# Welfare



## The Dude (Nov 6, 2013)

Bridechu said:
			
		

> So, not sure if someone already did this because there's already thirty-five pages, but I did the math on these purchases.
> 
> The high school is $50 and I believe he said there's eight of them?
> The riding camp is a whopping $100.
> ...



Your tax dollars at work folks. NASA? Missile Defense? Feeding the starving? Housing the homeless? Paying our soldiers better and making sure their spouses and kids are taken care of by the VA if the soldier dies (a big one for me)? Funding our schools (Mrs. Dude is a middle school teacher, so this one really pisses me off)? Prisons and law enforcement (my Dad was in law enforcement, so another big one for me)? FUCK ALL THAT! A fat autistic man needs his fucking LEGOs!


----------



## c-no (Nov 6, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> Bridechu said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, let's have the tax dollars fuel the   of a thirty-one year old man who will spend it on Lego play-sets rather than on things that are important. Let's get this man his Lego's, the schools and soldiers don't need funding at all *sarcasm*.


----------



## Silver (Nov 6, 2013)

c-no said:
			
		

> The Dude said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Okay, that's not fair. It's not the government's fault that Chris has absolutely no idea how to use his tugboat. It's Borb's for not teaching him properly, as well as for using his autism to excuse him from many things that would otherwise be expected of him (the court-mandated psychiatry, for instance) and for raising him to a point where he now *needs* the welfare because there's no way now that Chris would be able to work. I really hate the way the US government works, but I'm also a huge supporter of welfare, so while yes I'm pissed that taxpayer dollars are going towards these Lego (and of course vidya) he's buying, I also know that that's gonna happen when the way welfare works is that taxpayer money pays people who aren't able to work. There's no way the government could keep tabs on every single person with welfare (I mean, actively, like studying the worth of what they do with their lives and money), and Chris is far from the only person abusing the system - and hell, he's not doing it to scam the system so much as because he wasn't taught a better way to live.


----------



## The Dude (Nov 6, 2013)

Altissimo said:
			
		

> c-no said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Yeah? Well, y'know, that's just like, uh...your opinion, man. Please explain why my money, which I earned, has to go to people who squander it? Why am I and every other tax payer responsible for these people? Because they're "special"? Is that why they get to live off of my back? Fuck that noise, man. I wasn't raised that way. I was raised to either sink or swim. You either make it or you don't and if you don't make it you sure as hell don't drag other people down with you. People like Chris are the most selfish, entitled people I know. They don't respect you or have any gratitude for what you're providing them. They see it as free money, and it is. You don't earn that money just because you're mentally defective.


----------



## Kosher Dill (Nov 6, 2013)

@ The Dude
The way I see it: his tugboat is much cheaper than a prison cell or a bed in the ICU, which is where he'd inevitably end up without it. Instead, he's jailing himself for only $12K a year. It's still a disgrace, but it's the best bargain we're going to get, given that we don't let people literally die in the streets anymore.


----------



## CWCissey (Nov 6, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> Yeah? Well, y'know, that's just like, uh...your opinion, man. Please explain why my money, which I earned, has to go to people who squander it? Why am I and every other tax payer responsible for these people? Because they're "special"? Is that why they get to live off of my back? Fuck that noise, man. I wasn't raised that way. I was raised to either sink or swim. You either make it or you don't and if you don't make it you sure as hell don't drag other people down with you. People like Chris are the most selfish, entitled people I know. They don't respect you or have any gratitude for what you're providing them. They see it as free money, and it is. You don't earn that money just because you're mentally defective.



I agree! I may be a massive supporter of the welfare state AS A SAFETY NET and nothing more! Recently some chav slag who's never worked a day in her life got a £600,000 super house made for her and her litter because she can't keep her legs closed. Does that sound fair?

If you can work, do it. If you can't find work, do something useful with your time to EARN your keep. Like perhaps volunteering with those who ACTUALLY deserve handouts.


----------



## Silver (Nov 6, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> Yeah? Well, y'know, that's just like, uh...your opinion, man. Please explain why my money, which I earned, has to go to people who squander it? Why am I and every other tax payer responsible for these people? Because they're "special"? Is that why they get to live off of my back? Fuck that noise, man. I wasn't raised that way. I was raised to either sink or swim. You either make it or you don't and if you don't make it you sure as hell don't drag other people down with you. People like Chris are the most selfish, entitled people I know. They don't respect you or have any gratitude for what you're providing them. They see it as free money, and it is. You don't earn that money just because you're mentally defective.



Well, I think we have different views on the subject from the get-go so all I can say is, agree to disagree? I could try and explain my viewpoint better but I really don't want to end up derailing the thread.


----------



## The Dude (Nov 6, 2013)

Kosher Dill said:
			
		

> @ The Dude
> The way I see it: his tugboat is much cheaper than a prison cell or a bed in the ICU, which is where he'd inevitably end up without it. Instead, he's jailing himself for only $12K a year. It's still a disgrace, but it's the best bargain we're going to get, given that we don't let people literally die in the streets anymore.



If he was jailed or in a ward somewhere he wouldn't be free to harass business owners, run over innocent people trying to protect their businesses, vandalize other peoples' property, mooch free wi-fi and take up TWO FUCKING TABLES with his LEGO hugbox at local eateries, or back his POS Caddy into other peoples' vehicles. I'd much rather my tax dollars going to PROTECT innocent people from his idiocy than it going to making Baby Huey happy for five minutes with material possessions and have him free to terrorize the good people of Virginia. 

But, y'know, that's just my opinion, man.


----------



## DykesDykesChina (Nov 6, 2013)

Kosher Dill said:
			
		

> @ The Dude
> The way I see it: his tugboat is much cheaper than a prison cell or a bed in the ICU, which is where he'd inevitably end up without it. Instead, he's jailing himself for only $12K a year. It's still a disgrace, but it's the best bargain we're going to get, given that we don't let people literally die in the streets anymore.


I think that people who cannot work (e.g. very low-functioning autistics) have a right to be supported by the community. So has anyone who has lost his/her job (it's not always their own fault) and is looking for a new one.

Okay, I know: Chris probably IS able to work and he's not at all looking for employment. If his tugboat was taken away, he'd probably starve... I don't want that, I don't think anyone deserves to starve in the street. But I also think that some sort of employment would be the best that could happen to Chris - not even primarily for economic reasons, but for him personality-wise (social interaction, sense of accomplishment, etc). He won't look for a job by himself. As I said, a professional carer would be great.


----------



## The Dude (Nov 6, 2013)

DykesDykesChina said:
			
		

> Kosher Dill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You want to help those people out? Fine. More power to you. There are several churches and other charities you can donate your own money to. Welfare is forced, tax payer funded charity. You get no choice as to where your money goes. Is it sad that person has mental impairments? Is it sad that person lost their job? Sure it is. Help them if you want. Just don't force me to do it because of some bullshit, feel-good "civic duty, communal responsibility" nonsense. I don't owe those people a damn thing. Like I said, you don't automatically deserve money because you're down on your luck or a mental defective. I've lost jobs before and no one gave me a fucking thing. I went back out and found another fucking job.


----------



## QI 541 (Nov 6, 2013)

> Okay, I know: Chris probably IS able to work and he's not at all looking for employment. If his tugboat was taken away, he'd probably starve... I don't want that, I don't think anyone deserves to starve in the street.



I'm not so sure about that.  Chris gets welfare because he's disabled, not because he's poor.  Considering how much he spends on toys and crap, I'm not sure he needs it to survive.



			
				The Dude said:
			
		

> Help them if you want. Just don't force me to do it because of some bullshit, feel-good "civic duty, communal responsibility" nonsense.



You're forced to do it because it's necessary for society to function.  Whether you choose to feel good about it is up to you.


----------



## PvtRichardCranium (Nov 6, 2013)

The only reason I'm on disability is because if I'm not on disability than I lose access to Medicaid and then I can't afford my meds and then I go crazy and then I get a bunch of teenage girls praising me for shooting up a movie theater or something. I use it to pay bills and buy groceries because my job doesn't pay enough to do either of that. Sure, if I didn't have the job I'd be getting the full 800 or so dollars or whatever, but I don't just want to sit on my ass all day and do nothing, plus I can't live off of 800 a month. Do I want to be on welfare? Not really. I could get a better job that would pay a lot more money, or work more hours on the job I work now to get more money, but if I do that, I can't have meds because my disability is the only thing that qualifies me for my meds, which are REALLY FUCKING EXPENSIVE because they're the kind of meds that druggies use to kill themselves with superduper mind blowing trips. So yeah, I feel like shit because I can't afford to keep myself from going completely fucking insane without government assistance.

Chris doesn't feel any remorse and he doesn't even need the social security! He uses the welfare he doesn't even need to buy Legos and video games. He doesn't need it for medication! It's people like him that make people like The Dude hate people like me!

Chris needs to die in a fire.


----------



## Marvin (Nov 6, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> DykesDykesChina said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


But... without centralized, public services, you wouldn't be able to have private property in the first place. There are tons of federal services that everyone benefits from, things like the interstate highway system. Ultimately, at the end of the day, I don't feel bad about taxing people and using that tax for the greater good.



			
				raymond said:
			
		

> > Okay, I know: Chris probably IS able to work and he's not at all looking for employment. If his tugboat was taken away, he'd probably starve... I don't want that, I don't think anyone deserves to starve in the street.
> 
> 
> 
> I'm not so sure about that.  Chris gets welfare because he's disabled, not because he's poor.  Considering how much he spends on toys and crap, I'm not sure he needs it to survive.


Well, Chris' financials are kind of tricky. He spends a lot of money on credit. Ultimately, if Chris lost the tugboat, it'd be up to Barb to support them and whether or not they'll be able to survive, things will at least be a lot harder for them.


