Im sick of welfare and other programs that are abused.

[brokenstrings]

I’ve heard through the grape vine that not only are these Altoona drug dealers getting money from the drug trade, but since they don’t have jobs they are collecting SSI and Welfare on top of that. I can’t believe it. Some people deserve welfare but I would estimate that 75% of its recipients could work and be productive people. There is something very wrong here. Does anyone know of a welfare bum who could work but dosent due to laziness?

[bassist_25]

Does anyone know of a welfare bum who could work but dosent due to laziness?

Whoa dude! I'm from Houtzdale. That's like asking someone who goes to Berkley if they know anybody who's a musician.

*Disclaimer: Everyone from Houtzdale is not on welfare. Though many of the people I graduated school with and were the "cool" kids aren't accomplishing any great feats nowadays. Actually, I usually don't go to Electric Avenue a lot because I don't feel seeing the people I didn't give a poo about in high school. But I did about a month ago, and it's crazy how unhappy the people I went to school with are in their lives.

[Hawk]

Fraud is prevalent everywhere ! What about the politicians who take legal bribes ( from lobbyists) and pass laws to favor them. That's costing you a hell of a lot more money then welfare fraud. Santorum went so far as to force companies to use only lobbyists HE hand picked, so they would give more (bribe) money to Republicans then to Democrats.

Since Santorum did that. The lobbyists give about 2 to 1 to the Republicans. Why aren't you screaming about that.

It's been a fact for a long time. About 95% of those who win office, spend the most money. And the money comes from the lobbyists. So the Republicans are buying offices, and it's legal. We don't really have a choice anymore.

Why do you think Bush doesn't want to do anything about Mexican immigrants. Because the Mexican legals present a large voting block !
Bush Doesn't care if the ileagles rob OUR system blind.

And the Mexicans don't want to become Americans, They don't want to adapt to the US. Is is us that have to adapt to them ! We have to have Spanish speaking teachers, doctors ETC. This is different then EVERY ethnic group who came to the USA to become Americans .


If we threw out the ileagles, raised the wages for the jobs they do that "no Americans want". The Americans would then want them, if they payed well. Our economy would prosper having many more Americans at work. The initial spike in prices would be countered by lowering taxes, because more Americans would be on the tax role. And the illegals sucking our system dry would be gone.

Welfare DOES HELP many people. We just need to have a system to catch the frauds. Not throw out the whole system.

Sorry for the rant.

[bassist_25]

If we threw out the ileagles, raised the wages for the jobs they do that "no Americans want". The Americans would then want them, if they payed well. Our economy would prosper having many more Americans at work. The initial spike in prices would be countered by lowering taxes, because more Americans would be on the tax role. And the illegals sucking our system dry would be gone.

But it's not as easy as saying, "Hey, let's get rid of the illegals and raise wages so Americans will be willing to mop floors and flip burgers!" Employment and wages are determined by the same supply and demand curves that determine which products get sold. The power of wage negotiation is determined by two things: 1. How differiantated your skills are from the others in the employee pool 2. How in demand your skills are. If you have highly sought after skills, then congrats: You have more power over demanding a higher wage. That's why I, for the most part, got out of the IT game: Everyone and their brother is an MCSE-certified tech and it was just too hard to compete in an overcrowded market.

The largest majority of people will always be part of the unskilled labor force...or at least that seems to be the current trend. They are, for the most part, expendable. That was a big basis for Marx's theory - The capitalist keeps the labor force in surplus so as to artifically drive down the price of wages. There's a reason why major corporations have head hunters to find MBA-level executives: Most people are not an MBA-level executive. Wal-Mart doesn't need to overexert itself advertising for cashiers and shelf-stockers. Those are for the most part unskilled positions that most competent people can do. BTW, I'm not trying to devalue those positions. I come from a blue-collar family (actually, I've technically lived below the poverty line most of my life), and respect an honest day's work. I'm just giving a view of the reality of the situation.

Most immigrants coming through the border right now are not lawyers, nurses, managers, tractor trailer drivers, electricians, journalist, etc. They are instead part of the unskilled labor force. So therefore, the unskilled American worker cannot offer anymore. Business owners then go for the same thing, only cheaper. If you walked into a grocery store and saw two bags of potatoe chips, one a name-brand one which is generic and a buck cheaper, if they both tasted the same, would you buy the bag that was more expensive?

