Pages:
Author

Topic: Some statistics on welfare - page 2. (Read 2582 times)

full member
Activity: 164
Merit: 100
June 25, 2014, 10:03:46 PM
#28

Many folks claim its predominantly blacks who are on welfare which as far as this site suggests is not the case at all.

Should really redefined what welfare mean.

Federal and state employees, are they not welfare recipient?



Bank and insurance sector getting bailout money is welfare also.

People in the western countries think it is "other" who take on welfare check. Little do they realized the subsidy comes from artificially high currency and artificially low interest rate are another form of welfare.
full member
Activity: 179
Merit: 100
June 25, 2014, 08:13:22 PM
#27

Many folks claim its predominantly blacks who are on welfare which as far as this site suggests is not the case at all.

Should really redefined what welfare mean.

Federal and state employees, are they not welfare recipient?

hero member
Activity: 728
Merit: 500
June 24, 2014, 09:19:14 AM
#26
Quote
So keep them on full welfare, but with a stipulation that they train for some sort of skilled job. Then after a year or two, whatever the program might be they transition into full time work.

That isn't what I'm talking about exactly, altho I would agree in general with 'keep them on full welfare while they train'....the FACT is that most disabled people, whatever the disability physical or mental, can't successfully do much more than part time or min. wage work, if they can find it. It's also a fact that when they take such work, hoping to supplement, they are docked in benefits.  So they don't try. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. It is a type of trap.
I had a good friend , from a well off family, valedictorian in her high school class, Daddy bought her a new convertible for graduation, already accepted into pre-med at the state college, plus, she was drop dead gorgeous.  She also had a boyfriend---  who felt bad because she had a new car and he didn't, so after graduation he drove her new car, -----------and flipped it.  Broke her neck and left her with the ability to move ONE arm slightly.  I met her at work, you see after the accident she couldn't handle the rigorous education course she had planned, so she changed to accounting, which would not require the ability to walk.  She never accepted one cent of charity, or disability---she worked every day, and could type faster than I using a pencil eraser in her one functional hand....  her boyfriend dropped her within six weeks of the accident, because being around her made him depressed.  I'm sorry, if Rosemary could support herself,  by God anyone can.

If same had happened to someone from minimum wage family, would that person had same chances? That is get the support for education? I take that her family paid for it and not her?
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
June 24, 2014, 09:07:05 AM
#25
Quote
So keep them on full welfare, but with a stipulation that they train for some sort of skilled job. Then after a year or two, whatever the program might be they transition into full time work.

That isn't what I'm talking about exactly, altho I would agree in general with 'keep them on full welfare while they train'....the FACT is that most disabled people, whatever the disability physical or mental, can't successfully do much more than part time or min. wage work, if they can find it. It's also a fact that when they take such work, hoping to supplement, they are docked in benefits.  So they don't try. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. It is a type of trap.
I had a good friend , from a well off family, valedictorian in her high school class, Daddy bought her a new convertible for graduation, already accepted into pre-med at the state college, plus, she was drop dead gorgeous.  She also had a boyfriend---  who felt bad because she had a new car and he didn't, so after graduation he drove her new car, -----------and flipped it.  Broke her neck and left her with the ability to move ONE arm slightly.  I met her at work, you see after the accident she couldn't handle the rigorous education course she had planned, so she changed to accounting, which would not require the ability to walk.  She never accepted one cent of charity, or disability---she worked every day, and could type faster than I using a pencil eraser in her one functional hand....  her boyfriend dropped her within six weeks of the accident, because being around her made him depressed.  I'm sorry, if Rosemary could support herself,  by God anyone can.
Everyone is not made the same. Great story about this 'Rosemary' but lets face facts, it's not typical. Many people don't have that fortitude, she is fortunate and I hope she is grateful for that gift of strength.
So, that's why we the people(government) must regulate these things. We need welfare reform IMO so that people who are not so gifted still have an opportunity to shine in their own way. We all have something to give and it's our responsibility to find something to do, something to make a person be a part of this wonderful society. 
Bigotry and prejudice don't help anyone. 
sr. member
Activity: 350
Merit: 250
June 24, 2014, 08:50:10 AM
#24
What about an "guaranteed annual income"? Would anyone buy into that? It could get rid of the need for welfare altogether.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
June 24, 2014, 08:20:22 AM
#23
Quote
So keep them on full welfare, but with a stipulation that they train for some sort of skilled job. Then after a year or two, whatever the program might be they transition into full time work.