----------



## sparklemilhouse (Nov 6, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> DykesDykesChina said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




and this is why I have you on my ignore list.


----------



## Suloxide (Nov 6, 2013)

*Re: YT 11/05/13 - Lego Manchester High Video*



			
				The Dude said:
			
		

> Kosher Dill said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I don't see how minor vandalism of a store display and taking up two tables at a McDonalds is terrorizing people.  Realistically if you plan on doing business, it's inevitable that you're going to run into someone like Chris.  The people I encounter while working graveyard at a 7-11 make Chris' antics look childish, interestingly if Chris was a body of work he would be Sonichu and the crap I got during graveyard would be the Mona Lisa.
Nobody at McDonalds cares that he's there with Legos, they'd care if he was actually harassing other people but just doing that video doesn't matter to any of them.
The only person that had to worry was Snyder and look where that landed Chris.


----------



## Burning Love (Nov 6, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> DykesDykesChina said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I nominate this for worst post of the year. 

Jobbychu's gonna have to try harder next time. The bar has been lowered.


----------



## The Dude (Nov 6, 2013)

Marvin, there is a huge difference between taxes going to roads and public services that everyone uses and people who sit on their ass all day building LEGO hugboxes, playing vidya, or just happened to shit out a few kids and dropped out of school. One is the greater good because it benefits everyone, one is just twselfish and lazy. I have no problem having my money go to schools, roads, national parks, the military, law enforcement, or EMS and fire fighters. Giving free money that someone else earned to someone that does nothing to benefit society is not the greater good.

And I'm done with my welfare ranting. 

Sparklemillhouse, I'm honored to be on your ignore list.


----------



## Mitsunari (Nov 6, 2013)

Where I come from, welfare is widespread and given to people in exchange for votes, since those in power want to stay in power. We still live.


----------



## Null (Nov 6, 2013)

I would gladly give a billionth of every penny I earn to Chris if I didn't have to give a twentieth of it to blowing up brown people.


----------



## IanBrannanSOMETHING (Nov 6, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> Marvin, there is a huge difference between taxes going to roads and public services that everyone uses and people who sit on their ass all day building LEGO hugboxes, playing vidya, or just happened to shit out a few kids and dropped out of school. One is the greater good because it benefits everyone, one is just twselfish and lazy. I have no problem having my money go to schools, roads, national parks, the military, law enforcement, or EMS and fire fighters. Giving free money that someone else earned to someone that does nothing to benefit society is not the greater good.
> 
> And I'm done with my welfare ranting.
> 
> Sparklemillhouse, I'm honored to be on your ignore list.



...Wow. So basically people with actual severe mental handicaps, or people with serious illnesses, or debilitating disabilities don't deserve to be able to live? People who in no way could hold down a job through no fault of their own shouldn't be able to have a roof over their heads or food put in front of them?

I agree that spongers are the worst type of tax drain but don't tar everyone with the same brush.


----------



## Count groudon (Nov 6, 2013)

IanBrannanSOMETHING said:
			
		

> The Dude said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Ok can we please stop arguing? This is getting nothing accomplished and it's just wasting everyone's time. You two have different views on things,please just accept that and let this be over with.


----------



## Stuff and Things (Nov 6, 2013)

Count groudon said:
			
		

> IanBrannanSOMETHING said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Just say it this way: stop sperging and focus on the damn topic... man, it feels so good being able to say that


----------



## Batman VS Tony Danza (Nov 6, 2013)

YOU GUYS ARE RUINING CHRISTMAS!!!


----------



## The Dude (Nov 6, 2013)

BatmanVSTonyDanza said:
			
		

> YOU GUYS ARE RUINING CHRISTMAS!!!



But what about the spaghetti dinner?


----------



## Mourning Dove (Nov 6, 2013)

FemboiBunny said:
			
		

> Count groudon said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I have an opinion just like many others about welfare. But if we are going to argue about the merits of the welfare system, then that topic belongs in General.


----------



## Null (Nov 6, 2013)




----------



## IanBrannanSOMETHING (Nov 6, 2013)

Count groudon said:
			
		

> Ok can we please stop arguing? This is getting nothing accomplished and it's just wasting everyone's time. You two have different views on things,please just accept that and let this be over with.



You say this as though I made more than one post on the matter.

In theory, your post could be considered the same waste as it's not talking about the video at hand


----------



## Uzumaki (Nov 7, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> Marvin, there is a huge difference between taxes going to roads and public services that everyone uses and people who sit on their ass all day building LEGO hugboxes, playing vidya, or just happened to shit out a few kids and dropped out of school. One is the greater good because it benefits everyone, one is just twselfish and lazy. I have no problem having my money go to schools, roads, national parks, the military, law enforcement, or EMS and fire fighters. Giving free money that someone else earned to someone that does nothing to benefit society is not the greater good.



The pubic good it does is not having people starving in the streets, knifing people for a few dollars to eat or dying in a gutter. Do you really want to live in the America where everyone sinks or swims by their own merits? Because that's the American where half of the people are looking to rob you. Living in a country where you can go for a walk alone at night is just as important as paved fucking roads.



> And I'm done with my welfare ranting.



Okay, but that doesn't give you the automatic last word.


----------



## The Dude (Nov 7, 2013)

Uzumaki said:
			
		

> The Dude said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Don't want to get robbed by some lowlife? Buy a gun, learn how to use it, get a concealed carry permit, learn how to defend yourself. Don't be a victim. Of course that is all under the assumption that you live in a place that allows you to own and carry a firearm. If you live in some draconian place that doesn't allow you to defend your life, your loved ones, and your property then I can't help you. Maybe you'll be lucky enough to have the police show up in time to get a statement before you bleed out.

As for helping people in need, great. I'm for it as long as It's only temporary until someone can support themselves again. They should also be required to be clean of drugs and doing community service to earn that money, something to benefit the community. They should be given incentive to go back out and earn for themselves again. I am not for welfare leeches who manipulate the system so they can live off my back without working a day in their lives.

I have three severely disabled cousins. One sadly passed away about ten years ago and his brother doesn't have much longer to live. They are on my Dad's side of the family. Neither of them could walk, they scooted around the house on their backsides when they weren't in wheelchairs. They communicated by grunts that nearly resembled speech. Neither of them we're on disability or any kind of welfare. My other cousin is on my Mother's side and when he was a baby his biological parents would hold him under water when he cried until he stopped. He was adopted by my Uncle and Aunt along with his sister who also has some disabilities. He cannot walk either, but he has a sharp mind still. Neither of them are on disability or collect welfare. He has a job in computers and tutoring despite his severe physical disabilities. 

It's one thing to collect disability when there is no other option it support structure and you really cannot earn. It's another if You're someone like Chris who collects it simply because It's easier than working.

I know I said I was done, but since we have a dedicated thread now I'm weighing in again.


----------



## Bgheff (Nov 7, 2013)

This thread makes me glad I was banned.


----------



## Foulmouth (Nov 7, 2013)

I would gladly give a billionth of every penny I earn to brown people if I could give a twentieth of it to blowing up chris.
(Sorry Null)


----------



## c-no (Nov 7, 2013)

lurkingintheshadows said:
			
		

> not this topic again... it just brings out the worst in people.


It pretty much would bring out the worst in both sides. 
Regarding welfare, I'm ambivalent towards it. I don't mind it helping people who need the money to buy the necessities like food but I do not like those who would sponge off the system. I can't say more since I'm more than willing to admit that I'm ignorant in the field of welfare.


----------



## Kosher Dill (Nov 7, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> As for helping people in need, great. I'm for it as long as It's only temporary until someone can support themselves again. They should also be required to be clean of drugs and doing community service to earn that money, something to benefit the community. They should be given incentive to go back out and earn for themselves again. I am not for welfare leeches who manipulate the system so they can live off my back without working a day in their lives


I think the real question is: or else what? What do you do with someone like Chris who absolutely will never work unless you literally enslave him? How much money do you spend on social workers, incentives, dragging him in and out of court, forcing him to do community service, etc?


----------



## Pikonic (Nov 7, 2013)

That red box above us said:
			
		

> People are expressing personal opinions here. Please be courteous and do not outright insult someone.



I probably shouldn't touch this thread with a thirty foot pole, but here it goes.

Nothing in existence is perfect (except apple flavored Toaster Strudles, do not listen to people who prefer strawberry) and welfare is no exception. I see we're talking welfare as a form of unemployment over disability. In this case I support welfare, so long as you are actively seeking work. When my boyfriend was laid off he got unemployment until he got his new job. Every month he called the Social Security Office in RI and was asked if he was actively seeking work. Do people lie? Yes, but that is going to happen whether we like it or not. I think we sometimes let the minority speak for the majority. Unemployment sucks ass and most people want to work, but all we hear about are the welfare queens buying sirloin and play stations with our money. This minority sucks, I get that, but I'd rather these people have money along with the hard working people who just got laid off for uncontrollable  reasons than for the latter to have nothing. I see my taxmoney that goes to these programs as kinda insurance, for one day _I_ might lose my job.
Now onto disability (Chris)
I have a friend who suffers from MS and another with sever anxiety. I've known these people for years, they are nice people but the reality is they cannot work. I promise you these two would love jobs that pay much higher than what they receive but they can not work (one mentally can not, one physically can not) Who are we to say, "well, I guess you're a starving hobo, sorry bitch". The reality is Chris can't work at this point in his life. What will he do? Retail? Food Service? Costomer Service? IT? He can't do these, he has the mentality of a child. As I stated before the system isn't perfect, but I'll pay for Chris if it gives my friends who need it a roof over their head and food on their tables.

