RE: Welfare vs Charity (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

[Poll]

Welfare vs Charity


Welfare is theft.
  9% (8)
Welfare is moral and just.
  20% (18)
Welfare is theft, but in the service of a greater good, it's needed.
  5% (5)
The welfare state does more harm than good.
  23% (20)
Welfare given to big business is far more troubling to me.
  40% (35)


Total Votes : 86
(last vote on : 2/26/2013 10:50:04 AM)
(Poll will run till: -- )


Message


JeffBC -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 10:02:34 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Level
If so, I don't think we're disagreeing, as much as it is semantics getting in the way.

Ahhhh... Yup... that.




TheHeretic -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 7:47:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: SpiritedRadiance

Ive called it 3 times, the gas station cannot find the receipts for the purchases so there is nothing that can be substantiated.


I can't say that I'm believing this. I suspect there must be more to the story, somewhere. Nailing the businesses that will participate in FS fraud is typically more of a priority than catching the individual perpetrators.

I've also made reports to We Tip that wound up going nowhere. They'll say the report could not be substantiated, yes, but never with investigative detail, and the detail you say is provided doesn't make sense. If they suspect a business is allowing such transactions, they send in an investigator posing as participant, and try to make the purchase. Once they have that, then comes a warrant for the business records.

One recent development, here in California, is the change that allows SNAP benefits to be used at restaurants. There is a logic here, since the homeless don't have much opportunity to keep a pantry, or cook. The old rule was, if it is cold, it is sold, if it is hot, it's not. During my brief stint as a convenience store clerk, the customer had to come up and pay for the burrito, then go back to microwave it.

The way it works first requires the individual business to sign up to participate, pay some fees, and then the participant must register to use the card at that specific location. To me, it seems like a good improvement, to get the aid where it is needed.

Misperceptions have been mentioned, and this is creating a doozie, because the places that offer this, put up signs to announce the fact. "Use your EBT card here!" can grate a little on people pulling out hard-earned cash. We may have more people on food stamps than ever before (I think the number I keep seeing is 43 million), but there are still plenty more who feel the price, when they take the kiddies out for Happy Meal, and signs like these only feed into resentment.





Marini -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 8:58:57 PM)

quote:

I can't say that I'm believing this. I suspect there must be more to the story, somewhere. Nailing the businesses that will participate in FS fraud is typically more of a priority than catching the individual perpetrators.

I've also made reports to We Tip that wound up going nowhere. They'll say the report could not be substantiated, yes, but never with investigative detail, and the detail you say is provided doesn't make sense. If they suspect a business is allowing such transactions, they send in an investigator posing as participant, and try to make the purchase. Once they have that, then comes a warrant for the business records.


Let's just face the fact that there are many "crimes" that many don't care about.
Maybe those that don't care about millions of people coming into this country illegally, also don't care about welfare fraud?

Does anyone really know what time it is?
Does anyone really care?
If so I can't imagine why (Oh no, no)
We've all got time enough to cry.
-Chicago

Yes, I love classic rock.
[;)]




TheHeretic -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 9:06:43 PM)

I watched a couple documentaries from Netflix this afternoon, Mari. Inside North Korea, stuff. If people are able to get across that border for freedom, do you really think we are going to keep people on the other side of ours? Do we want to be the kind of country that has the kind of borders it would take to even try for 100% security? We can do a lot better, but they are going to come.

We've got a big mess to clear up in immigration, and this thread seems to be going so well, I'd hate to drag it off into the weeds of that argument.




Marini -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 9:10:49 PM)

I didn't mean to change the subject at all Rich.

I am just pointing out there seems to be a LONG list of "crimes" and misdemeanors that many don't seem to really give a rats ass about.

I certainly don't think law enforcement will be putting in a lot of investigations or man-power into uncovering all the welfare fraud/and similar criminal acts that are common place these days.




LookieNoNookie -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 9:18:41 PM)

Somehow I knew corporate welfare would take the top spot.




TheHeretic -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 9:39:47 PM)

As much a reminder to me, as to you, Mari. You know immigration is another one of those topics where I'm happy to get rolling. [:D]

A lot of participant fraud can be addressed pretty easily, with structural improvements. First, we need to acknowledge that there is an entire subculture, where living in the safety net is a multi-generational way of life, and find better ways to address that problem, while simultaneously making the system more flexible for people for people who fall, and need the net to be flexible enough to let them get out onto their feet.