I'm not saying to open our borders. I'm just giving an objective view of the situation. I'm just saying that you can't be a capitalist when it suits your ends, and then become a socialist when you don't like the way that things are going. As I said in the other thread, people need to wake up to the reality that the days of graduating high school and getting a middle-class job at the mill are over. Liking it or lump, we're living in global market, and that means we have to swallow or egos and be more competitve. We're living in a time when even an undergraduate degree isn't enough. Just some food for thought.

[bassist_25]

Wow, there's a lot of typos in that post. Capt. Grammar would kick my ass. I don't feel like fixing them though. LOL

[PanzerFaust]

Wow, there's a lot of typos in that post. Capt. Grammar would kick my ass. I don't feel like fixing them though. LOL

Nice try but I have a feeling that this disclaimer will not save you from the dreaded wrath of Capt "G"........

Ahhh... Capt G .... My hero.....

Look! up in the sky.... Bigger than a capitol "A"... faster than a verb... stronger than an adjective... It's Capt Grammar... haha...

[Hawk]

We are most definitely are Capitalist / Socialist American Society. We already have it both ways. Check and see what percentage of US citizens work for the government. The very roads you drive on are not privately owned roads (yet). I could go on and on about our GOOD social projects. Schools , Water, Law enforcement, etc..

I'm guessing those jobs held by illegal aliens are paying way below minimum wage. Just raise them to minimum wadge. Most of them are crop workers. I doubt the demand for food will go down.

[f.sciarrillo]

They should totally abolish welfare. It is the root of almost all things wrong in this country.

[bassist_25]

Oh I agree with you 100%, Hawk. You need some socialist programs no matter what. I wouldn't be able to get the grants to go to school if it weren't for socialist programs. I just think that trying to control the free-market is just a little too Marxist for my personal tastes. I'm fine with sending illegals back because they're illegal. I don't think we should be denying immigrants though just because we're afriad of a little competition.

Also, for the record - I am in favor of a national language. I don't expect people to fully assimilate just because they're in America, but I don't feel that it's the dominate culture's responsibility to accomodate different languages. Should you know three languages just so you can get a gig bagging groceries?

But while we're on the subject, what constitutes welfare? I know plenty of hardworking people who use foodstamps and get fuel caps. Are they in the same category of people who don't work and collect a check every month? It's not black and white.

[Hawk]

How is paying a FAIR wage to AMERICANS "trying to control the free market " ?

I agree 100% DO NOT deny LEGAL immigrants ! But throw out the illegals.

It's not black and white. Some people have a family. Work a low paying job. And are still at the poverty level. They need the food stamps.

If we were rid of those who are here illegally, there would be less of a drain on our economy.

[Hawk]

They should totally abolish welfare. It is the root of almost all things wrong in this country.

Hey f.

Are you just trying to push my buttons ?

Would you suggest the disabled and jobless and low income people be homeless ?

[tonefight]

Welfare has its place but unfortunatly it is abused, it really can't be done away with because there are people that do need it, who knows I could get sick or hurt and need it tommorrow. I read once that 5% of your taxes go to welfare, I really don't have a big problem with that. I have more of a problem with Politicians and big buisness abuse of our tax dollars, I'm guessing that amounts to more than 5%.

[Hawk]

Did you know :

Clinton made welfare cuts ?

Tony Snow (Bush's mouth piece) bragged "The President Bush Administration has spent more money on the poor than any previous administration " ! Wonder why they didn't use the word "welfare" ?

[f.sciarrillo]

They should totally abolish welfare. It is the root of almost all things wrong in this country.

Hey f.

Are you just trying to push my buttons ?

Would you suggest the disabled and jobless and low income people be homeless ?

Hmmm .. O.k let me tell you what my "real" thoughts are about welfare. It is the most abused government assisted program in America. It is a generational career move for millions of families. It is the reason you see crime, and drugs.

My thoughts have changed over the years, it's just at times when I see or hear something that is not right with it I go back to the ways of the old. My new stance is that people who need it can be on it.

Like:

* 1: Disabled people (those that not on it because they don't want to work. Yes, I know an individual who intentionally hurt them self to get on it because they were too lazy to get off their butt and work.)