TLR The system isn't perfect, but I'm glad the people who truly need it have it.


----------



## hellbound (Nov 7, 2013)

I'm probably going to be one of the few to agree with the Dude here, but I agree that welfare, at least to the extent we have it now, is a HUGE error. 

It is pitiable that there are people there unable to work. Absolutely, I will 100% agree. It is unfortunate that there are those who are looking and can't find it, and those who can only find meager wages, it really is.

But, and I hate to say it, life is hard. It always has been, and it always will be. And people talk in terms of it being charitable. It's not, it's base theft. Charity is when you pay from your own pocket, not vote to pay from somebody else's.

We have a system where other people's money buys chips, soda, candy, cakes, practically any food you want (about the only restriction is it's not prepared, and even that not always). Why is it acceptable that somebody who is taking from others to spend it on luxury foods, particularly unhealthy luxury foods, rather than bare necessities?

We have a system where other people's money buys video games, televisions, toys, electronics,  essentially anything you want. Hell, look at Chris. Why is that acceptable? That's not helping somebody survive a rough patch.

We have a system that essentially encourages people to have children they can't afford so they can get more money. If you're on welfare, you shouldn't be having kids in the first place. Why do we subsidize poor choices? 

At what point did we decide it was the responsibility of everybody else to provide for our own retirement? You have millions of Americans who don't put aside anything for themselves, counting on a system rapidly shooting past bankruptcy to support them when they're too old to work. It may have worked if we had the life expectancy and birth rates we did when it was instituted, but it won't work for much longer the way things are.

At what point did we decide it was the responsibility of everybody else to provide our healthcare? It's the fault of the fucked-up system that began to treat health insurance as a way of paying for basic care rather than management of risk that healthcare became so expensive in the first place, so we institute laws to further that dependency and completely remove the ability of health insurance companies to manage risk at all! And then we wonder why premiums are skyrocketing and people are getting dropped left and right.

It is a cold, hard, sad reality that not everybody can live comfortably in this world. What the welfare system as it is now does, is send us spiraling so far into debt we might as well not even keep track, drag down those who are willing and able to work hard, and remove incentive for many to even try. If you're satisfied with a welfare lifestyle, why bother working at any level above what you need to get a welfare lifestyle? And by perpetually increasing the welfare lifestyle, you find more and more people willing to accept it.

I'm not even sure I'm opposed to things like TANF and workfare, but those need to be temporary measures to support people who are legitimately between jobs. There should be no cradle-to-grave from the government. Charity is another matter.


----------



## Foulmouth (Nov 8, 2013)

Basically welfare should be to help people get back on their feet, not to pay them to sit on their arse.


----------



## The Dude (Nov 8, 2013)

Kosher Dill said:
			
		

> The Dude said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I guess I'm just a cold, heartless conservative bastard (as many of you must assume I am) but lazy ass people like Chris should be cut loose. No one should be given a free ticket to ride simply because they are unable to work. Sink or swim, simple as that. I pointed to my disabled cousins as examples as people in worse condition than Chris who still are able to work. Of my two cousins who can't even talk, both of them had jobs and worked for many years until one passed on and the others health became too poor for him to do so anymore. My other cousin, who can talk but is still severely physically handicapped, works hard and earns his own way. Chris has no excuse other than his parents allowed (encouraged really) him to be lazy, which is no excuse at all.



			
				hellbound said:
			
		

> I'm probably going to be one of the few to agree with the Dude here, but I agree that welfare, at least to the extent we have it now, is a HUGE error.
> 
> It is pitiable that there are people there unable to work. Absolutely, I will 100% agree. It is unfortunate that there are those who are looking and can't find it, and those who can only find meager wages, it really is.
> 
> ...



Very eloquent. Couldn't have said it better myself.


----------



## QI 541 (Nov 8, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> I guess I'm just a cold, heartless conservative bastard (as many of you must assume I am) but lazy ass people like Chris should be cut loose. No one should be given a free ticket to ride simply because they are unable to work. Sink or swim, simple as that.



You know, most conservatives build a strawman where they represent all welfare recipients as leeches and abusers.  I rarely see them outright state that they would deny welfare to those who legitimately need it.


----------



## The Dude (Nov 8, 2013)

raymond said:
			
		

> The Dude said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



If someone legitimately needs it, they are so crippled or mentally handicapped that there is no possible way of supporting themselves, then yeah, help those people out. Chris isn't one of those people. There are many people who are on welfare, and I mean MANY, that do not fall into that category.  But there are also many people with worse problems, mental or physical, than Chris who don't require taxpayer funded tugboats to get by in life.


----------



## QI 541 (Nov 8, 2013)

The Dude said:
			
		

> If someone legitimately needs it, they are so crippled or mentally handicapped that there is no possible way of supporting themselves, then yeah, help those people out.



Then you should really reword what you said.  Saying things like you would have people who are "unable to work" sink means something significantly more psychotic than "i hate welfare abusers".


----------



## Grand Number of Pounds (Nov 8, 2013)

I was going to say something, but decided not to. This thread pretty much illustrates why I hate politics.


----------



## The Dude (Nov 8, 2013)

raymond said:
			
		

> The Dude said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



At this point my opinion really doesn't matter. The welfare critter is just going to get bigger and hungrier and nothing is going to change that. "Just, like, uh...my opinion, man" and all that.


----------



## c-no (Nov 8, 2013)

GrandNumberOfPounds said:
			
		

> I was going to say something, but decided not to. This thread pretty much illustrates why I hate politics.


Considering that, I feel this image might sum things up if the thread gets out of hand.


Spoiler


----------



## CatParty (Nov 8, 2013)




----------



## Hasharin (Nov 9, 2013)

Being outraged so much by the welfare queens in society in which some attention whores from the media (for example) are richer than a miner or a sweatshop worker (despite never contributing to the society in any meaningful way) is like shouting _Oh my God, look, the sink got clogged!_ while the house is on fire. 

You know, I think that Chris is not so much of a burden to you as some people getting money for having money.


----------



## Smokedaddy (Nov 12, 2013)

The code among furries for getting awarded disability for their emotional condition is "winning the jackpot."

A jackpot it ain't, unless you equate [not working + just scraping by] as a victory of some sort.  I had _even more fun_ when I was banking $10K a month and working like madmen do than I have sitting here farting around on the Internet and wondering where cash to pay the power bill is coming from.  I can't wait to get off this shit, with the caveat that I'm going to get back to what I was doing and if I have to wait, I wait.  I'm not going to wait tables (not that I'd anything more than useless at it), or do something similar that would interfere with getting back to Real Life.

And none of you is paying for it; I already did, with the FICA tax they pried out of my hide every time a paycheck came along for a couple of decades. (I may have collected more than I paid -- inflation, you know -- but them was the rules when we signed up.   All in all, the people that need a leg up deserve to get one, whether they're on straight welfare or retirement income or whatever.  The trick is figuring out who exactly those people are; too many that really need help slip through the cracks, while too many that don't snicker all the way to the bank.  What exactly "a leg up" means is nebulous, too.  The formulas we're using aren't right, and it's imperative that they get fixed before another billion or two goes down the drain or another somebody starves to death that shouldn't have had to.  Reform is essential, but so is the institution. It can't just be "gotten rid of" without worse consequences than anything we've got going on here at the moment.


----------



## Picklepower (Nov 12, 2013)

Smokedaddy said:
			
		

> *The code among furries for getting awarded disability for their emotional condition is "winning the jackpot."*A jackpot it ain't, unless you equate [not working + just scraping by] as a victory of some sort.  I had _even more fun_ when I was banking $10K a month and working like madmen do than I have sitting here farting around on the Internet and wondering where cash to pay the power bill is coming from.  I can't wait to get off this shit, with the caveat that I'm going to get back to what I was doing and if I have to wait, I wait.  I'm not going to wait tables (not that I'd anything more than useless at it), or do something similar that would interfere with getting back to Real Life.
> 
> And none of you is paying for it; I already did, with the FICA tax they pried out of my hide every time a paycheck came along for a couple of decades. (I may have collected more than I paid -- inflation, you know -- but them was the rules when we signed up.   All in all, the people that need a leg up deserve to get one, whether they're on straight welfare or retirement income or whatever.  The trick is figuring out who exactly those people are; too many that really need help slip through the cracks, while too many that don't snicker all the way to the bank.  What exactly "a leg up" means is nebulous, too.  The formulas we're using aren't right, and it's imperative that they get fixed before another billion or two goes down the drain or another somebody starves to death that shouldn't have had to.  Reform is essential, but so is the institution. It can't just be "gotten rid of" without worse consequences than anything we've got going on here at the moment.



Wait is that a thing? in the furry community?


----------



## c-no (Nov 12, 2013)

Picklepower said:
			
		

> Smokedaddy said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


If it is a thing among the furry community, I'd like to hear the words of furries who aren't too keen on not working and scraping by.


----------



## Zim (Nov 12, 2013)

The big problem with people taking advantage of the system is that some are so determined to do so that no matter what reforms or changes the system gets they will always find a way to cheat it.

However, like Smokedaddy said, they can have whatever "jackpot" or whatever they call it. I've never had welfare but I was on unemployment for 10 months or so and it sucked balls. I suspect most who take advantage of the welfare system have deep rooted disorders that make them think they deserve it or are getting one over on the man. 

The one friend I had who mooched off the system didn't stay my friend very long because he was also trying to mooch off of me too.  His excuse was that he had flat feet so he couldn't stand long enough to do any job and he wouldn't settle for most sit down jobs because they were shitty.


