Truth Hurts???

[LizBiz]

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that. And so what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don’t know any better.”

– Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolinaand candidate for S.C. governor.

Posting from phone so someone catch me a link ;)

IMO...I agree. As harsh as it sounds it makes a lot of sense. You give people free childcare they will keep having babies...pregnancy is veiwed as a positive. There are some people who need the system while others abuse it, how do u cut back on the abusers? Quit giving them free sh*t.

What do YOU think?? I shall return.

[Total_Blender]

I don't think theres a connection, because having babies is a whole fuck of a lot of work and responsibility that most people who are truly lazy and inclined to be parasites off of the system would rather not willingly take on.

I think the reason most of these lower-class families are having more kids is because of a lack of sexual education. Most of the time sexual education in the schools starts around the 9th grade, which is about the time most people drop out of high-school (a lot of times because they are already preggo).

Also, I think "welfare mothers" are more of a made-up problem based on a stereotype than they are a real cause for concern.

Also, some people make a career out of being foster parents because of all the money in the system for children. I'm not saying thats right, but if you remove this support then the state gets burdened with kids that would otherwise not have homes.

Welfare probably amounts to 2% of federal spending, anyway. Here is the graph for FY 2008:

http://www.noonewatching.com/archives/2009/06/Fy2008spendingbycategory.png

See that the budget for the Dept. of Health and Human services is 16.6%. Out of this 16.6% you have the entire budgets for the FDA, the CDC, the National Institute for Health, the office of the Surgeon General, the Office of Public Health and Science, etc etc in addition to programs most people would call "welfare".

By the time you get down to what the federal Gov't spends on programs like TANF, Food Stamps, etc its a decimal percentage of the federal budget.

As far as state spending, spending on "welfare" is at 9%, but this figure includes unemployment insurance as well as the Dept. of Labor. So again, not a whole lot of money is being spent of welfare compared to other government programs and agencies.

http://www.usgovernmentspending.com/usgs_piecol.php?title=State%20Government%20Spendin g&year=2010&sname=Georgia&units=b&label=Pensions_Health%20Care_Education_Welfare_Pro tection_Transportation&fed=5.364721_9.941704_8.261883_3.006631_2.683185_2 .606756

[bu villain]

I don't know where to begin...I guess I'll just say that poor people are not equivalent to stray cats. Liz I am sure you are not about to quit your job and have lots of babies on welfare are you? Do you think their goals are so different from yours?

The answer to most problems with the poor is education.

[BanginJimmy]

I don't think theres a connection,

You dont believe there is a connection between rewarding a behavior and the continued use of the behavior?


because having babies is a whole fuck of a lot of work and responsibility that most people who are truly lazy and inclined to be parasites off of the system would rather not willingly take on.

Its not that they are trying to get pregnant, they just arent trying to NOT get pregnant.


I think the reason most of these lower-class families are having more kids is because of a lack of sexual education.

Are you really dumb enough to think that your average 5th grader doesnt know where babies come from? Is your mommy still telling you you were delivered by a stork or some shit? Then after the first kid, they still dont figure it out?




Most of the time sexual education in the schools starts around the 9th grade, which is about the time most people drop out of high-school (a lot of times because they are already preggo).

Maybe they should require a HS education to partake in welfare then. People without even a basic education do nothing to further society anyways.


Also, I think "welfare mothers" are more of a made-up problem based on a stereotype than they are a real cause for concern.

The thing about stereotypes is that they are mostly based in truth. Welfare mothers are real and they are a problem because they tend to breed another generation of welfare mother.


Also, some people make a career out of being foster parents because of all the money in the system for children. I'm not saying thats right, but if you remove this support then the state gets burdened with kids that would otherwise not have homes.

If you need welfare then you shouldnt be fostering any kids. End of story.



As far as your graphs go, 1% of next years federal budget is over 30Bil. That money could be used far better on any number of things that involved in handouts. That 1% also doesnt consider state spending or spending that is hidden in other areas of the budget.

[Total_Blender]

Thats why I included the graph of state spending, Jimmy. I know the states spend more on social programs than the federal gov't does.

