if you don't understand one of the main concepts that is driving the many people calling for the resurgence of a Constitutional government and as awakened citizenry,(even OWS is, they just don't know it)then read this article...
http://patriotupdate.com/articles/the-e … illes-heel
I just feel for the people that would like to work and either get sick, injured or just can't find a job. I know you disagree with this. I don't like the people that make welfare a resting place though. To prevent this you just limit the amount of time that they can collect. Some states already do this.
You must be a very blessed person that you haven't had enough hardship to understand that some people do need help.
I believe MOST states have limits AND lifetime limits.
The exception is probably food stamps and perhaps subsidized housing. Tough to throw somebody out if they are living on just SS or less.
There are time limits,the problem is no one enforces them
More assertions that are false.
There are EXCEPTIONS. There is abuse. It is ridiculous to say that no one enforces them.
However, if you believe that is true, then the law must need tightening. How does reducing the welfare budget tighten it?
Where are you on this subject. You even state yourself about the 5 year limit except for disable people, now you deny it? I have said several times no one is enforcing that time limit. Why else do you think people are upset over multi generational people on welfare? We talked about that remember the example I gave you about my daughters friends getting welfare and SS for life because they have ADD? Can someone out there explain it to me, I must be missing something.
"How does reducing the welfare budget tighten it"? PC, this is where you are not understanding where people are coming from. If you fix the problems of welfare that will reduce the budget without taking one penny or changing one program. Or you can look at it this way, fix the problems and free up the money, do not cut the budget and help more people if they need it, if not give more on the program. Since you cannot get it and I seem to frustrate you, maybe someone else here can
I feel the article is somewhat shortsighted and biased. Entitlement is something learned or implied. It works on both sides of the extremes. Look at huge corporations and businesses. It's the other side of welfare. Either way the money comes from taxpayers.
There is a limited role in government in response to the needs of its citizens, but it should be fair. There is always going to be a segment of the population that lives in generational poverty.
Until the housing crisis gets under control, jobs are still hard for some to find.
Entitlement is also taught by parents who give their children everything.
I get it!! The wealthy are entitled to a tax cut the middle class is not entitled to a tax cut.
You do realize the majority of outrage is about how bankers and stock traders were able to more or less demolish thousands of people's 401ks and house value, then foreclose those same houses they helped devalue, after receiving billions from taxpayers?
If anyone is following an entitlement mentality it is the large corporations that got away with this nonsense, got bailed out and continue to use underhanded tricks to screw everyone else over.
Not to mention large companies like say, Exxon Mobil manage to find loopholes and offshore financial methods to avoid paying taxes on their billions of income. Exxon Mobil pays 0$ in taxes to the american government. I pay more in taxes than Exxon... that's the outrage.
People need to stop assuming its because a bunch of kids spent their lunch money on iPods then got all pissy when they had none left. That is not the issue at hand.
Being a citizen of a first world nation does come with some entitlements.
...this way of looking at things NEVER implies that those that are truly in need won't be able to get what they need...the system just needs to run better and allow those that can help themselves to do so.
Helping others needs to be done by private enterprises, non-profits and churches instead of making it governments issue (that tends to overreach and be too much red-tape and makes the people feel like a number and worthless).
Hey, I was a teen single mom and on welfare for a decade...don't think I don't know what it is all about...I know how one can get "lost" in the system when it isn't done right. How do you think I understand what the problems are we are seeing in too many people that are stuck, some all too happily, in the system.
We need to get to a Constitutionally aligned government, (and it will be a transitioning length of time)and a true free market running economic system.
Now, things are not done well, too much of the time and people are suffering from the very system itself.
It used to be that there were more privately run aid societies, charities, church-run organizations but those went away when the government bloated up with welfare. I often wonder if the sense of community diminished because government took over and the link between the have and have not got disconnected. I gotta look that up.
There are no doubt just as many now. Government got into welfare BECAUSE THOSE PRIVATE INITIATIVES AREN'T ENOUGH.
Many are also discriminatory - yet another reason that we need impartial government programs.
Organizations are a reflection of their time. I would think that as the country has progressed, the organizations would have had to change as well to be accessible to all people. As for whether those private initiatives not being enough, I would have to reserve judgment until I read up about it.
No, the reason government got involved was so that the politicians could get more votes.