That isn't what I'm talking about exactly, altho I would agree in general with 'keep them on full welfare while they train'....the FACT is that most disabled people, whatever the disability physical or mental, can't successfully do much more than part time or min. wage work, if they can find it. It's also a fact that when they take such work, hoping to supplement, they are docked in benefits.  So they don't try. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. It is a type of trap.
I had a good friend , from a well off family, valedictorian in her high school class, Daddy bought her a new convertible for graduation, already accepted into pre-med at the state college, plus, she was drop dead gorgeous.  She also had a boyfriend---  who felt bad because she had a new car and he didn't, so after graduation he drove her new car, -----------and flipped it.  Broke her neck and left her with the ability to move ONE arm slightly.  I met her at work, you see after the accident she couldn't handle the rigorous education course she had planned, so she changed to accounting, which would not require the ability to walk.  She never accepted one cent of charity, or disability---she worked every day, and could type faster than I using a pencil eraser in her one functional hand....  her boyfriend dropped her within six weeks of the accident, because being around her made him depressed.  I'm sorry, if Rosemary could support herself,  by God anyone can.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
June 24, 2014, 07:04:24 AM
#22
Quote
So keep them on full welfare, but with a stipulation that they train for some sort of skilled job. Then after a year or two, whatever the program might be they transition into full time work.

That isn't what I'm talking about exactly, altho I would agree in general with 'keep them on full welfare while they train'....the FACT is that most disabled people, whatever the disability physical or mental, can't successfully do much more than part time or min. wage work, if they can find it. It's also a fact that when they take such work, hoping to supplement, they are docked in benefits.  So they don't try. Damned if they do, damned if they don't. It is a type of trap.
sr. member
Activity: 378
Merit: 250
June 24, 2014, 06:57:59 AM
#21
Welfare has changed significantly, and much of what currently circulates as discussion about it is dated information.  It looks to me as though the government has phased itself successfully out of the picture and future generations won't have the same expectations.
Why should anyone work if they are satisfied with the current revenue stream?
Not happy with the homeless population especially the growing numbers of children.
Public education is the solution.  Teach them to fish, grow vegetables, start a business.
If you want them off the streets at night, maybe a mandate that all vacant motel rooms be provided.  All restaurants with eatable food leftover not be allowed to throw it away.  Surpluses can be scooped up for them.  The county and town poor farms used to operate to give people a hand up.  Stigma was not as intense back in the day.  Annie Oakley learned to read and write in just such a facility.  Back in the day it was not uncommon for people to fall on bad times, and we had more humane ways of dealing with it.  Smaller communities paid individuals to take them into their homes for a time.  We can do better, obviously.  Why don't we?
The expense went through the ceiling as private contractors bid on the services instead of government hiring and providing the services....then the contracted service just fell out of the budget, at some point when state's no longer required counties to provide for the indigents in this way. Now the county budgets are screaming over the health expense of indigent care...it's a vicious downward spiral initiated by some sound good ways of saving tax dollars.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
June 24, 2014, 06:43:26 AM
#20
Quote
Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all.