----------



## PopOfColor (Feb 3, 2014)

Zim said:
			
		

> The big problem with people taking advantage of the system is that some are so determined to do so that no matter what reforms or changes the system gets they will always find a way to cheat it.
> 
> The one friend I had who mooched off the system didn't stay my friend very long because he was also trying to mooch off of me too.  His excuse was that he had flat feet so he couldn't stand long enough to do any job and he wouldn't settle for most sit down jobs because they were shitty.



Had friends like this also. They lived next door to me and my youngest was around her oldest age. Started out as playdates (where you get kids together that are before school age to play) but once we started to really hang out I learned all kind of odd things about welfare that I never knew. We had pizza one friday that I paid for. Just some crap 8$ a pie deal that my bugget  could handle. The next week she got them take and bake pizza's from Papa Murphy's  for the same amount of pizza she spent 40$ of her foodstamp    I ended up making the joke to my husband about it "I wish I was that poor that I could toss money around"  :x 

I have no issues with people needing help. This set of parents where much younger then me mid 20's nothing wrong with them to not work a normal job.


----------



## Picklepower (Feb 3, 2014)

Of course there are people who mooch off the system, but there are also people who are legit in need. I don't like when people demonize the poor, and lump them all into the same category. I bet a lot of republicans that claim to hate welfare, and "the guhment" have been on some kind of aid themselves, at some time, BUT ITS OK WHEN THEY DO IT GUIZ!!


----------



## Stalin (Feb 18, 2014)

Welfare could've helped my grandmother out when she had to raise seven kids alone.

Welfare could've helped my mom out when she had to raise me alone on minimum wage.

I definitely don't mind paying for it since I know what it's like to be dirt poor.


----------



## Holdek (Feb 18, 2014)

Stalin said:
			
		

> Welfare could've helped my grandmother out when she had to raise seven kids alone.



Didn't they have it under communism?


----------



## Stalin (Feb 19, 2014)

Holdek said:
			
		

> Stalin said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Welfare didn't help when there was shortages of everything. They can't give you food that's not there.


----------



## WiseOldBadger (Feb 19, 2014)

Are Wellfare queens an actual thing?

Or is that just a race bating myth that Reagen capitalized on?


----------



## CatParty (Feb 19, 2014)

WiseOldBadger said:
			
		

> Are Wellfare queens an actual thing?
> 
> Or is that just a race bating myth that Reagen capitalized on?




http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welfare_queen


----------



## WiseOldBadger (Feb 19, 2014)

...Hail to the Queens...


----------



## Burning Love (Feb 19, 2014)

ITT: libertarians.


----------



## Holdek (Feb 20, 2014)

WiseOldBadger said:
			
		

> ...Hail to the Queens...


----------



## Pikonic (Feb 22, 2014)

My problem with queens is that they're the face of welfare, if we use them as a reason to cut welfare we're going to hurt a lot of innocent people.


----------



## hellbound (Feb 22, 2014)

WiseOldBadger said:
			
		

> Are Wellfare queens an actual thing?
> 
> Or is that just a race bating myth that Reagen capitalized on?



They are real. I couldn't possibly speculate how common it is vs. somebody who uses the system for a leg up while seeking work or raising their kids on low pay, but I've personally seen them in action. Fat women with several kids in tow, shopping cart(s) full of junk like twinkies, soda, chips, packaged mac and cheese, etc., paying with EBT and getting into a nice Escalade. People talking about the best way to milk the system and hide income so they get more. Once outside a 7-11 a man told me he'd sell me $100 worth of "food stamps" (I don't know how since it's usually done on EBT cards) for $50 so he could buy cigarettes and beer, I shit you not. It hasn't happened to me frequently, but almost 8 years of living in a fairly poor city and you'll come across it.


----------



## Carlson (Feb 22, 2014)

hellbound said:
			
		

> WiseOldBadger said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I wouldn't use a vehicle as a sign of wealth and prosperity. It's very easy for someone to fall from wealth and still have a vehicle that they paid off, or be gifted a car, or inherit it.


----------



## The Dude (Feb 22, 2014)

Carlson said:
			
		

> I wouldn't use a vehicle as a sign of wealth and prosperity. It's very easy for someone to fall from wealth and still have a vehicle that they paid off, or be gifted a car, or inherit it.



Not many people go from being able to afford a $65,000 SUV to "Shit, now we're so broke we need food stamps." Welfare queens are a thing, and not a new thing. There are third, fourth, and even fifth generation Queens now. They get somewhere between their freshmen and senior year, get pregnant, drop out, and go on the government dole. They then learn that more bastard children = more government duckets and so have more kids.


----------



## Carlson (Feb 22, 2014)

The Dude said:
			
		

> Carlson said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sure, Welfare Queens exist. So do drug users on welfare; didn't mean that when Florida enacted mandatory drug testing for welfare recipients, more than about 2% actually failed the test. Just because you can find accounts of the people existing doesn't mean that they're at all a major thing.

In reality, people who abuse welfare are few and far between. Welfare suffers from a huge number of myths, primarily touted by right-wingers who want to stop government assistance for the poor and talk about your bootstraps a lot.


----------



## Holdek (Feb 23, 2014)

The Dude said:
			
		

> They then learn that more bastard children = more government duckets and so have more kids.


----------



## A-Stump (Feb 23, 2014)

That's actually how it is though. Around here I think it's like 200 dollars in foodstamps per child, regardless of age. Go to a Wal-Mart at midnight on the first and you will see first-hand what this nonsense is. Fat ladies beating their sunken eyed children and pulling around two carts full of junk food. I do most of my shopping at night because usually it's completely dead and I won't have to wait in lines or find a parking space, foodstamp day though it's like a fucking jungle.


----------



## Carlson (Feb 23, 2014)

A-Stump said:
			
		

> That's actually how it is though. Around here I think it's like 200 dollars in foodstamps per child, regardless of age. Go to a Wal-Mart at midnight on the first and you will see first-hand what this nonsense is. Fat ladies beating their sunken eyed children and pulling around two carts full of junk food. I do most of my shopping at night because usually it's completely dead and I won't have to wait in lines or find a parking space, foodstamp day though it's like a fucking jungle.




Anecdotal accounts are wonderful, but they don't prove anything.

Again, saying "They exist" is not the same as "They're prevalent enough to force us to change the system."


----------



## A-Stump (Feb 23, 2014)

Why is the system the way it is anyways? I understand not letting people go hungry but why the fuck should I be paying into a system so poor people can go out and buy soda, snack cakes, and frozen pizzas? Give them a food ration. If they don't want to eat it, tough titty


Beans, lentils, any dry protein that can last a long time 
Eggs
Milk (powdered or fresh, whatever)
Big blocks of government cheese 
Fresh vegetables/fruit allotments
Bread or crackers

There you go, a humane way to feed the poor and to stop misuse of funds

Edit: When I was a kid we ate soup beans at least twice a week and I didn't die. We were poor as shit and ate things that most people probably wouldn't even touch these days, but food is food and if you're destitute enough to need charity then you shouldn't be picky.


----------



## Carlson (Feb 23, 2014)

A-Stump said:
			
		

> Why is the system the way it is anyways? I understand not letting people go hungry but why the fuck should I be paying into a system so poor people can go out and buy soda, snack cakes, and frozen pizzas? Give them a food ration. If they don't want to eat it, tough titty
> 
> 
> Beans, lentils, any dry protein that can last a long time
> ...



They were given money to buy food. If that's what they're doing, they aren't doing anything wrong; it may seem "wrong" for them to buy cheap junk food, but they suffer the consequences if they choose to buy something unhealthy.

If you don't want them to eat frozen pizza, tough titty. I don't see why they should be forced onto any kind of diet; it's useless complication to the system that does nothing but make you feel better.


----------



## A-Stump (Feb 23, 2014)

Well, now I know you're plain ridiculous 

You had my goat for a short while but now I just see you're clueless. Good run though.


----------



## Picklepower (Feb 23, 2014)

Its a generalization to say, "poor people on food stamps are all fat women with their dumb kids, getting junk food" I cant trust your anecdote, because you probably didn't notice the people that didn't confirm the picture you want to paint of the poor. I don't completely disagree with your idea, that food stamps shouldn't go to junk food. But I'm sensing that your really annoyed by the poor. Oh and don't think I didn't notice how you called the cheese, GOVERNMENT CHEESE, that sounds like a cheap little jab at those people, that is really gross of you, and not clever, in fact that phrasing makes you sound like a dick.


----------



## A-Stump (Feb 23, 2014)

Government cheese is a real thing. It wasn't a 'cheap little jab', it's a huge block of cheese traditionally produced for governmental food programs.


----------



## Picklepower (Feb 23, 2014)

I knew it was an expression, I read your statement wrong I guess.


----------



## A-Stump (Feb 23, 2014)

No not really, I was completely sincere with what I said and there is nothing wrong with government cheese/butter rations. I think even having subsidized food stores like I think (Denmark?) has would be better than the current system. Those stores have heavily reduced food prices and provide nutritious things for people to eat.


----------



## Picklepower (Feb 23, 2014)

Oh ok that's cool, I misread.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Mar 25, 2014)

I'm on welfare and I love it. Getting free money from Uncle Sam kicks ass, especially when I can use it to buy video games, junk food, tequila, and most importantly*:*





*WEED! *


----------



## bradsternum (Mar 25, 2014)

There will always be people who work this system to their own selfish ends rather than what the money is actually for.  That doesn't mean welfare is bad.



> You don't earn that money just because you're mentally defective.



Ok, let's send all the retards to camps and burn them. That sounds like a good alternative. You can't just send all the mentally ill people out into the world. They cannot survive. "Sink or swim?" What if your new baby turns out severely autistic? What if when he/she comes of age, it becomes abundantly clear that he/she is incapable of working? Sure, you'll work your ass off to get her a job pushing shopping carts or whatever, but when you die, the last thing you'll think about is "Oh Christ, what's going to happen to my kid when I'm gone?"