* 2: Retired citizens - There is no way they can live on 600.00 a month

* 3: If you are jobless you have a certain amount of time to find a job, if you do not find a job in that amount of time then you are off and not back on until you work for a certain number of months. My suggested maximum would be 24 months.

to extend that: If you quit your job, or fired for anything that is not ethical; stealing, drug use, etc. you can not be eligible for it either.

* 4: If you are going to college or a trade school, or some other type of schooling to better yourself, .you can be on it the length of time it takes you to finish. And extend it for a certain number of months after wards to get your feet on the ground. After that point the extended point of #4 comes into play.

Extension of this one should be to make it academically eligible. If they drop below a certain GPA then they are kicked off. Of course they will have a probation period first.

Further eligiblity instutes:

* 5: Each person who is on it should be drug tested and agree to random tests there after. If at any point they fail one of the tests they should be kicked off at once and not be allowed back on, ever. First offence and you are done.

* 6: If a person who is on it commits a crime of felonious magnitude, like robbery, murder, drug dealing, etc. They should be kicked off and not allowed back on it again, ever. First offence and you are done.

* 7: if a parent is on it and their children do any of listed numbers five and six, they should be at risk of being kicked off. And not let back on, ever

Basically, it is time for the crap to stop. We paid over 10 trillion dollars out in welfare since it's inseption by FDR. We could have paid the deficit off with all the money we paid out in it.

Anyway, end of my rant. Hopefully, this enlightened you ..

Frank

[Hawk]

Sorry f. I was enlightened before your post.


Most of your ideas actually increase bureaucracy.

We agree some people need it, some don't. And we probably agree for a need to thin out the ones who don't.

Because someone is on welfare does not make them "lesser" citizens. They are equal citizens like you and me. If you drug test them , you have to do it to everyone. Most Republicans want government out our lives . [unless they want to listen to phone calls].


I guarantee you, less money is spent on welfare fraud then the BILLIONS the Republicans gave to the oil companies. Go get that back !

[Hawk]

I have to stop here. Gonna use some stamps and get sum weed.

[Punkinhead]

I guarantee you, less money is spent on welfare fraud then the BILLIONS the Republicans gave to the oil companies. Go get that back !

No doubting that...

[Geetarzz]

Just my opinion, if your able to limp in and go and collect the check, and your still able to go and hangout at the bar 7 nights a week while i'm out busting my ass to pay for it when I can't afford to go out 7 nights a week, no..........you don't deserve it. But......we all know a musician that has that liberty. Say what you will......but I earn every cent that I get. I'm getting older and the groupie's (band aids) are getting smarter.
Just my 2 cents.

[brokenstrings]

I think that the whole system should have more of a watch dog agency overseeing it. I honestly believe that most of those who subscribe to these government programs do not qualify for them in the reasonable and prudent mans eyes. The scope of these programs has been lost over time.

If you want to drive a truck you have to be drug screened. So if you receive government benefits why should you not be susceptible to drug screening as well? The last time I remembered, drug addicts don’t make the best employees and tax money should not be channeled to the pockets of the drug dealers. Secondly, not only felonious crimes but also those crimes that rise to a misdemeanor level should revoke government benefits. I believe that the distribution of the benefits should be made public record so as those people who witness blatant abuse of welfare can report such abuse to the governing entity.

The bleeding heart liberals have had too much of a hold on this country and I for one am sick of pampering the lazy.

[Hawk]

I think that the whole system should have more of a watch dog agency overseeing it. I honestly believe that most of those who subscribe to these government programs do not qualify for them in the reasonable and prudent mans eyes. The scope of these programs has been lost over time.

If you want to drive a truck you have to be drug screened. So if you receive government benefits why should you not be susceptible to drug screening as well? The last time I remembered, drug addicts don’t make the best employees and tax money should not be channeled to the pockets of the drug dealers. Secondly, not only felonious crimes but also those crimes that rise to a misdemeanor level should revoke government benefits. I believe that the distribution of the benefits should be made public record so as those people who witness blatant abuse of welfare can report such abuse to the governing entity.

The bleeding heart liberals have had too much of a hold on this country and I for one am sick of pampering the lazy.

Wow do the Republicans have you fooled. "Most don't qualify" ? You are way off. Fraud is around 2%. But those are the ones you hear about.

Clinton spent less on welfare. Bush spends MORE. Bleeding heart two faced Bush.

Are you suggesting if a disabled person gets caught taking drugs, HE SHOULD BECOME HOMELESS ?