I don't think that statement was exactly putting the guy in a positive light. I guess because my friend is highly intelligent, very skilled in a variety of sets and will retire with a beautiful home on a lake in a scenic part of Quebec with a good pension and a couple rental properties. I guess the janitor I know doesn't fit your view does he?
I'm happy for your janitor friend, but that's not how it is for mine.  Sorry if that offends you, but it has nothing to do with looking down on him.  I quite respect him for his work when so many in his position would choose differently.  Mr. Nate would not take a handout so long as he could work.
I know , it really boils down to the individual. We do kind of make our own luck I think. For instance I had a busboy from Lebanon, he came here with a couple hundred bucks in his pocket, 20 years old. He took a job as a busboy at two different restaurants, one by day, one by night. He saved his money and after 5 years he was able to put a down payment on a 3 bedroom house. He spent what spare time he had finishing the basement and after 2 years he sold that house for an 80,000 profit...................and so on. Now he is a small business owner with a wife and 2 kids.
Then there is the busboy that spends his pay as soon as he gets it, doesn't have a car, a rental apt. and collection agencies after his ass constantly. I'm sure he tells everyone how he is 'only' a busboy and he doesn't make enough money.
Character is the difference. Since some people are lacking in that quality then we need to require them to do the right thing for the good of everyone. Hence my views on welfare.........
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
June 24, 2014, 06:40:11 AM
#19
Quote
Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all.


I don't think that statement was exactly putting the guy in a positive light. I guess because my friend is highly intelligent, very skilled in a variety of sets and will retire with a beautiful home on a lake in a scenic part of Quebec with a good pension and a couple rental properties. I guess the janitor I know doesn't fit your view does he?
I'm happy for your janitor friend, but that's not how it is for mine.  Sorry if that offends you, but it has nothing to do with looking down on him.  I quite respect him for his work when so many in his position would choose differently.  Mr. Nate would not take a handout so long as he could work.
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
June 24, 2014, 06:38:14 AM
#18
Is there paying work? Is there lack of work force?

As long as answer to those is no, there is no welfare problems.

That's the lazy way out.  If every American waited for somebody to give them a job then we would have no Henry Ford.  If there's no job, you make one.  You hustle.  You work your ass off.  You offer to mow lawns, wash cars, etc.  Don't sit on your ass watching Oprah and Dr. Oz.  If you have trouble making ends meet take the public assistance, but don't sit on your ass wondering why somebody from McDonald's hasn't run to your front door with a uniform begging you to work.

The people spoiled on welfare don't know poverty.  In 1932 how many people walked door to door asking if work was available.  I doubt more than 5% of the welfare generationals even try this.
There are 4.5 million jobs now going vacant in the US.  No one is trained to fill them.  Many jobs require only 3 months training some more but over 80% of jobs could be trained for in one year. Some corporations are understanding this and are working toward helping their workers become trained.

  We have moved into a new age and are having a hard time keeping up especially with a government that right now is uunfunctionable. We need to take our community colleges and have them work with the various companies in that area and design training for their new employees.  We have done that here in Spokane and it worked very well.  That idea needs to expand to all states. Unions used to do a lot of trianing but with the decline of unions we have lost a lot of training for the trades.
DrG
legendary
Activity: 2086
Merit: 1035
June 24, 2014, 04:19:44 AM
#17
Is there paying work? Is there lack of work force?

As long as answer to those is no, there is no welfare problems.

That's the lazy way out.  If every American waited for somebody to give them a job then we would have no Henry Ford.  If there's no job, you make one.  You hustle.  You work your ass off.  You offer to mow lawns, wash cars, etc.  Don't sit on your ass watching Oprah and Dr. Oz.  If you have trouble making ends meet take the public assistance, but don't sit on your ass wondering why somebody from McDonald's hasn't run to your front door with a uniform begging you to work.

The people spoiled on welfare don't know poverty.  In 1932 how many people walked door to door asking if work was available.  I doubt more than 5% of the welfare generationals even try this.
legendary
Activity: 3066
Merit: 1047
Your country may be your worst enemy
June 23, 2014, 06:09:08 PM
#16
Amazing to see several welfare supporters on this board. I shall remind those people that in India, in Nigeria and 50 more countries, about 2 billions people are in urgent need of everything, please help them as much as you can. Thank you.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
June 23, 2014, 12:02:44 PM
#15
Quote
Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all.


