Does welfare make people lazy?

[bedowin62]

left-wing idiot says it's "human nature to be self-reliant"; and that government doesnt remove that quality

and in the next post he'll rant that greedy corporate executives suck up government subsidies

so which one is it?

idiots and hypocrites

 

[Vandalshandle]

Nope. you paid into SS as a retirement program, just as you paid into medicare to be your health coverage when you retired.

These are not means tested cash handouts, i.e. welfare. Just like unemployment insurance isn't welfare, you pay in for it.

Welfare is general government funds used for programs to give money and stuff to people who do not do anything in return for it, or did nothing previously in return for it.

To get SS you had to contribute to it, same with medicare and unemployment insurance. To get welfare all you have to have is been means tested, you don't have to contribute a dime.

A rare day, we disagree. Social Security and Unemployment are clearly welfare. The social security taxes the prior generation paid they spent, nothing was saved. In 46 out of 50 States, employees pay zero unemployment taxes, their employer pays it, then the employer's taxes are raised to cover anything paid. In four, the employee does pay a portion of it.

Well, I guess that I am guilty then, of being on "welfare". I'm glad we got that cleared up. Still, I don't feel too guilty about it, having not only paid for it for 50 years, but also with dollars taxed to me.

 

[BillyZane]

Nope. you paid into SS as a retirement program, just as you paid into medicare to be your health coverage when you retired.

These are not means tested cash handouts, i.e. welfare. Just like unemployment insurance isn't welfare, you pay in for it.

Welfare is general government funds used for programs to give money and stuff to people who do not do anything in return for it, or did nothing previously in return for it.

To get SS you had to contribute to it, same with medicare and unemployment insurance. To get welfare all you have to have is been means tested, you don't have to contribute a dime.

A rare day, we disagree. Social Security and Unemployment are clearly welfare. The social security taxes the prior generation paid they spent, nothing was saved. In 46 out of 50 States, employees pay zero unemployment taxes, their employer pays it, then the employer's taxes are raised to cover anything paid. In four, the employee does pay a portion of it.

Even when the employer pays the unemployment insurance, the employee is still paying it. When I figure payroll, I figure UI into it and consider it part of wages even though the employee doesn't receive it, no different than health insurance premiums or any other benefit.

 

[bedowin62]

I'm collecting Social Security and am insured by Medicare. Am I on welfare"?

I know a guy who always votes republican who is paid not to grow certain crops in Iowa. Is he on "welfare"?

YOU pay into Medicare and SS; you dont have taxes taken specifically for welfare moron. but if you want to think you're on welfare go ahead

oh and i cant believe we still have farm subsidies. didnt the 40 UNBROKEN string of Democrat control of the House end all that?

The guy I know who gets crop subsidies owns his farm in Iowa, which has not voted democratic since Roosevelt. He has his winter home here in Arizona.

oh goody doofus!! and if you come to Connecticut you'll see limosine liberals who have Hispanic illegals crawling all over their lawns cleaning their pools and landscaping their mansions; but if a black man is seen on the tree-lined streets of Greenwhich or Darien the same libs will call the cops in a heartbeat

so what are you saying jackwagon?

 

[Vandalshandle]

The guy I know who gets crop subsidies owns his farm in Iowa, which has not voted democratic since Roosevelt. He has his winter home here in Arizona.

Yeah?...I have different colored bottle caps that I use for different kinds of beer I make.
Have anymore random comments you would like to make?

Oh, sorry! I should have stayed on topic by posting random photos of buildings in Detroit....

 

[Sunshine]

So they renamed it. Its still the same stuff. Sorry I don't feel like typing acronym soup when i describe the programs that are "welfare"

The Dole is still the Dole.

I'm collecting Social Security and am insured by Medicare. Am I on welfare"?

I know a guy who always votes republican who is paid not to grow certain crops in Iowa. Is he on "welfare"?

YOU pay into Medicare and SS; you dont have taxes taken specifically for welfare moron. but if you want to think you're on welfare go ahead

oh and i cant believe we still have farm subsidies. didnt the 40 UNBROKEN string of Democrat control of the House end all that?

SS and Medicare always seem to be running out of money. But SSI and Medicaid never seem to be running out of money.

 

[Vandalshandle]

YOU pay into Medicare and SS; you dont have taxes taken specifically for welfare moron. but if you want to think you're on welfare go ahead

oh and i cant believe we still have farm subsidies. didnt the 40 UNBROKEN string of Democrat control of the House end all that?

The guy I know who gets crop subsidies owns his farm in Iowa, which has not voted democratic since Roosevelt. He has his winter home here in Arizona.

oh goody doofus!! and if you come to Connecticut you'll see limosine liberals who have Hispanic illegals crawling all over their lawns cleaning their pools and landscaping their mansions; but if a black man is seen on the tree-lined streets of Greenwhich or Darien the same libs will call the cops in a heartbeat

so what are you saying jackwagon?

Well, I will have to think about your post for a while. I am trying to figure out how you managed to bring race into the topic.....

