This mayor wants to publicize who’s on welfare and where they live

[Nosmo King]

So, you want all people receiving SSI, SSDI, and Medicare to be listed?

Theoretically, SSI and Medicare benefits are paid for by contributions from the beneficiaries. Furthermore, that would include almost everyone at some point in their lives, so , no, they should be listed. However, welfare beneficiaries have done nothing in exchange for what they receive. Taxpayers are paying their bills.

So everyone else including farm subsidies, Section Eight landlords, banks and financial institutions that get bailed out, they should all get listed as government beneficiaries.

I believe landlords are forced to accept section #8 vouchers. The people who use them should be listed. The landlord gains nothing.

All farm subsidies should be public records. Also bank bailouts, but they already are.

Section Eight landlords are NOT forced to accept vouchers. Your belief is wrong again (but I admire your consistency). The landlord gets a check each and every month. Hardly nothing.

Yep, you are right: they aren't forced to accept it. However, it doesn't benefit them in any way. All it means is that some tick on the ass of society lives in his unit rather than a productive citizen. Either way, the landlord gets a check, but Section #8 tenants normally bring a lot of crime and drug abuse with them.

I live and work in a county in northeast Ohio. I am the county building inspector. Along with inspections conducted for zoning clearance, environmental clearance and building code clearance, I also inspect Section Eight properties. I can speak from actual real life experience from thirteen years on the job that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about. I personally know the tenants and landlords.

You seek immediately to demonize them.

That's why this public listing on a website is such a dangerous idea.

Casting espersions on working class people serves no noble purpose. It does not help a single thing. It's brutal for brutality's sake. It's undeserved humiliation.

 

[David_42]

Theoretically, SSI and Medicare benefits are paid for by contributions from the beneficiaries. Furthermore, that would include almost everyone at some point in their lives, so , no, they should be listed. However, welfare beneficiaries have done nothing in exchange for what they receive. Taxpayers are paying their bills.

So everyone else including farm subsidies, Section Eight landlords, banks and financial institutions that get bailed out, they should all get listed as government beneficiaries.

I believe landlords are forced to accept section #8 vouchers. The people who use them should be listed. The landlord gains nothing.

All farm subsidies should be public records. Also bank bailouts, but they already are.

Section Eight landlords are NOT forced to accept vouchers. Your belief is wrong again (but I admire your consistency). The landlord gets a check each and every month. Hardly nothing.

Yep, you are right: they aren't forced to accept it. However, it doesn't benefit them in any way. All it means is that some tick on the ass of society lives in his unit rather than a productive citizen. Either way, the landlord gets a check, but Section #8 tenants normally bring a lot of crime and drug abuse with them.

I live and work in a county in northeast Ohio. I am the county building inspector. Along with inspections conducted for zoning clearance, environmental clearance and building code clearance, I also inspect Section Eight properties. I can speak from actual real life experience from thirteen years on the job that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about. I personally know the tenants and landlords.

You seek immediately to demonize them.

That's why this public listing on a website is such a dangerous idea.

Casting espersions on working class people serves no noble purpose. It does not help a single thing. It's brutal for brutality's sake. It's undeserved humiliation.

People who dedicate themselves to hating the poor don't care about reality.

 

[Coyote]

Yes. Totally irresponsible and wrong.

Why ?

You figure that if people came for their guns, they might get the bullets ?

I'd have no problem with someone doing it around here.

No. I figure it's nobody's business.

Who really gives a flying fig what you figure.

I don't know but you were the one asking and figuring. If you don't want to know then...why waste everyone's time asking?

I didn't ask if it was a matter of being people's business. I asked if you had a concern over safety.

No. You didn't.

But if that is what you are really asking then yes, safety is a concern. If zealots are aware of who is getting welfare they could decide to harrass them. If zealots are aware of who has guns, same thing.

And, even though you didn't ask - it's no one's effing business if someone is on welfare or if someone has a gun.

But, we've already established that owning guns does not equate to being on government assistance.

It has been well established over the years that people scam the government on a routine basis.

