The Lazy Poor

[Againsheila]

Though, being lefties, I'm sure you would opt to remove all choice and just store them in warehouses...

Or kill them. Cuz everybody knows, it's better to be dead than uncomfortable.

I'm not a "lefty." I do however, accept that their are poor in this country. Some will never be able to find jobs, and we need to deal with that. Either provide enough money on disability for them or house them in dormitories with kitchens. Have someone to teach them how to cook, how to shop, how to clean. Give each of them jobs to do so they feel they are contributing. Some will be able to take classes and learn and get a job outside the system, some will be in the system forever but that doesn't mean we should just give up on them.

Those who can work, fine, let's put them to work. They can pick up trash on the roadside, they can plant things in our parks, there are a million things they can do to earn a living, but pay them enough to live. End food stamps altogether. Give them enough money they can buy their own food, teach them how to shop and how to cook. I can live on less money for food than they provide for some of the people on food stamps. Of course, I have to make it myself, but fresh baked bread smells and tastes so much better than the bread you buy in the store. You can do a lot with a fryer, buy them on sale and freeze them. One frying chicken can provide my family for 3 meals.

Of course the don't dare end the food stamp program because that is the one program that keeps the poor from rising up. And they won't replace it with decent wages so people don't have to get help to buy their food.

Then there are the seniors on social security who have slipped through the cracks. They are paying $hundreds on medication they can't afford. They are losing their homes, etc. People who have worked their lives shouldn't have to live their last years in poverty wondering where their next meal is coming from or how they are going to pay for their medication.

Women who have children knowing they have no way to support them, give them up for adoption immediately. People who already have kids and then end up in a bad situation, help them...

Pretty simple stuff.

 

[Freemason9]

It doesn't count if they are homeless, heatless, and foodless by CHOICE.

We do not have families with children huddling on the streets. We do have homeless, mentally ill and drug addled and some run aways that opt to live on the street instead of living at home. It isn't because of poverty, however. It's because of dysfunction.

Actually, we do. They live out of their cars. Some of them find temporary housing. There's a church in Tacoma that provides shelter for homeless families during the winter. The congregation takes turns cooking breakfast and dinner for them and they are provided with sack lunches.

Most of these are people who had kids when they were working and supporting themselves but they lost their jobs in this terrible economy and can't find another.

Some people on this board really need to get out there and find out what they are talking about. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

Here's an article I found on homeless families in Seattle:

Local News | Seattle Times Newspaper

And you have to realize, for every 1 you find out about, there are probably 10 you haven't found out about. When they counted the homeless in our city, the got on the bus at night and counted the people sleeping on the bus. How stupid. We have at least 3 tent cities in this city and they didn't visit any of them, nor did they count the people sleeping in their cars or under whatever they could find on the streets.

How odd that I've worked in human services for decades...and my reality is completely different.

I know the numbers, and I know the reality. I've never seen one family that was homeless because one person lost a job. Ever. It's a fantasy.

But why do you work for a system you hate? Do you have no other skills?

 

[paulitician]

America's 'Poor' are mere pawns in an age-old Political Game. Our 'Poor' live quite comfortably compared to most of the World. So what is being 'Poor' in America these days? It seems the definition keeps changing. The goalposts keep being moved.

Our poor live as they live because our government, of the People, has decided to help them.

If conservatives like you had their way, our poor would live like they do in Africa or India or any other hellhole you wish to name.

Please expound on your interpretation of what being 'Poor' in America is. I'll wait.

 

[koshergrl]

Remember when I told you that people who want to work will work? I know it's hard to imagine that people might actually work at jobs they don't love 24/7, but I assure you, that the working poor can imagine that quite easily. I'm sure I could go on welfare and sit on my ass all day because there are no positions at the newspaper in my hometown available, or because my last novel hasn't been picked up, but I'm not like that. If I can't find a job doing one thing, I'll do another, because my objective is to WORK and HAVE AN INCOME to SUPPORT MY FAMILY. It's not to Have Fun All the Time and Eat Lots of Cheese, while pissing and moaning that I have it bad and somebody else needs to fund my life.

I want to work.

And I am skilled at working with a certain population, it's where my experience is. For me to work with that population, I work within the system that manipulates them. I've worked all aspects of it. I know it very, very well.

 

[Freemason9]

Remember when I told you that people who want to work will work? I know it's hard to imagine that people might actually work at jobs they don't love 24/7, but I assure you, that the working poor can imagine that quite easily. I'm sure I could go on welfare and sit on my ass all day because there are no positions at the newspaper in my hometown available, or because my last novel hasn't been picked up, but I'm not like that. If I can't find a job doing one thing, I'll do another, because my objective is to WORK and HAVE AN INCOME to SUPPORT MY FAMILY. It's not to Have Fun All the Time and Eat Lots of Cheese, while pissing and moaning that I have it bad and somebody else needs to fund my life.