TheHeretic -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 9:47:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

Somehow I knew corporate welfare would take the top spot.



That is one way to look at it, Lookie. Another way to look at it, would be say that the majority have actual thoughts on the subject, while a minority would prefer to snark, and ignore the topic with the standard talking point answer.




Marini -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 9:52:37 PM)

If we want to "attempt" to be fair Rich, we would have to address corporate welfare, fraud and abuse and be as aggressive about prosecuting those at the top as we are those at the bottom.

It's a big kettle of fish.




TheHeretic -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 10:12:07 PM)

Apples and oranges, Mari. Just because some think tank decided to slap a nifty label on something they would rather talk about, doesn't mean it has anything to do with the goals and practices of the poverty maintenance structure we have in place.

Should we call any job creation program, "working class welfare?" Are roads and public transportation, "commuter welfare?" Is any financial incentive or benefit from the government, "welfare?"

Of course there are things worth looking at and talking about in pretty much anything our government gets up to, but this deserves a plate of its own.




FrostedFlake -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 10:56:06 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: LookieNoNookie

Somehow I knew corporate welfare would take the top spot.



That is one way to look at it, Lookie. Another way to look at it, would be say that the majority have actual thoughts on the subject, while a minority would prefer to snark, and ignore the topic with the standard talking point answer.


There is another way to look. At the big picture. Follow me through this loop.

Nixon went to China. To split the Communist block. By exporting our jobs. Which is a better idea than tossing missiles back and forth. But which leaves a bunch of unemployed people here in the U.S. Who would be ....difficult... if allowed to starve. So the welfare state is created. Which is a better idea than allowing starving millions to pull the house of cards down around out ears. But which costs money. That has to come from somewhere.

The upshot of this thread seems to be, "Why me? And that might even be fair. But, ending the gravy train, as attractive as the idea might be to the guys with the jobs, is essentially equivalent to telling all those whose jobs were sacrificed for the greater good to go jump in the lake. This would make those folks ...difficult. This should make it plain that removing the solution, welfare, without replacing it with ...oh, I don't know, JOBS... is a prescription for ...is revolution too big a word to use here?

If you want to end the welfare state, come up with a better idea.

That might sound like more of a challenge than it is. You don't have to come up with all the answers at once and you don't have to do it all by yourself. But you do have to at least try to visualize what the World is supposed to be like. Instead of trying to knock down the policy edifice built intentionally to prevent your Countrymen showing up at your house looking for a sandwich.

Is there one thing about the welfare state that is not a policy?

Is it not obvious that a policy of some sort is needed?

Do you know where to get a policy?

Can you describe the policy that would both please you and address the problem intentionally created to solve a much bigger problem we called The Cold War?

I can.

Clean sheet of paper. The Cold War is long over. China is in some ways a bigger threat to the United States now than Nuclear War was during the Nixon years. Fuck China. Tax their products sufficiently that we can work our own jobs again. Suddenly there are millions of jobs. NOW cutting welfare is possible. And there is no reason to stop there. Why should we pay income tax? Why shouldn't Income Tax be paid only by Corporations? Does it really sanctify anything to have Corporations pay people and then have the IRS tax people? Would it not be a lot simpler and more efficient and much, much more FREE to cut out the hundred million middlemen and have the IRS directly bill Monsanto? And why stop at this? Ditto Social Security. And why stop at that? Why not admit that health care is not optional and therefore demonstrably a constitutional right? That would disconnect healthcare from the world of work and put it where it belongs, in the hands of Doctors and the people they treat. Including the Bums. Insurance companies would never again be able to say, "Preexisting Condition" or "Your premium has increased", or "Your policy is cancelled", because there would be one payer and no argument.

What kind of Country would we be living in if we did that?

Why don't we do that?

Is it because Corporations (Break the code : Wealthy people) would lose power?




TheHeretic -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/24/2013 11:23:16 PM)

Now that's an interesting approach to the subject, FrostedFlake. Unfortunately, the sort of response it deserves will have to wait for a better hour, on another day.

In the meantime, any chance you can cover the gap, where the poverty maintenance programs in question were created by LBJ, well before all those jobs started going to China?

G'nite




Politesub53 -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/25/2013 3:39:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Voted for now. I'll be back (assuming the thread doesn't get locked and deleted, for violating Lib/Dem dogma).


