- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: "Gravy train is over"
Posted on 4/12/18 at 1:26 pm to MSMHater
Posted on 4/12/18 at 1:26 pm to MSMHater
quote:
Neither option "saves money". One just cost less. Removing or decreasing the entitlement would "save money".
If those are the only 2 options? Sure, I guess. That cost me less. And I don't personally give a shite about their well being or health, so don't care if they get high. Whether for drugs, or drug tests, that tax money is being wasted, IMO. I'll take the cheaper option.
I don't understand how any fiscally responsible person could look at past results for this program, in any state, and consider it a good financial decision.
It's feel good legislation. Something, apparently, liberals don't have a monopoly on.
If ANY of this was true , and you actually didn't care about their well being and or were most concerned about what cost you , the taxpayer, the least amount of money your position would be "no welfare" period. But that isn't your position.
Let's just cut the bullshite , shall we?
1
Posted on 4/12/18 at 1:28 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
your position would be "no welfare" period. But that isn't your position.
It most certainly is!
quote:
Let's just cut the bullshite , shall we?
Let's. My position is consistent with the fiscal conservatism this board applauded for years until the current populist was elected. Apparently, I haven't "evolved" with the rest of the board. So let's "cut the bullshite" and stop pretending the Trump train isn't leftward bound "with no brakes".
This post was edited on 4/12/18 at 1:34 pm
Posted on 4/12/18 at 2:35 pm to HeyHeyHogsAllTheWay
quote:
So what? If one person was saved from overdosing on drugs because they chose to quit so they could receive welfare that's a good thing, right?
Hahahaha. You guys are so fricking ridiculous. Now youre for lots of spending just to save poor addicts? Lol. Are leftist slowly turning you guys into progressives? I guess that is what happens Through Time
Posted on 4/12/18 at 2:40 pm to Ebbandflow
that dude doesn't speak for me. let the addicts die on the streets for all i care if it saves taxpayer money.
Posted on 4/12/18 at 2:44 pm to Ted2010
quote:
Spot on. Invest in program to help train and educate people in various trades. That will create a vast number of skilled workers. Good job Mr. President.
10 percent of our population will always need some form of assistance. They are literally too stupid to work. No amount of trade school will help them. But obviously we should try to get the portion of our population that is on assistance down as close as we can to that 10 percent.
Posted on 4/12/18 at 2:54 pm to Ebbandflow
quote:
Hahahaha. You guys are so fricking ridiculous. Now youre for lots of spending just to save poor addicts? Lol. Are leftist slowly turning you guys into progressives? I guess that is what happens Through Time
Not at all. I simply realize that we're never going to just say "frick you" to poor people and do away with welfare, which would OBVIOUSLY be the most cost effective stance to take RE: welfare, just get rid of it.
So, facing this reality I look at drug testing to get a large portion of these people to leave the system themselves, the "oh drug testing is more expensive than just giving them welfare" is just bullshite, because in study after study we see that when states introduce drug testing , the welfare rolls drop. People leave the system themselves because they KNOW they won't pass the drug tests, thus they don't even have to be tested (and this is why you also see low numbers of recipients fail drug tests, becuase these people are leeches who know how to use the system, they aren't going to be drug tested when they know they will fail. I would even bet that a great majority of them move from one state to another when the state they are currently in starts drug testing.
So the cost of drug testing < the savings resulting from these people leaving the system meaning tax payer money is saved.
Posted on 4/12/18 at 3:03 pm to TigerCruise
quote:
Won't really fix the underlying problem of people working less than full time so they can keep their welfare.
Nope. That's the biggest issue.
Posted on 4/12/18 at 3:17 pm to Welwood
As a “bleeding heart liberal”, I’m ok with this. IF they legalize marijuana.
I mean, they can still buy booze and cigs. Pot is no worse than those two bastions of welfare.
Now, the other stuff? I’m all for it, specifically opiates.
I mean, they can still buy booze and cigs. Pot is no worse than those two bastions of welfare.
Now, the other stuff? I’m all for it, specifically opiates.
Posted on 4/12/18 at 4:13 pm to Welwood
The primary thing I would like to see as far as welfare reform is a one child cap on increased benefits.
People that can’t provide for one kid shouldn’t have four. Any child past the first one is on you.
Also, fraud is rampant. The scam is that an EBT holder converts their cards into cash by buying another’s groceries in a 50¢ on the dollar agreement. The card holder converts their food benefits into cash at 50% value and the other person gets their groceries 50% off.
People that can’t provide for one kid shouldn’t have four. Any child past the first one is on you.
Also, fraud is rampant. The scam is that an EBT holder converts their cards into cash by buying another’s groceries in a 50¢ on the dollar agreement. The card holder converts their food benefits into cash at 50% value and the other person gets their groceries 50% off.
Posted on 4/12/18 at 4:58 pm to Scoop
quote:
The primary thing I would like to see as far as welfare reform is a one child cap on increased benefits.
