Why are those who are on governmental assistance seen as lazy?

[Aristotle]

There is a growing trend of college students unfortunately applying for governmental assistance since many of these students do not have enough sufficient income to sustain themselves. This is not new as we see many college students across the country applying on welfare. But my main concern is about Romney's 47% as being taker's of assistance I have to ask why do people label welfare recipients as "lazy?" Are we looking at those who don't attain jobs? Are we looking at the fact that its a race issue?

 

[Intense]

Bottom line, You do what you need to do to survive. People on all sides of the equation are going to Label. That is not what it is about, when one is Purpose Driven. Dependency should be a Temporary state of being for most of us.

 

[Aristotle]

Bottom line, You do what you need to do to survive. People on all sides of the equation are going to Label. That is not what it is about, when one is Purpose Driven. Dependency should be a Temporary state of being for most of us.[/QUOTE]

Truest statement ever said....I'm gonna make the bold my signature

 

[Merchant_of_Meh]

People that actually use gov't assistance/welfare for its intended purpose are generally and often lumped in with those who intentionally misuse it and game the system in order to get out of actually having to work for a living. I sadly know people who do this and have done this for so many years that it's practically their profession. It's pathetic honestly, but it's even more pathetic because for the ones that actually need this service because of a truly unforeseen circumstance get put through the ringer because of those who have destroyed the integrity of this process.

Simply put: It's guilt by association. If you're on welfare, you're automatically lazy is what society now tells us. Regardless of the actual reason that caused said welfare. Noserious efforts have actually been made to separate the scam artists from the rest and until that happens, this perception will persist.

 

[oldfart]

But my main concern is about Romney's 47% as being taker's of assistance I have to ask why do people label welfare recipients as "lazy?" Are we looking at those who don't attain jobs? Are we looking at the fact that its a race issue?

First Romney got i facts wrong. The 47% figure was the percentage of income tax return filers who owed no income tax in 2011. Many of these were reasonably wealthy (5% got to zero because of the exclusion for tax-free bond interest). Then Romney went into his riff about dependency. Paying no income tax is a quite different thing from being dependent on the government in most people's universe.

In another thread I and a few other people crunched the numbers. At the most generous, only 5% of return filers could be coonsidered recipients of means-tested assistance. If you take out the retired, disabled, students, and working poor, you get to less than one percent. So this is a stereotype not based in current reality.

But it is a convenient stereotype for a certain ideology. It goes along with the idea that private sector jobs are productive while public sector jobs are not. If your water comes from a private water company, its workers are productive; but if it is municipally owned, its workers are "dependent on government". So are the medical staff of VA hospitals, actively serving military including Seal Team Six, millions of schoolteachers, law enforcement, emergency service responders, and, yes, the clerks who record your property deeds. All are useless, but if we privatize the function so a major corporation can rake off 20% or so, magically all of these people become productive. Enter the voucher idea, forcing Medicare recipiients to choose among private inflated cost insurance plans. Same with schools.

"Individual investment accounts" in Social Security do the same thing. Wall Street gets another stream of fee income for investments that have for a decade underperformed the Treasury securiies comprising the trust funds. The risk of investment loss has been transfered from the Social Security system to the individual retiree.

There is also the idea that the solution to funding problems is to means-test social insurance. This converts a self-funded insurance system into a welfare program which can be cut or eliminated in the future.

I hope you see a pattern. People like the Koch brothers support this ideology because this is how they make money. The bst return on investment is always going to be political contributions to further this agenda. As these changes take place, income inequality increases, virtually all the economic improvement goes to the very top of the income ladder, and everyone else has a declining standard of living.

This also makes America less competitive. Fewer college graduates, poorer public education, decreasing life expectancy in major groups, gutting basic research, and crumbling infrastructure cripple economic growth.

So follow the money. The lies are profitable lies.

 

[Katzndogz]

The people on welfare are generally seen as lazy because they won't work and are quite arrogant about collecting welfare. It is something they are owed by virtue of being alive. That's why they vote democrat. They vote for the party that promises more welfare rather than the party that would give them a job.

 

[Bfgrn]

The people on welfare are generally seen as lazy because they won't work and are quite arrogant about collecting welfare. It is something they are owed by virtue of being alive. That's why they vote democrat. They vote for the party that promises more welfare rather than the party that would give them a job.

There is no sin except stupidity.
Oscar Wilde

8 Myths About "Welfare Queens", Debunked

Whites and Welfare: GOP and the Food Stamp Fallacy

 

[Zoom-boing]

The ones who are lazy aren't the ones who use welfare as a leg up, it's the ones who use it as a leg to stand on.