I want to work.

And I am skilled at working with a certain population, it's where my experience is. For me to work with that population, I work within the system that manipulates them. I've worked all aspects of it. I know it very, very well.

Okay, I apologize. I don't agree with you politically, but you do write well. I wish you luck with your efforts!

 

[paulitician]

This whole discussion is meaningless. The dam's gonna break at some point. This Welfare/Warfare State cannot be sustained. We're already $17 Trillion in Debt. How do Americans think we're gonna pay for all the massive future Entitlements? Especially if Amnesty is granted? We just can't afford another 15/20 Million more demanding Government assistance. That's just reality. And the hard-working Middle Class is sick of being soaked. But nothing will change until the dam breaks. There will be mass Civil Unrest and upheaval. Bet on that.

 

[koshergrl]

I'm too busy working to effort much, lol.

 

[High_Gravity]

America's 'Poor' are mere pawns in an age-old Political Game. Our 'Poor' live quite comfortably compared to most of the World. So what is being 'Poor' in America these days? It seems the definition keeps changing. The goalposts keep being moved.

Our poor live as they live because our government, of the People, has decided to help them.

If conservatives like you had their way, our poor would live like they do in Africa or India or any other hellhole you wish to name.

Please expound on your interpretation of what being 'Poor' in America is. I'll wait.

Air Jordans, Flat Screen, X Box 360. Done.

 

[Againsheila]

Remember when I told you that people who want to work will work? I know it's hard to imagine that people might actually work at jobs they don't love 24/7, but I assure you, that the working poor can imagine that quite easily. I'm sure I could go on welfare and sit on my ass all day because there are no positions at the newspaper in my hometown available, or because my last novel hasn't been picked up, but I'm not like that. If I can't find a job doing one thing, I'll do another, because my objective is to WORK and HAVE AN INCOME to SUPPORT MY FAMILY. It's not to Have Fun All the Time and Eat Lots of Cheese, while pissing and moaning that I have it bad and somebody else needs to fund my life.

I want to work.

And I am skilled at working with a certain population, it's where my experience is. For me to work with that population, I work within the system that manipulates them. I've worked all aspects of it. I know it very, very well.

Last time I went seriously looking for work it took me more than a year to find a job. It's never taken me that long to find a job before, I've usually gotten one in a couple of days, maybe not the one I was looking for but A job is better than no job and you can always get another job once you have one, at least that's what I thought at the time. Things are not what they used to be.

Seriously, I couldn't get a job at Jack in the Box. When I was finally hired by United Airlines, they had to train us. Most of my class was 50 or older. It was a very full class, they expected 3/4 of us not to make it through training. Guess what, all but one of us made it through training, and it was a younger person that dropped out. In fact, we were all on probation for a year and none of us older people were let go, everyone who didn't last through probation was in their 20's. I was surprised that United hired so many of us old fogies but I guess they don't age discriminate. All the fast food places do. It would have been great if they hadn't outsourced our jobs to India a year and a half later.

When my husband retires, I'm really hoping I can go to Chicago and get a job in one of the last call centers United has in the USA. If I can, then I can work until ten years from my original hire date and retire, and then we can travel for taxes anywhere United Airlines flies. (and yes, I can thank the union for that. and it doesn't cost the airline a thing because we would be flying standby, filling up seats that normally wouldn't be full and we'd pay the taxes) It would be great. I really want to see the Louvre before I die.

 

[PoliticalChic]

She stepped right in it with that claim, because the government assistance that she would end is what has lifted the very poor out of poverty.

She believes there are no poor, but wishes to recreate the poor by taking away what keeps them from being poor.

That, btw, happens to be the core belief of conservative economic policy...

...to make the poor poorer by ending or drastically reducing the aid that alleviates their poverty.

66% of conservative superhero's Paul Ryan's budget cuts were aimed at government spending for the benefit of low income Americans.

"She stepped right in it with that claim, because the government assistance that she would end is what has lifted the very poor out of poverty."

Actually, I go far further than that....I can prove that liberal/progressive 'welfare' increases poverty.


Watch this:

The government conducted a study, 1971-1978 known as the Seattle-Denver Income Maintenance Experiment, or SIME-DIME, in which low income families were give a guaranteed income,, a welfare package with everything liberal policy makers could hope for.

