I was looking more for what services you believe need to be given and when do those services end.
I posted later about some of the services I think should be offered for the parents:
1. Affordable, accessible contraceptive medications, devices, & procedures for both women & men.
2. Comprehensive sex education for both girls & boys.
3. Programs that teach boys & girls refusal skills, communication skills, and how to have good self esteem.
4. Programs that teach parenting skills, to both women & men.
5. Policies that support parents in the workforce, such as requirements for maternity & paternity leave, requirements that women must have a safe, clean place to breastfeed or pump at work, etc.
6. Affordable, accessible, quality childcare for everyone.
As for Medicaid, food stamps, etc., I think we need to remember that those services are primarily for the children and I think children should have whatever services they need for as long as they need them.
What do you do with a welfare parent that is abusing the system though? That is already on welfare and has more children? That uses foodstamps to pay for twinkies and then the cash in their pocket to buy the cigarettes and booze? Not that this is anyway the majority, but it does happen. So, what do you do? DO you turn a blind eye and say, well the $ is for the kids we can't hold them accountable?
If you are accepting $ from the government I believe specific, stringent rules must be followed or else you lose your benefits.
Does the government tell you how to spend your stimulus check?
Does the government tell you how to spend your stimulus check?
You do realize that when the government "gave me $"...they were giving me back $ I PAID them in taxes...right? Surely you get that.
how do you know it was your money exactly they gave back, and it was money that you had given them, and a stimulus is different then a tax refund right? It was probably money that had been allocated for something else anyway so really it wasn't your money. Or maybe they gave me some of your money as well, so should they have told me how to spend your money.
In that case why don't you drive down to some poor persons house and tell them how to spend your money, why should the government do it? Cut out the middle man.
In that case why don't you drive down to some poor persons house and tell them how to spend your money,
Why start now? They have been doing it for years.
This country has become a welfare equal rights state. It punishes those that pay their taxes and succeed in life. Granted there are people who need assistance and I think there is a place for government to help. However the system is in dire need of an overhaul. People don't recite these stories of abuse out of some story hour myth. They view these abuses every day. It needs to stop.
I was personally dealt a losing card with this exact topic. I bought a home in a neighborhood that was supposed to be higher class. I saved and I worked to be able to do so. Yet somehow five houses on my street were Section 8. It is not stereotypical when people claim that the homes become run down and dilapidated. I have pictures and documents as proof. Equal housing is a sham, since when did government assistance go from putting a solid roof over someone's head to allowing them to live in housing that they can not obviously maintain even when someone else is footing the bill? Yet here they are letting the properties fall apart therefore causing the surrounding properties to decrease in value. The slumlord decides he doesn't want to fork out the money to fix the properties and they go into foreclosure. Now if I want to sell my house I have to compete against foreclosure houses $100k less in price than my own even though those places needed over $100k in repairs. After viewing the inside of one of these homes I cannot believe PEOPLE lived there instead of ANIMALS. But of course they don't care because they have no ownership.
Bottom line should be that welfare is temporary, is NOT a right, and should be more carefully policed. Recipients should be subject to drug tests and if they are found to be using drugs their benefits should stop. If they are able-bodied they should be doing something to contribute to the community, some type of service, not just sitting on their butts eating cheetos and playing on the Wii, and watching brainnumbing TV like MTV.
What should be done with welfare mothers?
That's the question... hmmmm...
Well, I would say, 'Don't throw them all in one convenient bag just because we hear about some of them behaving badly'. Don't you remember... just a few short weeks ago, they were "Families in need" of our charity, in the giving spirit of Christmas. So soon they have become animals to be spayed and the offspring left to fend for themselves? Wow. And we define ourselves as a 'Christian Nation'?
I figure, even if there are some well fed, soul-less people who will take from the mouths of the truely hungry... it isn't worth punishing the ones who really need it because of the few who steal from us.
...
If you know of cheats... it is your duty to the American Taxpayer to report these criminals. If you don't, then aren't you are part of the problem?
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
how do you know it was your money exactly they gave back, and it was money that you had given them, and a stimulus is different then a tax refund right? It was probably money that had been allocated for something else anyway so really it wasn't your money. Or maybe they gave me some of your money as well, so should they have told me how to spend your money.