----------



## Strewth (Mar 25, 2014)

Overpopulation. That's the real problem. If every person in the world would kill just one other person we'd have it all completely solved.


----------



## BT 075 (Mar 25, 2014)

PanasonicStrewth said:


> Overpopulation. That's the real problem. If every person in the world would kill just one other person we'd have it all completely solved.



Not just any random person though. It's more a matter of quantity versus quality.

As for welfare? Meh. I happen to have a moderately healthy mind in a perfectly healthy body. I'm a blessed man. Some people aren't quite as lucky. My family is relatively well-to-do and I have never gone hungry for even a day. It would be very easy for me to complain about welfare and all that jazz, but I don't feel I have the life experience or the right to bitch about it.

Sure there are some things that make me shake my head a bit. It happens. Whatever system you invent, there will always be people who try to take advantage of it. And of those who try there will always be those who succeed. Those are the people I side eye.

My own parents work with children with developmental issues. Concentration problems, autism and the like. In my country parents with such children receive some money from the state. With this money they have to pay for any type of extra costs the "special" child may need, and they have to then provide proof of it being well-spent in order to maintain the flow of cash. It's not exactly a large sum and from what I can tell, it's really helpful to these people. I am not such a misanthrope yet that I wouldn't want to spend a tiny percentage of my own income in helping these families out.

Also, where I come from it is policy to have those on welfare do shit for their money, provided they are not physically disabled. They would have to clean the streets for example or volunteer somewhere. Other programs fund their education, some sort of job training or the like. They take it quite serious, with contracts and all. If they fail to cooperate the cash flow is cut.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Mar 26, 2014)

PanasonicStrewth said:


> Overpopulation. That's the real problem. If every person in the world would kill just one other person we'd have it all completely solved.



Afterwards, we can solve world hunger by feeding the dead to the poor:


----------



## Holdek (Mar 29, 2014)

A-Stump said:


> No not really, I was completely sincere with what I said and there is nothing wrong with government cheese/butter rations. I think even having subsidized food stores like I think (Denmark?) has would be better than the current system. Those stores have heavily reduced food prices and provide nutritious things for people to eat.



Conservatives already attempted to restrict what people could buy with food stamps, i.e. not letting people buy junk food.  It turned out it would cost substantially more net to add another layer of regulation into the system, so they opted not to go through with it.

The food stamp system is cost efficient because it piggy-backs on private enterprise, and where the manufacture and distribution system already exists.  Setting up a network of government-run stores for people to redeem "butter rations" would cost a lot more money.

It's kind of like when conservatives say, "Poor people should pay federal income tax too, even if it's just $1!"  When it would actually cost the government more net to go after those $1 tax bills.


----------



## A-Stump (Mar 29, 2014)

The government should require compulsory public work programs as parts of Detroit have for those on welfare. Barring the disabled/those unable to for other reasons. Parts of Detroit already instated this and it motivates people into finding work. Certain counties in Ohio, where I live, require you to report into Job and Family Services and do work programs to the tune of four hours a day. You decide not to show, you're in the dark. That's how it should be.


----------



## Ouija Board (Mar 30, 2014)

hellbound said:


> They are real. I couldn't possibly speculate how common it is vs. somebody who uses the system for a leg up while seeking work or raising their kids on low pay, but I've personally seen them in action. Fat women with several kids in tow, shopping cart(s) full of junk like twinkies, soda, chips, packaged mac and cheese, etc., paying with EBT and getting into a nice Escalade. People talking about the best way to milk the system and hide income so they get more. Once outside a 7-11 a man told me xir'd sell me $100 worth of "food stamps" (I don't know how since it's usually done on EBT cards) for $50 so xir could buy cigarettes and beer, I shit you not. It hasn't happened to me frequently, but almost 8 years of living in a fairly poor city and you'll come across it.



I've seen that too. I'm on food stamps myself and I try to get something healthy but it is hard when you are restricted to less than $200 a month for a single person. Most people that are on welfare buy junk food because a) it's less expensive b)produce and good quality food is expensive as hell as well as it spoils quickly and c) junk food lasts longer. When you are on such a tight budget like that you would want to buy foods that are processed, have a shit ton of preservatives because it _lasts longer_. Food stamps are a once a month thing, not a bi-weekly or weekly thing like with normal paychecks.


----------



## Ruckersvillian (Mar 31, 2014)

The Dude said:


> You want to help those people out? Fine. More power to you. There are several churches and other charities you can donate your own money to. Welfare is forced, tax payer funded charity. You get no choice as to where your money goes. Is it sad that person has mental impairments? Is it sad that person lost their job? Sure it is. Help them if you want. Just don't force me to do it because of some bullshit, feel-good "civic duty, communal responsibility" nonsense. I don't owe those people a damn thing. Like I said, you don't automatically deserve money because you're down on your luck or a mental defective. I've lost jobs before and no one gave me a fucking thing. I went back out and found another fucking job.



"Am I my brother's keeper?"

I just have a problem with this "screw you, buddy; got mine" attitude. Although I understand where you're coming from to a certain degree, it's usually the comfortable/well-off who have this type of attitude - those who either never struggled or struggled so long ago that they've forgotten the many advantages they had along the way.

As Americans, we have our priorities skewed if we're more worried about paying a few more dollars in taxes (God forbid) rather than the poor and the hungry who benefit from those extra dollars. It's selfish.


----------



## Holdek (Mar 31, 2014)

A-Stump said:


> The government should require compulsory public work programs as parts of Detroit have for those on welfare. Barring the disabled/those unable to for other reasons. Parts of Detroit already instated this and it motivates people into finding work. Certain counties in Ohio, where I live, require you to report into Job and Family Services and do work programs to the tune of four hours a day. You decide not to show, you're in the dark. That's how it should be.



The federal government already has work requirements, it just doesn't have a public work program component.


----------



## Pikimon (Apr 9, 2014)

Radi Ashun said:


> I've seen that too. I'm on food stamps myself and I try to get something healthy but it is hard when you are restricted to less than $200 a month for a single person. Most people that are on welfare buy junk food because a) it's less expensive b)produce and good quality food is expensive as hell as well as it spoils quickly and c) junk food lasts longer. When you are on such a tight budget like that you would want to buy foods that are processed, have a shit ton of preservatives because it _lasts longer_. Food stamps are a once a month thing, not a bi-weekly or weekly thing like with normal paychecks.



Good lord _this_ a million times this. You try restricting your food budget to 200 dollars a month and see what you shop for.


----------



## Holdek (Apr 23, 2014)

Pikimon said:


> Good lord _this_ a million times this. You try restricting your food budget to 200 dollars a month and see what you shop for.


The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (AKA food stamps) is just supposed to _add_ to your food budget, not comprise the entirety of it.  Unfortunately a lot of folks are in dire straights and all they have is SNAP.


----------



## maninthepicklesuit (Apr 24, 2014)

Here's my two cents.  I'm going to begin with these three premises:

*1. Propensity to spend is higher at lower income levels* - At lower income levels, you spend a higher percent of every dollar you "earn."  If you hypothetically earned $1 a day, you'd have to spend the whole $1 on food.  As your income rises over your basic costs of living, you'll tend to save a greater percentage of each dollar because basic necessities won't consume your entire income.

*2. Welfare transfers money from people with lower propensities to spend to those with higher propensities to spend* - A welfare system transfers money from higher income earners to lower income earners.  As per point 1, lower income earners tend to spend a higher percentage of each dollar.

*3. Spending tends to be better for the economy than saving* - Let's say you save your money.  You can hide it under the mattress, in which case the money has been effectively taken out of the economy until you spend it.  Or you can deposit it in a bank, in which case the bank by law has to reserve a fraction of your deposits (let's say 30%), and then it can deploy the remaining 70% into the economy as loans, which will then be spent by the recipients of the loans.  On the other hand, if you spend a dollar, 100% of that dollar represents income to someone else, and that person will go on to spend that dollar again.  In these three scenarios, the last one has the biggest "multiplier effect" on the economy: as that single dollar gets spent over and over, it represents income to people, which stimulates job creation (also, more taxes for the government).

With that said, if you agree with the foregoing, you should agree that welfare has a positive effect on the overall economy.  Whatever your feelings are about moochers, some level of wealth transfer is arguably beneficial for the economy as a whole.  I'm just trying to highlight that individual morality ("it's not fair that others who don't work still benefit from the sweat of my back") isn't necessarily congruent with what's pragmatic for society as a whole (it's good to stimulate the economy, even if moochers get a free ride).

Note that this isn't necessarily a pro-welfare rant.  I'm open to the possibility that the welfare system could be re-calibrated, or that there are ways for the government to spend dollars that would be even more efficient than welfare from a "stimulate the economy" perspective.

As a side-note: can you imagine OPL without welfare?  Would he have had the leisure time to make an ass of himself on such a monumental level if he had to do a 9 to 5 job?  I guess in a perverse way, we already benefited from the system.


----------



## Trickie (Apr 24, 2014)

There's a few things in this thread that kind of bother me. I've been poor for most of my life, and homeless on more than one occasion, and it perplexes me every time I see someone rage over someone using welfare to buy something they enjoy. Sure, it wasn't earned in the strictest sense of the word, but are you honestly expecting everyone on welfare to live like monks? The feeling of worthlessness that a lot of people get when they can't provide for themselves is depressing enough without having absolutely nothing to take your mind off of the shitty situation you're in, even if just for a little while.