If you go through the policies of the New Deal, you'll see a "Remarkable" tendency that the states that just barely didn't vote for FDR got the most money, the states that just barely did vote for FDR got the next most, and the states that didn't vote for him by a small margin got quite a bit of money, yet the states that overwhelmingly voted for FDR got next to nothing. IF you look at it by "which states *cough* NEEDED *cough* the money the most, you find no correlation.
Politicians aren't holy angels, Pcunix. There's a reason why people don't trust them.
I am making myself a New Years Resolution: Don't respond to Evan.
Both you and Evan are correct.
This is exactly why there is a need for the gov to intervene.
Intervention comes with a price. We had years to come up with a solution to helping those who need help, we had this one saying it needs to be done this way and that one saying do it another way, we had those in charge of helping saying ok we will help you but not him. No definite set rules. So big brother steps in, lays down the guidelines, and guess what, from there, it still aint fixed.
In order to help some, lets say no income homeless person, to be fair, the offer has to extend to all no income persons. Where is the problem, it lies with the person who will not work but would rather ride the roads instead of getting a job to keep from losing his seat at the welfare office. Paid food, utilities, home and cash to boot. The more kids the more money.
We can not be upset with the people for this, they are just doing what the system has set up to do.
NOW, you better believe its all about the vote. Just go sign up for these entitlements. One of the first piece of paperwork you will fill out is a voter registration application.
Do you really think they would vote for anyone who is in favor of decreasing the budget for any programs.?
Instead of arguing about the problem, discuss ways to fix it.
"Helping others needs to be done by private enterprises, non-profits and churches instead of making it governments issue (that tends to overreach and be too much red-tape and makes the people feel like a number and worthless)."
The problem with that is that private enterprises can pick and choose who gets help and who gets nothing, and the "wrong sort" will be left out in the cold.
"How do you think I understand what the problems are we are seeing in too many people that are stuck, some all too happily, in the system."
Yeah? How about some numbers? Welfare fraud is a problem, but not nearly as big a problem as many on the right would have us believe.
BTW, that decade you were on welfare? You would be kicked off after 5 years under a new Michigan law. Do you support the 5 year limit?
"It used to be that there were more privately run aid societies, charities, church-run organizations but those went away when the government bloated up with welfare."
No they didn't. There are still many non-governmental food banks, shelters, etc in operation. They're there if you look.
"We need to get to a Constitutionally aligned government, (and it will be a transitioning length of time)and a true free market running economic system."
No we don't. What we really need are strong regulations against corporate money in campaign finance, limits to what an individual can contribute, and abolition of legalized money laundering (via 501 (c) 4 organizations), and then maybe the government would start working for the people (the actual people, not the fake ones who can only 'speak' via campaign contributions and other spending).
Well of course there are still some, but there would have been more.
If we are talking Federal welfare dollars, you are required to work after two years and have a lifetime limit of five. That's been true since 1997. The exceptions are children and the disabled, of course. Look up "Personal Responsibility, Work Opportunity, and Medicaid Restructuring Act of 1996".
After that, I guess you have to go begging at the church. Depending on the church, you had better not be gay or an atheist or perhaps even a heterosexual Catholic.. because some of these wonderful private programs don't like "those kind".
Yes, there are some people in this country who do have an inflated sense of entitlement. Our constitution does grant us certain liberties. Also we have social programs which protect us within certain limits. However, there are some Americans who consistently believe in being rescued and in a free ride. Well, life is not like that. If we want something, we should earn it pure and simple.
Like the free-ride banks and many corporations which don't pay taxes.
2008, biggest transfer of wealth to the free loading, entitlement minded elitist financial institutions.
Oh, and I went ahead and read the linked article. What a load of carp. Really. This guy is more full of poop than a constipated elephant.
And who is entitling the Tea Party and the right wing to label the needy as "feeling entitled"? What entitles such a minority of our society to such hypocrisy and foolishness.
I'm not from the US but here in Australia at least, I don't think many poor people do have a sense of entitlement. Rather they are made to feel worthless and parasitic. What about wealthy and middle-class welfare? These groups expect, no demand,to have their private health and education subsidised by government yet are apt to whinge and moan about welfare. These are the people who really feel the sense of entitlement.
The so called 'trickle down' effect from tax cuts for the wealthy and minimal government spending and regulation is really a myth. I think/hope we might just be waking up to that...