In that case why don't you drive down to some poor persons house and tell them how to spend your money, why should the government do it? Cut out the middle man.
Huh? It certainly was my own money. Anyone that paid taxes and got back less than they paid in total was simply receiving some of their own money back to spend. Pretty simple.
The main point of this story seems to have been lost.
So what if a person is on welfare, it doesn't give medical personnel the right to arbitrarily sterilized a woman. This was no mistake, a) they could have surgically tied her tubes as a method of birth control, instead, b) they performed a permanent sterilization on her by tying and cutting her tubes preventing her from having the option to decide whether she wanted to reproduce to not.
You don't see medical personnel mistakenly giving men a vasectomy for being deadbeat dads. Even convicted rapists are not subjected to a vasectomy without consent.
Yet, the only reproductive issue ever acted upon in our society - by law or by someone taking matters into their own hands based on their own moral or professional stance - is the right of a woman to reproduce.
SIN EATERS--We take the moral excrement we find in this equation and we bury it down deep inside of us so that the rest of our case can stay pure. That is the job. We are morally indefensible and absolutely necessary.
The main point of this story seems to have been lost.
So what if a person is on welfare, it doesn't give medical personnel the right to arbitrarily sterilized a woman. This was no mistake, a) they could have surgically tied her tubes as a method of birth control, instead, b) they performed a permanent sterilization on her by tying and cutting her tubes preventing her from having the option to decide whether she wanted to reproduce to not.
You don't see medical personnel mistakenly giving men a vasectomy for being deadbeat dads. Even convicted rapists are not subjected to a vasectomy without consent.
Yet, the only reproductive issue ever acted upon in our society - by law or by someone taking matters into their own hands based on their own moral or professional stance - is the right of a woman to reproduce.
how do you know it was your money exactly they gave back, and it was money that you had given them, and a stimulus is different then a tax refund right? It was probably money that had been allocated for something else anyway so really it wasn't your money. Or maybe they gave me some of your money as well, so should they have told me how to spend your money.
In that case why don't you drive down to some poor persons house and tell them how to spend your money, why should the government do it? Cut out the middle man.
Huh? It certainly was my own money. Anyone that paid taxes and got back less than they paid in total was simply receiving some of their own money back to spend. Pretty simple.
Again I said the stimulus check not a refund check there is a difference however you do not want to acknowldge that so fine
In that case why don't you drive down to some poor persons house and tell them how to spend your money,
Why start now? They have been doing it for years.
This country has become a welfare equal rights state. It punishes those that pay their taxes and succeed in life. Granted there are people who need assistance and I think there is a place for government to help. However the system is in dire need of an overhaul. People don't recite these stories of abuse out of some story hour myth. They view these abuses every day. It needs to stop.
I was personally dealt a losing card with this exact topic. I bought a home in a neighborhood that was supposed to be higher class. I saved and I worked to be able to do so. Yet somehow five houses on my street were Section 8. It is not stereotypical when people claim that the homes become run down and dilapidated. I have pictures and documents as proof. Equal housing is a sham, since when did government assistance go from putting a solid roof over someone's head to allowing them to live in housing that they can not obviously maintain even when someone else is footing the bill? Yet here they are letting the properties fall apart therefore causing the surrounding properties to decrease in value. The slumlord decides he doesn't want to fork out the money to fix the properties and they go into foreclosure. Now if I want to sell my house I have to compete against foreclosure houses $100k less in price than my own even though those places needed over $100k in repairs. After viewing the inside of one of these homes I cannot believe PEOPLE lived there instead of ANIMALS. But of course they don't care because they have no ownership.
Bottom line should be that welfare is temporary, is NOT a right, and should be more carefully policed. Recipients should be subject to drug tests and if they are found to be using drugs their benefits should stop. If they are able-bodied they should be doing something to contribute to the community, some type of service, not just sitting on their butts eating cheetos and playing on the Wii, and watching brainnumbing TV like MTV.
Why start now? Yes it is better to sit on some internet forum and bitch huh?
Did you ever knock on your neighbors door or just creep around at night or when they weren't home and take picture of what animals they were.
Many of us have pointed out that it takes education, I also use to work with Section 8 and it take more then giving someone a home.