I'm telling you , welfare fraud is costing you MUCH LESS than the Billions the republicans just gave to the oil companies. Get angry about that ! I am. Check how much Halliburton has been ripping us off in Iraq. We OVER PAID them more then welfare fraud has cost us. Get angry about that. If you want to look at government waste, welfare fraud is a drop in the ocean !

The amount the oil companies are overcharging YOU (with the Bush administration's blessing) is costing YOU more money in ONE gas tank fill up, than what it cost YOU to cover welfare fraud. Get angry about that !

Before Bush, gas was under $2.00. When Chaney worked for the oil companies, he said gas Should be more than $2.00. He got his way.

[lonewolf]

The very roads you drive on are not privately owned roads (yet).

Assuming you are talking about the federal government, this is one of the few things they do that is actually enumerated in the constitution.

Things like welfare, education, energy, housing & urban development, minimum wage and other niceties that modern America has become accustomed to are not enumerated in the constitution and the stumbling, bumbling, corrupted federal guvernment has no business being there.

BTW, corruption and backscratching is an equal opportunity political provider. How else could one party control the House for 40 years?

As far as the original theme to this thread...in many cases, you will find a male drug dealer living with his welfare crack/heroin ho. She will be set up with a free section 8 living space, a monthly SSI disability check and 3 or 4 unfortunate children who garner welfare money and food stamps which are traded for cash.

This local welfare state got its big push in Altoona during the early 90s when the infamous inner-city halfway house residents were released into the unsuspecting Altoona public and brought along their inner-city lifestyle.

[Hawk]

The very roads you drive on are not privately owned roads (yet).

Assuming you are talking about the federal government, this is one of the few things they do that is actually enumerated in the constitution.

Things like welfare, education, energy, housing & urban development, minimum wage and other niceties that modern America has become accustomed to are not enumerated in the constitution and the stumbling, bumbling, corrupted federal government has no business being there.

BTW, corruption and backscratching is an equal opportunity political provider. How else could one party control the House for 40 years?

As far as the original theme to this thread...in many cases, you will find a male drug dealer living with his welfare crack/heroin ho. She will be set up with a free section 8 living space, a monthly SSI disability check and 3 or 4 unfortunate children who garner welfare money and food stamps which are traded for cash.

This local welfare state got its big push in Altoona during the early 90s when the infamous inner-city halfway house residents were released into the unsuspecting Altoona public and brought along their inner-city lifestyle.

I've been waiting for your take on this.

We all agree there is welfare fraud. But too many people don't look at the big picture where the welfare fraud is a drop in the ocean compared to other way we get screwed.

Illegal aliens are costing us much more money, and they are here with Bush's blessing .

I don't have an answer to control the fraud without increasing bureaucracy, which would cost us even more.

What do you think of Santorum hand picking lobbyists ?

I know your Libertarian views, but what would we do without those things ? Privatising isn't the answer. There is as much corruption in the private sector [ENRON].

[lonewolf]

I don't have an answer to control the fraud without increasing bureaucracy, which would cost us even more.

What do you think of Santorum hand picking lobbyists ?

I have one answer....don't give them the power in the 1st place. 3/4 of the federal government shouldn't even be there. If you eliminate the bureacracy, you eliminate the fraud. What's left is a little easier to oversee.

Most of those issues are best handled by local and state governments. The department of energy is a red herring and education at the federal level is a big f'ing joke.

As far as Santorum, I haven't heard anything about that. Did this just make the news? All I know is that he has foot-in-mouth disease.

[Hawk]

The Santorum thing happened a couple of months ago. That's the consertive media for you. If that was a Democrat. It would still be in the news.

How could we do without those social programs ? Describe what would happen.

[lonewolf]

The Santorum thing happened a couple of months ago. That's the consertive media for you. If that was a Democrat. It would still be in the news.

How could we do without those social programs ? Describe what would happen.

The social programs would be the responsibility of the states where the citizens would have a better chance of oversight. All programs would NOT be created equal and that way there would be a sort of free market competitive nature. Welfare is already distributed by the states anyway--all I'm saying is get the federal bureacracy and rules out of the way. I would not even object to a reduced simple form of population-weighted revenue distribution back to the states to help fund it. One small federal office to distribute 0.99 on the dollar to 50 states instead of some fractional amount that mostly gets digested by the federal bureacracy today.