Welfare, Gimmie, & Hypocrisy

Blockhead

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

wow i have my own thread.

how humbling....

You seem to be the leader of this "hypocrisy group" that posts here on AMT.

you might as well get it all out here, as i am sure you will be read only again soon enough...

Get what all out? its pretty clear by reading your posts that your a hypocrite.
And I am assuming by your second statement that you think i have been banned before. I would love KAT to comment on that, as many posters have assumed I have been banned, yet for some reason I NEVER have.
Don't add Liar to your name...

gimmesometruth27

Blockhead wrote:

Get what all out? its pretty clear by reading your posts that your a hypocrite.
And I am assuming by your second statement that you think i have been banned before. I would love KAT to comment on that, as many posters have assumed I have been banned, yet for some reason I NEVER have.
Don't add Liar to your name...

ok heidijam.

UpSideDown

UpSideDown wrote:

whoprincess wrote:

Whenever I see arguments such as this, my first response is to ask for some definitions. I like to say that the term "welfare" went the way of the 8-track and around the same time. Are you referring to TANF? Food stamps? Subsidized housing? Unemployment benefits? Medicaid? Social Security disability? These are all specific programs and simply being poor does not qualify an individual to receive money for nothing.

This post (and I'm only quoting a section to be brieve) needs addressed by the OP. Things need defined in order to have an actual discussion.

Back to the topic at hand :arrow:

Blockhead

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

Get what all out? its pretty clear by reading your posts that your a hypocrite.
And I am assuming by your second statement that you think i have been banned before. I would love KAT to comment on that, as many posters have assumed I have been banned, yet for some reason I NEVER have.
Don't add Liar to your name...

ok heidijam.

Yes... thats me ( I think everyone knew that)... and your point.
Like I said, I have never been banned, a simple message to KAT could clear up an confusion you had...

Blockhead

UpSideDown wrote:

UpSideDown wrote:

whoprincess wrote:

Whenever I see arguments such as this, my first response is to ask for some definitions. I like to say that the term "welfare" went the way of the 8-track and around the same time. Are you referring to TANF? Food stamps? Subsidized housing? Unemployment benefits? Medicaid? Social Security disability? These are all specific programs and simply being poor does not qualify an individual to receive money for nothing.

This post (and I'm only quoting a section to be brieve) needs addressed by the OP. Things need defined in order to have an actual discussion.

Back to the topic at hand :arrow:

Abuse happens in all of them... I am mainly talking about TANF/Food Stamps, subsidized housing
Unemployment is your money that your employer takes out of your pay.
http://jfs.ohio.gov/owf/tanf/OhioTANF2010.pdf This is TANF from Ohio (my state)
On top of all these benefits/grants/funding/cash assistance/additional pay for "good" school attendance.
Public schools are now providing 2-3 meals A DAY for students with additional weekend pre-made meals.
If these parents are not paying for School(education & supplies)/health care/day care/transportation/food/housing.
What exactly are they spending their money on?

JonnyPistachio

Blockhead wrote:

gimmesometruth27 wrote:

wow i have my own thread.

how humbling....

You seem to be the leader of this "hypocrisy group" that posts here on AMT.

Sorry, but that's just rude. There are some good discussions going on here, stay focused man.

Blockhead, you do make some good points. But the way you keep comparing govt assistance to things like GPA and the DP, you're stretching man. Argue its flaws and how to fix it, fine. But this is a terrible comparison and a weak attempt to get Gimme to look hypocritical.

my answer would be that the DP doesnt serve much of a purpose. And in my opinion, the flaws outweigh anything positive.
As far as many govt assistance programs, I know they are flawed and it upsets me to hear some people take advantage of it, but the positive things it does seomtimes outweighs the negative.. gives innocent kids food and clothing, keeps some poor people from resorting to more crime, and generally is there to benefit your fellow human... not end their life.
so, bottom line DP vs. Welfare?? not quite.