Can you imagine the despair a man with a family to care for, who has been actively looking for work, must feel when told his financial assistance time is up? There are no frigging jobs to be had out there. OK, there are some jobs in Texas, or North Dakota, but how does he get there? They re-possessed his car after he lost his last job, and even if he had a car he couldn't afford the gas to get there. This situation will happen more and more with time limits on financial assistance. This could turn an honest man into a bank robber so he could care for his family.
A great deal of time is spent discussing the good and the bad about the various assistance programs. Much hatred and name calling results from these discussions. The sad thing is, welfare is not the problem we should be discussing. The need for welfare and extensions of welfare programs is only a symptom of the real problem.
There are no frigging jobs out there. If we put as much effort into job creation plans as we do arguing about welfare, we wouldn't need nearly as much welfare and this problem would become smaller. It will never completely go away as some will always need help, and we owe it to them.
Putting time limits on welfare before we fix the jobs problem is insane in my opinion.
I agree, but that was done in 1996.
That despair is exactly what I was talking about in my hub where AV an TMWNP and you and I got into a shouting match.
There is no "entitlement" for the able bodied person caught out of work and under 62 (limited social security available at 62). When unemployment runs out, they are left with just about nothing - food pantries, maybe food stamps.
In the '90s I lost 2 jobs to NAFTA. By 2000 I had lost a 3rd. Unemployment helped but ran out before I could find a different job. Now in just 6 yeard I went from a good job(14.25 per hour) to disability. I just lost that because I could not afford to see a doctor on my disability income. Now I am still looking for a job but there are none to be had at this time. WHY?? because gov't is nothing but B.S. spouting liars. They DON'T care about anything except what they get.
Well it is a tough market for a 50 plus person. The younger people today have taken jobs at such a cut in pay it makes it hard for someone our age to get a job at the pay grade we need. So we need to settle for a lower pay to get back inthe market. If you are willing, could you tell me what you did or what kind of job you had?
Machine operations, manufacturing jobs mostly.
I do not know much about Wisconson, but here is a link to 584 machine jobs in the state. If I knew the area better I would narrow it down, Sorry. I hope and wish you well in you search.
http://www.indeed.com/q-Machine-Operato … -jobs.html
Read my latest hub. I addressed this problem in that hub. We are treating the symptoms, but not fixing the problem.
Oh, never mind. Rhetorical shouting.
Forget it - keep reading in things and keep twisting in the wind. Say it's really fraud that bothers you and you want to help the needy, but vote for GOP candidates who want to cut budgets.
Keep up the typical completely illogical conservative double talk. We aren't really cutting, we are trimming. No, not trimming, we are making adjustments. We want to help, but not with our precious money or the even more precious money of the wealthy.
It's all conservative b,s. and I am really sick of it.
I believe that you really do want to help. You just are blinded by GOP rhetoric and can't see how utterly illogical your positions are.
I like your passion but this is deteriorating. You continue to go down a road that am not on. You keep up the rhetoric about me, I vote GOP, I am a righty, yelled at you, I twist thing. I am sorry you feel that way but I have not changed my position onse, not changed one word in anything i have written, my stance is the same. I dare you to show the readers one time I said anything like that about you. I cannot understand why you do not understand so we will have to agree to disagree.
Yes, welfare is a symptom of a broken system.
No. There are jobs. They may not be the ones everyone wants but there are jobs. There are 2 dairy farms within a couple of miles from me, they always need help. No one wants the job. Maky ds hires people all the time supermarkets hire as well. People that rent property hire people to clean up after a renter leaves, the problem is simple, many people do not want to work.
It is much easier for them to ride around all day, jot down a few names of where they looked for work and keep on riding, while guess who pays the gas bill.
Sounds cruel. Yes. True? Yes.
How to solve problem? Start with drug testing. Simple. Milliions saved.
People that are truly down on their luck, deserve help. Most of who can't get them.
This is yet another subject that is so skewed it's not even funny. There's so much individual interpretation, distortion and misinformation going around about the subject that you would be lucky if 1 out of every 2 people talking about the subject completely understood it.
Before you talk about entitlements? It might be helpful to address each supposed entitlement on a one-to-one basis.
Making broad-based statements about entitlements only creates more distortion and misinformation, and ends up doing nothing, but getting people into arguments.
I just tried very hard to have an intelligent conversation about welfare at a Conservatives hub. I thought we were getting somewhere. We both agree that there are needy who need help and we both agree that fraud exists and is absolutely unacceptable.
