• Hello!

    Either you have not registered on this site yet, or you are registered but have not logged in. In either case, you will not be able to use the full functionality of this site until you have registered, and then logged in after your registration has been approved.

    Registration is FREE, so please register so you can participate instead of remaining a lurker....

    Please be certain that the location field is correctly filled out when you register. All registrations that appear to be bogus will be rejected. Which means that if your location field does NOT match the actual location of your registration IP address, then your registration will be rejected.

    Sorry about the strictness of this requirement, but it is necessary to block spammers and scammers at the door as much as possible.

Example of What's Wrong with America

I never said HE was uneducated but that his take on Hayes as well as Palin's take on Revere were uneducated and flawed. Her take could be a guess and his could be the fault of speech writers but both had no idea of facts.

And btw just because you have a Harvard degree doesn't mean you are educated in ALL subject matter. History doesn't seem to be either one of their best subjects.
 
I really didn't intend to take the comparison so seriously. I'm making fun out of the Palin situation, in reference to the embellishments of the OP. Maybe I underestimated the factual interpretation that some had of the OP, but I personally found it as light in seriousness as Palin's playfully mocked statements of 'seeing Russia' from her house.

Honestly, I'm fairly certain that I would not want to go on Jeopardy against Pres. Obama or Sarah Palin... seriously, I think they both have been filled with their fair share of historical facts (maybe why they mess up more easily on the obvious ones), and they both are respectably educated.
 
I found out recently that those ebt cards can be used in alot of places.

At one point there was a debate whether they can be used at strip clubs (I am not quite sure how that issue was decided).....

Around here we have a local convience store called Cumberland Farms. They have a coffee bar, hot and iced coffee, in any size and flavor you want for $1 and I love my coffee so I go in just about everyday.
I was there one day last week and there were 3 kids in front of me, 2 girls that looked around 15-16 and a boy who looked to be around 10. They had the counter piled high with 12 packs of soda (2 of them, coke and mountain dew), cookies, one of those sandwiches you micro wave, and all 3 had fountain drinks with ice. And they used an ebt card to pay for it.
This was on a school day right around lunchtime.
The cashier told me that that was the third time they had been in that day, and the other times they had bought piles of junk food as well.

Our tax dollars at work......
 
I am surprised there's no limit on what the EBT cards can be spent on if for no other reason than parents could spend that money on drugs/alcohol/etc while their children go hungry...I don't see the harm in making a mandatory list of foods that the money can be spent on. It's actually better for the people that way.
 
Actually, there are some limits on what EBT cards can be used for. If it's strictly a Food Stamps EBT card (and not other cash assistance), it can only be used to purchased uncooked foods, no alcohol, no tobacco, and (if I remember correctly) nothing that can be taxed. I only have information for the state of Florida, mind you, due to personal experience.
 
All I have to say is, Mandatory Drug Tests Please! I have a feeling that would disqualify a lot of people...
 
Outcast said:
All I have to say is, Mandatory Drug Tests Please! I have a feeling that would disqualify a lot of people...
Click to expand...

I'm not sure this would have the effect you're looking for.

1) The drug tests that companies use on their employees have rampant false positives (For example, eating a poppyseed muffin will make you test positive for opiates for up to 48 hours).

2) It will cost a hell of a lot more to administer drug tests than the money saved by rejecting all people who test positive

3) Due to 1 and 2, not only will there be less money for the people that need it, but the likelihood of false positives mean that a lot of people who need this money and should be getting it will not be.
 
So what is your fix Nova? Should we ignore rampant abuses because the speculative cost of stopping the abuse may take money from the pool? Tolerating the abuse serves only to perpetuate it.
 
I guess I could give up Poppy-Seed muffins lol...I'm not sure what the likelihood of a false positive is, but I can't imagine they'd be too inaccurate. Athletes use them all the time and they're usually dead-on. My only thing with drug tests though, is that it's not like the people who test positive will rationalize and be like "Well, I guess it's time for me to get clean". I imagine it would only make more addicts resort to crime as a means of getting money. I think a better solution is some kind of drug reform. Maybe make new alternatives as far as rehab or detox while also having systems for people to go into once they get clean.
 
tsst said:
So what is your fix Nova? Should we ignore rampant abuses because the speculative cost of stopping the abuse may take money from the pool? Tolerating the abuse serves only to perpetuate it.
Click to expand...

My fix? Personally I don't give a good goddamn about the people abusing the system. There are several people I know that don't abuse the system and are getting royally screwed because everyone treats them like thieves since they require assistance.

My mother, who can't work anymore because of her health, for example, and receives $600 a month for her and my nephew who she is the primary caregiver for.

My friend, who had a stroke at 26 and nearly starved to death before I knew him because he was denied assistance for over a year.

An acquaintance whose health was affected because he lived on ramen for months and related a story of collecting all the money he had to go buy ramen, and whose entire wealth consisted of not enough pennies to buy a packet of ramen.

How much money is wasted on abuse? How much is spent on the so called abusers who are apparently buying Mercedes and BMWs and steak and lobster and living the high life? This is the only place I have ever heard of that. These anecdotal stories mean nothing to me because I don't care about the abusers.

I care about the poor who are suffering because we are denying them assistance because so many people suspect them of being abusers, of being liars and thieves and cheats.

My answer is and will always be - Worry about the poor and disenfranchised first, and then go after the abusers once we take care of those who need it.
 