I don't think that statement was exactly putting the guy in a positive light. I guess because my friend is highly intelligent, very skilled in a variety of sets and will retire with a beautiful home on a lake in a scenic part of Quebec with a good pension and a couple rental properties. I guess the janitor I know doesn't fit your view does he?
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
June 23, 2014, 11:55:33 AM
#14
I suppose I should say our janitors are not well paid, and I doubt they get great benefits either.  I know and like the man, and he walks to work from his small shotgun style house that has probably been around since who knows when.  He is a hard working guy.
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
June 23, 2014, 11:50:06 AM
#13
The problem arises when these unproductive people have children. Cutting welfare benefits from these people means that their children are affected. If we can find a way do see that children are taken of and their parents are not maybe we can get people to be more productive.
There is such a thing as generational welfare, and being trapped in a cycle of poverty.  It does involve a mindset, but it is far more complicated than can be explained away with "lazy and entitled".  If you start with poor education and lack of skill sets, combine it with limited opportunity, or the availability of only low/minimum wage employment that keeps them in poverty...then you get "what's the point?"  They do better (financially) by simply staying put.

There's also this:  People who are disabled, but still capable of doing simple jobs or tasks that pay low...get their welfare benefits cut, so they stay stuck in the same or worse situation.   
I don't really buy that.  I mean, I believe that is the justification, I just don't believe it's valid.  Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all.  But they have the integrity to want to work regardless, and to put in the hours for their pay even if they could make as much sitting around on welfare and every government benefit they can qualify for.
There are people who could be on welfare and do just about as well as they do at their jobs, but they work anyway because it's the right thing to do.

I don't feel sorry for those who choose to do the opposite.

Government benefits should be for those who are truly in need, not those who just figure they're just as well off not working.
don't look down on the guys who keep our schools clean. Any work is honorable, and as a matter of fact I have a friend that is a janitor at a school and he does fine, he even bought a fixer upper on a lake in the beautiful Laurentians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurentian_Mountains
and he renovated it and it's gorgeous. Not to mention the bennies and pension from a gov. job. 
The guy works hard, does good work and is enjoying his life. It is what we make of it.........life. 
Nobody ever said it would be easy, but it ain't impossible either. My friend the janitor is living a dream...
lakeside in the Laurentians

The glass really is half full.........
What in the world made you think I was looking down on him after saying that he has integrity to work at a job that doesn't pay well because he has a work ethic?
sr. member
Activity: 448
Merit: 250
June 23, 2014, 11:39:49 AM
#12
The problem arises when these unproductive people have children. Cutting welfare benefits from these people means that their children are affected. If we can find a way do see that children are taken of and their parents are not maybe we can get people to be more productive.
There is such a thing as generational welfare, and being trapped in a cycle of poverty.  It does involve a mindset, but it is far more complicated than can be explained away with "lazy and entitled".  If you start with poor education and lack of skill sets, combine it with limited opportunity, or the availability of only low/minimum wage employment that keeps them in poverty...then you get "what's the point?"  They do better (financially) by simply staying put.

There's also this:  People who are disabled, but still capable of doing simple jobs or tasks that pay low...get their welfare benefits cut, so they stay stuck in the same or worse situation.   
So keep them on full welfare, but with a stipulation that they train for some sort of skilled job. Then after a year or two, whatever the program might be they transition into full time work. I don't personally know of one person who can not find work. Adults, kids coming out of college, everyone I know and their kids too have good jobs. 
Basically if the gov. gives you money you have to earn it if you're physically able. Community service, jobs programs, menial labor for some public works. Just make it so a person can't sit home watching the Jerry Springer show eating Cheetos while they wait for a check. Want a hand up, no problem...........earn it.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
June 23, 2014, 11:39:29 AM
#11
The problem arises when these unproductive people have children. Cutting welfare benefits from these people means that their children are affected. If we can find a way do see that children are taken of and their parents are not maybe we can get people to be more productive.
There is such a thing as generational welfare, and being trapped in a cycle of poverty.  It does involve a mindset, but it is far more complicated than can be explained away with "lazy and entitled".  If you start with poor education and lack of skill sets, combine it with limited opportunity, or the availability of only low/minimum wage employment that keeps them in poverty...then you get "what's the point?"  They do better (financially) by simply staying put.

