Should welfare recipients be banned from having a TV, computer, or cell phone

[ShootSpeeders]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

 

[R.D.]

No.


Punishing the children is no way to stop what abuses may occure.

 

[Harry Dresden]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

someone needs to take your Computer away.....

 

[francoHFW]

OP- Terminal hater dupe. Everyone would prefer a good job.

SEE SIG PARA. 1

 

[Spiderman]

No.


Punishing the children is no way to stop what abuses may occure.

Turning off the TV is not punishment.
A child without a cell phone is not suffering.

Get your priorities straight.

 

[R.D.]

No.


Punishing the children is no way to stop what abuses may occure.

Turning off the TV is not punishment.
A child without a cell phone is not suffering.

Get your priorities straight.

Turning off a tv or not buying youngster cell phones is sound parenting and not what the op suggested.

Allowing these kids the ability to keep up is a solid priority

 

[iamwhatiseem]

The question is backwards...should someone who can afford cable TV/Internet/Smart phones get Food Stamps?
And don't forget about the Xbox Console with a shelf of games.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

The question is backwards...should someone who can afford cable TV/Internet/Smart phones get Food Stamps?
And don't forget about the Xbox Console with a shelf of games.

That was my thought as well. Why not just stop the welfare, instead of going all draconian on those who take up the offer?

 

[Jarhead]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

I have no doubt that it is a rare occasion to find a mother who will cut back on food for her children so she can have her luxuries.

You first need to understand human nature before you engage in a debate about welfare and food stamps.

 

[Little-Acorn]

Should welfare recipients be banned from having a TV, computer, or cell phone


No. They should be banned from receiving government Welfare.

Problem solved.

 

[Mojo2]

America - We are told what we CAN NOT do.

Bad Systems of Government - Those citizens are told what they CAN do.

Our way pre-supposes free will and life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.


GOOD INTENTIONS is how all and every stupid, short sighted, Liberal policy failure starts.

Find some way to accomplish your well intentioned goal without infringing people's rights and you may have something!

 

[dblack]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

You are such a fucking fascist. I only click on your threads to see what ridiculous, over-the-top shit you'll say next. Rawk on!

 

[g5000]

May I suggest A Modest Proposal...

 

[kidrocks]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

Should welfare recipients be 'executed' is what you are really asking... isn't it?

 

[NYcarbineer]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

You want to deny a child television because his or her mother is poor?

You're either trolling or mentally retarded.

 

[longknife]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

I have no doubt that it is a rare occasion to find a mother who will cut back on food for her children so she can have her luxuries.

You first need to understand human nature before you engage in a debate about welfare and food stamps.

Ahem. How many mothers -- and fathers -- cut back on food for their children -- and themselves -- so they can have their drugs?

 

[Contumacious]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

No.

You would be punishing the politicians and screwing their chance to be electable.

A WELFARE STATE = GOVERNMENT BUY THE PEOPLE

.

 

[dblack]

ShootShootSpeeders

 

[Jarhead]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

I have no doubt that it is a rare occasion to find a mother who will cut back on food for her children so she can have her luxuries.

You first need to understand human nature before you engage in a debate about welfare and food stamps.

Ahem. How many mothers -- and fathers -- cut back on food for their children -- and themselves -- so they can have their drugs?

I have no idea...

But my guess is that number is not nearly enough for us to say that welfare is not effective for those that need it.

Sorry bro....I have no issue with welfare and foodstamps.

 

[Edgetho]

We need to make life unpleasant for these people to encourage them to work. Reducing benefits always leads to the "mothers" cutting back on food for the kids so the mother can keep her luxuries.

Since computers and cells need an outside provider for internet use, it would be fairly simple to enforce a ban on them. If they really need a computer for something, they can go to a friend or library. TVs are bulky and would be hard to hide when a social worker pays a visit.

Should welfare recipients be 'executed' is what you are really asking... isn't it?

No.

Just you