Pretty much!

[ricechickie]

There are plenty of working poor who aren’t worried about prospering; surviving would be nice.

The “welfare queen” theme of the 80s is no more. The working poor use government assistance while having a full-time, or several part-time, jobs, and then are demonized for still needing assistance like food stamps or medicaid or housing subsidies.

The welfare queen is alive and well.

Nope. There are restrictions on how much assistance one can get and for how long.

Yep. They live it until the end so there are still the queens. They still scam the system and we all pay for it.

If they’re “scamming”, that implies criminal fraud.

If they’re using it within legal parameters, there are limits to how long a person can get assistance. The “welfare queen” stereotype is why those limits were put in place.

They still exist. They know how to scam the system. It is criminal fraud and that's how the keep their queen status.

I wonder if you’ve got some evidence to back that up.

 

[PredFan]

We'll see but anyone running on her platform and can't explain how it's funded will struggle.
Then again leftists are too fucking stupid to grasp it

The wealthy can pay for it. Higher income taxes. Much higher. And less military spending.

Bing, there it is.

Now, at some point, the GOP will have to do more than just scream SOCIALISM. That doesn't work any more. This is going to take actual effort.

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

There are plenty of working poor who aren’t worried about prospering; surviving would be nice.

The “welfare queen” theme of the 80s is no more. The working poor use government assistance while having a full-time, or several part-time, jobs, and then are demonized for still needing assistance like food stamps or medicaid or housing subsidies.

I don’t demonize those who work for their money and I agree the system had its flaws but any system has flaws. Call me crazy but I don’t like the idea of others benefitting from my hard work unless I choose to help them benefit from it. Most wealthy people DO give back in their own ways. I am not wealthy but my parents are, though their income doesn’t even come close to that of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc.

Why is the idea of “just getting by” whilst being dependent on the government to take care of you appealing? Serious question.

It’s not appealing. As a person with a work ethic, I’d like to see people who work get paid a living wage. I wish there was no need for people who work to need food stamps, housing subsidies, or medicaid.

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

 

[ricechickie]

The wealthy can pay for it. Higher income taxes. Much higher. And less military spending.

Bing, there it is.

Now, at some point, the GOP will have to do more than just scream SOCIALISM. That doesn't work any more. This is going to take actual effort.

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

There are plenty of working poor who aren’t worried about prospering; surviving would be nice.

The “welfare queen” theme of the 80s is no more. The working poor use government assistance while having a full-time, or several part-time, jobs, and then are demonized for still needing assistance like food stamps or medicaid or housing subsidies.

I don’t demonize those who work for their money and I agree the system had its flaws but any system has flaws. Call me crazy but I don’t like the idea of others benefitting from my hard work unless I choose to help them benefit from it. Most wealthy people DO give back in their own ways. I am not wealthy but my parents are, though their income doesn’t even come close to that of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc.

Why is the idea of “just getting by” whilst being dependent on the government to take care of you appealing? Serious question.

It’s not appealing. As a person with a work ethic, I’d like to see people who work get paid a living wage. I wish there was no need for people who work to need food stamps, housing subsidies, or medicaid.

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

Such as?

 

[PredFan]

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

There are plenty of working poor who aren’t worried about prospering; surviving would be nice.

The “welfare queen” theme of the 80s is no more. The working poor use government assistance while having a full-time, or several part-time, jobs, and then are demonized for still needing assistance like food stamps or medicaid or housing subsidies.

I don’t demonize those who work for their money and I agree the system had its flaws but any system has flaws. Call me crazy but I don’t like the idea of others benefitting from my hard work unless I choose to help them benefit from it. Most wealthy people DO give back in their own ways. I am not wealthy but my parents are, though their income doesn’t even come close to that of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc.

Why is the idea of “just getting by” whilst being dependent on the government to take care of you appealing? Serious question.

It’s not appealing. As a person with a work ethic, I’d like to see people who work get paid a living wage. I wish there was no need for people who work to need food stamps, housing subsidies, or medicaid.

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

Such as?

Such as spending every penny they make when they make it. Such as having more kids than they can afford, such as not saving any at all. Such as tricking out cars, drinking and gambling, buying expensive jewelry and clothes, expensive TVs and sound systems, etc., etc.

 

[dave p]

The welfare queen is alive and well.

Nope. There are restrictions on how much assistance one can get and for how long.

Yep. They live it until the end so there are still the queens. They still scam the system and we all pay for it.