Prince Of Dorkness

markin ball wrote:

Is it possible that more money goes into assistance programs because the poverty rate rises?

no no... 5 out of 5 billionaires agree that the cart comes before the horse, dontchyaknow?

Blockhead

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

markin ball wrote:

Is it possible that more money goes into assistance programs because the poverty rate rises?

no no... 5 out of 5 billionaires agree that the cart comes before the horse, dontchyaknow?

5 self made billionaires...

Prince Of Dorkness

Blockhead wrote:

5 self made billionaires...

Ah yes... the conservative delusion.... "one day if I work hard enough I'll be a billionaire too so for now I'll just vote to protect my interests then... and not my own interests now."

Do you NEVER feel like Charlie Brown running at that football?

Blockhead

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

5 self made billionaires...

Ah yes... the conservative delusion.... "one day if I work hard enough I'll be a billionaire too so for now I'll just vote to protect my interests then... and not my own interests now."

Do you NEVER feel like Charlie Brown running at that football?

Well.... I don't vote, so there goes your theory.
Do I need to post the stats of self made millionaires or can you look that up for your self?

Prince Of Dorkness

Blockhead wrote:

Well.... I don't vote, so there goes your theory.

Ah.

You're one of those.

Well then, why are you wasting our time crying about anything if you're not willing to do anything about it. Why do I get the feeling that you also loudly complain when "someone" pees in your pants?

Blockhead

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

Well.... I don't vote, so there goes your theory.

Ah.

You're one of those.

Well then, why are you wasting our time crying about anything if you're not willing to do anything about it. Why do I get the feeling that you also loudly complain when "someone" pees in your pants?

You forgot to address the sencond part of my post...

Prince Of Dorkness

Blockhead wrote:

You forgot to address the sencond part of my post...

Ok... do I need to post stats of the people who've been screwed by the system and the existing billionaires who use every loop hole and lack of regulation to get their own?

Or how about the extremely widening gap between the rich and the poor?

But yeah.. go ahead and tell me about the self-made millionaires. Then correlate that with the number of people who've gone bankrupt, lost their houses and lost their pension and health care when they get "down-sized" by companies who turn around and give $30-million bonuses to their CEOs.

Wanna keep going?

Go Beavers

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

whoprincess makes a very good point.

Welfare isn't just there for a poor "race," it's there for all of us. If we ever need it.

When I was 21, I got my one and only Welfare check. I was about a year out of college and although I had worked steadily since I was 16 and paid into the system, after college I was unable to find any steady work.

I refused to ask for unemployment because I had managed to save plenty of money to support myself for months. Which, for a 21 year-old man just out of college is pretty damn impressive, especially since my parents had decided that if they gave me money for school, it was an endorsement of my being gay... so I did it all on my own.

Months later, unable to find any work, I finally had to eat shit and admit that I was out of resources... spent all my savings, ran up my debts and had no other options than to apply for UI.. which would take 6 weeks to kick in. I was sent to Welfare to ask for "an emergency check" which was THE most humiliating experience of my life.

A case worker came to my small apartment and saw that it was clean. I had a nicely furnished place because I went to the Salvation Army store, bought old furniture and then bought cheap textiles at Fabricland and recovered it all myself, painted with paint I'd got on sale at Canadian Tire and took good care of the things I'd accumulated for the years I worked to put myself through school. My walls were decorated with the same Picasso prints I'd bought in high school.

She asked me "if you're so broke, how can you afford a computer?" in a very rude tone. I explained that the computer was a gift from my parents three years before to help me with my school work. She exhaled loudly through her nose at that.

After a few more rather obnoxious things ("you sure have enough time to clean this place, when are you out looking for a job?") I was granted a $600 check. It would have been enough to last me maybe a month.

I found work not soon after that... but I'll never forget the way I got treated.

If you've never felt like that or been in that situation... well, I hope you never find out what it's like.