If someone is scamming then all means - turn them in and press charges otherwise - it's no more your business then their tax returns are or their children's school records are (after all - tax money goes into that).

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Why ?

You figure that if people came for their guns, they might get the bullets ?

I'd have no problem with someone doing it around here.

No. I figure it's nobody's business.

Who really gives a flying fig what you figure.

I don't know but you were the one asking and figuring. If you don't want to know then...why waste everyone's time asking?

I didn't ask if it was a matter of being people's business. I asked if you had a concern over safety.

No. You didn't.

But if that is what you are really asking then yes, safety is a concern. If zealots are aware of who is getting welfare they could decide to harrass them. If zealots are aware of who has guns, same thing.

And, even though you didn't ask - it's no one's effing business if someone is on welfare or if someone has a gun.

But, we've already established that owning guns does not equate to being on government assistance.

It has been well established over the years that people scam the government on a routine basis.

If someone is scamming then all means - turn them in and press charges otherwise - it's no more your business then their tax returns are or their children's school records are (after all - tax money goes into that).

Like any left wing twit you assume this means instant witch hunt.

If you have a legitimate need...what are you afraid of ?

 

[Coyote]

No. I figure it's nobody's business.

Who really gives a flying fig what you figure.

I don't know but you were the one asking and figuring. If you don't want to know then...why waste everyone's time asking?

I didn't ask if it was a matter of being people's business. I asked if you had a concern over safety.

No. You didn't.

But if that is what you are really asking then yes, safety is a concern. If zealots are aware of who is getting welfare they could decide to harrass them. If zealots are aware of who has guns, same thing.

And, even though you didn't ask - it's no one's effing business if someone is on welfare or if someone has a gun.

But, we've already established that owning guns does not equate to being on government assistance.

It has been well established over the years that people scam the government on a routine basis.

If someone is scamming then all means - turn them in and press charges otherwise - it's no more your business then their tax returns are or their children's school records are (after all - tax money goes into that).

Like any left wing twit you assume this means instant witch hunt.

If you have a legitimate need...what are you afraid of ?

It's called "privacy". You have a problem with it? If not, then by all means - publish all your information.

 

[auditor0007]

This mayor is a moron.
This mayor wants to publicize who’s on welfare and where they live

If you receive government assistance in the state of Maine, Lewiston Mayor Robert Macdonald thinks the public has a right to know about it.

In a Thursday column for the Twin City Times, Macdonald said a bill will be submitted during Maine’s next legislative session“asking that a Web site be created containing the names, addresses, length of time on assistance and the benefits being collected by every individual on the dole.”

He added: “After all, the public has a right to know how its money is being spent.”

Proposals to target welfare recipients and reform assistance programs have become lightning rods for broader discussions on how the poor are treatedand how taxpayer dollars are used.

Kansas lawmakers received both national criticism and praise this summer after approving a law limiting how people in the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program can use their benefits. And at least 13 states have some sort of drug testing laws for public public assistance applicants or recipients.

[Kansas bans welfare recipients from seeing movies, going swimming on government’s dime]

Macdonald, a local Republican mayor who is up for reelection in November, can’t submit a state bill himself, so he would need a state lawmaker to back the plan in the legislature.

In his column Thursday, he wrote that Maine has a Web site listing the pension amounts individuals receive — something “taxpayers have a right to know,” he said — and wondered why welfare recipients’ information isn’t also publicly posted.

“The answer: our liberal, progressive legislators and their social-service allies have made them a victimized, protected class,” Macdonald wrote. “It’s none of your business how much of your money they get and spend. Who are you to question it? Just shut up and pay!”

Blaming poor people for being poor. The great American (Republcian Nut Job) way.

If you can't blame poor people for being poor, who do you blame? Who's fault is it when somebody is poor?

I don't know. Why don't you ask the 80% of the world population why it is that they are poor?

Other countries have different reasons. We are talking about poor in the US, but I know you're trying to divert the discussion here.