And why do I see so many people saying that he's spending "MY" money, as if Chris is literally breaking into your house and stealing all your savings? It's not your money. If anything, it's our money, as in all of us who live in the US, the people who the government is supposed to be made by and for. Like it or not, even if Chris is spending the money on vidya or Legos, it's at least contributing to the economy, and helping it go, which also helps jobs.

Sorry for the rant, everyone.


----------



## Foulmouth (Apr 24, 2014)

Trickie said:


> There's a few things in this thread that kind of bother me. I've been poor for most of my life, and homeless on more than one occasion, and it perplexes me every time I see someone rage over someone using welfare to buy something they enjoy. Sure, it wasn't earned in the strictest sense of the word, but are you honestly expecting everyone on welfare to live like monks? The feeling of worthlessness that a lot of people get when they can't provide for themselves is depressing enough without having absolutely nothing to take your mind off of the shitty situation you're in, even if just for a little while.
> 
> And why do I see so many people saying that he's spending "MY" money, as if Chris is literally breaking into your house and stealing all your savings? It's not your money. If anything, it's our money, as in all of us who live in the US, the people who the government is supposed to be made by and for. Like it or not, even if Chris is spending the money on vidya or Legos, it's at least contributing to the economy, and helping it go, which also helps jobs.
> 
> Sorry for the rant, everyone.


 People pay Taxes
Taxes are given to chris
Chris buys lego
???????
PROFIT !


----------



## Marvin (Apr 26, 2014)

Eh, incredible amounts of government money is given to big businesses, the middle class, all sorts of groups. It's not bad, but still, it's morally equivalent to the money given to the poor. Like really, we should start calling all that stuff welfare too, and watch how quickly the anti-welfare people stop talking. And what we call welfare now has the benefit in that it's such an insignificant amount. Over the past few decades, it's something like a few bucks, per person, in the US. Pfft, I spent that much on fast food today.

There's zero reason to discuss welfare like this, unless we're talking about cutting all the other handouts we give at the same time.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 26, 2014)

Marvin said:


> Eh, incredible amounts of government money is given to big businesses, the middle class, all sorts of groups. It's not bad, but still, it's morally equivalent to the money given to the poor. Like really, we should start calling all that stuff welfare too, and watch how quickly the anti-welfare people stop talking. And what we call welfare now has the benefit in that it's such an insignificant amount. Over the past few decades, it's something like a few bucks, per person, in the US. Pfft, I spent that much on fast food today.
> 
> There's zero reason to discuss welfare like this, unless we're talking about cutting all the other handouts we give at the same time.



Welfare for agriculture and industry is called subsidies. But there's a large number of people who neither work nor pay taxes. It wouldn't be such an issue if free money weren't given out to so many people who refuse to work. No, not "unable" to work-REFUSE.


----------



## Marvin (Apr 26, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> Welfare for agriculture and industry is called subsidies.


Yep.



Black Sonichu said:


> But there's a large number of people who neither work nor pay taxes. It wouldn't be such an issue if free money weren't given out to so many people who refuse to work. No, not "unable" to work-REFUSE.


Well, it's kinda like welfare queens. I know such people exist, in the sense that literally any negative stereotype of a person might exist. People disparaging gays might bring up examples of gays that jerk off with diarrhea, but that doesn't mean it's reasonable to consider them to represent all gays. These sorts of comparisons are like telling someone they can make a living off of regularly winning the lottery. It happens, because while ultimately, someone might win the lottery, it's still such an unlikely situation that it's not worth considering.

Now, I know that people are going to be gaming the system more frequently than people are winning the lottery. But still, even if it was like 30%, am I willing to tell the other 70% to fuck off? To die in the streets? No.

Really, for me, it's a combination. It's both the tiny amount of money that we're putting into welfare, plus the substantial impact it's having. Really, at this point, if we're so hard up for cash, come back to me when we've squeezed all the cash we can out of everything else we're sinking money into.


----------



## Grand Number of Pounds (Apr 26, 2014)

That's a good point - what are the results of the current system and what can we do to improve it. 

The one thing I noticed in this thread and the reason I stayed out of it is that no one is providing evidence to back up their claims and are letting their emotions run wild, with some saying most welfare recipients are good-for-nothing deadbeats and others saying their opponents want the poor to die in the streets.

All I'm asking is that people provide evidence for their strong opinions. If you find evidence that most welfare recipients are abusing the system, post it, or if such evidence eludes you then be willing to change your position. Same goes for the side that thinks welfare is generally beneficial.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 26, 2014)

Marvin said:


> Yep.
> 
> 
> Well, it's kinda like welfare queens. I know such people exist, in the sense that literally any negative stereotype of a person might exist. People disparaging gays might bring up examples of *gays that jerk off with diarrhea,*



Hey! Don't be telling everybody my secret, now. 



Marvin said:


> but that doesn't mean it's reasonable to consider them to represent all gays. These sorts of comparisons are like telling someone they can make a living off of regularly winning the lottery. It happens, because ultimately, someone while might win the lottery, it's such an unlikely situation that it's not worth considering.



You keep gambling, eventually, you're gonna lose. Some people lose everything. My dad kind of has the whole "GET A JOB!" mentality, but that's economists for you. 



Marvin said:


> Now, I know that people are going to be gaming the system more frequently than people are winning the lottery. But still, even if it was like 30%, am I willing to tell the other 70% to fuck off? To die in the streets? No.



Nobody's telling anybody to fuck off and die in the streets. The problem is, it's very difficult to enforce any kind of consistency with this welfare stuff. I mean, everyone needs a leg up now and then, but some people treat it like a permanent lifeline. That's no way to live, I'm not saying throw them all out on the street, I'm just a strong advocate of self-sufficiency.



Marvin said:


> Really, for me, it's a combination. It's both the tiny amount of money that we're putting into welfare, plus the substantial impact it's having. Really, at this point, if we're so hard up for cash, come back to me when we've squeezed all the cash we can out of everything else we're sinking money into.



The way .gov spends money, I doubt it even matters anymore. America's sunk over $16 trillion already, what's $800 a month for an overweight manchild to have his LEGO sets and video games, anyway? Or Commander Stryker his weed and CoD?

Well, in a very fucked up way, we have benefited at least a little, with some unintentional amusement in the process. But eventually, there's going to be fewer people working and paying taxes and many more on handouts if we aren't careful. Then where's the money gonna come from?

Governments don't produce money on their own, they only print it. A medium of value has to come from somewhere.


----------



## Marvin (Apr 27, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> You keep gambling, eventually, you're gonna lose. Some people lose everything. My dad kind of has the whole "GET A JOB!" mentality, but that's economists for you.


Haha, well, I wasn't thinking they'd win in the first place. But that works too.



Black Sonichu said:


> Nobody's telling anybody to fuck off and die in the streets. The problem is, it's very difficult to enforce any kind of consistency with this welfare stuff. I mean, everyone needs a leg up now and then, but some people treat it like a permanent lifeline. That's no way to live, I'm not saying throw them all out on the street, I'm just a strong advocate of self-sufficiency.


Oh, of course not. But by cutting off welfare, that's essentially what they're doing. I mean, can't pay everything, you can't make rent in a given month. Things might take a bit to actually apply, but ultimately, throwing people out on their asses is what we'd be doing. Even with a huge amount of conmen gaming the system, it wouldn't justify fucking over the people who actually need it. Especially because of how tiny the amount of money we're talking about.

Self sufficiency is definitely the goal, but not everyone's there yet.



Black Sonichu said:


> The way .gov spends money, I doubt it even matters anymore. America's sunk over $16 trillion already, what's $800 a month for an overweight manchild to have his LEGO sets and video games, anyway? Or Commander Stryker his weed and CoD?
> 
> Well, in a very fucked up way, we have benefited at least a little, with some unintentional amusement in the process. But eventually, there's going to be fewer people working and paying taxes and many more on handouts if we aren't careful. Then where's the money gonna come from?
> 
> Governments don't produce money on their own, they only print it. A medium of value has to come from somewhere.


Oh sure. It's definitely possible to be in a situation where you're going to need to make hard decisions, in order to maintain your structure. But we're not there yet. We're not even close.


----------



## Bosnian Wizard (Apr 27, 2014)

I live in the UK, and benefits, especially benefits fraud, is discussed a lot in politics. A lot of it is stirred up by the government complaining about how much is spent in benefits, and the papers posting stories along the lines of 'Single mother of 17 claims £15m of YOUR taxes in benefits while importing illegal immigrants' (or maybe something less extreme). Whenever I see stuff like this, I always think of the above image. 

The amount lost due to tax avoidance completely eclipses the amount lost due to benefit fraud. Christ, even the amount of benefits unclaimed eclipses the amount of benefits claimed fraudulently. However, the government do very little to combat tax avoidance, especially be large companies, while putting a focus on benefits. The papers do the same. I feel the only reason this happens is because people in the government and their friends benefit from tax avoidance (either directly or through lobbying), whereas poor people who benefit from benefits are a much easier target, as they generally aren't friends with politician, don't have the ability to lobby them, and are easier to stereotype as work-shy layabouts. 

While I'm not saying fraudulent claiming of benefits isn't a problem, it is completely overshadowed by tax avoidance (both legal and illegal), and I don't like this hard-and-fast solutions people tend to offer about it, such as workfare (one step off slavery in my opinion, 'do this job for much less than minimum wage or we'll take your money off you') as decreasing benefits. I feel the focus should be on the people who already have lots of money, and are using the influence that comes from that to make even more. 

socialist-soapbox.txt


----------



## Holdek (Apr 27, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> ...It wouldn't be such an issue if free money weren't given out to so many people who refuse to work. No, not "unable" to work-REFUSE.


Nah.  Welfare has had work requirements since the '90s.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 27, 2014)

Holdek said:


> Nah.  Welfare has had work requirements since the '90s.