Thats what I love about you Rich. You never lose your sense of the ridiculous. [8D]

I voted for the bottom anwer, welfare should be for those in need.




joether -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/25/2013 5:33:59 AM)

I work with a local group/charity. We help veterans, families, and in one case, a neighborhood in solving a pile of problems. These are good people, all in all. They arent the types that take the aid even though they have resources they could tap. Many have had honest to God, bad circumstances befall them. Each of us simply donate a few hundred bucks to the local food pantries each month. It never seems like enough....

I've heard, seen, and witness sad stories, horror stories, and just the stuff that would make a grown man weep! I've even see a few Repbublians come to a very startling realization that the crap they've been fed is wholly untrue and inaccurate. Others, once they understand the problems encountered, try stepping up to help. A few dollars here, a few hours of community service there. It just really never feels like enough....

An its not the money, or the health issues, or their house about to be foreclosed on, nor their child struck down with some terrifying illness no child should....EVER....endure; Its the mental and emotional toll that takes place that is the real damaging part. These people are just so over whelmed by circumstances they have no idea what to do!

Fortunately living in the Commonwealth of Massachusetts affords my group abilities not easily had in the other 46 states, 3 commonwealths, 6 territories and 1 district! But that comes to the heart of the issue: The state has resources our charity could only dream on. Its an economic concept called 'The Scales of Economy'. An when its the federal goverment, those scales are simply even larger. I know of no charity organization that has the scales of economy equal a state in the union let alone the US Goverment! And I simply laugh in those ignorant morons that bitch their tax dollars should be in their pockets to give to charities. Like they, in their selfish minds and little hearts would give a penny to help those in need.

My organization nor I are suckers either. We do check people out. Most of the time, everything checks out pretty well. When we are still 'on the fence' it comes to a vote with the group. States and the US Goverment would be wise to have anti-fraud departments set up with their welfare programs. As those that would defraud the system amount to only 3-6% of the total citizens in need. Put 'em in jail, fine them for damages and keep thier names on a list.

Most people have trouble accepting hand outs. Its a matter of pride and ego really. There are those that have some honestly serious problems, and I feel as a society we should do our utmost to help them. For we ourselves may find our hides in the same spot; wouldn't be nice to get help out of a bad situation?




Notsweet -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/25/2013 5:50:17 AM)

Excuse me, Joether. I don't know where you get these ideas about Republicans not giving to charity, or doing work, but maybe sometime you and I could chat privately about my own work. And I'd like to see the stats you found about Republicans not giving, or Democrats being more generous. Let's start with the President and the VP, and the last Democrat president and VP, as their tax returns state how much they were proud to give, shall we? Look that one up.




DesideriScuri -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/25/2013 6:31:32 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Notsweet
Excuse me, Joether. I don't know where you get these ideas about Republicans not giving to charity, or doing work, but maybe sometime you and I could chat privately about my own work. And I'd like to see the stats you found about Republicans not giving, or Democrats being more generous. Let's start with the President and the VP, and the last Democrat president and VP, as their tax returns state how much they were proud to give, shall we? Look that one up.


Two examples from each side do not define either whole. The only thing you'd be capable of showing is that Obama and Biden didn't donate as much as Bush and Cheney. That's it. I have heard many times that conservatives are more charitable than liberals, but I have yet to find any hard evidence from an unbiased source to support or refute those allegations.

What galled me most about President Obama was his statement of having hundred's of thousands of dollars that he didn't need, and used that to call for greater taxation on the wealthy. I don't dispute his claim of having hundred's of thousands of dollars after taxes and spending. I do dispute it being a reason for higher taxes. Had he taken those hundred's of thousands of dollars and donated them, what impact would they have had?

One last thing just occurred to me. It is entirely possible that liberals donate just as much as conservatives, but don't claim the tax benefits. You won't see those on their returns, which could lead to an analysis that they aren't donating. Claims of "some" donations do not prove there were no other donations.




Notsweet -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/25/2013 6:41:00 AM)

Again, I would match my actual physical work here to anyone's. And not all Republicans claim their charitable donations either.
But I don't see why comparing politicians' reported contributions doesn't hold muster. Democrat politicians are famous for stingy donations while generously offering what others have worked for.

Clearly, I'm not against a safety net. What I'm against is vote buying.