 

[Bfgrn]

One man, the great American socialist president, the myth-maker icon of the right fabricated a fictitious 'welfare queen', who resided on the south side of Chicago (race never in doubt).

Policy should not be made on myth or the anecdotal.

The most famous myth about welfare may be the one begun by Ronald Reagan on the 1976 campaign trail: the story of a woman from Chicago's South Side who was arrested for welfare fraud. "She has 80 names, 30 addresses, 12 Social Security cards and is collecting veteran's benefits on four non-existing deceased husbands. And she is collecting Social Security on her cards. She's got Medicaid, getting food stamps, and she is collecting welfare under each of her names." Many investigative reporters tried to track down this "Welfare Queen". She didn't exist.

 

[flacaltenn]

We can't GUARANTEE outcomes without COERCING folks on welfare to overcome the obstacles that hold them back.. I hate coercion a lot more than I worry about dependence. Especially when it results in Granny getting tossed from Govt housing because her visiting Nephew dealt a couple bags of weed out of her apartment.

So being on welfare SHOULD be a self-assessment of all the decisions that got you there.

The number of folks who are not properly skilled for a 21st century job is gonna reach unbelievable proportions really quickly --- IF america remains economically competitive in a World market. If we DON'T remain competitive --- there won't be enough bucks to HAVE welfare...

 

[AmyNation]

People like to stereotype, both sides are equally guilty of it.

 

[Katzndogz]

We can't GUARANTEE outcomes without COERCING folks on welfare to overcome the obstacles that hold them back.. I hate coercion a lot more than I worry about dependence. Especially when it results in Granny getting tossed from Govt housing because her visiting Nephew dealt a couple bags of weed out of her apartment.

So being on welfare SHOULD be a self-assessment of all the decisions that got you there.

The number of folks who are not properly skilled for a 21st century job is gonna reach unbelievable proportions really quickly --- IF america remains economically competitive in a World market. If we DON'T remain competitive --- there won't be enough bucks to HAVE welfare...

No one should be coerced. They should be allowed to experience the consequences of their actions. If Granny loses her apartment because she allowed her living space to be used for her nephews drug dealing, she should be out on the street.

 

[flacaltenn]

We can't GUARANTEE outcomes without COERCING folks on welfare to overcome the obstacles that hold them back.. I hate coercion a lot more than I worry about dependence. Especially when it results in Granny getting tossed from Govt housing because her visiting Nephew dealt a couple bags of weed out of her apartment.

So being on welfare SHOULD be a self-assessment of all the decisions that got you there.

The number of folks who are not properly skilled for a 21st century job is gonna reach unbelievable proportions really quickly --- IF america remains economically competitive in a World market. If we DON'T remain competitive --- there won't be enough bucks to HAVE welfare...

No one should be coerced. They should be allowed to experience the consequences of their actions. If Granny loses her apartment because she allowed her living space to be used for her nephews drug dealing, she should be out on the street.

Granny did not lose her rights or dignity when she took that govt apartment. She deserves a hearing on the matter -- not braindead heavy handed dealing from the bureaucracy.

But as soon as folks assume "the dependent positiion" -- it's apparent to THEM -- that welfare handouts are NOT because of leftist Altruistic motives..

Now granted -- a unsuspecting apartment owner could have his propery SEIZED for the same scenario ---- NEITHER is right.. But it's a clue about how "dignity" and "welfare" are not compatible.

 

[Bfgrn]

We can't GUARANTEE outcomes without COERCING folks on welfare to overcome the obstacles that hold them back.. I hate coercion a lot more than I worry about dependence. Especially when it results in Granny getting tossed from Govt housing because her visiting Nephew dealt a couple bags of weed out of her apartment.

So being on welfare SHOULD be a self-assessment of all the decisions that got you there.

The number of folks who are not properly skilled for a 21st century job is gonna reach unbelievable proportions really quickly --- IF america remains economically competitive in a World market. If we DON'T remain competitive --- there won't be enough bucks to HAVE welfare...

No one should be coerced. They should be allowed to experience the consequences of their actions. If Granny loses her apartment because she allowed her living space to be used for her nephews drug dealing, she should be out on the street.

Granny did not lose her rights or dignity when she took that govt apartment. She deserves a hearing on the matter -- not braindead heavy handed dealing from the bureaucracy.