And most the burden should be one the landlord, that is the job of landlord. Shame on them if they did not properly screen and take the time to find good tenets. It is obvious that they did not care about the homes. I suspect that they didn't even pay the mortgages, just pocketed the money from section until the home was in the banks control and walked with cash in hand.
Maybe you just didn't move far enough and build your fence high enough. We live in a diverse society and with that comes... gasp... different kinds of people.
Again I say worry about the poor and not the white collar crooks in our community that go to church with you and who have kids in your school... oh wait they don't affect your property value so they are okay ripping of tax payers and cheating the system.
I know that people abuse the system I am not an idiot, in my line of work I have seen all sorts of things. What about a woman that has her kids taken by the state only to have them adopted by a sister that lives in the apartment next door. Now the woman has her kids back and the sister is getting X amount of dollars by the state to raise the kids. Who do we blame the sisters or the state that isn't smart enough to figure it out.
Actually yes I have many pictures of the properties as the person who bought the house was my new neighbor. We had quite the chat. After two months of making repairs he was close to $100k.
The landlords were bad, that's why the FBI was investigating them for mortgage fraud. Amazing how easy evidence is found by using the internet and viewing public records. The fact remains that someone who owns a home is generally more likely to care for it in a manner better than a renter who has no real financial ties.
Diversity has nothing to do with this. I'm not going to apologize for wanting to buy a home in a crime free neighborhood where people actually take care of their properties. If someone thinks people should just accept that that someone needs a brain check.
Section 8 should be limited to certain properties, not those that exceed the ability for one to maintain it.
Prosecute the sister for fraud and fire those that work for the state that failed to verify the situation.
no, i just knew you were going to bring citizenship into it, since stopping illegal immigration seems to be your passion on this board because nearly every post you post mentions it in some form.
"You can tell the greatness of a man by what makes him angry." - Lincoln
no, i just knew you were going to bring citizenship into it, since stopping illegal immigration seems to be your passion on this board because nearly every post you post mentions it in some form.
Well, I disagree with it.
First of all, the most widely abused drug is alcohol. There isn't a test for that.
Second, I think it's inhuman to have someone who's obviously addicted and needs help, or who's undocumented, to turn them away from being able to survive. Plus, depriving them of food stamps will very likely cause them to turn to criminal activity.
Thirdly, there's very few social services that are available to undocumented immigrants to begin with.
Fourthly, it's an unwarranted intrusion on our privacy. Why does the government have to go into my body to determine what I'm taking before I can get benefits? What happens if I'm on medical marijuana - it's illegal under federal law - do they then have the right to take away Medicare or food stamps?
Fifth, it's much too expensive and it's not cost effective to administer a program of testing, than it is to simply provide the benefits.
Lastly, in today's economy, the social safety net is more important than ever. One in every 8 Americans is now on food stamps - one out of every four children. One in every six mortgages are delinquent over 90 days. One in every 10 Americans have no medical insurance, and those that do, roughly half will become bankrupt if a major medical catastrophe hits them. I'm not willing to sacrifice anyone's safety for the sake of satisfying an unreasonable bias against certain human beings. It's simply wrong.
"It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
First of all, the most widely abused drug is alcohol. There isn't a test for that.
Yes there is. But that is besides the point, alcohol is not illegal for those 21 and over. If the person is in a treatment program and is clean then they should have no problem passing a test. It shows they are trying to turn their life around. If they continue to use illegal drugs then they should not get taxpayer funded benefits. It's really common sense.
And yes since someone has made it their life mission to continue to make it known that I am against illegal immigration, I am 100% against it. I am also 100% for LEGAL immigration. The Democrats support for Illegal aliens was one of the main reasons I will no longer vote for them if they support it. I am a registered Democrat however I now have to see where each candidate stands before I decide my vote.
See there is a difference, and anyone that knows how to use a dictionary can tell.
no, i just knew you were going to bring citizenship into it, since stopping illegal immigration seems to be your passion on this board because nearly every post you post mentions it in some form.
Well, I disagree with it.
First of all, the most widely abused drug is alcohol. There isn't a test for that.