Thanks for posting this. Often the ones who speak against public assistance overgeneralize way too much, ignoring the fact that each person who has received assistance of any form have their own story and circumstances that led to the point where they seek services.

Who Princess

EmBleve wrote:

whoprincess wrote:

Cherry-picking from the overall statistics cited paints a picture of a comfortably secure family that is leaching off the government so that they can have it easy. That's not what I've seen of poverty.

This is a valid, albeit moot, point in this particular instance. People fake poverty and use it as a crutch in order to receive free handouts. Didn't you know? :roll:

WOW! No shit?! People lie to get what they want?! Amazing how little I've learned after spending most of my adult life working with poor folks! :lolno:

Yes, sometimes people lie and try to manipulate the system in order to receive benefits. Unfortunately for them, most aren't sophisticated enough to pull this off. Technology has improved reporting systems and record keeping so that it's not hard to find out who is trying to con you. It's become easier and easier to verify people's income or lack thereof, their utility balances, employment history, residency, and other services they are receiving. That doesn't mean people don't try and don't continue to try with other organizations after they've been caught. But unless they're genuine sociopaths, they probably won't be adept enough at lying to get away with it more than occasionally. And if they're that good at conning people, they'll probably be going after much bigger scams.

What makes you think all these "handouts" are free? You don't get TANF unless you have children. The amount of food stamps and subsidized housing are based on income and requires documentation. Food stamps also don't pay for everything and housing is often low cost, not no cost. Even people who lose their jobs don't always get unemployment. I don't know of any program that is something for nothing.

Who Princess

Blockhead wrote:

Abuse happens in all of them... I am mainly talking about TANF/Food Stamps, subsidized housing
Unemployment is your money that your employer takes out of your pay.
http://jfs.ohio.gov/owf/tanf/OhioTANF2010.pdf This is TANF from Ohio (my state)
On top of all these benefits/grants/funding/cash assistance/additional pay for "good" school attendance.
Public schools are now providing 2-3 meals A DAY for students with additional weekend pre-made meals.
If these parents are not paying for School(education & supplies)/health care/day care/transportation/food/housing.
What exactly are they spending their money on?

I would guess that they they are spending their money on stuff like rent, utilities, gas or public transportation to get to work, clothing and shoes, cleaning products that aren't covered by food stamps--stuff that keeps their kids living in a stable household. As I said above, subsidized housing is often reduced rent, not NO rent. You are also assuming that because they receive TANF they automatically have all other types of assistance. That's not the case in my state. The kids may be eligible for Medicaid but not teens or adults. The family may qualify for housing but due to shortages the typical waiting list in my area is 2-3 years.

It's also news to me that unemployment is MY money that was withheld by my employer. So why did 2 of my former employers regularly fight tooth and nail not to pay it to former employees if it was their money?

Go Beavers

whoprincess wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

Abuse happens in all of them... I am mainly talking about TANF/Food Stamps, subsidized housing
Unemployment is your money that your employer takes out of your pay.
http://jfs.ohio.gov/owf/tanf/OhioTANF2010.pdf This is TANF from Ohio (my state)
On top of all these benefits/grants/funding/cash assistance/additional pay for "good" school attendance.
Public schools are now providing 2-3 meals A DAY for students with additional weekend pre-made meals.
If these parents are not paying for School(education & supplies)/health care/day care/transportation/food/housing.
What exactly are they spending their money on?

I would guess that they they are spending their money on stuff like rent, utilities, gas or public transportation to get to work, clothing and shoes, cleaning products that aren't covered by food stamps--stuff that keeps their kids living in a stable household. As I said above, subsidized housing is often reduced rent, not NO rent. You are also assuming that because they receive TANF they automatically have all other types of assistance. That's not the case in my state. The kids may be eligible for Medicaid but not teens or adults. The family may qualify for housing but due to shortages the typical waiting list in my area is 2-3 years.