But as soon as folks assume "the dependent positiion" -- it's apparent to THEM -- that welfare handouts are NOT because of leftist Altruistic motives..

Now granted -- a unsuspecting apartment owner could have his propery SEIZED for the same scenario ---- NEITHER is right.. But it's a clue about how "dignity" and "welfare" are not compatible.

Granny on Social Security and Medicare is NOT someone who assumes "the dependent positiion". Granny didn't choose to grow too old to compete in the workplace. And I am sure she would trade her Social Security and Medicare benefits that she EARNED, for 30, 20, 10 or even 5 years back.

 

[flacaltenn]

No one should be coerced. They should be allowed to experience the consequences of their actions. If Granny loses her apartment because she allowed her living space to be used for her nephews drug dealing, she should be out on the street.

Granny did not lose her rights or dignity when she took that govt apartment. She deserves a hearing on the matter -- not braindead heavy handed dealing from the bureaucracy.

But as soon as folks assume "the dependent positiion" -- it's apparent to THEM -- that welfare handouts are NOT because of leftist Altruistic motives..

Now granted -- a unsuspecting apartment owner could have his propery SEIZED for the same scenario ---- NEITHER is right.. But it's a clue about how "dignity" and "welfare" are not compatible.

Granny on Social Security and Medicare is NOT someone who assumes "the dependent positiion". Granny didn't choose to grow too old to compete in the workplace. And I am sure she would trade her Social Security and Medicare benefits that she EARNED, for 30, 20, 10 or even 5 years back.

Irrelevent. Why are you confused? Soc Sec and Medicare ARE NOT WELFARE. They are COERCED UNIVERSAL insurance programs --- that even NON-indigent persons are ENTITLED to...

 

[Aristotle]

The people on welfare are generally seen as lazy because they won't work and are quite arrogant about collecting welfare. It is something they are owed by virtue of being alive. That's why they vote democrat. They vote for the party that promises more welfare rather than the party that would give them a job.

Hell in '10 I was on welfare when I was laid off. I felt since my state and federal fund this I may as well take advantage.

 

[Aristotle]

The problem about attributing laziness to welfare recipients is as is:There is a common misconception that welfare is static and that only minorities receive it, when in fact, more whites receive government handouts than anyone. On top that, people assume welfare is about an EBT card and general relief money. No. Welfare consist of other elements: student loans, social security, medicare, etc So knowing this, why is the UCLA student perceived as lazy for asking for a handout?

 

[syrenn]

There is a growing trend of college students unfortunately applying for governmental assistance since many of these students do not have enough sufficient income to sustain themselves. This is not new as we see many college students across the country applying on welfare. But my main concern is about Romney's 47% as being taker's of assistance I have to ask why do people label welfare recipients as "lazy?" Are we looking at those who don't attain jobs? Are we looking at the fact that its a race issue?

Part of the problem is ...your pet college students think many jobs are beneath them.

lots of dishwasher jobs out there... lots of maid jobs... lots of babysitting jobs...


Just becasue you have a degree is not a guarantee of getting the job of your choosing..in the field of your choosing.

 

[Desperado]

Why are those who are on governmental assistance seen as lazy? Because of spokespeople like this:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tpAOwJvTOio&feature=player_embedded]Original Obamaphone Lady: Obama Voter Says Vote for Obama because he gives a free Phone - YouTube[/ame]

 

[flacaltenn]

The problem about attributing laziness to welfare recipients is as is:There is a common misconception that welfare is static and that only minorities receive it, when in fact, more whites receive government handouts than anyone. On top that, people assume welfare is about an EBT card and general relief money. No. Welfare consist of other elements: student loans, social security, medicare, etc So knowing this, why is the UCLA student perceived as lazy for asking for a handout?

THis is something a great Greek mind like yourself could figure out. I don't KNOW that UCLA student. Don't know if they wasted $100,000 of their parent's money studying Greek Literature or whether they were in Nuclear Eng and ended up a C student.

It's not so much lazy as being statistically linked to a chain of bad decisions. It's a very personal and individual problem to diagnose from where we sit. If it's a honor student that has a mom on crack -- that's not lazy. If it's a business major that's never had a job.

These are all WAAY too complex to diagnose --- right? But chances are -- there are FUNDAMENTAL problems that need to be addressed and PREFERABLY not from 2000 miles away in Washington, D.C.

BTW:: Let's cut the crap and stop calling Soc Sec/Medicare and EVEN student loans _______ Welfare... These are NOT intended for just the indigent and out of luck...