Stop Welfare. Its a burden on the Working Taxpayers and the Country

[K-D-K-D-K]

These figures are extremely alarming. The figures are tallied every 10 yrs so they are out of date until 2010 but I bet the numbers are around the same or worse. These figure show the abuse of the system that has been a drain to the taxpayers of the mighty United States of America. We all know who abuses the system as it provides them a way of life on a generational scale these days while they are surely able to work and make a living on their own. They teach the principle to their kids that this entitlement is expected to be handed to them from the government and that creates a terrible quality of life. I say abolish the welfare system which will free up all this money that can be put to good use like investing in New Military weapons Systems and overall Defense spending and foreign and domestic investments in oil and gas exploration (that would benefit my Oil company) which will ensure the US as a leader in Natural Resources production and Military might. Look at these staggering figures at the Cost of Welfare that put a burden on You and the economy. The Freeloaders need to be weeded off welfare and learn to live independently by making on their own by learning to work and establishing quality of ife ethics that will ensure that their future generation of kids will reject welfare and see its not a way of life that the goverment shouldn't take care of you if you are able to work. It needs to be Stopped.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Welfare/Test030701b.cfm

[PatrickHenry]

What will you do with the mentally incompetent?

Or the physically disabled?

[ECW]

I agree. Corporate welfare should be stopped completely. If a business cannot make it without massive influxes of taxpayer cash, they ought to fail. Let's go back to the days of the Old West where a man stood on his own two feet or he didn't stand at all. Screw everybody else and, more importantly, to hell with Christian Charity. Slap people in the poor house and let them tough it out. Corporations and individuals alike. To hell with them all. Let's just build more weapons and better ways to kill people.







</sarcasm>

[Keith Hamburger]

Screw everybody else and, more importantly, to hell with Christian Charity.

Well, I could address a lot of your statements here, for example, I completely disagree with the OP stating we should use the savings from welfare for more military funding, we should drastically cut both.

However, to this point, welfare has nothing whatsoever to do with "Christian Charity". Christ taught to help others out of your own pocket and lead by example. Government welfare is about forcing others to help those you determine have a need and an attitude of "do as I say, not as I do", all at the point of a gun.

I don't think that Christ would have supported actual or implied violence to accomplish his charity.

Forced charity is no charity. Forced morality is no morality.

If one doesn't make a free and personal choice to be charitable and moral, and instead are forced to such through taxes and laws, then they don't have the opportunity to be either.

Keith

[potter]

I agree. Corporate welfare should be stopped completely. If a business cannot make it without massive influxes of taxpayer cash, they ought to fail. Let's go back to the days of the Old West where a man stood on his own two feet or he didn't stand at all. Screw everybody else and, more importantly, to hell with Christian Charity. Slap people in the poor house and let them tough it out. Corporations and individuals alike. To hell with them all. Let's just build more weapons and better ways to kill people.

</sarcasm>


Poor house? Well someone has to support the poor houses too. Screw compassion and benevolence - they're too expensive and I want another new vacation home.

If you're old and haven't planned for your retirement and are broke - off to the gas chambers!

If you're sick and have no health insurance - off to the gas chambers!

If you're mentally ill and have no one to support you - off to the gas chambers!

Let's gas anyone who will not or cannot support themselves, it's not their money, it's OUR money and they can't have ANY of it. This is America damn it, and we don't do charity or benevolence.!!!*

*Rant paid for by the GOP re-election fund

[/snark]

:ecstatic:

[AnnEsthesia]

ROFL. Great snark potter. ;)

[potter]

Screw everybody else and, more importantly, to hell with Christian Charity.

Well, I could address a lot of your statements here, for example, I completely disagree with the OP stating we should use the savings from welfare for more military funding, we should drastically cut both.

However, to this point, welfare has nothing whatsoever to do with "Christian Charity". Christ taught to help others out of your own pocket and lead by example. Government welfare is about forcing others to help those you determine have a need and an attitude of "do as I say, not as I do", all at the point of a gun.

I don't think that Christ would have supported actual or implied violence to accomplish his charity.

Forced charity is no charity. Forced morality is no morality.

If one doesn't make a free and personal choice to be charitable and moral, and instead are forced to such through taxes and laws, then they don't have the opportunity to be either.

Keith


Of course you do have a point. One should also not be forced to pay for roads, a military or anything else they don't want as well. The sad reality though is that if we want a civilized society we must ante up for this stuff. With medical costs completly unreasonable and out of control and businesses unwilling to pay a living wage and benefits these days we either support these people or we become China, with a very small obscenely wealthy class and a very large totally impoverished class living in hovels. I think this is where we're heading. At the rate we're going I don't thin any welfare or social security program will help.

It's all about greed...really. Sure, a business owner has a right to take home a salary of 250 million a year and pay his workers 6 bucks an hour, but is it the right thing to do? Most businemen these days seem to think so.

http://custom.marketwatch.com/custom/iwon-com/news-story.asp?guid={C5F1A412-D153-4477-96DE-9CEA8CA63DCB}

Even with jobs, 41 million Americans struggle to make ends meet


New report finds 41 million Americans 'struggling to make ends meet'

By Ruth Mantell, MarketWatch
Last Update: 5:42 PM ET Oct 10, 2007

WASHINGTON (MarketWatch) -- About 1 in 5 Americans in working families can't afford basic needs, and many are scraping to get by on insufficient income and government aid, policy researchers conclude in a report released Wednesday.

Many of these workers earn too much to qualify for "work supports" such as Medicaid and food stamps, while their employer-provided health insurance doesn't cover enough of their basic medical costs, according to the report by the Center for Economic and Policy Research and the Center for Social Policy at the University of Massachusetts.

"We no longer live in a world where having a job means you're automatically able to make ends meet," said Heather Boushey, co-author of the report. "Our work-support policies need to be updated to support the millions of families with earners in bad jobs."

About 41 million people in working families can't afford such basic necessities as health care and housing, according to the report. The study, which examined conditions in nine states and the District of Columbia, found that government programs close abut two-fifths of the "hardships gap" -- a measure of the difference between a family's income, including all aid programs, and the local costs of goods and services.

"Families fall into the hardships gap because the low-wage labor market provides meager pay and few employment-based work supports for low- and moderate-wage workers," the report noted.

The report's authors recommend steps such as focusing on better wages and mandates for employers to provide employment-based benefits, and simplifying the eligibility criteria and application requirements for work supports.

"Public policy has not caught up to the reality that even working families may need public work supports," the authors wrote. "Without public work supports, they and their families go without health insurance, adequate child care, safe housing, or other necessities. Many of those in the hardships gap earn too much, or do not meet other eligibility criteria, to qualify for work supports, even through they are low-income."

In 2005, about one-fifth of workers were in "bad jobs" -- those that paid less than the median wage in 1979 in inflation-adjusted dollars, and did not offer health insurance or a retirement plan, according to the report. Employer-based benefits are good for people with access to them, but most low-wage workers aren't offered or can't afford them, the report said.

"While workers with moderate or high earnings commonly receive health insurance, paid time off, and retirement plans, low-wage workers most often do not," the report noted.

The median monthly hardship gap for families in the states covered by the report was $1,524. After work supports, that gap decreased to $855. Therefore, the typical family with a hardships gap sees a savings of about $8,000 in work supports.

"However, we find that many low-income working families are either ineligible for work supports, or do not receive the supports to which they are entitled," the authors wrote.

Part of the problem is that the work supports don't reach all who are eligible due to a complex registration process and a lack of resources.

Boushey said government financial aid programs could draw a lesson from the earned income tax credit, which has a relatively straightforward system for eligible recipients to receive benefits.

[ECW]

Screw everybody else and, more importantly, to hell with Christian Charity.

Well, I could address a lot of your statements here, for example, I completely disagree with the OP stating we should use the savings from welfare for more military funding, we should drastically cut both.

However, to this point, welfare has nothing whatsoever to do with "Christian Charity". Christ taught to help others out of your own pocket and lead by example. Government welfare is about forcing others to help those you determine have a need and an attitude of "do as I say, not as I do", all at the point of a gun.

I don't think that Christ would have supported actual or implied violence to accomplish his charity.

Forced charity is no charity. Forced morality is no morality.

If one doesn't make a free and personal choice to be charitable and moral, and instead are forced to such through taxes and laws, then they don't have the opportunity to be either.

Keith


Sorry that you didn't get the point of my sarcastic rant. You haven't been on this board long enough to know that KDKDK posts crap like he does then sits back and watches the mayhem it creates. There is no discussion on his part, just a vile bitchslap that stirs everyone up and off to a new thread.

Engaging in a serious discussion of this issue is not what I intended because KDKDK rarely defends his shit&shinola parade so I won't either. One day, Keith, we will engage in a discussion of the purpose of government and the various views and theories on what "ought" to be done. But it won't be in this bogus thread.

[Nono]

K-D-K-D-K, in Amercian political discourse, "welfare" (like "crime" and "drugs") is code for Blacks. "Working taxpayers" is code for Whites.

"Cost of Welfare ... Freeloaders ... Stopped"

And capital letters are code for "I'm shouting here".

[S_E_N_D]

K-D-K-D-K I'm not sure whether you appreciate the welfare problem from an economical or utalitarian viewpoint. Being a calculating man such as yourself, I weight the positives against the negatives. We may free up some budget money when dropping welfare costs elminating the freeloader problem (on average estimated at 3% across all spectrum), but then we would have an even greater disparity problem. This would not only increase crime significantly, but also the overall stability of the nation. If you look at countries without a welfare system, you'll find greater rebellion and seeds for revolution. It's more efficient (cheaper) to subsadize poverty then to endure its rebellion.

[Finuzzo!]

Charities should be the only way, it's not fair that taxpayers are paying for other people, we're not socialist in America, and we shouldn't head down that path, it's corrupt (look at cuba)

[firefox]

K-D-K-D-K, I agree with you here, but you should consider using the term "government welfare." We aren't against welfare per se (some people always need help), we are simply against a government monopoly on it. Instead, we need to "go positive," and focus on the ways in which voluntary interaction and market competition is better for everyone.

[Pogo]

K-D-K-D-K, I agree with you here, but you should consider using the term "government welfare." We aren't against welfare per se (some people always need help), we are simply against a government monopoly on it. Instead, we need to "go positive," and focus on the ways in which voluntary interaction and market competition is better for everyone.

Would you explain how market competition would be preferable for both the middle class and the poor?