Result: for every dollar of extra welfare given, low income recipients reduced their labor by 80 cents.
http://www.policyarchive.org/handle/10207/bitstreams/12794.pdf


a. Further results: dissolution of families: “This conclusion was unambiguously unfavorable to advocates of a negative income tax that would cover married couples, for two important reasons. First, increased marital breakups among the poor would increase the numbers on
welfare and the amount of transfer payments, principally because the
separated wife and children would receive higher transfer payments.

Second, marital dissolutions and the usual accompanying absence of
fathers from households with children are generally considered unfavorable outcomes regardless of whether or not the welfare rolls increase.” http://www.bos.frb.org/economic/conf/conf30/conf30c.pdf


b. “When families received guaranteed income at 90% of the poverty level, there was a 43% increase in black family dissolution and a 63% increase in white family dissolution. At 125% of the poverty levels, dissolutions were 75% and 40%.”
Robert B. Carleson, “Government Is The Problem,” p. 57.



Ya' feel stoooopid, now, boyyyyeeeeeeee??

If I stipulate that I understand that you want to end all government aid to the poor, will you stop repeating it?

Do you not understand that your diaphanous method of attempting to pretend you misunderstand the import of a post has been revealed?



Government studies prove that giving money actually increases poverty.
Isn't that so?

 

[paulitician]

Our poor live as they live because our government, of the People, has decided to help them.

If conservatives like you had their way, our poor would live like they do in Africa or India or any other hellhole you wish to name.

Please expound on your interpretation of what being 'Poor' in America is. I'll wait.

Air Jordans, Flat Screen, X Box 360. Done.

Yeah, I just attempt to see where they're coming from. What is their interpretation of being 'Poor' in America. Is it not having that Big Screen TV and IPhone? They usually ignore the question. I really don't think they know what being poor is. But I give em a chance to explain anyway.

 

[PoliticalChic]

So you agree that historically, the Democrats/liberals have been right - in starting these programs -

and the Republicans/conservatives have been WRONG, in opposing them every step of the way.

They are in fact socialism and the redistribution of wealth, btw.

This is proof of why it is vital to keep conservatives out of power.

Hey....I got a note from someone who said I "shredded" you.....

Would it be OK if I addressed you as 'cole slaw' from now on?

An idiot endorsing what you say does not make what you say less idiotic, and keep in mind, about 98% of the props someone like you gets on a forum like this are only because you're under 80 and have a vagina.

I post links and sources, many of which are based on government studies.

What this proves is that your posts can be reduced to, simply "is not, is not!"


Isn't that true, cole slaw?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Hey....I got a note from someone who said I "shredded" you.....

Would it be OK if I addressed you as 'cole slaw' from now on?

You can address that imbecile however you wish, but cole slaw actually has a positive impact on the earth, and even if it becomes garbage it can be used for compost. NYBedwetter not only serves no positive purpose, but is stealing our oxygen and actually reducing the collective intelligence of mankind.

It's because of mindless parasites like that, I can not oppose abortion. If it wasn't for child-resistant lids on Drano, that idiot would have been yet another dead dumbass kid found under a kitchen sink.

Are you capable of substantively refuting anything I said?

EVERYTHING you've posted has been refuted.

 

[koshergrl]

Remember when I told you that people who want to work will work? I know it's hard to imagine that people might actually work at jobs they don't love 24/7, but I assure you, that the working poor can imagine that quite easily. I'm sure I could go on welfare and sit on my ass all day because there are no positions at the newspaper in my hometown available, or because my last novel hasn't been picked up, but I'm not like that. If I can't find a job doing one thing, I'll do another, because my objective is to WORK and HAVE AN INCOME to SUPPORT MY FAMILY. It's not to Have Fun All the Time and Eat Lots of Cheese, while pissing and moaning that I have it bad and somebody else needs to fund my life.

I want to work.

And I am skilled at working with a certain population, it's where my experience is. For me to work with that population, I work within the system that manipulates them. I've worked all aspects of it. I know it very, very well.

Last time I went seriously looking for work it took me more than a year to find a job. It's never taken me that long to find a job before, I've usually gotten one in a couple of days, maybe not the one I was looking for but A job is better than no job and you can always get another job once you have one, at least that's what I thought at the time. Things are not what they used to be.

Seriously, I couldn't get a job at Jack in the Box. When I was finally hired by United Airlines, they had to train us. Most of my class was 50 or older. It was a very full class, they expected 3/4 of us not to make it through training. Guess what, all but one of us made it through training, and it was a younger person that dropped out. In fact, we were all on probation for a year and none of us older people were let go, everyone who didn't last through probation was in their 20's. I was surprised that United hired so many of us old fogies but I guess they don't age discriminate. All the fast food places do. It would have been great if they hadn't outsourced our jobs to India a year and a half later.

