What is the ratio of "welfare queens" v. those truly in need?

beenthere · Sep 28, 2012

Fungus Gnat said:
You bitch about the government all day long here about how it doesn't create jobs, yet your own family works for it and for a welfare program to boot.

So are we off the subject of holding government workers accountable?? LOL
I bitch about the federal government not creating jobs, not local government.
I have a direct voice when it comes to my localities, not so with the federal government.

I'm against a centralized government and am pro states rights, anything else?

beenthere · Sep 28, 2012

althor said:
Ok, so a person who does not work with 4 kids would NEED welfare, yet at the same time, the question becomes...
If a person needs welfare why do they have 4 kids?

Mother: Girl, you need to hurry up and have a baby so you can start getting YOUR checks.
16 year old daughter: I was looking at taking some classes at (local university) after highschool.
Mother: That ain't going to pay no bills.

Within a month 16 year old girl was pregnant.
I would like to say this is an isolated incident, but its not. In some communities this is how people live and how they think about things.
They have been born into these conditions and never strive to remove themselves from it, only to continue living how they were raised.
It will not change until the parents change, but the parents arent going to change because thats how they were raised. These communities are all over America and are made up of wide diversities of people, from the trailer parks to the ghettos to the reservations.

I might add one thing, if we drastically cut the funding and put in strict guidelines, there would be no incentive for this shit!

deprave · Sep 28, 2012

Fungus Gnat said:
Local charities tried and failed, the government stepped in. I suppose for you there's always the negative income tax polices of Milton Friedman.

Exactly what they want you to think...the all mighty righteous government stepped in and made it right, lmao give me a break

canndo · Sep 28, 2012

althor said:
Ok, so a person who does not work with 4 kids would NEED welfare, yet at the same time, the question becomes...
If a person needs welfare why do they have 4 kids?

Mother: Girl, you need to hurry up and have a baby so you can start getting YOUR checks.
16 year old daughter: I was looking at taking some classes at (local university) after highschool.
Mother: That ain't going to pay no bills.

Within a month 16 year old girl was pregnant.
I would like to say this is an isolated incident, but its not. In some communities this is how people live and how they think about things.
They have been born into these conditions and never strive to remove themselves from it, only to continue living how they were raised.
It will not change until the parents change, but the parents arent going to change because thats how they were raised. These communities are all over America and are made up of wide diversities of people, from the trailer parks to the ghettos to the reservations.

You presume that people are in a constant state of poverty. Ever think that maybe that person had 4 kids when he was in a stable financial condition?

It's all about trailer parks and ghettos is it?

lifegoesonbrah · Sep 28, 2012

Re-institute time limits, best way to reduce the fraud IMO. People can use the programs for emergencies, not for life.

You can currently get food stamps for life..... not cool brah.

Rob Roy · Sep 29, 2012

Padawanbater2 said:
Do we have any data on those numbers? The people who simply abuse government assistance v. those that work everyday and truly need it?

If not, what % do you feel out of the entire American population, 325 million +, make up the "abuse" category? What evidence or proof do you have to justify your opinion?

This raises another question for me. Which percentage is acceptable for a third party (government) to take from party 1, against party 1's wishes to give to give party 2 before it is considered theft?

Fungus Gnat · Sep 29, 2012

deprave said:
Exactly what they want you to think...the all mighty righteous government stepped in and made it right, lmao give me a break

Government is much more efficient especially with programs that are difficult to administer. Food stamps for example has 28% overhead and that mostly has to do with eligibility verification. Private charities have a surprisingly low level of money donated that actually goes to the cause. Even when using volunteers....

Rob Roy · Sep 29, 2012

Fungus Gnat said:
Government is much more efficient especially with programs that are difficult to administer. Food stamps for example has 28% overhead and that mostly has to do with eligibility verification. Private charities have a surprisingly low level of money donated that actually goes to the cause. Even when using volunteers....

Government efficiency = oxymoron.

On the other hand it could be argued 100% of the money private charities get is from willing participants. Conversely the government programs are rarely charitable since they do not employ voluntary collection methods.

Fungus Gnat · Sep 29, 2012

Rob Roy said:
Government efficiency = oxymoron.

On the other hand it could be argued 100% of the money private charities get is from willing participants. Conversely the government programs are rarely charitable since they do not employ voluntary collection methods.

Medicare has an overhead of 9% show me any private healthcare insurance with such a love overhead.

That's because government programs are responsible for all people not just a narrow segment that people are willing to donate to. Also I seem to recall George Washington sending troops to collect taxes from whiskey distillers so what's the complaint about taking money from the unwilling again?

Rob Roy · Sep 29, 2012

George Washington eh? Okay here's what he said...."Government is not eloquence, it is not reason, it is force...."

Efficiency of government can be argued. What you seem to be avoiding and what I say cannot be argued is the method these "donations" are collected by. I submit that government cannot perform charitable acts. What you are describing would better be termed "efficient theft" .