DesideriScuri -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/25/2013 7:01:22 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: joether
I work with a local group/charity. We help veterans, families, and in one case, a neighborhood in solving a pile of problems. These are good people, all in all. They arent the types that take the aid even though they have resources they could tap. Many have had honest to God, bad circumstances befall them. Each of us simply donate a few hundred bucks to the local food pantries each month. It never seems like enough....


It isn't enough. And, it will never be enough. Kudos to those, like you, who do it.

quote:

Most people have trouble accepting hand outs. Its a matter of pride and ego really. There are those that have some honestly serious problems, and I feel as a society we should do our utmost to help them. For we ourselves may find our hides in the same spot; wouldn't be nice to get help out of a bad situation?


So, who is supposed to be the ones providing the help, though? If you develop a government program, then government is helping, and not necessarily society. Do those that receive welfare/charity have any responsibility to the organization that gives to them? I think they do, even if it's simply to get off their roles (by changing their circumstances to no longer in in need). A charity is a lot more in tune with that than government.

Last, but not least, government welfare is not charity. Charity is freely given, by choice, and to the the donor's choice. Government takes money to give to others.




Owner59 -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/25/2013 7:29:34 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Notsweet

Excuse me, Joether. I don't know where you get these ideas about Republicans not giving to charity, or doing work, but maybe sometime you and I could chat privately about my own work. And I'd like to see the stats you found about Republicans not giving, or Democrats being more generous. Let's start with the President and the VP, and the last Democrat president and VP, as their tax returns state how much they were proud to give, shall we? Look that one up.



We aren`t talking about individual donations to charity.



We are talking about republicans cutting government aid to the poor,sick,elderly and homeless......while fighting to give away trillions of our tax dollars to the wealthy.



Both of those things are unacceptable and are going to be stopped.







TricklessMagic -> RE: Welfare vs Charity (2/25/2013 10:20:46 AM)

Our handout-for-nothing (welfare) system is broken. People who have legitimate need are often overlooked (folks with cancer who can't get SSDI or food stamps) in favor of those who pop out bastards whose futures are made up of only filling prisons or popping out more bastards. Thankfully our welfare system is so out-of-control and ineffective I never have to make a charitable donation ever again, to do so would only encourage the problems this country is already suffering. Now do I help those folks who are suffering from cancer, who have families, who prior to suffering cancer were hardworking productive people? Yes. But that's not charity so much as helping your fellow man/woman get back on their feet so they can take care of their family and not become a burden on the system. Do I do some pro bono representation to help women get child support or get injunctions against violence? Yes but again that goes back to helping to keep people from becoming a burden on the system.

Those whom are too old, sick, young, or mentally impaired to work I believe are entitled to some degree of welfare but that welfare should be narrowly tailored to government cheese, government meat, government milk, government produce, government OJ so as to meet basic nutrition needs, basic shelter, and basic medical needs (I'm not a doctor so I can't say what that is). We need to make it a crime to have children you can't afford to feed and clothe, and to not hand them over to the government to possibly be raised by superior people (that does not mean white people, just folks who make more money and have done something with their lives). For those women whom have more than two children, they shouldn't receive welfare for any more children than two children unless they submit themselves to sterilization (give them the choice). Fathers who sire more than two children they cannot afford should be required to engage in similar options (can't afford your kids, you get a vasectomy). Let those receiving welfare make up to one thousand dollars a month, any dollar earned over that per month while receiving welfare is forfeit to the government while receiving welfare. As long as their shelter, food, and health needs are met they won't legitimately need much else that $1,000 can't meet. Require those receiving welfare, who are physically fit to work and are older than 18 (being out of high school), to donate thirty hours a week of work to public service and construction projects leaving them with at least another thirty hours a week to work for that $1,000 a month. Public service and construction can be harvesting crops, tearing down dilapidated buildings, mine gold (we need a larger gold reserve anyways), build green energy producing facilities, build crop producing green energy structures in highly urban environments, urban improvement projects such as graffiti removal and unarmed neighborhood patrolling in force, work for companies that can hire them to perform unskilled labor (like Ford, GE, etc. etc. help break unions).

Basically get some return on the investment.

We need to make voluntary sterilization free to the public to help combat poverty.

We won't do any of that though. Oh well, I'll use the money I would have donated pre-Sandy Hook to keep buying guns and ammo like I did at Christmas time (that $1,000 went quick to guns and ammo).




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 3 [4] 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
0.046875