Welfare money being put to good use!

[Purlina]

Do any of you even know what happened to the poor and the underclass, the single mothers, the young children, before the advent of the modern first world state? They died from disease, starvation, and yes on the streets of your cities.

Also I have a feeling that crime would skyrocket if government assistance was eliminated.

[SturdyGamer]

Do any of you even know what happened to the poor and the underclass, the single mothers, the young children, before the advent of the modern first world state? They died from disease, starvation, and yes on the streets of your cities.

A lot of people are desensitised to the point where they probably wouldn't notice even if it happened before their very eyes. What's disturbing is that a lot of people seem to assume that anyone on welfare should be completely unable to actually do anything but exist with absolutely no spare cash to buy themselves a treat from time to time.

[Daelak]

A lot of people are desensitised to the point where they probably wouldn't notice even if it happened before their very eyes. What's disturbing is that a lot of people seem to assume that anyone on welfare should be completely unable to actually do anything but exist with absolutely no spare cash to buy themselves a treat from time to time.

Exactly, they are coming from an angle of an ideologue, not reality. Many people who rail against the welfare states, (all first world nations), are citizens of first world nations themselves, educated in publicly funded schools, roads, utilities, transportation, economic zones. It is cognitive dissonance to the T. The only reason they even can comprehend these quasi-serious, fifty year old ideologies that only exist on the sheet of paper is because of the modern first world state, with a robust welfare program, GI bill, medicare, medicaid, Social security, federal grants, federal slush funds for states, and the like.

[Mukki]

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/p...nvj2RwpsEDS7MN

Sooooo...we just raised taxes, but are still twiddling our thumbs when it comes to reductions in spending.

How about we track everytime someone uses EBT cards at strip clubs and bars and cut off the people doing so. It might be a drop in the bucket, but its a start.

Stip clubs and bars accept EBT these days? That's troubling.

[Grumash]

You have no idea what you are talking about. The vast majority (80%+) of recipients of welfare are single mothers, children under 8, and the impoverished elderly. Keep throwing random numbers and stereotypes out of your ass.

Single mothers: Either get child support, or make smart decisions and dont shack up with guys who cant pay child support/wont stick with you. I dont want to pay for your dumb life decisions, you should pay for your own. If your significant other died, I would classify you as a widow, and I can understand a need there.

Children under 8: please explain to me why they need a welfare check. Parent single? see above. No parents? foster homes should get this money, not the child.

Impoverished elderly: Lets be generous and say that the average impovershed elderly person saved up while they were working and had some shitstorm take all their savings away (not that they just didnt save and expected the government to catch them when they decided to stop working). They can probably find a job as a greeter at wal-mart or something. If they can't find a job, maybe the government should focus on lowering unemployment instead of ignoring it and saying its getting better, hoping that their words will have a magical effect. If they cannot work because of health issues or stuff like that, that is disablility not just being old.

Also I am sure there are folks out there who could live with their kids. I am more than willing to support my parents should the need arise (which it very well may), but i do NOT want to support your parents, thats your job.

People need to take some personal responsibility in their own lives. I am tired of people thinking government should have all the answers, and even worse, that they have unlimited money to pay for all of this. You realise that we are nowhere near to reducing the defecit (not even talking about the debt) with this 'rich pay their fair share' bullshit. We already spent 1/6th of the money that we raised by raising taxes on sandy. Spending cuts need to happen. All this welfare stuff and other expenses are nice to have, and goodwill and all that, but we dont have the money. If you are walking down the street, and you are flat broke, you dont take a loan out to give to the homeless dude on the street.

---------- Post added 2013-01-08 at 06:02 PM ----------

Exactly, they are coming from an angle of an ideologue, not reality. Many people who rail against the welfare states, (all first world nations), are citizens of first world nations themselves, educated in publicly funded schools, roads, utilities, transportation, economic zones. It is cognitive dissonance to the T. The only reason they even can comprehend these quasi-serious, fifty year old ideologies that only exist on the sheet of paper is because of the modern first world state, with a robust welfare program, GI bill, medicare, medicaid, Social security, federal grants, federal slush funds for states, and the like.

Compare the spending levels of the clinton era (since it sounds like you probably liked him) to the spending levels now. The people who 'rail against the welfare states' were raised and educated when we balanced the budget. That is not even possible now, not without some serous changes. Why dont we go back to clinton era spending levels.

Just to be clear, I am not against welfare and the such as much as I am against spending money we do not have. The programs we have today are nice to have, but not neccesary. You say that the single mothers, young children, and elderly died on the streets before all this spending? I dont recall that happening with spending levels that allowed a balanced budget.