Amen.
Also, the disbursement of welfare funds needs to be completely overhauled.
You need support for food and shelter? Fine, you get to live in a welfare apartment complex that serves 3 square meals a day.
No more payments directly to welfare recipients.
Oh you don't like that? Tough shite. You're welcome to go out and do better for yourself.
This post was edited on 4/12/18 at 5:00 pm
Posted on 4/12/18 at 5:01 pm to Wtodd
Most people who graduated high school in the 60’s didn’t go to college. Where is someone supposed to go to college when they live in rural area.
Who do you hire for a supervisor position 25 year old with a college degree who is not going to retire in 10 to 15 years or 50 plus without a college degree that is going to retire in 10 to 15 years.
Someone who has been working for over 35 years has plenty of skills, but not a lot of places to work in a town with less than 12,000 people.
Working for minimum wage or a little above it is idiotic, but it is not always the individual fault.
He did not live off the government and take our tax money, but had to change many things in his life after taking a $30k to $40 paycut.
Who do you hire for a supervisor position 25 year old with a college degree who is not going to retire in 10 to 15 years or 50 plus without a college degree that is going to retire in 10 to 15 years.
Someone who has been working for over 35 years has plenty of skills, but not a lot of places to work in a town with less than 12,000 people.
Working for minimum wage or a little above it is idiotic, but it is not always the individual fault.
He did not live off the government and take our tax money, but had to change many things in his life after taking a $30k to $40 paycut.
Posted on 4/12/18 at 5:10 pm to Welwood
Posted on 4/12/18 at 5:34 pm to CrimsonTideMD
A married or stable relationship couple working minimum wage alone without a second of overtime and not a second job between them will make $30,000 a year with no income tax liability and likely a tax benefit.
$30,000 is the poverty line for a family of 5.
If they have one kid, they are still $1000/month in income above the poverty line of $20,000 for a family of 3.
It is hard to be poor in the US without putting yourself there through terrible life choices.
$30,000 is the poverty line for a family of 5.
If they have one kid, they are still $1000/month in income above the poverty line of $20,000 for a family of 3.
It is hard to be poor in the US without putting yourself there through terrible life choices.
Posted on 4/12/18 at 5:40 pm to MizzouBS
But again, where is the compassion for the earners that get out and grind every day, bust their arse that have a less quality of life than they deserve at the end of the day due to loss of income to taxes that support those that don’t work but can?
Posted on 4/12/18 at 5:43 pm to Scoop
quote:
It is hard to be poor in the US without putting yourself there through terrible life choices.
Completely agree.
And moreover, the kids born to these welfare recipients grow up thinking it's completely normal and okay to live off the government. Then they make terrible choices, having too many children way too young.
Calling it a viscous cycle doesn't do it justice. That shite is COMPOUNDING
Posted on 4/12/18 at 5:49 pm to Welwood
Awesome
“We can lift Americans from poverty to prosperity!”
What a quote
#MAGA
“We can lift Americans from poverty to prosperity!”
What a quote
#MAGA
Posted on 4/12/18 at 6:24 pm to Scoop
If you can work and don’t and live off the government that is wrong.
I’m sure we all know people who do this and pisses me off. Driving new vehicles and using snap to buy cigarettes/dip.
Disability lawyers can get just about anybody disability. Change the laws and lawyers will change the way they get people disability. It’s not as easy as people think to get people off of some type of welfare. I have worked in HR for many years and have seen people take advantage of the system to many times.
It is frustrating to see people who need it and don’t get it and people who don’t need it and get it.
I’m sure we all know people who do this and pisses me off. Driving new vehicles and using snap to buy cigarettes/dip.
Disability lawyers can get just about anybody disability. Change the laws and lawyers will change the way they get people disability. It’s not as easy as people think to get people off of some type of welfare. I have worked in HR for many years and have seen people take advantage of the system to many times.
It is frustrating to see people who need it and don’t get it and people who don’t need it and get it.
This post was edited on 4/12/18 at 6:26 pm
Posted on 4/12/18 at 7:04 pm to Ebbandflow
quote:But the current structure of our entitlement programs creates an incentive structure that only perpetuates the problem. It makes low wages more practical for both the employee and the employer, and makes personal growth more difficult.
minimum wage is too low for people to survive without some assisstance
It's the reason why I would prefer UBI to our current system because there are no strings attached. Currently if people receiving assistance make more, they lose the assistance, so it's only rational to stay in the current situation. When slow but steady growth, personally and professionally, is no longer the obvious rational choice, there is a problem with the system, not the individuals or companies who are working within it. Add the inefficiencies of the government (bureaucracies, unnecessarily complicated, etc) instituting these programs, and it makes them that much worse.
UBI aside, anything that allows people to grow and become more productive is a net positive over the status quo.
Page 3 of 3
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News