It's also news to me that unemployment is MY money that was withheld by my employer. So why did 2 of my former employers regularly fight tooth and nail not to pay it to former employees if it was their money?

I've gone around and around with Blockhead on this topic, and he seems very set on the notion that most of the people on assistance are abusing the system and that "welfare" is creating more problems than people it helps. The underlying vibe from him is that welfare should only be for the most needy (not defined) and the rest should be cut off and the millions of unfilled jobs will be taken by them. He's taken some anecdotal stories from his wife's work experience and made conclusions from there that are set in cement. I've seen that the more facts you use, the more you challenge his assumptions, and the more you encourage him to define his terms, the less he responds.

Blockhead

Prince Of Dorkness wrote:

Blockhead wrote:

You forgot to address the sencond part of my post...

Ok... do I need to post stats of the people who've been screwed by the system and the existing billionaires who use every loop hole and lack of regulation to get their own?

Or how about the extremely widening gap between the rich and the poor?

But yeah.. go ahead and tell me about the self-made millionaires. Then correlate that with the number of people who've gone bankrupt, lost their houses and lost their pension and health care when they get "down-sized" by companies who turn around and give $30-million bonuses to their CEOs.

Wanna keep going?

so your blaming the companies because people can't save for a rainy day???
Its not the companies job to make sure you save your money and live within your means. Just because someone got laid off and wen't bankrupt, lost house, etc is not the companies fault. I was once laid off so was my wife, we managed to keep our house, feed our two kids, and get other jobs, all without losing our house, going bankrupt, etc.
So yeah, selft made millionaires SHOWS that if people take some responsibily, work hard, they can achieve monitary success.
Again YOUR not entitled to a job or money.
So again, how are you SCREWED by the system.
Is it the systems fault that you chose gay porn as your line of work? Maybe people shouldn't go to school for liberal arts degrees and start geting into medical/engineering fields where there is actual work/needs.

Blockhead

whoprincess wrote:

I would guess that they they are spending their money on stuff like rent, utilities, gas or public transportation to get to work, clothing and shoes, cleaning products that aren't covered by food stamps--stuff that keeps their kids living in a stable household. As I said above, subsidized housing is often reduced rent, not NO rent. You are also assuming that because they receive TANF they automatically have all other types of assistance. That's not the case in my state. The kids may be eligible for Medicaid but not teens or adults. The family may qualify for housing but due to shortages the typical waiting list in my area is 2-3 years.

It's also news to me that unemployment is MY money that was withheld by my employer. So why did 2 of my former employers regularly fight tooth and nail not to pay it to former employees if it was their money?

Clothing and shoes they usually get from programs called "crayons to computers" which my wife takes 75% of her students to on Fridays.
Also subsidized housing is reduced rent you are correct, the complex around where I live is $8 a month.
I am suprised that you have held a job for this long not knowing that unemployment is taken out of your pay and put into a "company fund". They fight tooth and nail because the employers unemployment insurance rates increase extremely.

Who Princess

Go Beavers wrote:

I've gone around and around with Blockhead on this topic, and he seems very set on the notion that most of the people on assistance are abusing the system and that "welfare" is creating more problems than people it helps. The underlying vibe from him is that welfare should only be for the most needy (not defined) and the rest should be cut off and the millions of unfilled jobs will be taken by them. He's taken some anecdotal stories from his wife's work experience and made conclusions from there that are set in cement. I've seen that the more facts you use, the more you challenge his assumptions, and the more you encourage him to define his terms, the less he responds.

Thanks for the heads up. :thumbup:

I wasn't expecting to convince anyone, since I've observed for years that people can be very single-minded on this topic. Occasionally that just strikes a nerve with me. I am hardly a kneejerk, bleeding heart and I believe in a strong sense of personal responsibility and work ethic. But unlike most of the people who rant about this sort of topic, I've met and worked with many, many impoverished people. Their circumstances were anything but enviable.