Second, I think it's inhuman to have someone who's obviously addicted and needs help, or who's undocumented, to turn them away from being able to survive. Plus, depriving them of food stamps will very likely cause them to turn to criminal activity.
Thirdly, there's very few social services that are available to undocumented immigrants to begin with.
Fourthly, it's an unwarranted intrusion on our privacy. Why does the government have to go into my body to determine what I'm taking before I can get benefits? What happens if I'm on medical marijuana - it's illegal under federal law - do they then have the right to take away Medicare or food stamps?
Fifth, it's much too expensive and it's not cost effective to administer a program of testing, than it is to simply provide the benefits.
Lastly, in today's economy, the social safety net is more important than ever. One in every 8 Americans is now on food stamps - one out of every four children. One in every six mortgages are delinquent over 90 days. One in every 10 Americans have no medical insurance, and those that do, roughly half will become bankrupt if a major medical catastrophe hits them. I'm not willing to sacrifice anyone's safety for the sake of satisfying an unreasonable bias against certain human beings. It's simply wrong.
i wish JB811 hadn't chosen to ignore most of your points in response to his question. you raise some very valid concerns here Starfall.
what should be done? what can be done? i cant give an opinion on america, but in australia welfare dependancy is encouraged. its one thing to ask for a helping hand if you need it, but its entirely another to expect it, and abuse it to the full extent able.
kids learn from example first and foremost. educate the children, and enable them to have respect for themselves and their life skills. have pride in their ability to support themselves. and have the self respect to want to better their own lives, learn and teach what lessons they have.
personally i hate how 'welfare mothers' are lumped into a bludging, handout group. there are plenty of parents ... mothers, fathers, working, not working, single, married ... whatever - that shouldnt be responsible for a dog or cat let alone a child! parenting in general is a difficult and undervalued skill. it takes a licence to drive, to practice medicine, to sell real estate, hell - to fucking catch fish ffs!!! but to raise another human - to pass on these skills - to send them out into the world as dignified, productive individuals? all you need is a working set of overies and a hard on. theres not even an age limit.
Everyone on welfare should be subject to a drug test. Everyone on welfare should also be a US citizen.
...
The only problem I have with this is... man, it sounds too much like something the governments of the former Soviet Union, Communist China or North Korea enact.
Allen Fieldhouse, home of the 2008 NCAA men's Basketball Champions! Go Jayhawks!
Hail, Hail!!!
Yeah well welfare and government handouts remind me of rations in a former USSR society.
No system is foolproof. There are people who need help, let's help them. However we also need to identify and prosecute the ones that are fraudulent.
I'm all for helping citizens in need. I'd also consider helping legal immigrants who are contributing. But I think we need to stop the bleeding first. If someone loads their foodstamp groceries into an Escalade something is not right. If you can't afford FOOD you should not be driving something like that. Take public transportation, buy an affordable car. Then guess what there might be money for milk.
I'm all for helping the ones that need it, I'm against helping the lazy, the junkies, and the illegals.
i wish JB811 hadn't chosen to ignore most of your points in response to his question. you raise some very valid concerns here Starfall.
I pretty much did answer all of this. What points should I expand on? Medical insurance isn't the topic. Neither is mortgages. I thought we were talking welfare.
My wife and I were reading an article yesterday (http://www.bostonherald.com/news/region ... id=1222682) about a women who is suing a Massachusetts hospital because they apparently wrongfully sterilized her after having her ninth kid.
The women is unemployed, on disability and receives public assistance for some of the children she has custody of.
Between this story, and a friend's facebook rant Saturday about waiting in line at stores behind people wearing designer clothes and buying junkfood with foodstamp cards, or another friend (social worker) complaining about missing her kids while working over the holidays while dealing with deadbeat mothers who ignore their children while laying in bed all day "eating doritos and smoking marlboros", it made think angrily think about all of the lazy people living off everyone else.
I'm all for helping people and families who fall on tough times, but what can and should be done to people who continue to have kids that they obviously can't afford? or continue to milk the system because they know that it's easier than getting a job and supporting themselves?
Let me ask you this: If you're really concerned about the issue of women having "too many" kids, do you support the availability affordable, accessible, reliable contraceptives for everyone?
how do you know it was your money exactly they gave back, and it was money that you had given them, and a stimulus is different then a tax refund right? It was probably money that had been allocated for something else anyway so really it wasn't your money. Or maybe they gave me some of your money as well, so should they have told me how to spend your money.