Actually, the reasons aren't much different at all. When you are born into a poor home, the odds are you will remain poor for the rest of your life. Yes, the US does offer opportunity for poor people to work their way out and to better themselves, but what the vast majority of cons completely miss is the fact that poor people face many more obstacles on their way to finding success than those who are not poor. You believe because this country supports the idea that everyone has equal opportunity then it must be true, but it is not. If it were true, then we would not have generation after generation of people being born poor, growing up poor, and dying poor.

 

[Meathead]

Actually, the reasons aren't much different at all. When you are born into a poor home, the odds are you will remain poor for the rest of your life. Yes, the US does offer opportunity for poor people to work their way out and to better themselves, but what the vast majority of cons completely miss is the fact that poor people face many more obstacles on their way to finding success than those who are not poor. You believe because this country supports the idea that everyone has equal opportunity then it must be true, but it is not. If it were true, then we would not have generation after generation of people being born poor, growing up poor, and dying poor.

Offering equal opportunity is not a guarantee of success. What we become is predicated on our upbringing and it is often not poverty that dictates that. A culture that encourages academic excellence of their children, even if the parents are poor, will deliver successful generations, the east-Asians being a prime example. Those whose expectations are tempered to the point of being non-existent, most notably blacks, are likely to fail.

Government cannot raise children nor instill the ambition and intellect needed for success. The most it can do is offer and encourage education and training, which it clearly does. The rest is on the individual.

 

[bripat9643]

So everyone else including farm subsidies, Section Eight landlords, banks and financial institutions that get bailed out, they should all get listed as government beneficiaries.

I believe landlords are forced to accept section #8 vouchers. The people who use them should be listed. The landlord gains nothing.

All farm subsidies should be public records. Also bank bailouts, but they already are.

Section Eight landlords are NOT forced to accept vouchers. Your belief is wrong again (but I admire your consistency). The landlord gets a check each and every month. Hardly nothing.

Yep, you are right: they aren't forced to accept it. However, it doesn't benefit them in any way. All it means is that some tick on the ass of society lives in his unit rather than a productive citizen. Either way, the landlord gets a check, but Section #8 tenants normally bring a lot of crime and drug abuse with them.

I live and work in a county in northeast Ohio. I am the county building inspector. Along with inspections conducted for zoning clearance, environmental clearance and building code clearance, I also inspect Section Eight properties. I can speak from actual real life experience from thirteen years on the job that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about. I personally know the tenants and landlords.

You seek immediately to demonize them.

That's why this public listing on a website is such a dangerous idea.

Casting espersions on working class people serves no noble purpose. It does not help a single thing. It's brutal for brutality's sake. It's undeserved humiliation.

People who dedicate themselves to hating the poor don't care about reality.

What about people who dedicate themselves to hating the rich? Do they care about reality?

One thing we know, following them means going down the road to ruin.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

This mayor is a moron.
This mayor wants to publicize who’s on welfare and where they live

Blaming poor people for being poor. The great American (Republcian Nut Job) way.

If you can't blame poor people for being poor, who do you blame? Who's fault is it when somebody is poor?

I don't know. Why don't you ask the 80% of the world population why it is that they are poor?

Other countries have different reasons. We are talking about poor in the US, but I know you're trying to divert the discussion here.

Actually, the reasons aren't much different at all. When you are born into a poor home, the odds are you will remain poor for the rest of your life. Yes, the US does offer opportunity for poor people to work their way out and to better themselves, but what the vast majority of cons completely miss is the fact that poor people face many more obstacles on their way to finding success than those who are not poor. You believe because this country supports the idea that everyone has equal opportunity then it must be true, but it is not. If it were true, then we would not have generation after generation of people being born poor, growing up poor, and dying poor.

If it were up to me, you would have to be fixed before getting on any government assistance program.

How in the world do you solve poverty when the government encourages the procreation of poor people? You are correct, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. To add insult to injury, many of these people have larger families than the middle-class or wealthy.

Our system is set up for failure.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Theoretically, SSI and Medicare benefits are paid for by contributions from the beneficiaries. Furthermore, that would include almost everyone at some point in their lives, so , no, they should be listed. However, welfare beneficiaries have done nothing in exchange for what they receive. Taxpayers are paying their bills.