Its not that people don't know where babies come from, its that they aren't aware of the risks of sex/drugs/dropping out by the time they are able to. When I was 15 years old, I thought I'd drop out of high school and work at Shaw Industries and smoke weed err' day, just like every other teenage punkass in my hometown. The difference in my life and theirs is that I had people who cared enough about me to show me thats not the way the world works.

Its awesome that you believe in stereotypes, really.

As far as the foster parents go, I don't think you quite understand what I was getting at. I was saying that the welfare is what makes it possible for people to take on foster kids. My mom took on a foster kid for a while. We didn't do it for the money (because this particular kid was family) but without the money and the medicaid we wouldn't have been able to, and the kid would have been a ward of the state. I imagine this is true for a lot of kids in the system, welfare keeps them in family homes instead of the state operated group homes.

[LizBiz]

Its awesome that you believe in stereotypes, really. Stereotypes and race shouldn't even matter in this cause EVERYBODY (black, white, pink, yellow, green, sensual amber, man, woman, gay, straight, semi stright, confused) uses welfare. It doesn't matter "who uses it more".

[Total_Blender]

Stereotypes and race shouldn't even matter in this cause EVERYBODY (black, white, pink, yellow, green, sensual amber, man, woman, gay, straight, semi stright, confused) uses welfare. It doesn't matter "who uses it more".

I'm not saying its a negative stereotype based on race or gender, I'm just saying that theres a stereotype people of who use welfare as being "welfare mothers who have more kids just to take advantage of the system".

[LizBiz]

I'm not saying its a negative stereotype based on race or gender, I'm just saying that theres a stereotype people of who use welfare as being "welfare mothers who have more kids just to take advantage of the system".Ahhh!! I feel you!! It wasn't directed at you, I just picked that part cuz he said the word "stereotype" being lazy. :cheers:

[tony]

In the grand scheme of things, its South Carolina, is anyone really suprised?

[jhadleyh]

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that. And so what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don’t know any better.”

– Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolinaand candidate for S.C. governor.

Posting from phone so someone catch me a link ;)

IMO...I agree. As harsh as it sounds it makes a lot of sense. You give people free childcare they will keep having babies...pregnancy is veiwed as a positive. There are some people who need the system while others abuse it, how do u cut back on the abusers? Quit giving them free sh*t.

What do YOU think?? I shall return.


BOOM MOTHERFUCKING HEADSHOT LIZ!!!! REPPED

[Jaimecbr900]

I don't see what's wrong with the message? :thinking:

It may not be a very eloquent one, but the base of the message is true.

[Total_Blender]

It may not be a very eloquent one, but the base of the message is true.

Not really, but thanks for playing.

If the social support agencies just told people to "go screw" or "pound sand" or "get over it" or whatever the catchphrase du jour over at FreeRepublic happens to be that day, we'd end up with a situation like Somalia, where people resort to crime to get by.

Its hard enough as it is for educated folks to get jobs right now... people with college degrees are working at Mickey D's because those are the only jobs available. Uneducated people, people who have criminal records, people who can only work a certain schedule because of their kids... theres not much out there for them right now in the way of honest employment.

[Jaimecbr900]

Not really, but thanks for playing.

Of course it wouldn't to a bleeding Liberal like you....:rolleyes: Standing and falling by your own two feet is a foreign concept to someone like you. You and all your hand-sticking-out friends need to put on your big girl panties on and deal with it rather than feel others need to support you in your bad choices.


If the social support agencies just told people to "go screw" or "pound sand" or "get over it" or whatever the catchphrase du jour over at FreeRepublic happens to be that day, we'd end up with a situation like Somalia, where people resort to crime to get by.

No we wouldn't. We don't live in a 3rd World Country where resources to help YOURSELF aren't available AT ALL like in countries like Somalia. Civil unrest comes from a great many compound issues and not just lack of "jobs". Explain just what's wrong with putting real restrictions on public assistance programs which hold the PERSON RECEIVING ASSISTANCE accountable for that assistance?