In that case why don't you drive down to some poor persons house and tell them how to spend your money, why should the government do it? Cut out the middle man.
Huh? It certainly was my own money. Anyone that paid taxes and got back less than they paid in total was simply receiving some of their own money back to spend. Pretty simple.
Again I said the stimulus check not a refund check there is a difference however you do not want to acknowldge that so fine
Where did the government get the $ to "give back"?
First of all, the most widely abused drug is alcohol. There isn't a test for that.
Yes there is. But that is besides the point, alcohol is not illegal for those 21 and over. If the person is in a treatment program and is clean then they should have no problem passing a test. It shows they are trying to turn their life around. If they continue to use illegal drugs then they should not get taxpayer funded benefits. It's really common sense.
And yes since someone has made it their life mission to continue to make it known that I am against illegal immigration, I am 100% against it. I am also 100% for LEGAL immigration. The Democrats support for Illegal aliens was one of the main reasons I will no longer vote for them if they support it. I am a registered Democrat however I now have to see where each candidate stands before I decide my vote.
See there is a difference, and anyone that knows how to use a dictionary can tell.
Wrong. The fact that alcohol is illegal and cocaine isn't is a matter of politics. Wasn't that long ago that Prohibition was in effect. Alcohol can also destroy your life as easily as cocaine. I know, I've been there.
Besides, if you're going to raise the criminal angle, then why should we continue to house murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals in jail at taxpayer expense? Surely they don't deserve to live any more than a heroin addict?
BTW, you DO realize that last year's Republican Presidential candidate, John McCain, was very much in favor of immigration reform?
And you know who signed the only illegal alien amnesty into law in 1987? Ronald Reagan.
We don't have an illegal alien problem - we have an illegal employer problem. If you crack down on all the businesses that hire them, I guarantee you we won't have people coming here illegally. But that doesn't mean an otherwise law abiding family should have their parents and children separated from each other, or have them denied the ability to find a better living for themselves. Unless your ancestors were 100% Native American, they were technically undocumented aliens too when they arrived.
It's that kind of "I got mine, fuck you" attitude that's given us George W. Bush.
Post edited by Starfall on
"It's not hard to own something. Or everything. You just have to know that it's yours, and then be willing to let it go." - Neil Gaiman, "Stardust"
Comments
Does the government tell you how to spend your stimulus check?
You do realize that when the government "gave me $"...they were giving me back $ I PAID them in taxes...right? Surely you get that.
how do you know it was your money exactly they gave back, and it was money that you had given them, and a stimulus is different then a tax refund right? It was probably money that had been allocated for something else anyway so really it wasn't your money. Or maybe they gave me some of your money as well, so should they have told me how to spend your money.
In that case why don't you drive down to some poor persons house and tell them how to spend your money, why should the government do it? Cut out the middle man.
Why start now? They have been doing it for years.
This country has become a welfare equal rights state. It punishes those that pay their taxes and succeed in life. Granted there are people who need assistance and I think there is a place for government to help. However the system is in dire need of an overhaul. People don't recite these stories of abuse out of some story hour myth. They view these abuses every day. It needs to stop.
I was personally dealt a losing card with this exact topic. I bought a home in a neighborhood that was supposed to be higher class. I saved and I worked to be able to do so. Yet somehow five houses on my street were Section 8. It is not stereotypical when people claim that the homes become run down and dilapidated. I have pictures and documents as proof. Equal housing is a sham, since when did government assistance go from putting a solid roof over someone's head to allowing them to live in housing that they can not obviously maintain even when someone else is footing the bill? Yet here they are letting the properties fall apart therefore causing the surrounding properties to decrease in value. The slumlord decides he doesn't want to fork out the money to fix the properties and they go into foreclosure. Now if I want to sell my house I have to compete against foreclosure houses $100k less in price than my own even though those places needed over $100k in repairs. After viewing the inside of one of these homes I cannot believe PEOPLE lived there instead of ANIMALS. But of course they don't care because they have no ownership.