So everyone else including farm subsidies, Section Eight landlords, banks and financial institutions that get bailed out, they should all get listed as government beneficiaries.

I believe landlords are forced to accept section #8 vouchers. The people who use them should be listed. The landlord gains nothing.

All farm subsidies should be public records. Also bank bailouts, but they already are.

Section Eight landlords are NOT forced to accept vouchers. Your belief is wrong again (but I admire your consistency). The landlord gets a check each and every month. Hardly nothing.

Yep, you are right: they aren't forced to accept it. However, it doesn't benefit them in any way. All it means is that some tick on the ass of society lives in his unit rather than a productive citizen. Either way, the landlord gets a check, but Section #8 tenants normally bring a lot of crime and drug abuse with them.

I live and work in a county in northeast Ohio. I am the county building inspector. Along with inspections conducted for zoning clearance, environmental clearance and building code clearance, I also inspect Section Eight properties. I can speak from actual real life experience from thirteen years on the job that you don't have the first clue what you're talking about. I personally know the tenants and landlords.

You seek immediately to demonize them.

That's why this public listing on a website is such a dangerous idea.

Casting espersions on working class people serves no noble purpose. It does not help a single thing. It's brutal for brutality's sake. It's undeserved humiliation.

Maybe the Mayor is trying to get those poor people to move out. If he could accomplish that, it would help a lot of things in his city.

I remember during the housing bubble how it destroyed my suburb. With 0% down and no credit check, all the lowlifes moved here from the inner-city. Why not? Free living until the bank kicks you out.

Along with them came the crime. Our police were so busy that they often summoned police from surrounding suburbs. Businesses closed down. The ones that remained open closed earlier because they feared being held up. People getting mugged on the streets. Our schools went to hell because of gang fights and drugs.

It took the banks several years, but they finally foreclosed on all the lowlifes and most of them went back to the city where they belong. Things are much better now, but will never be the same. Like the aftermath of a tornado, some things can never be rebuilt.

Generally speaking, poor people destroy communities, and maybe that's the motivation behind this Mayor's actions. If so, then the Mayor is doing his job.

 

[rightwinger]

I really don't care.

Don't people have a right to know if gun owners live near them?
What is the point of posting the names and addresses of those who receive some form of public assistance?
What if it inspires some anti-welfare nut to go and harrass them?



Or, is that one of those "I really don't care" moments?

I posted my reasons prior.....go back and read.

What if ? Always the whining about what if......

In an age where we could stand a few more taxes on the rich and a few less soakers on the other end....it's time to start thinking about how this all works.

There are other means of dealing with the other end that doesn't hurt innocent people.

If making it public that someone is on welfare is harmful, then you must think it is shameful.

I do think it's shameful. It's horrible to have to be put in a position where you need assistance. It's humiliating. Why make it worse for the person who needs it?

The only reason I can think of that people would want to do this is to deliberately target and shame them, regardless of what has driven them to that point.

Conservatives portray those receiving assistance as being on a gravy train soaking the public. They don't understand how poor people struggle. They treat them like they need to be punished for being poor

 

[rightwinger]

Yes. Totally irresponsible and wrong.

Why ?

You figure that if people came for their guns, they might get the bullets ?

I'd have no problem with someone doing it around here.

No. I figure it's nobody's business.

Who really gives a flying fig what you figure.

I don't know but you were the one asking and figuring. If you don't want to know then...why waste everyone's time asking?

I didn't ask if it was a matter of being people's business. I asked if you had a concern over safety.

But, we've already established that owning guns does not equate to being on government assistance.

It has been well established over the years that people scam the government on a routine basis.

Wealthy people scam the government more than all the poor people combined. They have a team of lawyers to help them

 

[Shrimpbox]

People like RW have a disease. It is the complete inability to see his conservative neighbors as real people. Some people living on welfare are on a gravy train, that is just an inescapable fact. I believe there is something like 18 TRILLION that has been spent on the poor through welfare. Do I disagree that a lot of rich people including a whole bunch of democrats are scamming,the,system. Not at all, that,is true, but that is not what the op is about. Your accusation that conservatives don't understand poor people is just claptrap. Other than a good education, I started my journey with nothing and rub shoulders with many who would be,poor and still do. I sometimes wonder if you ever do the same, you are so far disengaged from reality.