 

[Spoonman]

I'm collecting Social Security and am insured by Medicare. Am I on welfare"?

I know a guy who always votes republican who is paid not to grow certain crops in Iowa. Is he on "welfare"?

YOU pay into Medicare and SS; you dont have taxes taken specifically for welfare moron. but if you want to think you're on welfare go ahead

oh and i cant believe we still have farm subsidies. didnt the 40 UNBROKEN string of Democrat control of the House end all that?

SS and Medicare always seem to be running out of money. But SSI and Medicaid never seem to be running out of money.

thats because it would cost the liberals votes

 

[RDD_1210]

when individuals on welfare start creating jobs, providing benefits, making product, increasing the GDP, doing research and development come talk to us. untol then, shevle your old, worn out, tired argument that has no bearing or similarity to this diccussion.

LOL, you really think corporations create jobs? Hahaha.

So you're ok with handouts, just not to people who need it. Got it.

so you really think government creates jobs leftard?

lol

Definitely didn't say that "rightard". Isn't calling names fun!

The purchasing power of the middle class is what drives job creation. I dare you to argue otherwise "rightard". Weee!

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The guy I know who gets crop subsidies owns his farm in Iowa, which has not voted democratic since Roosevelt. He has his winter home here in Arizona.

Yeah?...I have different colored bottle caps that I use for different kinds of beer I make.
Have anymore random comments you would like to make?

Oh, sorry! I should have stayed on topic by posting random photos of buildings in Detroit....

Hahaha...unbelievable.
You don't see the connection. Jesus.
All of those buildings, including the previous photos in this thread, are abandoned federal housing buildings from the 60's and 70's disastrous social programs.
The thread topic is about welfare, laziness etc.
These photos are the multi-$billion lost civilizations throughout America from well intended, horrifically thought out welfare programs of that era that thoroughly destroyed millions of lives.
And little by little, we are recreating the same mess.

 

[Sunshine]

Point being...again...and again...free money is not an answer for poverty, it is a guarantee of increasing it.

So what should we do, remove welfare entirely? Whats your plan?

Yes it should be removed entirely from the federal government.


Leave welfare to local governments and faith based charities.

I agree. All the taxes that get paid in by the welfare class is state sales tax if they pay anything. The ycertainly don't pay anything to the federal government in the way of income taxes. So why should the federal government keep them up.

 

[bedowin62]

The guy I know who gets crop subsidies owns his farm in Iowa, which has not voted democratic since Roosevelt. He has his winter home here in Arizona.

oh goody doofus!! and if you come to Connecticut you'll see limosine liberals who have Hispanic illegals crawling all over their lawns cleaning their pools and landscaping their mansions; but if a black man is seen on the tree-lined streets of Greenwhich or Darien the same libs will call the cops in a heartbeat

so what are you saying jackwagon?

Well, I will have to think about your post for a while. I am trying to figure out how you managed to bring race into the topic.....

just keeping it real doofus; i mean since your implication was that people here are hypocrites for complaining about welfare if they believe in SS or Medicare; or arent ranting bout corporate subsidies; it is justified to point out the hypocrisy pouring from the idiotic Left

 

[Meister]

Does welfare make people lazy? - The Week

The best way to measure whether the unemployed are behaving lazily is by examining the ratio of job seekers to job openings. If the problem is that unemployed people are slacking off work to enjoy the fruits of government welfare, we would expect to see a shortage of labor in the economy. Employers trying to recruit workers to expand their businesses would come up against the fact that job seekers are in short supply. Job vacancies would go unfilled and wages would be bid upward as businesses fight to recruit scarce labor away from the easy option of free welfare money. In such a scenario, cutting welfare would incentivize work, and help businesses fill vacancies.

And here is where the evidence undercuts conservative attacks on welfare. The data shows decisively that the problem is not laziness at all, but a lack of job openings. There are still three jobseekers for every job opening. In the dark days following the 2008 recession, that ratio was as high as seven people for every job opening. Wage growth remains weak. Surely there are still people who would rather claim welfare than try to work, but with so few jobs available, these people don't make a real difference. Trying to nudge them off welfare won't expand the supply of jobs. It would increase the number of people looking for a job — and remember, there are already not enough jobs for those seeking employment

I believe that for some it's considered a needed temporary safety net, and for others it's seen as a career. It just depends on the mindset of the individual.

 

[RDD_1210]

Point being...again...and again...free money is not an answer for poverty, it is a guarantee of increasing it.

So what should we do, remove welfare entirely? Whats your plan?

Hahaha....typical answer from the bleeding hearts.
If you don't support anything and everything they put forth - you must therefore want the complete opposite of whatever it is.
Don't support no strings attached free money for all - well then you hate the poor and wish they would all die.
Hilarious.

"Answer"?

I asked you a question. I didn't make a statement.
Here's your chance to tell us your opinion and you get your thong wedged so far up your ass crack you couldn't even put together a coherent response. You must be proud.

 

[RDD_1210]

Point being...again...and again...free money is not an answer for poverty, it is a guarantee of increasing it.

So what should we do, remove welfare entirely? Whats your plan?