If they’re “scamming”, that implies criminal fraud.

If they’re using it within legal parameters, there are limits to how long a person can get assistance. The “welfare queen” stereotype is why those limits were put in place.

They still exist. They know how to scam the system. It is criminal fraud and that's how the keep their queen status.

I wonder if you’ve got some evidence to back that up.

Lets start with Rachel Dolezal. We can go a little further. Los Angeles alone had 10,975 cases of fraud in one year. The office of investigations for the Social Security administration had 143,385 cases of fraud for a total of $52.6 million The auditors of the SSA said fraud against all benefits account for 10% of the Social Security trust. U.S. Department of labor reports that in San Diego alone the rate on Welfare fraud ( not including S.S. standard benefits) is 2.6% . The Department of Health and Human Services reports that there is a 5% fraud rate in benefits for children.Yes fraud exists. I don't have the time to go into each state, city and Agency ( feel free to do your own research ). I'm sure even you can see there is a problem.

 

[dave p]

The wealthy can pay for it bc they all obviously are heirs who never worked for their success.

This kind of mindset disgusts me. How about you give fifty+ years of your life traveling and being away from your family, working long hours and climbing the ladder of success to give your kids the kind of life you never had only to have a bunch of morons who don’t want to work for a buck rip it away from you. Sounds fair, doesn’t it?

Socialists want to prosper from the efforts of others—and that’s the ugly truth.

There are plenty of working poor who aren’t worried about prospering; surviving would be nice.

The “welfare queen” theme of the 80s is no more. The working poor use government assistance while having a full-time, or several part-time, jobs, and then are demonized for still needing assistance like food stamps or medicaid or housing subsidies.

I don’t demonize those who work for their money and I agree the system had its flaws but any system has flaws. Call me crazy but I don’t like the idea of others benefitting from my hard work unless I choose to help them benefit from it. Most wealthy people DO give back in their own ways. I am not wealthy but my parents are, though their income doesn’t even come close to that of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc.

Why is the idea of “just getting by” whilst being dependent on the government to take care of you appealing? Serious question.

It’s not appealing. As a person with a work ethic, I’d like to see people who work get paid a living wage. I wish there was no need for people who work to need food stamps, housing subsidies, or medicaid.

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

Such as?

Bad decisions, bad lifestyle. Look at the amount of poor Lotto winners. Its just simple human nature. Take one million dollars split it up equally among 10 people. In three months some will have more than what they were given, some will have the same amount and some will owe money.

 

[Penelope]

now run by a dictator.

View attachment 206892

I wouldn't go near trump with a 10' pole, he would be likely to grab my you know what.

Yeah I’m sure he would.

You obviously don’t know what a dictatorship entails so you deflect to the “pussy grabbing” comment.

He is working on it, so yes he is a want to be XI JInping and Putin. The US is going to stop him , even if the GOP are sitting watching all the crap going on.

 

[ricechickie]

There are plenty of working poor who aren’t worried about prospering; surviving would be nice.

The “welfare queen” theme of the 80s is no more. The working poor use government assistance while having a full-time, or several part-time, jobs, and then are demonized for still needing assistance like food stamps or medicaid or housing subsidies.

I don’t demonize those who work for their money and I agree the system had its flaws but any system has flaws. Call me crazy but I don’t like the idea of others benefitting from my hard work unless I choose to help them benefit from it. Most wealthy people DO give back in their own ways. I am not wealthy but my parents are, though their income doesn’t even come close to that of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc.

Why is the idea of “just getting by” whilst being dependent on the government to take care of you appealing? Serious question.

It’s not appealing. As a person with a work ethic, I’d like to see people who work get paid a living wage. I wish there was no need for people who work to need food stamps, housing subsidies, or medicaid.

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

Such as?

Such as spending every penny they make when they make it. Such as having more kids than they can afford, such as not saving any at all. Such as tricking out cars, drinking and gambling, buying expensive jewelry and clothes, expensive TVs and sound systems, etc., etc.

I will not deny that there are people who do not manage their money well. But when you talk about not saving, that’s not possible if you’re barely making enough to cover rent and grocieries and essentials.

 

[ricechickie]

Nope. There are restrictions on how much assistance one can get and for how long.

Yep. They live it until the end so there are still the queens. They still scam the system and we all pay for it.

If they’re “scamming”, that implies criminal fraud.