I don't know how you can even make a statement like
Conservatives want the poor to be punished. Why, because,we,don't,want,to,throw money at them. Obama,has made more poor, not less all the while spending more and more money. He has made the one percent richer. He is going the wrong way and we need a new direction. Because you cannot see this you are hurting the poor much more,than conservatives, you are promoting the status quo. Our,society today rewards people at a certain income level, making,them feel like,they can never break out of,their station in life, keeping them beat down and on the plantation.

You disrespect the poor, treating them like one giant monolithic helpless victim. I want them to partake in the great,experiment that is America.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

rightwinger Shrimpbox

#1

People like RW have a disease. It is the complete inability to see his conservative neighbors as real people. Some people living on welfare are on a gravy train, that is just an inescapable fact.

#2

I believe there is something like 18 TRILLION that has been spent on the poor through welfare. Do I disagree that a lot of rich people including a whole bunch of democrats are scamming,the,system. Not at all, that,is true, but that is not what the op is about. Your accusation that conservatives don't understand poor people is just claptrap. Other than a good education, I started my journey with nothing and rub shoulders with many who would be,poor and still do. I sometimes wonder if you ever do the same, you are so far disengaged from reality.

#3

I don't know how you can even make a statement like Conservatives want the poor to be punished. Why, because,we,don't,want,to,throw money at them. Obama,has made more poor, not less all the while spending more and more money. He has made the one percent richer. He is going the wrong way and we need a new direction. Because you cannot see this you are hurting the poor much more,than conservatives, you are promoting the status quo. Our,society today rewards people at a certain income level, making,them feel like,they can never break out of,their station in life, keeping them beat down and on the plantation.

#4

You disrespect the poor, treating them like one giant monolithic helpless victim. I want them to partake in the great,experiment that is America.

#1 Let us assume you are correct in that "People like RW have a disease. It is the complete inability to see his conservative neighbors as real people. Some people living on welfare are on a gravy train, that is just an inescapable fact." -- Do RW and people like him deny this fact? Is your point that welfare is somehow inherently evil because as you say . "Some people living on welfare are on a gravy train?"""""

#2 You say "18 TRILLION that has been spent on the poor through welfare" -- let us say this is true. What of it? What is your point exactly?

You attack RW (and people like him whatever that means) and claim "Your accusation that conservatives don't understand poor people is just claptrap. Other than a good education, I started my journey with nothing and rub shoulders with many who would be,poor and still do. I sometimes wonder if you ever do the same, you are so far disengaged from reality." -- What makes you believe anyone that is not poor understands poor people? It's a simple question.

... and ...

How did you get what you call "a good education" and what do you mean by a good education? What exactly is your education and how do you use that as a measure of anything in the world outside of academia?

... and ...

are your people that 'would be poor' poor, or people that would be poor?

You do sound like a progressive nitwit who thinks rubbing shoulders with somebody else gives them carte blanche to speak for them

#3 Conservtives and punishment. Do you know what people argue when they argue for austerity?

#4 You rub shoulders with a few 'would be poor' people ... and ... disrespect the poor by treating them like one giant monolithic helpless victim.

 

[Shrimpbox]

As usual Dante, not one fact in your rebuttal. I could use everything you said and turn it around on you. You think bullying rhetoric will carry the day. Attack me, attack me personally, question my thought process, diminish my opinion by association. Keep up the incessant insinuations that you have inside information that I despise poor people. You've showed nothing but vitriol and desperation. Have another drink.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Why ?

You figure that if people came for their guns, they might get the bullets ?

I'd have no problem with someone doing it around here.

No. I figure it's nobody's business.

Who really gives a flying fig what you figure.

I don't know but you were the one asking and figuring. If you don't want to know then...why waste everyone's time asking?

I didn't ask if it was a matter of being people's business. I asked if you had a concern over safety.

But, we've already established that owning guns does not equate to being on government assistance.