Yes it should be removed entirely from the federal government.


Leave welfare to local governments and faith based charities.

Bwahahahahahahahahaahahahahahahahah.

You're serious, right?

 

[martybegan]

Nope. you paid into SS as a retirement program, just as you paid into medicare to be your health coverage when you retired.

These are not means tested cash handouts, i.e. welfare. Just like unemployment insurance isn't welfare, you pay in for it.

Welfare is general government funds used for programs to give money and stuff to people who do not do anything in return for it, or did nothing previously in return for it.

To get SS you had to contribute to it, same with medicare and unemployment insurance. To get welfare all you have to have is been means tested, you don't have to contribute a dime.

A rare day, we disagree. Social Security and Unemployment are clearly welfare. The social security taxes the prior generation paid they spent, nothing was saved. In 46 out of 50 States, employees pay zero unemployment taxes, their employer pays it, then the employer's taxes are raised to cover anything paid. In four, the employee does pay a portion of it.

Yes, that's the way the system works, but it is not welfare as the term was conceived. For both of those programs, you have to had been working to be eligible, paying into said programs. And even if the employer pays it, it is still being paid by someone as a specific contribution. Also one would assume its part a of a person's benefit package anyway.

Welfare doesn't have any of those string attached. Its sole qualifier is means.

 

[bedowin62]

So what should we do, remove welfare entirely? Whats your plan?

Hahaha....typical answer from the bleeding hearts.
If you don't support anything and everything they put forth - you must therefore want the complete opposite of whatever it is.
Don't support no strings attached free money for all - well then you hate the poor and wish they would all die.
Hilarious.

"Answer"?

I asked you a question. I didn't make a statement.
Here's your chance to tell us your opinion and you get your thong wedged so far up your ass crack you couldn't even put together a coherent response. You must be proud.

pay attention leftard; i saw your question answered. a poster said YES it should be eliminated and taken over by states and cities and charitable organizations

 

[DGS49]

"Welfare," a generic term, and welfare payments are generally based on need. Welfare, or "relief" was originally conceived as a temporary helping hand to those in need. However, as with any Government handout, there is a small sliver of the population that has made a practice of contriving to get these benefits permanently, which is a distortion and abuse of the system. I also suspect that the creators of "welfare" would be horrified to learn that tens of thousands of high school girls are yearly making themselves welfare-eligible by popping out bastard kids. The same principle and phenomenon applies to food stamps, SSI, Section 8 housing assistance, and a whole cornucopia of tax deductions and incentives granted to businesses, and people with substantial incomes.

My favorite is federal flood insurance. Without federal subsidies, homeowners' insurance would be prohibitively expensive for most residences perched on our seashores and many estuaries. The property would be uninsurable and worthless. But because subsidized insurance is available, inflated property values are propped up, and our upper-middle class can have their luxury homes on the shore. And there is no legitimate reason to have federally subsidized flood insurance - it is a pure sop to the wealthy.

Social Security is an entitlement, usually based on the past payment of taxes and not based on need. I would like to say it is a sort-of "contract," but it is not. You pay taxes; the government gives you money. It is not a "contract" because the Government has a unilateral right to change the "contract" any way it wants, any time it wants. They can increase the tax you are required to pay in several different ways (raise the pct, increase the employer match, raise the maximum contribution, etc). They can increase the monthly checks, decrease them, change the retirement age, change the formula for inflation adjustment, whatever. They can even make it "need based," which means if you are wealthy, your benefits could be reduced or eliminated. Think about that. There are no guarantees. The Supreme Court has decreed it.

And there ain't a damned thing you can do about about it, except vote against the congressperson who does something you don't like.

 

[RDD_1210]

Hahaha....typical answer from the bleeding hearts.
If you don't support anything and everything they put forth - you must therefore want the complete opposite of whatever it is.
Don't support no strings attached free money for all - well then you hate the poor and wish they would all die.
Hilarious.

"Answer"?

I asked you a question. I didn't make a statement.
Here's your chance to tell us your opinion and you get your thong wedged so far up your ass crack you couldn't even put together a coherent response. You must be proud.

pay attention leftard; i saw your question answered. a poster said YES it should be eliminated and taken over by states and cities and charitable organizations

The rightard I was talking to didn't answer. Try and keep up gomer.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

So what should we do, remove welfare entirely? Whats your plan?

Hahaha....typical answer from the bleeding hearts.
If you don't support anything and everything they put forth - you must therefore want the complete opposite of whatever it is.
Don't support no strings attached free money for all - well then you hate the poor and wish they would all die.
Hilarious.

"Answer"?

I asked you a question. I didn't make a statement.
Here's your chance to tell us your opinion and you get your thong wedged so far up your ass crack you couldn't even put together a coherent response. You must be proud.

No little one, my point that flew right over your head, is a terrible idea is a terrible idea.
We have 40 years of overwhelming data showing how welfare is a destroyer, it is a prison sentence for those who depend on it. Unbridled welfare is a horrific idea, no matter whether another idea exist or not - it is a terrible plan with disastrous results all over the country.