Bottom line should be that welfare is temporary, is NOT a right, and should be more carefully policed. Recipients should be subject to drug tests and if they are found to be using drugs their benefits should stop. If they are able-bodied they should be doing something to contribute to the community, some type of service, not just sitting on their butts eating cheetos and playing on the Wii, and watching brainnumbing TV like MTV.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
That's the question... hmmmm...
Well, I would say, 'Don't throw them all in one convenient bag just because we hear about some of them behaving badly'. Don't you remember... just a few short weeks ago, they were "Families in need" of our charity, in the giving spirit of Christmas. So soon they have become animals to be spayed and the offspring left to fend for themselves? Wow. And we define ourselves as a 'Christian Nation'?
I figure, even if there are some well fed, soul-less people who will take from the mouths of the truely hungry... it isn't worth punishing the ones who really need it because of the few who steal from us.
...
If you know of cheats... it is your duty to the American Taxpayer to report these criminals. If you don't, then aren't you are part of the problem?
Hail, Hail!!!
If not, jog over now!
Huh? It certainly was my own money. Anyone that paid taxes and got back less than they paid in total was simply receiving some of their own money back to spend. Pretty simple.
So what if a person is on welfare, it doesn't give medical personnel the right to arbitrarily sterilized a woman. This was no mistake, a) they could have surgically tied her tubes as a method of birth control, instead, b) they performed a permanent sterilization on her by tying and cutting her tubes preventing her from having the option to decide whether she wanted to reproduce to not.
You don't see medical personnel mistakenly giving men a vasectomy for being deadbeat dads. Even convicted rapists are not subjected to a vasectomy without consent.
Yet, the only reproductive issue ever acted upon in our society - by law or by someone taking matters into their own hands based on their own moral or professional stance - is the right of a woman to reproduce.
And education for their kids to get them to break the cycle of poverty... including sex education.
Hail, Hail!!!
Agreed
Again I said the stimulus check not a refund check there is a difference however you do not want to acknowldge that so fine
Why start now? Yes it is better to sit on some internet forum and bitch huh?
Did you ever knock on your neighbors door or just creep around at night or when they weren't home and take picture of what animals they were.
Many of us have pointed out that it takes education, I also use to work with Section 8 and it take more then giving someone a home.
And most the burden should be one the landlord, that is the job of landlord. Shame on them if they did not properly screen and take the time to find good tenets. It is obvious that they did not care about the homes. I suspect that they didn't even pay the mortgages, just pocketed the money from section until the home was in the banks control and walked with cash in hand.
Maybe you just didn't move far enough and build your fence high enough. We live in a diverse society and with that comes... gasp... different kinds of people.
Again I say worry about the poor and not the white collar crooks in our community that go to church with you and who have kids in your school... oh wait they don't affect your property value so they are okay ripping of tax payers and cheating the system.
I know that people abuse the system I am not an idiot, in my line of work I have seen all sorts of things. What about a woman that has her kids taken by the state only to have them adopted by a sister that lives in the apartment next door. Now the woman has her kids back and the sister is getting X amount of dollars by the state to raise the kids. Who do we blame the sisters or the state that isn't smart enough to figure it out.
The landlords were bad, that's why the FBI was investigating them for mortgage fraud. Amazing how easy evidence is found by using the internet and viewing public records. The fact remains that someone who owns a home is generally more likely to care for it in a manner better than a renter who has no real financial ties.
Diversity has nothing to do with this. I'm not going to apologize for wanting to buy a home in a crime free neighborhood where people actually take care of their properties. If someone thinks people should just accept that that someone needs a brain check.
Section 8 should be limited to certain properties, not those that exceed the ability for one to maintain it.
Prosecute the sister for fraud and fire those that work for the state that failed to verify the situation.
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
i thought we had millions devoted to abstinance only education, which has been sooooo amazingly effective... :roll:
i agree with both of you by the way...
"Well, you tell him that I don't talk to suckas."
Well, I disagree with it.
First of all, the most widely abused drug is alcohol. There isn't a test for that.
Second, I think it's inhuman to have someone who's obviously addicted and needs help, or who's undocumented, to turn them away from being able to survive. Plus, depriving them of food stamps will very likely cause them to turn to criminal activity.