I have been on welfare payments for a short period in my life when I couldn't avoid it (3 preschoolers being raised after throwing out their father for his emotional abuse) I had worked before having the boys, but I never felt the benefit money was my 'right', it was a temporary solution to a situation. So I took him back, with promises to change and I worked 3 jobs, temporary agency work, part-time jobs all dove-tailing together to make enough to support us while he was 'finding himself'. Went to nursing college on a bursary payment whilst working weekends and through every holiday whilst the home situation just got worse again, graduated and raised the boys alone from then on on my salary with perhaps $500 in total in maintenance over the years. Supported my boys into further education by working nights and extra shifts to improve our standard of living.
I have been disappointed by the two eldest boys attitudes to work being more like their father, they have both had and lost several good jobs, then became less and less willing to work, happy to live on welfare with me supporting them at home. Pointing out that with my degree qualification under my belt I'd worked every job I could to keep a roof over our heads (cleaning meat factories at night, fruit picking, fruit packing, cleaning, anything to keep the money coming in) had no effect. 'Why should they do menial jobs?' They find my attitude shocking, I think there should be some kind of work for benefits scheme where able-bodied people have to work for their dole payments. Why? Because I work for every penny I earn! Whether it would be community schemes, work placements or classroom skills training, I strongly feel that no-one has the inherent right to sit at home being supported by others labours unless they are paying something back to society, or they have health conditions that totally prevent them working.
 
Nova_C said:
My answer is and will always be - Worry about the poor and disenfranchised first, and then go after the abusers once we take care of those who need it.
Click to expand...
That's how I see it as well. People don't often think about the perspective of the person receiving assistance, who does do everything that they can to better themselves, and who has learned to cope on minimal resources (but that is always looking/trying to improve their situation).

Of course there are people who abuse the system. But there are people who do not. And to try and force this as the problem of those who need assistance is just unbecoming of a 'civilized' nation.

I also think that the drug test idea is very flawed (along with actual drug laws). It's another expense that's larger than the total of what it's looking to save. And it's also another way of intruding on the lives of people who do not use drugs, or those who live responsible and productive lives, as their sacrifice of dignity in order to weed out the abusers (that's what Law Enforcement is getting paid so much to try and do).

I find that it's the reaction of people with no experience needing assistance (or having a real disability), or being close to someone that does, to say that they all need to be tested, or they all abuse programs. Especially when you're a person with a disability that affects your physical condition, where people might assume from the start by your looks/weight that you already are on drugs. That prejudice is very real, and it's not the burden of those people to be the drug-sniffing dogs on the front line, because of a poor judicial system and the false demonizing of everyone on assistance.
 
The welfare system does need to be reformed just like our justice system. There are those that really need the resources such as food stamps or cash assistance and you do actually have to jump through hoops to get help. It takes a lot of your time and energy. It is hard for those that need help to find a babysitter, or to get a ride, or time off to get down to all the appts. It is easy for those that are abusing the system because they have all the time in the world it seems.
You can get cash assistance and take the money off the card at any atm and use that money however you chose, there is no way of knowing or policing what people do with that money.

There are always going to be the pro's and con's in the welfare system. I would support drug testing for welfare and I have been on welfare before as a single mother of two children and going to school.
 
Honestly, if there's drug testing for welfare, there should be drug testing for citizenship, annual tests for a driver's license, a test for a marriage license (Or is there already? I've never been married. :p), basically for any government service, permit or license.

Or are the rich less drug addled than the poor?
 
I think there should be drug testing to become a citizen and for getting your DL. You have to take a drug test to get most jobs nowadays. You get random testing in the military and government jobs.
 
Drug testing is one thing that doesn't really go over in Canada. It's illegal for employers to drug test employees unless they're operating heavy equipment. For example, in my last job I managed a furniture delivery operation and while the company I worked for had the drivers do drug tests, by law they were not allowed for any of my staff to be tested.
 
Nova_C said:
Honestly, if there's drug testing for welfare, there should be drug testing for citizenship, annual tests for a driver's license, a test for a marriage license (Or is there already? I've never been married. :p), basically for any government service, permit or license.

Or are the rich less drug addled than the poor?
Click to expand...
Exactly! Let's have a regular test of racial profiling among police departments. Let's have people in office only make slightly more money than your average well paying job. Let's conserve land for wildlife, and focus only on clean energy so that we can support this planet.... let's do all of the other things that seem to go UN-noticed and unchanged, that are clear abuses of a system funded by tax dollars, before we're subjective about every person who needs assistance by telling them that they need drug-testing.

And the larger picture is... if you have to look down at a person worse off than you in order to find a reason for your problems, then you should probably show more appreciation for what you do have, rather than to say that they are the reason for your lack of prosperity. We all have only one life, and it's so counter-productive to treat other people's individual struggles with no value, regardless of what might have become of them. I agree, something needs to changed. But not so that someone else can prosper. I want change that actually allows these people to grow out of their sicknesses and addictions, or at least have hope that they can, so they can have a moment of peace of mind before they die (because they might not have ever had it).
 
beautifullywild77 said:
I just wanted to add... not all law enforcement get paid as much as you make it seem Michael http://www1.salary.com/police-officer-Salary.html.. They make about as much as teachers and just slightly more than a E4 in the military.
Click to expand...
I'm not saying that they do, and I certainly respect their job. I'm saying that it's a system that also faces corruption, that is also supported by tax dollars. There are great police officers, and ones that have assumed the role and play their positive part, and some that are in it for their own personal gain. But it is never a system that is almost never questioned (and changed even less).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top