If they’re using it within legal parameters, there are limits to how long a person can get assistance. The “welfare queen” stereotype is why those limits were put in place.

They still exist. They know how to scam the system. It is criminal fraud and that's how the keep their queen status.

I wonder if you’ve got some evidence to back that up.

Lets start with Rachel Dolezal. We can go a little further. Los Angeles alone had 10,975 cases of fraud in one year. The office of investigations for the Social Security administration had 143,385 cases of fraud for a total of $52.6 million The auditors of the SSA said fraud against all benefits account for 10% of the Social Security trust. U.S. Department of labor reports that in San Diego alone the rate on Welfare fraud ( not including S.S. standard benefits) is 2.6% . The Department of Health and Human Services reports that there is a 5% fraud rate in benefits for children.Yes fraud exists. I don't have the time to go into each state, city and Agency ( feel free to do your own research ). I'm sure even you can see there is a problem.

Fraud, and crime, exists in all walks of life. But to pretend that 5% is a good reason to demonize a whole group, well.... that’s irrational.

 

[PredFan]

I don’t demonize those who work for their money and I agree the system had its flaws but any system has flaws. Call me crazy but I don’t like the idea of others benefitting from my hard work unless I choose to help them benefit from it. Most wealthy people DO give back in their own ways. I am not wealthy but my parents are, though their income doesn’t even come close to that of people like Jeff Bezos, Bill Gates, Zuckerberg, etc.

Why is the idea of “just getting by” whilst being dependent on the government to take care of you appealing? Serious question.

It’s not appealing. As a person with a work ethic, I’d like to see people who work get paid a living wage. I wish there was no need for people who work to need food stamps, housing subsidies, or medicaid.

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

Such as?

Such as spending every penny they make when they make it. Such as having more kids than they can afford, such as not saving any at all. Such as tricking out cars, drinking and gambling, buying expensive jewelry and clothes, expensive TVs and sound systems, etc., etc.

I will not deny that there are people who do not manage their money well. But when you talk about not saving, that’s not possible if you’re barely making enough to cover rent and grocieries and essentials.

I’m not going to keep repeating myself. If you give those people more wages, they are not going to save any money. They are going to spend it on shit they don’t need. That’s one of the reasons they are poor.

 

[ricechickie]

It’s not appealing. As a person with a work ethic, I’d like to see people who work get paid a living wage. I wish there was no need for people who work to need food stamps, housing subsidies, or medicaid.

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

Such as?

Such as spending every penny they make when they make it. Such as having more kids than they can afford, such as not saving any at all. Such as tricking out cars, drinking and gambling, buying expensive jewelry and clothes, expensive TVs and sound systems, etc., etc.

I will not deny that there are people who do not manage their money well. But when you talk about not saving, that’s not possible if you’re barely making enough to cover rent and grocieries and essentials.

I’m not going to keep repeating myself. If you give those people more wages, they are not going to save any money. They are going to spend it on shit they don’t need. That’s one of the reasons they are poor.

Who’s asking you to repeat yourself?

It’s the same demonizing bullshit excuses for paying lousy wages.

I repeat, a work ethic should be rewarded with a living wage.

 

[dave p]

Yep. They live it until the end so there are still the queens. They still scam the system and we all pay for it.

If they’re “scamming”, that implies criminal fraud.

If they’re using it within legal parameters, there are limits to how long a person can get assistance. The “welfare queen” stereotype is why those limits were put in place.

They still exist. They know how to scam the system. It is criminal fraud and that's how the keep their queen status.

I wonder if you’ve got some evidence to back that up.

Lets start with Rachel Dolezal. We can go a little further. Los Angeles alone had 10,975 cases of fraud in one year. The office of investigations for the Social Security administration had 143,385 cases of fraud for a total of $52.6 million The auditors of the SSA said fraud against all benefits account for 10% of the Social Security trust. U.S. Department of labor reports that in San Diego alone the rate on Welfare fraud ( not including S.S. standard benefits) is 2.6% . The Department of Health and Human Services reports that there is a 5% fraud rate in benefits for children.Yes fraud exists. I don't have the time to go into each state, city and Agency ( feel free to do your own research ). I'm sure even you can see there is a problem.

Fraud, and crime, exists in all walks of life. But to pretend that 5% is a good reason to demonize a whole group, well.... that’s irrational.

You are ignoring the 10% stat. I haven’t demonized any one. You asked me to support a statement that there were still welfare queens and fraud within the system. I did that. Now you want to try and change the narrative, accuse me of something I never said. You have learned well from your puppet masters.

