The differences between the rich and the poor.

[Thanatos]

At Rhinosaur's bequest, I am creating a new topic on the differences between the rich and the poor, in order to create a general dialogue on the subject.

Simply continuing where Rhinosaur left off:

Is it your assertion that the people who collect things like food stamps or WIC are not poor?

And BWB, how big is a family? Who put out this statistic, and do they itemize it? Can I see exactly where the $40,000 is going?



Aka link please

Like I said, correct me if I was wrong. All I know is from what little hearsay I can gather.

Enlighten me, please!

[Poisoner]

I think what Thanatos is getting at are couples who spit out so many children they become eligible for welfare programs.

[Rhinosaur]

I have never known someone personally to be rich (either on paper or otherwise) who was collecting food stamps or WIC, or things of that nature. Your implication is that many people currently using those types of welfare meant for poor families (not corporate welfare) are really well to do or rich? Fraud exists to be sure, but it's investigated and prosecuted vigorously. Your implication is wrong on it's face.


edit:
Only one post in and we get the dreaded "welfare queen" crap. It's a myth.

[Thanatos]

Well, that too. That's just sad.

I'd personally like to see the Federal government kill their welfare programs entirely, and have the States and private charities take up the slack.

At any rate, I am happy that at least the law has made it that those on welfare must now search for employment instead of just sitting on their butts all day.

[Chaigidel]

the whole job of the government is to take care of everyone--- not just the rich(ideally)

welfare and programs like it go against the substance of autarchy- or oligarchy-- therefore are good.

[Justice and Mercy]

the whole job of the government is to take care of everyone--- not just the rich(ideally)

Yeah.

welfare and programs like it go against the substance of autarchy- or oligarchy-- therefore are good.

No.

Steal from the rich and give to the poor doesn't sound very "equal", to me.

It's not the government's money they're giving away, it's other people's money. The government is not entitled to it, and neither are the people they're giving it to.

[Thanatos]

Yes, but to what extent? Nobody ever said the government was your mother!

[Poisoner]

The government should not be a source of income unless its income for employement.

[Thanatos]

Like I said, it's fine for the government to take care of its citizens. Only thing is, is that it should be the state governments that do so, not the federal government. The constitution mentions as much.

[Rhinosaur]

State's Rights? That's Conservative code meaning they (Cons) want to screw someone over and the majority of the Country doesn't go along with it.

[morteduzionism]

State's Rights? That's Conservative code meaning they (Cons) want to screw someone over and the majority of the Country doesn't go along with it.

that's a perfect way to put it...


In another post someone suggested that "poor" women have alot of babies...welfare queen...yada yada...I disagreed...working in an affluent part of Washington, DC and living in a "poor" part I have first hand observations of who is having a lot of babies...it's not "poor" people:

http://www.wtkr.com/Global/story.asp?S=6488680&nav=ZolH
this is more indicative of the type of families/clans I see with goo-goo-gobs of chilluns

The only logical, as I can see it, reason someone would use the 'welfare queen'(a purposely misleading description) is because they want to mask their real intentions...to take from the have-nots and give more to the haves

[Thanatos]

No, I'm serious. I'm not a Republican, if that's what you're wondering.

I honestly feel that the language of the Constitution does not permit the Federal government from exericising welfare powers, unlike the states.

[Rhinosaur]

Federal government gives states the money for welfare programs, States distribute it as intended or they don't take the money, just like highway money. I can't go to the Federal building and get food stamps, I have to go to our county office to get them.

[Thanatos]

Federal government gives states the money for welfare programs, States distribute it as intended or they don't take the money, just like highway money. I can't go to the Federal building and get food stamps, I have to go to our county office to get them.

I also don't hold with the Federal government as the depository of all funds for States.

What's the point of a state, then? They might as well just be nothing other than money-collecting sectors.

If our government wasn't so ******* eager to expand, and actually complied with the Constitution, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today.

[Rhinosaur]

I also don't hold with the Federal government as the depository of all funds for States.

You'll be pleasantly surprised that States have revenue aside from the grace of the Federal Government.

What's the point of a state, then? They might as well just be nothing other than money-collecting sectors.

States do have separate duties from the Feds, and many times money given by the Feds is given only if States put in some money to match, like infrastructure projects.

If our government wasn't so ******* eager to expand, and actually complied with the Constitution, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today.

Depends on which mess. We are in quite a few lately.

edit:

us poor are a bunch of lazy scroungers living off all you hard workers.

Yes you are, now back into the mines before you feel the bite of my whip!! No gruel for you!!

[Gary88]

us poor are a bunch of lazy scroungers living off all you hard workers.

[Chaigidel]

most people on welfare are on it when they need it then they get back on their feet-- the leeches are exception not the rule, alot of people see welfare as a real blessing, and it really changes their ability to have more options--- but in the end it is still work that gets you what you want.

and most people know that.

[Rhinosaur]

most people on welfare are on it when they need it then they get back on their feet-- the leeches are exception not the rule, alot of people see welfare as a real blessing, and it really changes their ability to have more options--- but in the end it is still work that gets you what you want.

and most people know that.

You sir, are correct. Welfare, like Social Security, Disability, and unemployment insurance are absolutely vital in their importance to the average American. Most people want to work for a living and support themselves, but sometimes you can't, and that's when these programs are necessary. The vast majority of people using them actually need them, and would slip into a standard of living we don't want Americans to have to endure without these benefits.


@ Gary88: we have most of that here too (it's what we call welfare and tax credits) aside from the school thing you mention.

[Gary88]

in the UK what you call welfare is known as the 'dole' and it has tight restrictions now. basically you have to attend job interviews before they let you have any (afaik this is what they implemented) which basically prevents you from scrounging because it only pays you whilst you look for actual work. the other benefits we get are tax benefits, ie if you have kids you get money back from your taxes to help provide for them. really poor ****ers like me get something called EMA, which basically pays you to go to school. its a pretty unfair system because only a small fraction of kids who get it actually need it but its to prevent kids from low income famillies dropping out of sixth form to get a job.

[Gary88]

@ Gary88: we have most of that here too (it's what we call welfare and tax credits) aside from the school thing you mention.

yeah i thought you might, i just wanted to give a british perspective and the school thing isnt from the government direct but a government funded organisation called the LEA