Doesn't mean they can be enforced.


----------



## Holdek (Apr 27, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> Doesn't mean they can be enforced.


Except they are.  You don't work, or attempt to get work, your welfare gets cut off or reduced.  Additionally, the burden is on the recipient to prove that they are working or trying to find work, not the government.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 27, 2014)

Holdek said:


> Except they are.  You don't work, or attempt to get work, your welfare gets cut off or reduced.  Additionally, the burden is on the recipient to prove that they are working or trying to find work, not the government.



Well, my state doesn't have a work requirement. I'm not sure how it is in other areas, but here, you can just sign up and get free money, basically.


----------



## Trickie (Apr 27, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> Well, my state doesn't have a work requirement. I'm not sure how it is in other areas, but here, you can just sign up and get free money, basically.



Have you tried this yourself? It seems like they'd have a job application quota you have to meet every month/week at the very least.


----------



## Holdek (Apr 27, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> Well, my state doesn't have a work requirement. I'm not sure how it is in other areas, but here, you can just sign up and get free money, basically.


If by "my state" you mean one of the states of the US, then yes, it does; it's a federal law.  Every state must have at least half of their welfare recipients currently fulfilling a work requirement.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 27, 2014)

Holdek said:


> If by "my state" you mean one of the states of the US, then yes, it does; it's a federal law.  Every state must have at least half of their welfare recipients currently fulfilling a work requirement.



I've known quite a few people who receive "tugboat" like Chris and Jace around here. My state kind of has a reputation for attracting those kinds of people. If it is required, a good deal of people are getting away with more than they should.


----------



## Trickie (Apr 27, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> I've known quite a few people who receive "tugboat" like Chris and Jace around here. My state kind of has a reputation for attracting those kinds of people. If it is required, a good deal of people are getting away with more than they should.



I think you're talking about disability, which is (from what I understand) what Chris and Jace are getting, and they're getting it because they have a disability of some kind that, in the eyes of the law, prevent you from partially or fully being able to work. Welfare is for people who have no physical or mental disabilities.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 27, 2014)

Trickie said:


> I think you're talking about disability, which is (from what I understand) what Chris and Jace are getting, and they're getting it because they have a disability of some kind that, in the eyes of the law, prevent you from partially or fully being able to work. Welfare is for people who have no physical or mental disabilities.



Doesn't mean people don't fake disability to get fraudulent payments. I admit it's difficult to track them down but it does happen. I know a few people who have.


----------



## Holdek (Apr 27, 2014)

*"Welfare Limits Left Poor Adrift as Recession Hit"*


----------



## Trickie (Apr 27, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> Doesn't mean people don't fake disability to get fraudulent payments. I admit it's difficult to track them down but it does happen. I know a few people who have.



You can probably fake it, yeah, but I can't imagine it being easy, especially with all the hoops you have to jump through to get disability. It's most certainly not as easy as "sign up and get free money", as you characterized earlier. 

Besides, there's no way to prevent that kind of fraud without leaving people who are actually disabled to the wolves.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 27, 2014)

Trickie said:


> You can probably fake it, yeah, but I can't imagine it being easy, especially with all the hoops you have to jump through to get disability. It's most certainly not as easy as "sign up and get free money", as you characterized earlier.
> 
> Besides, there's no way to prevent that kind of fraud without leaving people who are actually disabled to the wolves.



True, but the lack of motivation to improve one's self and/or develop a skill set that will help one get off of it disgusts me.


----------



## Trickie (Apr 27, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> True, but the lack of motivation to improve one's self and/or develop a skill set that will help one get off of it disgusts me.



Here's the thing about that, actually. The suspicion around people who are on disability is actually what causes that lack of motivation. Right now, the system has you jump through so many hoops and parades you in front of judges and state psychologists and doctors, scrutinizes the slightest inconsistencies in your story that if after you get disability you start showing improvement and getting better, they start to wonder if you weren't just making it up the whole time. There is no "oh, they're doing their best to overcome their disability and getting their life back together good for them", it's only ever a "oh, you've held a job for a few months? you must not have been as disabled as you led us to believe" sort of attitude.

It creates an uncertainty in someone who's receiving disability. Yes, they can improve, maybe they could get to a point where they're working full time again and don't need disability, but what if the symptoms come back? If that happens, you have to apply for disability all over again, and if you do you have to explain why you were able to somehow overcome your crippling disability, and why you can't just suck it up and do it again now that you've proven that you're capable of it.

If you want to remove this incentive to not improve, you need to make it so that it's easier to get back on disability if you've been on it before, and that requires a change in attitude toward disability, and mental health in general.

EDIT: By the way, getting a job while on disability is usually enough to end your benefits completely, and if you don't tell them about your job in a certain amount of time, it becomes a fraud case.


----------



## Ti-99/4A (Apr 28, 2014)

Here's another issue that happens. A person with a disability applies for a job. They get an interview and opt to disclose they have a disability, but are more than capable of doing the job with a little or no accommodation. More likely than not the person will NOT be hired. Same person applies for a different job and does not disclose the disability. It later becomes a problem. Person then loses job for not being TRUE AND HONEST.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 28, 2014)

sikotik said:


> Here's another issue that happens. A person with a disability applies for a job. They get an interview and opt to disclose they have a disability, but are more than capable of doing the job with a little or no accommodation. More likely than not the person will NOT be hired. Same person applies for a different job and does not disclose the disability. It later becomes a problem. Person then loses job for not being TRUE AND HONEST.



In the US, many places require a certain number of people with some sort of disability hired, or be put ahead as a priority to be considered for hiring, assuming one is able enough otherwise to do the job. The Americans with Disabilities Act requires that for each job, certain tasks must be confirmed as necessary. Like lifting 50+ lbs., dealing with hot water/chemicals, etc. I know of a guy with a very mild form of autism that does very well where I work with little or no outside help. I'm not sure how it is in your country, or where you live, but here, having a disability that does not otherwise interfere with work increases one's chance of being hired, for the most part. Same with being a veteran, actually, except they get even higher priority, all other things being equal.

And the darker side of it is, for health insurance, sometimes people can't work over a certain number of hours lest they risk losing it. At least, that's how it is in my state.

Also:


----------



## Pikimon (Apr 29, 2014)

I'd rather have my hard earned money go to feeding a person, than to blowing up a country or to subsidize already rich corporations.


----------



## Ti-99/4A (Apr 29, 2014)

I'd love to work harder, but I need to get hired somewhere first. Full Disclosure:
I live in Astoria Oregon at the moment and I'm lucky to get an interview due to my nearly six years of being unemployed and on disability. I previously lived in Huntsville Alabama and worked my ass off for 15 years starting the summer after my sophomore year in high school. I covered for all the cool kids while they went out partying and getting laid. I went to college and burned out after 2 years because I had to work at my jobs so much. I ended up working in electronics manufacturing from 1997-2000, most of that time on perpetual 12 hour shifts 7 days a week until Y2K passed. I had another short stint at college in that time. Class at 8 AM after working till 3:30 AM. Then  the company had major cutbacks and got rid of tuition reimbursement. I joined the Navy in 2000 despite having battled mental illness the entire time prior. By the grace of God I passed Basic Training and finished Basic Submarine school in the top 10% of my class. It didn't last and I ended up discharged with a personality disorder just before VA benefits would kick in. I had bet my entire life and all my possessions on it and lost. My father and step mother couldn't deal with me so I went back home and got a similar job to what I had before. Worked more ungodly hours at night while going to school full time during the day. I graduated with honors and a year later after a failed engagement found myself living with an abusive thieving meth addict and his semi responsible pushover roommate. I slept on the couch with a knife under my pillow and 911 on speed dial on my cellphone. The experience gave me psychosomatic partial paralysis. I could barely walk at times and there was a constant dead feeling in the right side of my head. My right eye would only partially open and now right side of my mouth permenantly drooped downward and my speech was slurred. But I still went to work every single day because it was all I had left and I was so damn good at it that my coworkers always had my back. I didn't survive the next round of layoffs and spent six months drawing a check, but I found work again. 
         During all of this I was uninsured since I was a temp so  I was not able to get adequate mental health care. So in 2006 I had another major breakdown. I tried to keep working, but it was sporadic. The last job I had before I moved was stocking shelves at Kroger. I was supposed to get a transfer to the Fred Meyer in my new location, but I was terminated instead. That was in 2008.

My cousin convinced me to move here. Once I got here though, I was on my own. I could not get work and I was losing my mind. I found myself on the streets 2500 miles away from everything and everyone I knew. I was lucky to get put into a group home and signed up for the .

I now live in subsidized housing. 
Almost everything I own was well used and abused before it became mine.
I don't drink. I don't do drugs that were not perscribed to me and I take those as directed.
I have no ink or piercings.
I don't have a cell phone, smart or otherwise.
I have no Cable TV. 
I try to avoid junk food, but have a soft spot for Mtn. Dew
I might go out to  eat once a month.
I do not Gamble
My computer is a 10+ year old dumpster rescue on it's last legs
I do not own a vehicle
I do volunteer work when it comes up.
I get a little extra money helping people move, clean, or fix their computer
I am working with supported employment and signed up for vocational rehab.
I had some success selling arts and crafts at a show a few weeks ago.
I never ask for help from anyone since the whole country chips in for my $1021 a month income. I might at most ask for a smoke now and then.
While I never ask for help, I give it freely when I have the means.

So, am I doing the whole worthless mentally defective thing right?


----------



## Trickie (Apr 29, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


>



I fixed that for you:





*This is, of course, assuming you make six figures, annually, any less than that and your share of the work starts getting a lot lighter.