[Wells]

Because you don't have to get car insurance, but you have to pay taxes. I don't think anyone expects total perfection though.

Right but most(?) do pay car insurance, yes you never see anyone claim that some insurance fraud is proof the whole thing is bunk. "have to" is irrelevant to the point.

[dantian]

Just to be clear, I am not against welfare and the such as much as I am against spending money we do not have.

But we do have it. That's why we can borrow money with extraordinarily low interest rates as a nation. If we weren't capable of paying it we wouldn't get the loans. The reason America's credit got bumped down was because Republicans played chicken with the debt ceiling.

The programs we have today are nice to have, but not neccesary.

You have no idea what you're talking about. Before Clinton signed welfare reform into law it was far, far more liberal than it is today.

You say that the single mothers, young children, and elderly died on the streets before all this spending? I dont recall that happening with spending levels that allowed a balanced budget.

Before the 90s? Of course not, the programs were more inclusive then, not less. Your argument fails. If you mean before the program existed at all, yes, people actually starved and died.

[Felya]

Before the 90s? Of course not, the programs were more inclusive then, not less. Your argument fails. If you mean before the program existed at all, yes, people actually starved and died.

It has a lot to do with people not understanding why these programs were put in place and treating the results as just how things are. They only notice the small percentage that are out of the ordinary because they abuse the system, while ignoring that the system is in place so we have things the way they are.

In all of this, the only thing that should mater is reaching the point where the cost of enforcing the rules matches, but does not outweigh, the savings.

[Themius]

This isnt new. Most people who are on welfare are not looking for a career. Welfare pays well enough (in most cases) that you would need a fairly good job (not mcdonalds or anything close to minimum wage) to do better financially. If you dont have a college degree that route is out, as if you go to school you lose welfare. It is a system that keeps people in it, because of the designed difficulty of leaving the program.

In short, people on welfare dont have other options that pay better than welfare. Fix the system and you fix the little problems like this.

Most people? Wow I think I just met God, because you must be fucking omnipotent.

[Deleted]

But we do have it. That's why we can borrow money with extraordinarily low interest rates as a nation. If we weren't capable of paying it we wouldn't get the loans.

Actually nobody knows if you have it. They just hope you do because otherwise we're all fucked anyway. There is no safer value than american debt because it would take the whole economy with it.

[Tribunal]

TANF has a 60 month LIFETIME limit. Nobody's living off the system solely via TANF. It's also one of the biggest sources of cash from EBT cards since it's a more generalized assistance than other food or medical specific programs.

Also, SNAP benefits aren't unlimited... if someone consumes their entire allotment in a day on expensive goods or just quantity, they are out of luck if that food doesn't last a month. No, they 'shouldn't' do such a thing to start with, but they are educated on proper meal planning and budgeting and we can't possibly stop someone who is bad or stupid enough to do it preemptively. That being said, if they budget out their entire month's worth of groceries and realize "hey, I can have steaks one night if I have pasta for seven nights instead of six and use chicken for the soup instead of buying more ground beef", is that really the end of the goddamn world? They're still within their allotted budget. I or anyone else can do the same thing with my barely above the poverty requirements budget if we want (not actually my circumstances IRL at the moment, though I've been there in the past).

I'm not saying that's everyone who buys lobster or junk food on SNAP. Some people just buy (and eat) crap no matter who's paying. The government and society as a whole can try to influence and change their eating habits but ultimately change is up to them. Even if we cut those items off of SNAP (which there is some room for trimming, though not as much as people argue), they will find a way to purchase them otherwise.

I'm not my most eloquent at the moment, but basically: there's not always harm in the person buying lobster on EBT or beer with cash (save up what little money they have for the occasional treat of beer). There are some people who abuse it, but most of our options to try to stop such behavior are either futile, too costly, or too harmful to legitimate users.

[Wildtree]

A database of 200 million Electronic Benefit Transfer records from January 2011 to July 2012, obtained by The Post through a Freedom of Information request, showed welfare recipients using their EBT cards to make dozens of cash withdrawals at ATMs inside Hank’s Saloon in Brooklyn; the Blue Door Video porn shop in the East Village; The Anchor, a sleek SoHo lounge; the Patriot Saloon in TriBeCa; and Drinks Galore, a liquor distributor in The Bronx.

Dozens compared to 200 million..
The system apparently works as intended and, for all it needs is to punish the few dozen misuses.
Does the newspaper(if one can call it even a newspaper. it looks more like a rainbow press magazine) know whether that punishment happens, has happened already, or will never happen?