When my husband retires, I'm really hoping I can go to Chicago and get a job in one of the last call centers United has in the USA. If I can, then I can work until ten years from my original hire date and retire, and then we can travel for taxes anywhere United Airlines flies. (and yes, I can thank the union for that. and it doesn't cost the airline a thing because we would be flying standby, filling up seats that normally wouldn't be full and we'd pay the taxes) It would be great. I really want to see the Louvre before I die.

As I said, if you want to work, you'll work. Sometimes, it requires moving.

But if you aren't willing to work where employees are needed, then the fault isn't somebody else's. It's yours. I assume you were tethered to your home for some imaginary reason...but I guarantee, it was an imaginary reason. If you can't find a job where you live, then you move. Pretty simple.

 

[PoliticalChic]

She stepped right in it with that claim, because the government assistance that she would end is what has lifted the very poor out of poverty.

She believes there are no poor, but wishes to recreate the poor by taking away what keeps them from being poor.

That, btw, happens to be the core belief of conservative economic policy...

...to make the poor poorer by ending or drastically reducing the aid that alleviates their poverty.

66% of conservative superhero's Paul Ryan's budget cuts were aimed at government spending for the benefit of low income Americans.

Wow! So do we call all the lies you just told a fairy tale instead of lies?

Prove anything I said was a lie.

PC's statement that there are no poor is in this thread, so that's not a lie.

PC's desire to cut aid to the poor is common knowledge, so that's not a lie.

The figures on Paul Ryan's budget are common knowledge, so that's not a lie.

Proceed...

When you misstate facts by leaving out pertinent portions......


....then, you are lying.


Everything you say reeks of dishonesty.


As do you...

 

[Againsheila]

This whole discussion is meaningless. The dam's gonna break at some point. This Welfare/Warfare State cannot be sustained. We're already $17 Trillion in Debt. How do Americans think we're gonna pay for all the massive future Entitlements? Especially if Amnesty is granted? We just can't afford another 15/20 Million more demanding Government assistance. That's just reality. And the hard-working Middle Class is sick of being soaked. But nothing will change until the dam breaks. There will be mass Civil Unrest and upheaval. Bet on that.

We could start by not granting Amnesty. Illegals coming over the border has already picked up with all this talk of "amnesty". We could also do away with corporate welfare. We should have bailed out the people instead of the banks, the banks still would have gotten their money and more of it would have gone into the economy.

And what the heck are we doing providing foreign aid when we are so deep in debt? You take care of your own FIRST! Before you give to charity, you pay your bills. We should be cutting congresses pay every year they don't balance the budget.

Why have an FBI, a CIA AND Homeland Security? And what the heck is homeland security for if when there is a terrorist attack we are going to blame the FBI?

Why have a national Department of Education? We didn't have one before Carter and our test scores were better. There are a lot of government agencies and departments we can do away with completely to save ourselves money without ever touching aid to the poor.

And instead of food stamps, how about paying enough to our disabled, our seniors and the unemployed enough to buy food and pay their rent and utility bills?

You'd probably save enough in the bureaucracy of the food stamp program to make up the difference.

 

[paulitician]

This whole discussion is meaningless. The dam's gonna break at some point. This Welfare/Warfare State cannot be sustained. We're already $17 Trillion in Debt. How do Americans think we're gonna pay for all the massive future Entitlements? Especially if Amnesty is granted? We just can't afford another 15/20 Million more demanding Government assistance. That's just reality. And the hard-working Middle Class is sick of being soaked. But nothing will change until the dam breaks. There will be mass Civil Unrest and upheaval. Bet on that.

We could start by not granting Amnesty. Illegals coming over the border has already picked up with all this talk of "amnesty". We could also do away with corporate welfare. We should have bailed out the people instead of the banks, the banks still would have gotten their money and more of it would have gone into the economy.

And what the heck are we doing providing foreign aid when we are so deep in debt? You take care of your own FIRST! Before you give to charity, you pay your bills. We should be cutting congresses pay every year they don't balance the budget.

Why have an FBI, a CIA AND Homeland Security? And what the heck is homeland security for if when there is a terrorist attack we are going to blame the FBI?

Why have a national Department of Education? We didn't have one before Carter and our test scores were better. There are a lot of government agencies and departments we can do away with completely to save ourselves money without ever touching aid to the poor.