NLXSK1 · Sep 29, 2012

Medicare has an overhead of 9% show me any private healthcare insurance with such a love overhead.

ROFLMFAO!!! And the government admits at least 20% of medicare is fraudulent...

Show me any private healthcare insurance with a 29% overhead....

DOH!

Fungus Gnat · Sep 29, 2012

Rob Roy said:
George Washington eh? Okay here's what he said...."Government is not eloquence, it is not reason, it is force...."

Efficiency of government can be argued. What you seem to be avoiding and what I say cannot be argued is the method these "donations" are collected by. I submit that government cannot perform charitable acts. What you are describing would better be termed "efficient theft" .

And back during our founding fathers time welfare was land grants. That was actually theft from native inhabitants not paper wealth, but I'm sure you're rushing to the closest reservation to make amends.

canndo · Sep 29, 2012

Rob Roy said:
George Washington eh? Okay here's what he said...."Government is not eloquence, it is not reason, it is force...."

Efficiency of government can be argued. What you seem to be avoiding and what I say cannot be argued is the method these "donations" are collected by. I submit that government cannot perform charitable acts. What you are describing would better be termed "efficient theft" .

Demanding that you pay what you owe is not theft. This is simpy another hot button word like "slavery" and "murder" that is used so often it obscures the point. You use a service, say electricity for a month. The electric comapany finds that you have not paid and comes after you for the money - they are not committing theft.

Fungus Gnat · Sep 29, 2012

NLXSK1 said:
ROFLMFAO!!! And the government admits at least 20% of medicare is fraudulent...

Show me any private healthcare insurance with a 29% overhead....

DOH!

Notice how you don't add fraud to private insurers. They magically don't have any...that's the real comedy of your post.

Harrekin · Sep 29, 2012

canndo said:
Demanding that you pay what you owe is not theft. This is simpy another hot button word like "slavery" and "murder" that is used so often it obscures the point. You use a service, say electricity for a month. The electric comapany finds that you have not paid and comes after you for the money - they are not committing theft.

They didn't build that tho...?

canndo · Sep 29, 2012

Harrekin said:
They didn't build that tho...?

Ongoing provision of order is a service like any other but far more complicated. We get a bill for that service and it is something that only governments can provide.

Rob Roy · Sep 29, 2012

Fungus Gnat said:
And back during our founding fathers time welfare was land grants. That was actually theft from native inhabitants not paper wealth, but I'm sure you're rushing to the closest reservation to make amends.

Reservations? Nope. I'm not responsible for what some people did to others along time ago, but I do agree what happened was wrong. I'm also not beholden to uphold or be limited by "contracts" that people a long time ago made purportedly on my behalf either....like the Constitution. For a more concise explanation check out some Lysander Spooner essays....which by some strange coincidence I am wearing a t-shirt today that features his visage and declares "vices are not crimes".

Rob Roy · Sep 29, 2012

canndo said:
Ongoing provision of order is a service like any other but far more complicated. We get a bill for that service and it is something that only governments can provide.

Oh riiiight. Good evening sir, I'm Uncle Sam and I'll be your waiter this evening. Tonight's specials are the welfare / warfare combo plate. On the appetizer menu we have plowed roads and that comes with totalitarian sauce and some crisp Japanese nuked to perfection. Would you like a drink before we incarcerate you for growing a plant?

canndo · Sep 29, 2012

Rob Roy said:
Oh riiiight. Good evening sir, I'm Uncle Sam and I'll be your waiter this evening. Tonight's specials are the welfare / warfare combo plate. On the appetizer menu we have plowed roads and that comes with totalitarian sauce and some crisp Japanese nuked to perfection. Would you like a drink before we incarcerate you for growing a plant?

And it always comes down to your issue with the growing of a single plant. Yes, we nuked a country we were at all out war with and likely saved a hell of a lot of U.S. lives in the process of that nuking - perhaps we even saved Japanese lives.

The point is the same, if you live in this country, you receive a service and are required to pay for that service - you may have a problem with the amount of the bill but it is not theft.

Rob Roy · Sep 29, 2012

canndo said:
Demanding that you pay what you owe is not theft. This is simpy another hot button word like "slavery" and "murder" that is used so often it obscures the point. You use a service, say electricity for a month. The electric comapany finds that you have not paid and comes after you for the money - they are not committing theft.

Your example using the electric company is accurate, but is only one side of the equation.

Where you fear to tread is to examine the difference between a consensually contracted for service, such as buying something, versus a so-called government service that is in reality an imposition which removes the ability to chose or not chose the so-called "service".

Theft is it EVER possible for government to do this in your world? Which percent of your labor taxed against your will to purchase "services" you don't use or want becomes theft ?

What is the ratio of "welfare queens" v. those truly in need?

New Member

New Member

New Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member