 

[dave p]

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

Such as?

Such as spending every penny they make when they make it. Such as having more kids than they can afford, such as not saving any at all. Such as tricking out cars, drinking and gambling, buying expensive jewelry and clothes, expensive TVs and sound systems, etc., etc.

I will not deny that there are people who do not manage their money well. But when you talk about not saving, that’s not possible if you’re barely making enough to cover rent and grocieries and essentials.

I’m not going to keep repeating myself. If you give those people more wages, they are not going to save any money. They are going to spend it on shit they don’t need. That’s one of the reasons they are poor.

Who’s asking you to repeat yourself?

It’s the same demonizing bullshit excuses for paying lousy wages.

I repeat, a work ethic should be rewarded with a living wage.

Not if that particular job can’t warrant the cost. The market and consumers have a tendency to set what the value is. Someone could have a great work ethic but has a job that doesn’t pay and can’t demand a living wage because either the product produced doesn’t have a high enough market value or the job in itself doesn’t contribute enough to the whole. That’s why education is important. To many times we have adults working jobs meant for part time teenagers, those adults have decided that they will stay in that job and then are surprised that they can’t get paid more. The job was never meant to support and adult with expenses.

 

[LoneLaugher]

I love the Trump supporters who want others to explain the details of their plans.

 

[ricechickie]

Such as?

Such as spending every penny they make when they make it. Such as having more kids than they can afford, such as not saving any at all. Such as tricking out cars, drinking and gambling, buying expensive jewelry and clothes, expensive TVs and sound systems, etc., etc.

I will not deny that there are people who do not manage their money well. But when you talk about not saving, that’s not possible if you’re barely making enough to cover rent and grocieries and essentials.

I’m not going to keep repeating myself. If you give those people more wages, they are not going to save any money. They are going to spend it on shit they don’t need. That’s one of the reasons they are poor.

Who’s asking you to repeat yourself?

It’s the same demonizing bullshit excuses for paying lousy wages.

I repeat, a work ethic should be rewarded with a living wage.

Not if that particular job can’t warrant the cost. The market and consumers have a tendency to set what the value is. Someone could have a great work ethic but has a job that doesn’t pay and can’t demand a living wage because either the product produced doesn’t have a high enough market value or the job in itself doesn’t contribute enough to the whole. That’s why education is important. To many times we have adults working jobs meant for part time teenagers, those adults have decided that they will stay in that job and then are surprised that they can’t get paid more. The job was never meant to support and adult with expenses.

And yet men used to support families on manual labor jobs.

 

[dave p]

Such as spending every penny they make when they make it. Such as having more kids than they can afford, such as not saving any at all. Such as tricking out cars, drinking and gambling, buying expensive jewelry and clothes, expensive TVs and sound systems, etc., etc.

I will not deny that there are people who do not manage their money well. But when you talk about not saving, that’s not possible if you’re barely making enough to cover rent and grocieries and essentials.

I’m not going to keep repeating myself. If you give those people more wages, they are not going to save any money. They are going to spend it on shit they don’t need. That’s one of the reasons they are poor.

Who’s asking you to repeat yourself?

It’s the same demonizing bullshit excuses for paying lousy wages.

I repeat, a work ethic should be rewarded with a living wage.

Not if that particular job can’t warrant the cost. The market and consumers have a tendency to set what the value is. Someone could have a great work ethic but has a job that doesn’t pay and can’t demand a living wage because either the product produced doesn’t have a high enough market value or the job in itself doesn’t contribute enough to the whole. That’s why education is important. To many times we have adults working jobs meant for part time teenagers, those adults have decided that they will stay in that job and then are surprised that they can’t get paid more. The job was never meant to support and adult with expenses.

And yet men used to support families on manual labor jobs.

Men and women working manual labor jobs still do support families.They are jobs that require some skill and thought. Those aren’t the jobs that I mentioned and you know it. Why are you being obtuse? Never mind your being obtuse because you can’t back up anything you say and your generalization statements fall flat because they a uttered from the mouth of an alarmist. Try to be honest and then a real conversation could develop. I doubt that is possible with you.

 

[blastoff]

Good stuff all that...who the fuck pays for it?

Anyone buying her BS needs their head examined

And don’t forget in addition to free everything O-C wants completely open borders and the abolishment of ICE. More and more people, some quite dangerous, to get in on the freebies free for all. She should change her first name fo Manna, as in from heaven.