Also, I decided to make my own


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 29, 2014)

Trickie said:


> I fixed that for you:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



LOL, good one, I just thought the bumper sticker was funny and worth posting.

And I think you mean "depends?"


----------



## Trickie (Apr 29, 2014)

Black Sonichu said:


> LOL, good one, I just thought the bumper sticker was funny and worth posting.
> 
> And I think you mean "depends?"



I beg your pardon? I don't need diapers. It's not like I have a  problem.

but yeah, I noticed that I should've added an "s" to "depend", but by the time I noticed I closed the original psd without saving and I just kind of got lazy.


----------



## Duke Nukem (Apr 29, 2014)

Trickie said:


> I beg your pardon? I don't need diapers. It's not like I have a  problem.
> 
> And yeah, I noticed that I should've added an "s" to "depend", but by the time I noticed I closed the original psd without saving and I just kind of got lazy.



Oh yeah, to be fair, this one exists as well:






Far as I'm concerned, they're both true.


----------



## Holdek (May 5, 2014)

*"Woman A Leading Authority On What Shouldn’t Be In Poor People’s Grocery Carts" (The Onion)*



Black Sonichu said:


> And the darker side of it is, for health insurance, sometimes people can't work over a certain number of hours lest they risk losing it. At least, that's how it is in my state.



How does that work?


----------



## Duke Nukem (May 5, 2014)

Holdek said:


> How does that work?



If you make over a certain amount of money they cancel your state provided insurance. Then you have no insurance unless you buy it. The way it is set up, you practically have to double your income to get by. 

Work a job part time and get SSI/RSDI and income is close to a full time job. Except you can get free insurance due to earned income being below a certain amount. Go full time and abandon SSI though, and you have to buy insurance at a high price, and while you work more, net income is substantially less due to insurance cost. It makes it hard for people to get off the stuff.


----------



## More Spicey Than Coolwhip (Jun 18, 2017)

Duke Nukem said:


> If you make over a certain amount of money they cancel your state provided insurance. Then you have no insurance unless you buy it. The way it is set up, you practically have to double your income to get by.
> 
> Work a job part time and get SSI/RSDI and income is close to a full time job. Except you can get free insurance due to earned income being below a certain amount. Go full time and abandon SSI though, and you have to buy insurance at a high price, and while you work more, net income is substantially less due to insurance cost. It makes it hard for people to get off the stuff.



If I were to have any say on welfare reform, this is where I would start. When it starts costing people more to actually get a job than to just stay suckling off of government checks as a sole source of income there is an issue. I'd be for the expansion of welfare to supplement low income earners for the purpose of transitioning people off of a solely state-dependent lifestyle. 

In theory the cost of this expansion could be offset by the number of people transitioning off full dependence to the supplemental income. Granted, there would still be some lazy assholes who would prefer to live off handouts, but it would be a start.


----------



## ICametoLurk (Jun 18, 2017)

lol how you find this ancient as fuck thread


----------



## More Spicey Than Coolwhip (Jun 18, 2017)

Up way too late and randomly browsing the threads while my mind is already halfway to the bed.

also :autism:


----------



## ES 148 (Jun 18, 2017)

More Spicey Than Coolwhip said:


> Up way too late and randomly browsing the threads while my mind is already halfway to the bed.
> 
> also :autism:



You should get to sleep, then.
Not trying to be bossy, I'm just concerned for your _welfare._

now all I need to do is wait for positive ratings to flood in
_
_


----------



## Duke Nukem (Jun 18, 2017)

More Spicey Than Coolwhip said:


> If I were to have any say on welfare reform, this is where I would start. When it starts costing people more to actually get a job than to just stay suckling off of government checks as a sole source of income there is an issue. I'd be for the expansion of welfare to supplement low income earners for the purpose of transitioning people off of a solely state-dependent lifestyle.
> 
> In theory the cost of this expansion could be offset by the number of people transitioning off full dependence to the supplemental income. Granted, there would still be some lazy assholes who would prefer to live off handouts, but it would be a start.



But that would take work on the lawmakers' part. That's why it will probably never happen. Plus, gotta keep the poor poor so they continue to vote Democrat, not out of loyalty, but out of fear that the evil Republicans will take their precious entitlements away.


----------



## nice (Jun 18, 2017)

Wouldn't it be wonderful that in this day and age where e-funding is so popular, people could decide where their money is going (and just how much of it) to individual cases instead of having it decided by the government?

As OP started with Chris, let's use him as an example: his patreon currently nets him $209 per month. That is what the charitable people have decided he is worth in total. That's several hundred dollars lower than what the government had decided to give him.
Chris is also offering things in return for their generosity via patreon tier rewards, much unlike what he could've done on welfare (funding Japanese game companies do not count _imo_).

For better or for worse, the market has made their decision knowing who Chris is and what he has done/is doing to earn those kindbux. This is the result.


Communities should not be forced to pay for something or someone that they do not agree are worthy of their hard-earned money.
If only the people were able to see how many there are abusing welfare while others far more deserving are left out, they would also be fighting for more private control over the benefits system.


----------



## Pikimon (Jun 21, 2017)

nice said:


> Wouldn't it be wonderful that in this day and age where e-funding is so popular, people could decide where their money is going (and just how much of it) to individual cases instead of having it decided by the government?



E-funding is retarded because it funds a lot of really really dumb projects that are shit.

When you give people the choice, they'll throw 600k of their money to pay a man to make potato salad.


----------



## Morose_Obesity (Jun 21, 2017)

My life often brings me into contact with professional welfare leeches. I drift in and out of poverty, one year I'm brainwashing people to buy some companies shinies (I'm manipulative, makes me a good freelance ad guy. I even appeared in some in house productions you'll never see) the next I'm fucking working at the mall and going to community meetings for the free pizza and scamming apps that earn gift cards and working events mainly for the leftover beer and food.Yep, I really care about that zoning change bullshit. Om nom nom. I couldn't get any work for the Pride parade this year and I'm kinda sick of seeing oily buff men for awhile anyway.
One month I may use a food pantry, the next I'm volunteering in it. It's fucked but I only take handouts when I have to.
 I have a background in mental health (that's why I'm an asshole) but these days running a Taco Bell pays more and is less degrading. Haven't resorted to it in 15 years but it'll probably happen. I'm fucking fed up with the corruption. There are assholes worse than Chris, they blow their whole tugboats on drugs and smokes. My recent volunteer shift at a food bank featured old polocks snatching food out of each other's carts and the poor man's Deniro picking a fight with an old Filipino lady over a place in line. You haven't lived until you've seen a guy who looks like this try to throw a tantrum over nearly-rotten produce.


----------



## Meat_Puppet (Jun 24, 2017)

About 10 years ago my aunt was diagnosed with lung cancer and ended up bed ridden until the day she died. She had 4 kids whom she had supported on her own and was damn proud of it. The moment her doctors told her she was no longer able to work and had to stay home she had to hold back her pride and ended up filling for SSI. It took her almost a year and a half to finally qualify after having to go through so much crap with the government. So to see peices of shit like Chris receiving a government check really pisses me off. Seriously fatty, go find a job.


----------



## Piss Clam (Jun 24, 2017)

Meat_Puppet said:


> About 10 years ago my aunt was diagnosed with lung cancer and ended up bed ridden until the day she died. She had 4 kids whom she had supported on her own and was damn proud of it. The moment her doctors told her she was no longer able to work and had to stay home she had to hold back her pride and ended up filling for SSI. It took her almost a year and a half to finally qualify after having to go through so much crap with the government. So to see peices of shit like Chris receiving a government check really pisses me off. Seriously fatty, go find a job.



I use to drive people to the DHR. In five minutes they would get 200 dollars in food stamps and a 20 dollar gas card.

But...

Filling out SSI forms is a nightmare, there is no way a mentally ill person could do it let alone your aunt with cancer.


----------



## Meat_Puppet (Jun 26, 2017)

Piss Clam said:


> I use to drive people to the DHR. In five minutes they would get 200 dollars in food stamps and a 20 dollar gas card.
> 
> But...
> 
> Filling out SSI forms is a nightmare, there is no way a mentally ill person could do it let alone your aunt with cancer.


See I have zero issues with there being someone with a mental disorder that would restrict them from working with the public being on SSI. But then you get people like Chris who abuse the shit out of it when there are others who desperately need to be able to take care of themselves and their families and it's so unfair.


----------



## nice (Jun 28, 2017)

Pikimon said:


> E-funding is exceptional because it funds a lot of really really dumb projects that are shit.
> 
> When you give people the choice, they'll throw 600k of their money to pay a man to make potato salad.


People spend money on dumb shit all the time. The critical difference here is that it's voluntarily given as opposed to being distributed unwillingly by the government.


----------



## Piss Clam (Jun 28, 2017)

Meat_Puppet said:


> See I have zero issues with there being someone with a mental disorder that would restrict them from working with the public being on SSI. But then you get people like Chris who abuse the shit out of it when there are others who desperately need to be able to take care of themselves and their families and it's so unfair.



Yes that is a problem. You know the average time for SSI is shameful:

https://www.ssa.gov/appeals/DataSets/01_NetStat_Report.html

It's all these people clogging up the system and most of them don't have a case, and then some get the kickbacks between Judges and Lawyers.

I believe if I recall lawyers can only claim 20% of it, but if you have the inside road with a judge then you can claim, wad with SSDI and even get a decent payout on SSI for one meeting.

There was a guy who's mother was clearly disabled and he had spent seven years applying. I don't know what happened to him, but that was years ago.

The thing is also that people who have spent decades paying into the system get shutout by the same system.

Maybe we should pay off what we owe, then allow people to pay into some type of IRA from early life and it will stop these abuses.

You only get what you paid into the system.


----------