Why should we blindly hand out checks only to see them run down to the local bar, dept store, or weave shop in their nice shiny Escalade while they leave their 6 children alone at home to fend for themselves and have the "street" teach them basic life skills because THEY are too busy spending that precious check of yours on REAL:rolleyes: necessities like the food and shelter which they likely also get from John Q. Public too????.......:rolleyes:

I speak from experience.....experience in serving (i.e. FIRST HAND WORKING, not reading bias media or TV) in Juvenile court system(s), counseling youth and teens, volunteer work, having friends and family who have been and/or still are on public assistance, having LIVED in poverty myself, and general exposure that comes with living with eyes open for almost 40 yrs. You on the other hand seem to be full of charts, stats, and regurjitation of bias media reports that conform to your Liberal only views.

Liberal....Conservative....Independent.....Republi can....Democrat....White....Blue...Green....Orange .....I don't give a flying turd. If you can't look in the mirror and blame YOURSELF first for your "misfortune", then all you are is full of excuses.


Its hard enough as it is for educated folks to get jobs right now... people with college degrees are working at Mickey D's because those are the only jobs available.

Welcome to life. :rolleyes:



Uneducated people, people who have criminal records, people who can only work a certain schedule because of their kids... theres not much out there for them right now in the way of honest employment.

Oh my bleeding heart.......:rolleyes:

I neither stopped anyone from going to school, was an accessory to their crime, nor told them or enjoyed making any of their kids. Why should I be made to support it then? It's all just excuses, period.

EVERYONE in the U.S. has the OPPORTUNITY to get an education, even basic. Matter of fact, there are LAWS that require all of us to attend some kind of school when we are children until a minimum age. People CHOOSE to stop their education when THEY CHOOSE TO. How many DRs, Lawyers, Educators, Politicians, Business owners, wealthy people, and even former criminals came from poverty to pull up themselves by the boot straps and MAKE something of themselves. Problem is that it takes hard work, which the "entitled" crowd don't feel as if they should have to do in order to achieve the status of their neighbor or idol on TV. A lesson we perpetuate and confirm everytime they get that easy check in the mail or their rent subsidized for them.

If you can't work because you have too many kids.......gee willikers Beav....STOP FUCKING AND HAVING MORE KIDS.....it's not a hard formula. 3rd graders know kids don't come from a stork. There are ads for condoms, abstinance, and parenting solutions in just about every TV channel, magazine, and billboard. So what's the excuse now? Poor people don't watch TV, read magazines, or drive around town???? Bullshit, they do just like anyone else. The excuse of "lack of sex ed" is just that, an excuse to justify getting knocked up and not wanting to own up to it. There are very strict laws on the books right now to MAKE Fathers financially own up to their responsibility. Why are these "poor" women letting men get on top of them, get them pregnant (which is partly her fault too), and then LETTING them just walk away w/o taking any responsibility????? I know why. Wanna know why? Because they KNOW John Q. Public will be their babydaddy financially, that's why.

Even a bleeding Liberal like you should know that pregnancy, in 2010, is one of the EASIEST things to AVOID. It's harder to find a job today than it is to get pregnant. So stop whining about it and do it. You wanna screw???? Then it's YOUR responsibility to protect yourself, not the public to support you when YOU don't.

[Total_Blender]

:rolleyes::blah:.

I agree with you on general principle that people should be made accountable for for abuses of the system. I think where we differ is how that should happen. The conservo-douche (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_news) crowd is seeking to see this out by cutting out the social support system altogether rather than seeking reforms that make it work more efficiently.

Instead of cutting out these programs altogether, why not push for more verification and more prosecution of fraud when it happens? I think thats what the original intent of the original poster probably was, but to compare poor people to "stray cats" is like an insult to the most basic human dignity.

As for charts, figures, etc. v/s what you "see everyday," do you ask everyone you see rolling up to the weave shop in their escalade if they are on welfare? Whats a 40 year old man doing at a weave shop anyway? :ninja:

http://i120.photobucket.com/albums/o167/FcKaLLYaLL/shanaynay.gif

As far as the people on these programs who do spend irresponsibly, I think they should work to better identify those people and put them on a mandatory budget where DFACS pays for basic necessities like housing and utilities directly to the landlord and the utilities instead of handing them a check.


LETTING them just walk away w/o taking any responsibility?

Its easier for them to get on social services than it is for them to get the fathers to pay up... not saying thats right I'm just saying thats the way it is, they take the path of least resistance. Also, when the dad is in prison or living under the radar with no name or address available theres not any money to get. A reform here would be closer co-ordination between DFACS and child support enforcement to do everything possible to get the child support before resorting to welfare. If they made it to where the system prioritized child support over welfare, men would be more careful.