 

[ricechickie]

I will not deny that there are people who do not manage their money well. But when you talk about not saving, that’s not possible if you’re barely making enough to cover rent and grocieries and essentials.

I’m not going to keep repeating myself. If you give those people more wages, they are not going to save any money. They are going to spend it on shit they don’t need. That’s one of the reasons they are poor.

Who’s asking you to repeat yourself?

It’s the same demonizing bullshit excuses for paying lousy wages.

I repeat, a work ethic should be rewarded with a living wage.

Not if that particular job can’t warrant the cost. The market and consumers have a tendency to set what the value is. Someone could have a great work ethic but has a job that doesn’t pay and can’t demand a living wage because either the product produced doesn’t have a high enough market value or the job in itself doesn’t contribute enough to the whole. That’s why education is important. To many times we have adults working jobs meant for part time teenagers, those adults have decided that they will stay in that job and then are surprised that they can’t get paid more. The job was never meant to support and adult with expenses.

And yet men used to support families on manual labor jobs.

Men and women working manual labor jobs still do support families.They are jobs that require some skill and thought. Those aren’t the jobs that I mentioned and you know it. Why are you being obtuse? Never mind your being obtuse because you can’t back up anything you say and your generalization statements fall flat because they a uttered from the mouth of an alarmist. Try to be honest and then a real conversation could develop. I doubt that is possible with you.

Wow.

All you had to do was stop the discussion. There’s no reason for the personal insults.

And there are very few manual labor jobs that will support a family. By manual labor, I meant unskilled work.

Now, I am having a conversation. I don’t mind clarifying or supporting my position. Clearly, it has triggered you.

 

[dave p]

I’m not going to keep repeating myself. If you give those people more wages, they are not going to save any money. They are going to spend it on shit they don’t need. That’s one of the reasons they are poor.

Who’s asking you to repeat yourself?

It’s the same demonizing bullshit excuses for paying lousy wages.

I repeat, a work ethic should be rewarded with a living wage.

Not if that particular job can’t warrant the cost. The market and consumers have a tendency to set what the value is. Someone could have a great work ethic but has a job that doesn’t pay and can’t demand a living wage because either the product produced doesn’t have a high enough market value or the job in itself doesn’t contribute enough to the whole. That’s why education is important. To many times we have adults working jobs meant for part time teenagers, those adults have decided that they will stay in that job and then are surprised that they can’t get paid more. The job was never meant to support and adult with expenses.

And yet men used to support families on manual labor jobs.

Men and women working manual labor jobs still do support families.They are jobs that require some skill and thought. Those aren’t the jobs that I mentioned and you know it. Why are you being obtuse? Never mind your being obtuse because you can’t back up anything you say and your generalization statements fall flat because they a uttered from the mouth of an alarmist. Try to be honest and then a real conversation could develop. I doubt that is possible with you.

Wow.

All you had to do was stop the discussion. There’s no reason for the personal insults.

And there are very few manual labor jobs that will support a family. By manual labor, I meant unskilled work.

Now, I am having a conversation. I don’t mind clarifying or supporting my position. Clearly, it has triggered you.

Your definition of manual labor is incorrect. Entry level unskilled manual labor is completely different and the market has placed a value on that. I am not triggered in Any sense. I was trying present you with facts, you chose to ignore them and make unsubstantiated statements. You aren’t having a conversation because you keep uttering a prviuosy debunked talking point. Gather your thoughts and come back with cognitive rational.

 

[PredFan]

Pipe dream. You cannot make that happen. The problem is the same one that prevents us from fixing poverty. Poor people will continue to do the things that made them poor.

Such as?

Such as spending every penny they make when they make it. Such as having more kids than they can afford, such as not saving any at all. Such as tricking out cars, drinking and gambling, buying expensive jewelry and clothes, expensive TVs and sound systems, etc., etc.

I will not deny that there are people who do not manage their money well. But when you talk about not saving, that’s not possible if you’re barely making enough to cover rent and grocieries and essentials.

I’m not going to keep repeating myself. If you give those people more wages, they are not going to save any money. They are going to spend it on shit they don’t need. That’s one of the reasons they are poor.

Who’s asking you to repeat yourself?

It’s the same demonizing bullshit excuses for paying lousy wages.

I repeat, a work ethic should be rewarded with a living wage.

I repeat, that’s just stupid.