And instead of food stamps, how about paying enough to our disabled, our seniors and the unemployed enough to buy food and pay their rent and utility bills?

You'd probably save enough in the bureaucracy of the food stamp program to make up the difference.

Discussions like this are all for naught. The Party's gonna end. We simply can't sustain this Welfare/Warfare State. The money just isn't gonna be there to fund the massive future Entitlements. The hard-working Middle Class will be all tapped out. And that's when our real problems begin.

People who've lived off of Entitlements all their lives, are not gonna be happy when the Party ends. They'll likely take to the streets and burn it all down. And Homeland Security is currently preparing for that day. They're hoarding Ammo at this point. Our Government knows it's all gonna collapse. All I can say is prepare and stay safe.

 

[kwc57]

She stepped right in it with that claim, because the government assistance that she would end is what has lifted the very poor out of poverty.

She believes there are no poor, but wishes to recreate the poor by taking away what keeps them from being poor.

That, btw, happens to be the core belief of conservative economic policy...

...to make the poor poorer by ending or drastically reducing the aid that alleviates their poverty.

66% of conservative superhero's Paul Ryan's budget cuts were aimed at government spending for the benefit of low income Americans.

Wow! So do we call all the lies you just told a fairy tale instead of lies?

Prove anything I said was a lie.

PC's statement that there are no poor is in this thread, so that's not a lie.

PC's desire to cut aid to the poor is common knowledge, so that's not a lie.

The figures on Paul Ryan's budget are common knowledge, so that's not a lie.

Proceed...

See your statements in red.

 

[kwc57]

The problem is we are in a bad economy which means more people on assistance. Not saying their aren't people who abuse the system, just that not all of them, not even most of them abuse the system. Why is it no one complains about corporate welfare or the bank bailouts which cost us a heck of a lot more? No, they'd rather complain about people working minimum wage jobs that need food stamps and call them lazy.

You are missing the point of the OP. We aren't talking about people down on their luck trying to replace a good lost job. We are talking about those who refuse to work because they know the government will be their sugar daddy. The lazy poor. Those who are poor by choice and too lazy to fend for themselves because they know someone else will feed them while they do nothing but exist.

And when you see them on the street, how do you know the difference?

I wouldn't.......but then my job isn't to determine who would qualify for government assitance. If it WERE my job, their willingness to get an education, job training and work to support themselves when given the opportunity as opposed to those who want to be supported like their parents and grandparents before them for doing nothing but existing would be a fairly large clue of which is which though. Those who won't use assistance to better themselves and believe they deserve assisatance for life.......the lazy poor......should be cut off. It's called tough love.

 

[Againsheila]

This whole discussion is meaningless. The dam's gonna break at some point. This Welfare/Warfare State cannot be sustained. We're already $17 Trillion in Debt. How do Americans think we're gonna pay for all the massive future Entitlements? Especially if Amnesty is granted? We just can't afford another 15/20 Million more demanding Government assistance. That's just reality. And the hard-working Middle Class is sick of being soaked. But nothing will change until the dam breaks. There will be mass Civil Unrest and upheaval. Bet on that.

We could start by not granting Amnesty. Illegals coming over the border has already picked up with all this talk of "amnesty". We could also do away with corporate welfare. We should have bailed out the people instead of the banks, the banks still would have gotten their money and more of it would have gone into the economy.

And what the heck are we doing providing foreign aid when we are so deep in debt? You take care of your own FIRST! Before you give to charity, you pay your bills. We should be cutting congresses pay every year they don't balance the budget.

Why have an FBI, a CIA AND Homeland Security? And what the heck is homeland security for if when there is a terrorist attack we are going to blame the FBI?

Why have a national Department of Education? We didn't have one before Carter and our test scores were better. There are a lot of government agencies and departments we can do away with completely to save ourselves money without ever touching aid to the poor.

And instead of food stamps, how about paying enough to our disabled, our seniors and the unemployed enough to buy food and pay their rent and utility bills?

You'd probably save enough in the bureaucracy of the food stamp program to make up the difference.

Discussions like this are all for naught. The Party's gonna end. We simply can't sustain this Welfare/Warfare State. The money just isn't gonna be there to fund the massive future Entitlements. The hard-working Middle Class will be all tapped out. And that's when our real problems begin.

People who've lived off of Entitlements all their lives, are not gonna be happy when the Party ends. They'll likely take to the streets and burn it all down. And Homeland Security is currently preparing for that day. They're hoarding Ammo at this point. Our Government knows it's all gonna collapse. All I can say is prepare and stay safe.

I agree, but, well, that's another topic entirely.