It has been well established over the years that people scam the government on a routine basis.

Wealthy people scam the government more than all the poor people combined. They have a team of lawyers to help them

They are the government you moron.

 

[Sun Devil 92]

Conservatives portray those receiving assistance as being on a gravy train soaking the public. They don't understand how poor people struggle. They treat them like they need to be punished for being poor

That argument has been countered several times on this thread alone.

What's the matter....you need your Saul Alinsky merit badge ?

 

[auditor0007]

Blaming poor people for being poor. The great American (Republcian Nut Job) way.

If you can't blame poor people for being poor, who do you blame? Who's fault is it when somebody is poor?

I don't know. Why don't you ask the 80% of the world population why it is that they are poor?

Other countries have different reasons. We are talking about poor in the US, but I know you're trying to divert the discussion here.

Actually, the reasons aren't much different at all. When you are born into a poor home, the odds are you will remain poor for the rest of your life. Yes, the US does offer opportunity for poor people to work their way out and to better themselves, but what the vast majority of cons completely miss is the fact that poor people face many more obstacles on their way to finding success than those who are not poor. You believe because this country supports the idea that everyone has equal opportunity then it must be true, but it is not. If it were true, then we would not have generation after generation of people being born poor, growing up poor, and dying poor.

If it were up to me, you would have to be fixed before getting on any government assistance program.

How in the world do you solve poverty when the government encourages the procreation of poor people? You are correct, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. To add insult to injury, many of these people have larger families than the middle-class or wealthy.

Our system is set up for failure.

Well, for one you don't shut down Planned Parenthood hoping that women will just abstain from having sex.

 

[auditor0007]

Actually, the reasons aren't much different at all. When you are born into a poor home, the odds are you will remain poor for the rest of your life. Yes, the US does offer opportunity for poor people to work their way out and to better themselves, but what the vast majority of cons completely miss is the fact that poor people face many more obstacles on their way to finding success than those who are not poor. You believe because this country supports the idea that everyone has equal opportunity then it must be true, but it is not. If it were true, then we would not have generation after generation of people being born poor, growing up poor, and dying poor.

Offering equal opportunity is not a guarantee of success. What we become is predicated on our upbringing and it is often not poverty that dictates that. A culture that encourages academic excellence of their children, even if the parents are poor, will deliver successful generations, the east-Asians being a prime example. Those whose expectations are tempered to the point of being non-existent, most notably blacks, are likely to fail.

Government cannot raise children nor instill the ambition and intellect needed for success. The most it can do is offer and encourage education and training, which it clearly does. The rest is on the individual.

I pretty much agree with that, but you can't abolish the programs meant to help the poor and expect things to get better by doing that.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

If you can't blame poor people for being poor, who do you blame? Who's fault is it when somebody is poor?

I don't know. Why don't you ask the 80% of the world population why it is that they are poor?

Other countries have different reasons. We are talking about poor in the US, but I know you're trying to divert the discussion here.

Actually, the reasons aren't much different at all. When you are born into a poor home, the odds are you will remain poor for the rest of your life. Yes, the US does offer opportunity for poor people to work their way out and to better themselves, but what the vast majority of cons completely miss is the fact that poor people face many more obstacles on their way to finding success than those who are not poor. You believe because this country supports the idea that everyone has equal opportunity then it must be true, but it is not. If it were true, then we would not have generation after generation of people being born poor, growing up poor, and dying poor.

If it were up to me, you would have to be fixed before getting on any government assistance program.

How in the world do you solve poverty when the government encourages the procreation of poor people? You are correct, the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. To add insult to injury, many of these people have larger families than the middle-class or wealthy.

Our system is set up for failure.

Well, for one you don't shut down Planned Parenthood hoping that women will just abstain from having sex.

PP isn't going anywhere whether government funds it or not. The funding is just the liberal way of saying "thank you" for your support.

I say defund PP, NPR and PBS. There is no reason our tax dollars should be going to these programs. But if they insist that support continues, then Limbaugh and the NRA should be getting some of our tax dollars as well.

Fair is fair.