[bu villain]

Jamie, I understand your frustration. You don't want to pay for anyone else's life, especially if they have made bad choices. It's not fair you are right. But, you didn't respond to Blender's point which is, removing welfare would lead to a big increase in crime. Since you say you have extensive experience working with welfare recipients, what percentage do you think would go out and get a job if it wasn't for welfare? What percentage would resort to crime?

[Justin51982]

I agree with the initial post. Of this! I am at work so I can't go into details why, but good point and good post!

[eraser4g63]

Ok, For people who don't think this statement is true you need to come ride on an ambulance with me for a day, I will prove you wrong guaranteed.

[zspeed24]

I don't mind govt assistance programs for those who NEED it. I would love to see a welfare to work program where the state will either help you find a job or put you to work doing community service things in order to ween the people off of the system. There should also be a time limit for receipt of benefits

[Jaimecbr900]

I agree with you on general principle that people should be made accountable for for abuses of the system. I think where we differ is how that should happen. The conservo-douche (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fox_news) crowd is seeking to see this out by cutting out the social support system altogether rather than seeking reforms that make it work more efficiently.

Reform??? :rolleyes: That is a political term used which means, "Let's ACT like we're gonna do something, talk about it, show-boat about it, and tell all the stupid people we're doing something about it.....and then at the end, when I'm re-elected back to my position, we'll just shove it under the rug where it was when we started or until I need your stupid uneducated vote again in 2-4yrs...":rolleyes:

Keep your "reform"....on the shelf, right next to your pretty little idea that Gov't should be everyone's savior instead of holding people accountable for their own actions. :goodjob:


Instead of cutting out these programs altogether, why not push for more verification and more prosecution of fraud when it happens?

Who said anything about cutting out anything? We totally agree that police(ing) public assistance programs is the logical answer. Problem is that all those with a hand out won't ever let that happen. Know why? Because they have others, like you, believing all the hype and lies. So now, it's not only their votes/voices/request but also YOURS too. Compounding the never ending cycle of abuse.

There are way too many people believing the lies, most of which have never stepped foot in a court room to hear excuses for bad behavior, seen someone pay for groceries with Food Stamps only to get in their shiny new car in the lot outside, nor had someone walk up to them to try and fraudulently sell you their Food Stamps to get money to buy crack. Reality is far different than what your little media outlets would have you believe. Again, this is where first hand experience trumps nice little Gov't school books.


I think thats what the original intent of the original poster probably was, but to compare poor people to "stray cats" is like an insult to the most basic human dignity.

Some of "these" people your heart bleeds for are actually worse than stray cats. Atleast stray cats don't know better. Some of these people know exactly what they are doing.


As for charts, figures, etc. v/s what you "see everyday," do you ask everyone you see rolling up to the weave shop in their escalade if they are on welfare? Whats a 40 year old man doing at a weave shop anyway? :ninja:

No smarty pants, but I have dealt with and been in many people's homes where they have "public assistance" in one shape or another (from Welfare to SSI to disability to Section 8), yet they have a shiny new car in the driveway with no job and nice weave in their hair. Yep, I don't have to go into a weave shop to see with my eyes who has one.

Flip that coin......have you personally gone and questioned all those people who come up with your nice little neat charts???? Yet you believe them, right? :goodjob:




As far as the people on these programs who do spend irresponsibly, I think they should work to better identify those people and put them on a mandatory budget where DFACS pays for basic necessities like housing and utilities directly to the landlord and the utilities instead of handing them a check.

Again, your inexperience shows.

They do have this. It's called Section 8. :goodjob:



Its easier for them to get on social services than it is for them to get the fathers to pay up... not saying thats right I'm just saying thats the way it is, they take the path of least resistance.

So you're defending LAZY people......got it. :goodjob: Then give them YOUR whole damn paycheck if you think they're so worthy. :goodjob:



Also, when the dad is in prison or living under the radar with no name or address available theres not any money to get

They knew how to find each other to screw, right? They can find them again if they WANT to. Funny how sooooo many millions of other men pay their child support every month, pissed off as hell at times, and they don't live anywhere near their children. How's that happen?