We also agree that fraud steals from taxpayers and the truly needy. We agree that welfare fraud is even worse than other financial fraud because it affects perception of welfare recipients as well. We agree that vendor fraud shouldn't be a reason to punish recipients.
But after all that, he wants to cut the welfare budgets.
How does cutting help the needy? How does it combat fraud? If anything, it might increase fraud - on the vendor side and on the recipient side.
This is why I get frustrated and angry with the Right. They sound logical at first, but then they turn on a dime and say something that makes absolutely no sense at all.
Tell me you want to make the penalties for fraud higher. I'm with you. Tell me you want to tighten up some laws to make fraud harder. I'm with you.
But when they tell me they just want to cut, I want to scream and shake them and yell in their faces.
it's Xmas. I won't yell. But I am deeply upset.
Well here we go again. Everyone is free to view the article I wrote about welfare where me and Pcunix were talking. I think it was a good discussion. While PC claims he is frustrated as he said in his last comment in my article as well, I think his frustration is just semantics. He insists I am on the right, I know some here in this forum I have chatted with in the past know me as an independent.
We talked about fraud but not broken down into vendor or recipeint fraud, but no matter it needs to be dealt with. But included are those who do not deserve to be on welfare. So why do you not want to make that cut? As I have said I can agree with you if the right says cut for the sake of cutting, and I also stated if every penny currently spent in welfare was needed then leave the budget alone and not cut it. But we all know that is not the fact. So I believe the program needs to be examined closely and remove what it is not needed( IE people not eligible, those stealing, and more) without eliminating programs and without cutting benefits one penny. Well you all can read it and see if it makes sense to you
So now you say "without cutting one penny"
I wish you would make up your mind.
If you want to chase fraud, then just say you want to chase fraud and that you want budgets INCREASED so we can do that,
Stop talking out of both sides of your mouth. It drives me crazy.
No one is talking out both sides of their mouth. I challenge you for $100 to show me the exact place where I said I want budgets to increase to fight fraud. The readers here can read my post above and see I did not say that.
I said you SHOULD want that if you had any common sense.
We KNOW that Republicans want to cut welfare funding - they say so constantly. We KNOW that Republicans think we can't raise taxes because that comes out of their mouths every other sentence.
How do those things help the needy you say you want to help?
Here is Romney
"The threat to our culture comes from within. The 1960’s welfare programs created a culture of poverty. Some think we won that battle when we reformed welfare, but the liberals haven’t given up. At every turn, they try to substitute government largesse for individual responsibility. Dependency is death to initiative, risk-taking and opportunity. Dependency is a culture-killing drug. We have got to fight it like the poison it is."
Doesn't sound like what you SAY you believe.
"When free welfare is provided, people choose not to work. "
Not you again.
"Alongside our famous individualism, there's another ingredient in the American saga. A believe that we are connected as one people. If there's a child on the south side of Chicago who can't read, that matters to me, even if it's not my child. If there's a senior citizen somewhere who can't pay for her prescription and has to choose between medicine and the rent, that makes my life poorer, even if it's not my grandmother. If there's an Arab-American family being rounded up without benefit of an attorney or due process, that threatens my civil liberties. It's that fundamental belief--I am my brother's keeper. I am my sister's keeper--that makes this country work."
Oh, that's so AWFUL, isn't it?
" If you want to chase fraud, then just say you want to chase fraud and that you want budgets INCREASED so we can do that,
Stop talking out of both sides of your mouth. It drives me crazy."
That is what you said. Not should
How does these things help the needy? Oh I do not know, perhaps because it frees up money to help more people or maybe to give more help for those in need. I do not know but that sounds good to me.
Now I trult do not like Romney, but he is right, The 60s welfare did creat a cultrure. Professors, historians and documentaries have wriiten or filmed about it, So I am not sure they are all wrong no matter what you and I think.
"When free welfare is provided, people choose not to work. "
Obviously that is not a completely true statement. While there are those who choose not to work, there are those who are either looking for a job or are working but need help getting by. I believe I have said that about a dozen time, but you seem to think otherwise.
As for your last paragraph, we all want to help the needy for the 1 millionth time. but some of it is not on thios subject of welfare and I will address that where it is appropriate.
So I hope I once more answered your questions
No, you have just continued the double talk.
I give up. No point in talking about this any longer.
You all seem to forget that welfare isn't some socialist/communist plot. It is very much the product of the capitalist society that we all live in. It is a recognition that many men (and women) would steal before they saw their children starve. That many would fight on the streets for the right to work and keep their families.
