intended, and a free ride for those that gleefully abuse and defraud the system.
Maybe it’s not really very fair or “nice” that the government is imposing so many restrictions on recipients and that the “good ones” get punished right along with the “bad ones,” but the system does need to be changed and they do need to start somewhere.
When I applied for public assistance, I signed off on an agreement that included that I would report any changes to my employment status promptly. Why was I asked to do that if I am not expected to actually do so?
Many of the statements I make on my taxe returns are not supported (in the return itself, at least) by any documentation other than my own statements. Most taxpayers are never asked by the IRS to prove that their returns are true and accurate. We trust taxpayers to truthfully report their income. But this is not true of public assistance recipients. They’re poor, so they can’t be trusted. Damn shifty poor people. Can’t trust em. Not like those nice rich people like Ken Lay. They’d never lie to us. :rolleyes:
The net loss to the government from tax fraud completely dwarfs that to welfare fraud. Yet we continue to let people file tax returns solely on their own word. (Unless they’re poor enough to get the EITC. Those people we audit.)
CanvasShoes, if you’re trying to claim that the “typical” welfare recipient is making no effort to get off of welfare and is trying to come up with ways to scam more money out of the government, you’re a blooming idiot. We have lots of studies of this. The typical welfare recipient is only on welfare for a handful of months and goes off because of new employment. Most welfare recipients work hard to get off it. I know. I’ve met lots of people on welfare.
It’s true that there are people who try to make a living out of being on welfare. They are the minority. This is well documented, but totally ignored by greedy rightwing screw-the-poor types. Which appears to include you, asshole.
Depends on whose money they are spending. People have the right to spend their own money as they see fit. If they are spending someone else’s money, yes, they are going to be subject to a higher level of scrutiny whether they like it or not.
You mean the self-worth they derive from being supported by strangers?
That, and a little encouragement towards budgeting.
Nor would it cost a welfare recipient to consider that, just maybe, other people who have experienced poverty and escaped it, might know something worth hearing about budgeting and money management and so forth.
There we disagree. Those who do not know how to budget are more likely to wind up on welfare. Those of us who are not are more likely to know things people on welfare either do not know or know, but don’t care to actually do it.
People with good life management skills tend, by and large, not to wind up on welfare, or not to stay there very long. Therefore, almost by definition, those off welfare will tend to know a good deal more about how to have a successful life than those on welfare.
If your life is in such a state that you cannot even support yourself, wouldn’t it make sense to get some advice from someone else who can and who does?
I have every right in the world to tell people how to spend my money. This is especially true if, by going on welfare, you have given some indication that you aren’t the most frugal money manager in the world.
So far, I have advocated not allowing welfare recipients to gamble, buy liquor or cigarettes with their welfare money, and limits on daily withdrawals. I feel a good deal more strongly about the first two than the last, and most of my arguments have been in defense of the general principle that people on welfare should feel obligated to act in such a way as to minimize the amount they consume while on welfare, and to spend the funds they receive as wisely as possible. And to suggest that they don’t always do so.
You suggest this makes me a bully and a busybody.
I can live with that.
Regards,
Shodan
Good god, Shodan, you really are an asshole.
I have a feeling you’re going to be visited by Three Ghosts some night.
CanvasShoes, do you really believe that those for whom welfare is a temporary boost are outnumbered by those who, although perfectly able bodied and minded, choose to live on welfare? Do you have any facts on what a “typical welfare recipient” is? I see some assertions about “what the welfare system has turned into” and I’m genuinely interested in what you mean by this. Do you have any links to studies, or is this anecdotal from a few "bad ones’ that you’ve known?
Enjoy,
Steven
Kelly, dear, cool off. I don’t think he meant “typical” in that way. I think he really meant “abusive”, but in the way that some people phrase it (note his use of quotes).
I agree that there is abuse. Would it be A Good Thing if such abuse were stopped? Abolutely. Then question is, how can we do that without hurting those that genuinely need it? It’s a tricky thing, and I don’t think anyone has come up with a solution that satisfies all criteria.
What people have come up with is a bunch of tough sounding rhetoric and huffing and puffing. Real life solutions take a bit more thought and a lot less noise.