A reform here would be closer co-ordination between DFACS and child support enforcement to do everything possible to get the child support before resorting to welfare. If they made it to where the system prioritized child support over welfare, men would be more careful.

Again with your "reform". :rolleyes:

You have to have someone INITIATE child support for the courts to be involved. They don't have gov't cars driving around with bull horns asking people if they need help collecting child support. When the woman, as you clearly stated above, sits on her ass and it's EASIER for her to file for public assistance than it is to do the RIGHT THING......welllllllll, now we've come nice and tidy full circle back to the original point......:goodjob:

The bottomline is that just like success breeds success, failure does the same. If you want different results, you have to DO something DIFFERENT. If we keep making it easier for people to get hand outs than do the right thing......guess just what they'll do. It's not rocket science.

[Total_Blender]

You have to have someone INITIATE child support for the courts to be involved. They don't have gov't cars driving around with bull horns asking people if they need help collecting child support. When the woman, as you clearly stated above, sits on her ass and it's EASIER for her to file for public assistance than it is to do the RIGHT THING......welllllllll, now we've come nice and tidy full circle back to the original point......:goodjob:
.

I think we agree on more than we disagree on here. Its true that the mothers have to initiate child support and most don't because its easier to get welfare... thats what I said in my post earlier. What I'm saying is why not change that and make it a pre-requisite that you have to go through the process of applying for child support before you can apply for welfare, and then only give welfare to those whos needs can't be met by child support?

Also, the reason these people have so many nice things while they are on welfare probably has as much or more to do with credit fraud than welfare fraud. You might see a nice furniture, an escalade with 24's, etc one day and the repo man knocking on the door the next.



I don't mind govt assistance programs for those who NEED it. I would love to see a welfare to work program where the state will either help you find a job or put you to work doing community service things in order to ween the people off of the system.

I've said this many times in these discussions, but nobody ever pays attention to the real content of my posts because I'm a communist lefty. :crazy:

[BanginJimmy]

I have brought up my welfare plan before but we all know it wont pass. Both parties are too afraid it will cost them votes to do the right things.

http://www.importatlanta.com/forums/showpost.php?p=38054838&postcount=6

[preferredduck]

“My grandmother was not a highly educated woman, but she told me as a small child to quit feeding stray animals. You know why? Because they breed! You’re facilitating the problem if you give an animal or a person ample food supply. They will reproduce, especially ones that don’t think too much further than that. And so what you’ve got to do is you’ve got to curtail that type of behavior. They don’t know any better.”

– Andre Bauer, lieutenant governor of South Carolinaand candidate for S.C. governor.

Posting from phone so someone catch me a link ;)

IMO...I agree. As harsh as it sounds it makes a lot of sense. You give people free childcare they will keep having babies...pregnancy is veiwed as a positive. There are some people who need the system while others abuse it, how do u cut back on the abusers? Quit giving them free sh*t.

What do YOU think?? I shall return.

agreed, i have a messed up neck and back and cannot get insurance, medicaid, no help at all and my meds are $140/month just for them, not including $125 dr visit all from a car wreck, yet when i applied all these young girls got every benefit they could and were rushed through!!! i hate admitting i need help but at this time i do. when i go to a job interview and lie then they find out abt my injuries, no job, and if i'm upfront with them i get nowhere. i actually lost my job from my injuries and couldn't even get unemployment. now an ER dr says i should apply for SSI but i don't wanna do that i just need some help to get on my feet again not bleed the system dry like some folks where i used to work. selling food stamps, had medicaid so they didn't have to pay the $300/mo insurance, it's a friggin mess.

i worked for a personal finance company back in 06 and a dude came in 19yrs old on SSI because his anti-depressants made it where he couldn't work. i pulled out my Med bottles, laughed in his face and said leave and no loan because my meds make me drowsy because they are for pain. and abt the 3rd of each month the salon next door was poppin with new weaves and shiny cars outside. thank god mine is paid for and 10 years old but something has to give. out of the 1000 loans we had that were SSI related only about 50 were legit, the others were working the system. new car, decent house, but couldn't pay a loan payment of $50/mo back.