Slightly more subtly it is wage control, by providing a benchmark for low wages. You know, like well we pay a whole X dollars an hour, that's worth much more than welfare isn't it?
One thing it isn't, is generous or socialist, or communist.
It sure is not. What is someone in their late 50's supposed to do?
Yes, sometimes there are low paying jobs available. Not many - I haven't seen a help wanted sign anywhere in years. Oh, I take that back - I did see one the other day. The factory was out of business, I guess they forgot about the sign.
What I do see frequently is scared looking people asking for or dropping off applications at fast food joints. I guess McDonalds and BurgerKing can have their pick right now, but they can't pick them all, can they?
People naturally don't want to move to the bottom. If you had a good job, you hope that somehow you will find another or at least something close. If you took that fast food job, how could you keep looking? So they don't. Eventually some give up, and then they enter the poverty trap - many of these jobs pay so little and demand so much that it is all downhill from there.
But millionaires still cry '"socialism!". I go absolutely nuts when I hear this nonsense like above "plenty of jobs available", 'lazy people" all the rest of the heartless refrain.
Another victory for the right wing. They've convinced everybody that welfare is a socialist plot!
I don't know much about the situation in the US but here in the UK where just about everybody, socialists included, will tell you that the socialists were responsible for unemployment pay without knowing that the socialists opposed it on the grounds that it would take the fight out of the working man.
I do not want to be picky, but I would sooner like to see welfare help the one working at McDonalds making an effort but comes up short, than the one who wants the welfare to take care of them and not want to work ever. Not working is a choice, I agree in this market there are not alot of jobs as there usually are, but there are jobs. Do you not agree?
For me, welfare is also a recognition that at some point in our lives we may fall on hard times and need assistance. My sister was diagnosed with Allports syndrome in her mid thirties and later became a renal dialysis patient. She couldn't work, pay her mortgage or survive without assistance from the state and the National Health Service. I would gladly pay contributions to those in need, either through unemployment or ill health and do not in anyway see claimants as scroungers.
The "fraud" often discussed by the right wing press is often blown up and exaggerated. People don't want to be unemployed or ill and living on handouts. Sometimes there is no other option. If we're going to discuss fraud, let's talk about JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs et.al.
"the entitlement mentality of some Americans"
As an American I am appalled at the entitlement mentality of other Nations. I understand that we need to take care of our own!
Why we provide aid to Nations that do not even like us I will never understand.
Never mind providing aid to Nations which provide us credit. "Let us borrow money so we can give it back to you in assistance"
Aid to China -- $275 million worth over 10 years -- has been approved while control of both Congress and the White House has shifted between the parties.
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/washi … _to_china/
I give up. I promised myself that I would bend over backwards to exhibit tolerance and understanding but the utter absurdity of Right Wing positions just drives me insane.
It's like nailing jello to a wall. I give up.
Teach a man to fish, and he'll think education is a privilege, not a right.
Teach a man to fish and he'll spend all his money on fishing tackle and beer leaving his wife and children to fend for themselves
Wife and children will land in the poor house. Wife will have another 12 children and a longitudle study will document and televise (on Fox) their lifelong welfare dependency and used as supporting evidence for the documentary "Why we should have let them starve"
He was so fortunate to learn how to feed himself. Are you two being mischievous? Never
by GA Anderson2 years ago
this is the discussion I have wanted for a long time. Greetings, Old Poolman and when I am done I hope to get the frog out of the prince's throat. _______________________________________________--Excerpt from the link...
by Petra Vlah5 years ago
Through our working years we all paid for Social Security and Medicare, so why are they considered entitlements when in fact we contributed our own money into the system?
by rhamson7 years ago
The latest vote to pass health care reform in congress has failed. Do we need to drop the issue or negotiate a new one?
by Valerie Washington4 years ago
Do you agree with this crap? Mitt Romney, in a leaked video stated some interesting opinions of his perspective of certain Americans. Believing his was speaking privately, he stated that the 47% of Americans who support...
by Josak4 years ago
In recent time there has been a lot of rhetoric coming from the right about the abuse of unemployment benefits and of the entitled, lazy poor, a view totally inconsistent with the facts.87% of households below the...
by My Esoteric3 years ago
The Preamble to the Constitution of the United States contains several action verbs which give it life, vigor, and meaning. It reads "We the People of the United States, in Order to 'form' a more perfect...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.