Thirdly, there's very few social services that are available to undocumented immigrants to begin with.
Fourthly, it's an unwarranted intrusion on our privacy. Why does the government have to go into my body to determine what I'm taking before I can get benefits? What happens if I'm on medical marijuana - it's illegal under federal law - do they then have the right to take away Medicare or food stamps?
Fifth, it's much too expensive and it's not cost effective to administer a program of testing, than it is to simply provide the benefits.
Lastly, in today's economy, the social safety net is more important than ever. One in every 8 Americans is now on food stamps - one out of every four children. One in every six mortgages are delinquent over 90 days. One in every 10 Americans have no medical insurance, and those that do, roughly half will become bankrupt if a major medical catastrophe hits them. I'm not willing to sacrifice anyone's safety for the sake of satisfying an unreasonable bias against certain human beings. It's simply wrong.
Yes there is. But that is besides the point, alcohol is not illegal for those 21 and over. If the person is in a treatment program and is clean then they should have no problem passing a test. It shows they are trying to turn their life around. If they continue to use illegal drugs then they should not get taxpayer funded benefits. It's really common sense.
And yes since someone has made it their life mission to continue to make it known that I am against illegal immigration, I am 100% against it. I am also 100% for LEGAL immigration. The Democrats support for Illegal aliens was one of the main reasons I will no longer vote for them if they support it. I am a registered Democrat however I now have to see where each candidate stands before I decide my vote.
See there is a difference, and anyone that knows how to use a dictionary can tell.
kids learn from example first and foremost. educate the children, and enable them to have respect for themselves and their life skills. have pride in their ability to support themselves. and have the self respect to want to better their own lives, learn and teach what lessons they have.
personally i hate how 'welfare mothers' are lumped into a bludging, handout group. there are plenty of parents ... mothers, fathers, working, not working, single, married ... whatever - that shouldnt be responsible for a dog or cat let alone a child! parenting in general is a difficult and undervalued skill. it takes a licence to drive, to practice medicine, to sell real estate, hell - to fucking catch fish ffs!!! but to raise another human - to pass on these skills - to send them out into the world as dignified, productive individuals? all you need is a working set of overies and a hard on. theres not even an age limit.
The only problem I have with this is... man, it sounds too much like something the governments of the former Soviet Union, Communist China or North Korea enact.
Hail, Hail!!!
No system is foolproof. There are people who need help, let's help them. However we also need to identify and prosecute the ones that are fraudulent.
I'm all for helping citizens in need. I'd also consider helping legal immigrants who are contributing. But I think we need to stop the bleeding first. If someone loads their foodstamp groceries into an Escalade something is not right. If you can't afford FOOD you should not be driving something like that. Take public transportation, buy an affordable car. Then guess what there might be money for milk.
I'm all for helping the ones that need it, I'm against helping the lazy, the junkies, and the illegals.
I pretty much did answer all of this. What points should I expand on? Medical insurance isn't the topic. Neither is mortgages. I thought we were talking welfare.
Let me ask you this: If you're really concerned about the issue of women having "too many" kids, do you support the availability affordable, accessible, reliable contraceptives for everyone?
Where did the government get the $ to "give back"?
Wrong. The fact that alcohol is illegal and cocaine isn't is a matter of politics. Wasn't that long ago that Prohibition was in effect. Alcohol can also destroy your life as easily as cocaine. I know, I've been there.
Besides, if you're going to raise the criminal angle, then why should we continue to house murderers, rapists, and other violent criminals in jail at taxpayer expense? Surely they don't deserve to live any more than a heroin addict?
BTW, you DO realize that last year's Republican Presidential candidate, John McCain, was very much in favor of immigration reform?
And you know who signed the only illegal alien amnesty into law in 1987? Ronald Reagan.
We don't have an illegal alien problem - we have an illegal employer problem. If you crack down on all the businesses that hire them, I guarantee you we won't have people coming here illegally. But that doesn't mean an otherwise law abiding family should have their parents and children separated from each other, or have them denied the ability to find a better living for themselves. Unless your ancestors were 100% Native American, they were technically undocumented aliens too when they arrived.
It's that kind of "I got mine, fuck you" attitude that's given us George W. Bush.