There's also this:  People who are disabled, but still capable of doing simple jobs or tasks that pay low...get their welfare benefits cut, so they stay stuck in the same or worse situation.   
I don't really buy that.  I mean, I believe that is the justification, I just don't believe it's valid.  Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all.  But they have the integrity to want to work regardless, and to put in the hours for their pay even if they could make as much sitting around on welfare and every government benefit they can qualify for.
There are people who could be on welfare and do just about as well as they do at their jobs, but they work anyway because it's the right thing to do.

I don't feel sorry for those who choose to do the opposite.

Government benefits should be for those who are truly in need, not those who just figure they're just as well off not working.
don't look down on the guys who keep our schools clean. Any work is honorable, and as a matter of fact I have a friend that is a janitor at a school and he does fine, he even bought a fixer upper on a lake in the beautiful Laurentians
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laurentian_Mountains
and he renovated it and it's gorgeous. Not to mention the bennies and pension from a gov. job. 
The guy works hard, does good work and is enjoying his life. It is what we make of it.........life. 
Nobody ever said it would be easy, but it ain't impossible either. My friend the janitor is living a dream...
lakeside in the Laurentians

The glass really is half full.........
sr. member
Activity: 994
Merit: 441
June 23, 2014, 11:35:06 AM
#10
The problem arises when these unproductive people have children. Cutting welfare benefits from these people means that their children are affected. If we can find a way do see that children are taken of and their parents are not maybe we can get people to be more productive.
There is such a thing as generational welfare, and being trapped in a cycle of poverty.  It does involve a mindset, but it is far more complicated than can be explained away with "lazy and entitled".  If you start with poor education and lack of skill sets, combine it with limited opportunity, or the availability of only low/minimum wage employment that keeps them in poverty...then you get "what's the point?"  They do better (financially) by simply staying put.

There's also this:  People who are disabled, but still capable of doing simple jobs or tasks that pay low...get their welfare benefits cut, so they stay stuck in the same or worse situation.   
I don't really buy that.  I mean, I believe that is the justification, I just don't believe it's valid.  Even the guys who clean at the school probably don't have education or a specialized skill set, and may not even come out much further ahead than someone on welfare, if at all.  But they have the integrity to want to work regardless, and to put in the hours for their pay even if they could make as much sitting around on welfare and every government benefit they can qualify for.
There are people who could be on welfare and do just about as well as they do at their jobs, but they work anyway because it's the right thing to do.

I don't feel sorry for those who choose to do the opposite.

Government benefits should be for those who are truly in need, not those who just figure they're just as well off not working.
sr. member
Activity: 364
Merit: 250
June 23, 2014, 11:21:04 AM
#9
The problem arises when these unproductive people have children. Cutting welfare benefits from these people means that their children are affected. If we can find a way do see that children are taken of and their parents are not maybe we can get people to be more productive.
There is such a thing as generational welfare, and being trapped in a cycle of poverty.  It does involve a mindset, but it is far more complicated than can be explained away with "lazy and entitled".  If you start with poor education and lack of skill sets, combine it with limited opportunity, or the availability of only low/minimum wage employment that keeps them in poverty...then you get "what's the point?"  They do better (financially) by simply staying put.

There's also this:  People who are disabled, but still capable of doing simple jobs or tasks that pay low...get their welfare benefits cut, so they stay stuck in the same or worse situation.   
Pages:
Jump to: