Can We Agree?

[Disir]

I remember when I used to work in a supermarket way back when and they had a program called WIC that gave out what were basically food stamps but all that could be purchased were milk, formula, eggs, and cereals

I see no reason why there can't be similar restrictions on food stamps

That might hurt the poor dears feelings.

Because some of these folks are homeless and they don't have access to any cook areas. Some of these people have disabilities and they can't cook but they can order prepared meals. That's why.

So there can be limits placed on prepared meals as well.

Tell me more.

 

[SmokeALib]

Apparently, this young lady hasn't been indoctrinated by our liberal professors in our liberal universities yet. It's nice to see that some of our youth has the ability to think for themselves.

 

[Disir]

It was a 50 something old man that wrote that. It was posted a few pages ago.

 

[Jackson]

This young lady knows what it takes to build a free, strong country. Geaux4it has garnered 13 Winner points for bringing this to the board. Congratulations!

 

[SmokeALib]

It was a 50 something old man that wrote that. It was posted a few pages ago.

That works, too.

 

[Disir]

It was a 50 something old man that wrote that. It was posted a few pages ago.

That works, too.

Sure. Providing we agree a silly old man was trying to play himself off as a 21 year old chic. Then it becomes something of a your 50 something and you still can't clarify.

 

[SmokeALib]

It was a 50 something old man that wrote that. It was posted a few pages ago.

That works, too.

Sure. Providing we agree a silly old man was trying to play himself off as a 21 year old chic. Then it becomes something of a your 50 something and you still can't clarify.

I was referring to the message, genius. Not the source.

 

[Disir]

It was a 50 something old man that wrote that. It was posted a few pages ago.

That works, too.

Sure. Providing we agree a silly old man was trying to play himself off as a 21 year old chic. Then it becomes something of a your 50 something and you still can't clarify.

I was referring to the message, genius. Not the source.

The message is shit as well. I was considering the source.

 

[SmokeALib]

It was a 50 something old man that wrote that. It was posted a few pages ago.

That works, too.

Sure. Providing we agree a silly old man was trying to play himself off as a 21 year old chic. Then it becomes something of a your 50 something and you still can't clarify.

I was referring to the message, genius. Not the source.

The message is shit as well. I was considering the source.

Sorry, but you just lost any respect you may have had. I can't respect anybody that depends on other people or government for their own well-being. And you sound like you're actually proud of that fact. What a loser.

 

[Disir]

It was a 50 something old man that wrote that. It was posted a few pages ago.

That works, too.

Sure. Providing we agree a silly old man was trying to play himself off as a 21 year old chic. Then it becomes something of a your 50 something and you still can't clarify.

I was referring to the message, genius. Not the source.

The message is shit as well. I was considering the source.

Sorry, but you just lost any respect you may have had. I can't respect anybody that depends on other people or government for their own well-being. And you sound like you're actually proud of that fact. What a loser.

I have my self respect. Yours was unnecessary.

I work with many of these people.

 

[CowboyTed]

It says "right to vote " . And under the 14th we all have equal protection . 15th , protectss against racial discrimination .

Think of the 2nd . Ya righties love to quote "right to bear arms ".

Timmy want a laugh....

Fact Check: Rant on welfare abuse hits home with Internet admirers

Times-Union readers want to know:

An email I received recounts this letter by a 21-year-old female that was published in the Waco, Texas, newspaper. The email starts off: “Put me in charge of food stamps. I’d get rid of Lone Star cards. No cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho’s, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese, and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.” Is this for real?

Yes, the letter was published in the Nov. 18, 2010, edition of the Waco Tribune Herald. But it wasn’t written by a 21-year-old female. Just the opposite.

Alfred W. Evans, a 56-year-old resident of Gatesville, Texas, wrote the letter to the editor hoping to get others incensed about welfare abuse. What he didn’t expect, according to an interview with him in the Tribune Herald in November 2012, was that the letter would be emailed across the country and become an Internet phenomenon.

..........
Evans told the newspaper that he doesn’t oppose all government assistance; his beef is with people who abuse the system. He said he doesn’t even have a problem with tattoos, of which his wife has several. What he opposes is people who take government money and then use their own cash to get tattoos.

AGAIN NOT A 21 YEAR OLD

 

[frigidweirdo]

This sounds just like all the politicians. It doesn't sound like a sensible plan, it sounds like she's been told what to think, and then she's regurgitating what she's been told by political adverts over the last 10 years or so.

"You're free!"

"Yes, I am free"

Why do some think the people on welfare are entitled to luxuries afforded by the employed, and not just basic substance?

-Geaux

My point didn't really have anything to do with your reply.

To answer your question, I don't think those who don't work should be entitled to luxuries at all.

However to return to my point, the person is regurgitating what has been force fed her. Solutions for the problem of welfare are not as simple as what she's making out. There's not much thinking going on at all. That's why I have a problem with what has been said.

Force fed? I'd say it's common sense.
There was a time when being on welfare was embarrassing...those days need to return.

You'd say it's common sense huh? I wouldn't, I don't have time right now to go into it, I gotta run, but I'll try and remember when I get back in a looooong while.

I'd say things need to change, but not necessarily with simplistic nonsense.

When there's no shame being on the dole and they come to feel it's their right to receive it we have a problem.
And it should be abundantly clear to those who are on welfare that they are a burden on society and the benefits they receive should reflect that.

You think this is all about shame. I don't.

A good system works because it works.

Shame won't exist in the modern world because people can hide away from their neighbors, no longer reliant on the community around them, the world has changed, and people need to accept these changes.

What I believe is that people should get welfare based on what they have done. If you haven't paid into the system for five years, you should get nothing. After five years you should be the first level, you lose your job, you get welfare. I'm not sure what works best, whether welfare lasts for a certain amount of time, or the welfare payments get reduced after a period of time or not. Then after say 10 years of work that welfare level would rise, then after 15, or 20 years it would rise again. You paid in to the system, you should be able to get something out.
Also, those who have worked for a long period of time, are liable to have a work ethic, and therefore want to rely less on welfare, this would work better than your view, in my opinion, because you've built up a work ethic, instead of expecting people to have it at the age of 18.

For those who can't get welfare, there should be choices. The choice of education, I don't mean English literature and things like that, but work based education that aims to give people the skills they need to get jobs. The same in prisons too, so that prisoners when they leave prisons also have the ability to work.
The choice of some kind of apprenticeship, so that companies can do the same, educate people, get paid for educating them.
Joining the Armed Forces. Okay, the option is already there, but pushing this with those who aren't in work.
Community projects.
Whatever happens, these people only get money if they're actually doing something.

I believe we have similar ideas based on this, basically to stop there being the entitlement attitude that exists quite strongly in certain parts of the country.

However education is also essential to this, and by this I mean pre-19 education. Having education which isn't a one size fits all type education, where kids are learning skills that are necessary to their future, this depends on the person.
In poor inner city areas with major problems there needs to be a massive program of trying to reverse the entitlement attitude, the crime attitude and so on.

The problem is, many politicians aren't interested much in this. Look at the Flint water supply issue, who cares? No one, it doesn't enhance their career, so they don't bother.

Politicians shouldn't be about career enhancing, they should be about working for the people, they're also into this entitlement nonsense, just in a different way.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Why do some think the people on welfare are entitled to luxuries afforded by the employed, and not just basic substance?

-Geaux

My point didn't really have anything to do with your reply.

To answer your question, I don't think those who don't work should be entitled to luxuries at all.

However to return to my point, the person is regurgitating what has been force fed her. Solutions for the problem of welfare are not as simple as what she's making out. There's not much thinking going on at all. That's why I have a problem with what has been said.

Force fed? I'd say it's common sense.
There was a time when being on welfare was embarrassing...those days need to return.

You'd say it's common sense huh? I wouldn't, I don't have time right now to go into it, I gotta run, but I'll try and remember when I get back in a looooong while.

I'd say things need to change, but not necessarily with simplistic nonsense.

When there's no shame being on the dole and they come to feel it's their right to receive it we have a problem.
And it should be abundantly clear to those who are on welfare that they are a burden on society and the benefits they receive should reflect that.

You think this is all about shame. I don't.

A good system works because it works.

Shame won't exist in the modern world because people can hide away from their neighbors, no longer reliant on the community around them, the world has changed, and people need to accept these changes.

What I believe is that people should get welfare based on what they have done. If you haven't paid into the system for five years, you should get nothing. After five years you should be the first level, you lose your job, you get welfare. I'm not sure what works best, whether welfare lasts for a certain amount of time, or the welfare payments get reduced after a period of time or not. Then after say 10 years of work that welfare level would rise, then after 15, or 20 years it would rise again. You paid in to the system, you should be able to get something out.
Also, those who have worked for a long period of time, are liable to have a work ethic, and therefore want to rely less on welfare, this would work better than your view, in my opinion, because you've built up a work ethic, instead of expecting people to have it at the age of 18.

For those who can't get welfare, there should be choices. The choice of education, I don't mean English literature and things like that, but work based education that aims to give people the skills they need to get jobs. The same in prisons too, so that prisoners when they leave prisons also have the ability to work.
The choice of some kind of apprenticeship, so that companies can do the same, educate people, get paid for educating them.
Joining the Armed Forces. Okay, the option is already there, but pushing this with those who aren't in work.
Community projects.
Whatever happens, these people only get money if they're actually doing something.

I believe we have similar ideas based on this, basically to stop there being the entitlement attitude that exists quite strongly in certain parts of the country.

However education is also essential to this, and by this I mean pre-19 education. Having education which isn't a one size fits all type education, where kids are learning skills that are necessary to their future, this depends on the person.
In poor inner city areas with major problems there needs to be a massive program of trying to reverse the entitlement attitude, the crime attitude and so on.

The problem is, many politicians aren't interested much in this. Look at the Flint water supply issue, who cares? No one, it doesn't enhance their career, so they don't bother.

Politicians shouldn't be about career enhancing, they should be about working for the people, they're also into this entitlement nonsense, just in a different way.

Sorry...not going to read a wall of text for something that can be summed up in one sentence.
Stop making welfare acceptable.

 

[frigidweirdo]

My point didn't really have anything to do with your reply.

To answer your question, I don't think those who don't work should be entitled to luxuries at all.

However to return to my point, the person is regurgitating what has been force fed her. Solutions for the problem of welfare are not as simple as what she's making out. There's not much thinking going on at all. That's why I have a problem with what has been said.

Force fed? I'd say it's common sense.
There was a time when being on welfare was embarrassing...those days need to return.

You'd say it's common sense huh? I wouldn't, I don't have time right now to go into it, I gotta run, but I'll try and remember when I get back in a looooong while.

I'd say things need to change, but not necessarily with simplistic nonsense.

When there's no shame being on the dole and they come to feel it's their right to receive it we have a problem.
And it should be abundantly clear to those who are on welfare that they are a burden on society and the benefits they receive should reflect that.

You think this is all about shame. I don't.

A good system works because it works.

Shame won't exist in the modern world because people can hide away from their neighbors, no longer reliant on the community around them, the world has changed, and people need to accept these changes.

What I believe is that people should get welfare based on what they have done. If you haven't paid into the system for five years, you should get nothing. After five years you should be the first level, you lose your job, you get welfare. I'm not sure what works best, whether welfare lasts for a certain amount of time, or the welfare payments get reduced after a period of time or not. Then after say 10 years of work that welfare level would rise, then after 15, or 20 years it would rise again. You paid in to the system, you should be able to get something out.
Also, those who have worked for a long period of time, are liable to have a work ethic, and therefore want to rely less on welfare, this would work better than your view, in my opinion, because you've built up a work ethic, instead of expecting people to have it at the age of 18.

For those who can't get welfare, there should be choices. The choice of education, I don't mean English literature and things like that, but work based education that aims to give people the skills they need to get jobs. The same in prisons too, so that prisoners when they leave prisons also have the ability to work.
The choice of some kind of apprenticeship, so that companies can do the same, educate people, get paid for educating them.
Joining the Armed Forces. Okay, the option is already there, but pushing this with those who aren't in work.
Community projects.
Whatever happens, these people only get money if they're actually doing something.

I believe we have similar ideas based on this, basically to stop there being the entitlement attitude that exists quite strongly in certain parts of the country.

However education is also essential to this, and by this I mean pre-19 education. Having education which isn't a one size fits all type education, where kids are learning skills that are necessary to their future, this depends on the person.
In poor inner city areas with major problems there needs to be a massive program of trying to reverse the entitlement attitude, the crime attitude and so on.

The problem is, many politicians aren't interested much in this. Look at the Flint water supply issue, who cares? No one, it doesn't enhance their career, so they don't bother.

Politicians shouldn't be about career enhancing, they should be about working for the people, they're also into this entitlement nonsense, just in a different way.

Sorry...not going to read a wall of text for something that can be summed up in one sentence.
Stop making welfare acceptable.

Fine, you can't read anything more than a sentence. I got it. Don't bother me again then. Seriously, if you're into soundbites, then there are politicians you'll vote for, and they'll give you simplistic shit and you'll be happy, until it fucks up, then you'll vote the next guy who gives you simplistic shit.... until the county is a complete and utter cesspit.

Bye.

 

[Wyatt earp]

Ah 21 year olds . So ignorant of reality .

What reality is that?

You can't live and function with out ding dongs, a smart phone, walking to work etc...etc.... ?

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Force fed? I'd say it's common sense.
There was a time when being on welfare was embarrassing...those days need to return.

You'd say it's common sense huh? I wouldn't, I don't have time right now to go into it, I gotta run, but I'll try and remember when I get back in a looooong while.

I'd say things need to change, but not necessarily with simplistic nonsense.

When there's no shame being on the dole and they come to feel it's their right to receive it we have a problem.
And it should be abundantly clear to those who are on welfare that they are a burden on society and the benefits they receive should reflect that.

You think this is all about shame. I don't.

A good system works because it works.

Shame won't exist in the modern world because people can hide away from their neighbors, no longer reliant on the community around them, the world has changed, and people need to accept these changes.

What I believe is that people should get welfare based on what they have done. If you haven't paid into the system for five years, you should get nothing. After five years you should be the first level, you lose your job, you get welfare. I'm not sure what works best, whether welfare lasts for a certain amount of time, or the welfare payments get reduced after a period of time or not. Then after say 10 years of work that welfare level would rise, then after 15, or 20 years it would rise again. You paid in to the system, you should be able to get something out.
Also, those who have worked for a long period of time, are liable to have a work ethic, and therefore want to rely less on welfare, this would work better than your view, in my opinion, because you've built up a work ethic, instead of expecting people to have it at the age of 18.

For those who can't get welfare, there should be choices. The choice of education, I don't mean English literature and things like that, but work based education that aims to give people the skills they need to get jobs. The same in prisons too, so that prisoners when they leave prisons also have the ability to work.
The choice of some kind of apprenticeship, so that companies can do the same, educate people, get paid for educating them.
Joining the Armed Forces. Okay, the option is already there, but pushing this with those who aren't in work.
Community projects.
Whatever happens, these people only get money if they're actually doing something.

I believe we have similar ideas based on this, basically to stop there being the entitlement attitude that exists quite strongly in certain parts of the country.

However education is also essential to this, and by this I mean pre-19 education. Having education which isn't a one size fits all type education, where kids are learning skills that are necessary to their future, this depends on the person.
In poor inner city areas with major problems there needs to be a massive program of trying to reverse the entitlement attitude, the crime attitude and so on.

The problem is, many politicians aren't interested much in this. Look at the Flint water supply issue, who cares? No one, it doesn't enhance their career, so they don't bother.

Politicians shouldn't be about career enhancing, they should be about working for the people, they're also into this entitlement nonsense, just in a different way.

Sorry...not going to read a wall of text for something that can be summed up in one sentence.
Stop making welfare acceptable.

Fine, you can't read anything more than a sentence. I got it. Don't bother me again then. Seriously, if you're into soundbites, then there are politicians you'll vote for, and they'll give you simplistic shit and you'll be happy, until it fucks up, then you'll vote the next guy who gives you simplistic shit.... until the county is a complete and utter cesspit.

Bye.

Adios muchacho....
Enjoy the one world government.

 

[Geaux4it]

Ah 21 year olds . So ignorant of reality .

She wrote that from her lovely, homey concrete bunker in N Korea cuz by fucking god, if she ain't got no rights, no education, no brains and no hope for the future, neither can any one else.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Wish in one hand and crap in the other. They can hope and wish all they want. But first, get a job

-Geaux

 

[Rustic]

Ah 21 year olds . So ignorant of reality .

A 21year old far more responsible than the federal government...

 

[Rustic]

Hats off to ever this young lady was. Bravo

-Geaux
------------------

This was written by an unnamed 21 yr. old female who gets it. It's her future she's worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big government state that she's being forced to live in! These solutions are just common sense in her opinion.

PUT ME IN CHARGE . . ..

Put me in charge of food stamps no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.


Put me in charge of Medicaid. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.


Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.


In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22-inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good."


Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self-esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self-esteem.


If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.


AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check . If you want to vote, then get a job .

Excellent. There may yet be hope for American youth.

Probably not, but good to hear some have some Conscience.

 

[Rustic]

Hats off to ever this young lady was. Bravo

-Geaux
------------------

This was written by an unnamed 21 yr. old female who gets it. It's her future she's worried about and this is how she feels about the social welfare big government state that she's being forced to live in! These solutions are just common sense in her opinion.

PUT ME IN CHARGE . . ..

Put me in charge of food stamps no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.


Put me in charge of Medicaid. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.


Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.


In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22-inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good."


Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self-esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self-esteem.


If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.


AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check . If you want to vote, then get a job .

Excellent. There may yet be hope for American youth.

Nazi youth maybe !

Perhaps you could explain how permitting those on the public dole the honor of working for it, and for the reinstatement of their privilege to vote follows Nazi thought.

Someone posted this Andy clip a few days ago. Classic example of something for nothing and pay for performance

-Geaux

Well, i'm sure every bit of that is foreign to the progressive. But then again in this day and age freedom is foreign.