Which said extended life expectancy is absolutely a function of the advances made in medicine since FDR.
Which said extended life expectancy is absolutely a function of the advances made in medicine since FDR.
I'd never say that the federal government can do it better than... well, anything, but doesn't this same principle apply to charity (the private, non-forced kind)?
Oh ya, I know... I wasn't trying to say it was due to social programs.
Just (trying) to be funny.
It is interesting how until people started living longer, they didn't give two flips about social programs though. I think mostly they were concerned with just surviving.
Somewhat, sure, but in the case of non-coerced charity, while they may use children to pimp themselves, it is ultimately down to the individual giving the money to decide if this is a worthwhile venture. I may think Charity A is a ripoff and Charity B is a Godsend, but I can't stop you from giving to Charity A and force you to give to Charity B.
O_o...
The money coming from the Dept of Agriculture is some of the worst welfare out there... mostly getting paid to people who are anti-welfare, but have no problem cashing their own welfare checks.
Considering what we see from some receiving assistance it's understandable that some of those paying to provide that assistance could feel like many are undeserving and gaming the system.
Those who really need help should be helped but it's pretty clear that much of the expenditures are not going to feed hungry children or help the elderly, they're going to help those who aren't really that bad off maintain their place in society.
I know of a situation where a single mother who basically abandoned her two children from a marriage and didn't pay child support was allowed to not only get welfare which enabled her to go to school(never finished) and have "a life" but was somehow allowed to claim the results of that "life",(another child) as a foster child. That in turn allowed her to not work or go to school so that she could continue her "life" and have two more children.
She then married and her husband's family gave them a nice house but for some reason she was allowed to claim they were paying for it which allowed her to keep getting benefits.
I know of another case where a family with the man on state disability and trying for a vet disability for ptsd even though he only served three years noncombat over thirty years ago and had been working ever since then. The wife works under the table and they receive welfare benefits and any other assistance they can find while their two kids are in a private school, they shop at Perry's, and the husband has a safe full of guns and goes fishing and shooting all the time.
Both of the above cases have something in common, both are religious right leaning political types,(except for their personal wants). They dress and live well, can put their kids in costly extra curricular activities and complain about the "poor" being moochers who don't deserve what they and their kids do.
Shouldn't we consider that things like that don't happen unless the system allows it?
Shouldn't we remember that the state and those in it have no incentive to stop fraud or reduce the assistance rolls because then their job might not be needed? The more people who "need" help the more the state is needed and more state jobs are needed to distribute that help.
Should we remember that it was exposed to our State Legislature that benefits were being given to people who were not entitled to them which raises questions about how much the rules are being followed. It appears workers have some "discretion" in who gets help.
http://normantranscript.com/local/x...cing-illegal-immigration-reporting-laws/print
Should we remember that the same system controlling welfare is also the same system running child welfare, foster care, medicare, and medicaid? How much fraud have we seen in those programs? How much has that cost?
There's no doubt reform is needed, the question is should reform start with the system that appears to have allowed abuses or do we continue to scapegoat the poor as a whole without admitting what's really going on?
Vote yes on SQ 765 and bring accountability to the whole DHS system.
Those who really need help should be helped but it's pretty clear that much of the expenditures are not going to feed hungry children or help the elderly, they're going to help those who aren't really that bad off maintain their place in society.
I know of a situation where a single mother who basically abandoned her two children from a marriage and didn't pay child support was allowed to not only get welfare which enabled her to go to school(never finished) and have "a life" but was somehow allowed to claim the results of that "life",(another child) as a foster child. That in turn allowed her to not work or go to school so that she could continue her "life" and have two more children.
She then married and her husband's family gave them a nice house but for some reason she was allowed to claim they were paying for it which allowed her to keep getting benefits.
I know of another case where a family with the man on state disability and trying for a vet disability for ptsd even though he only served three years noncombat over thirty years ago and had been working ever since then. The wife works under the table and they receive welfare benefits and any other assistance they can find while their two kids are in a private school, they shop at Perry's, and the husband has a safe full of guns and goes fishing and shooting all the time.
Both of the above cases have something in common, both are religious right leaning political types,(except for their personal wants). They dress and live well, can put their kids in costly extra curricular activities and complain about the "poor" being moochers who don't deserve what they and their kids do.
Shouldn't we consider that things like that don't happen unless the system allows it?
Shouldn't we remember that the state and those in it have no incentive to stop fraud or reduce the assistance rolls because then their job might not be needed? The more people who "need" help the more the state is needed and more state jobs are needed to distribute that help.
Should we remember that it was exposed to our State Legislature that benefits were being given to people who were not entitled to them which raises questions about how much the rules are being followed. It appears workers have some "discretion" in who gets help.
http://normantranscript.com/local/x...cing-illegal-immigration-reporting-laws/print
Should we remember that the same system controlling welfare is also the same system running child welfare, foster care, medicare, and medicaid? How much fraud have we seen in those programs? How much has that cost?
There's no doubt reform is needed, the question is should reform start with the system that appears to have allowed abuses or do we continue to scapegoat the poor as a whole without admitting what's really going on?
Vote yes on SQ 765 and bring accountability to the whole DHS system.
Get out your checkbook and write a fat one to:
http://www.regionalfoodbank.org/
http://www.regionalfoodbank.org/
No doubt there's abuse. But I still want the kid who needs help to get what he/she needs. A belly full of food doesn't know personal or impersonal. Human shield or not it isn't the kid's fault. I agree that the system needs to be fixed or replaced.
Similar threads
Latest posts
-
-
-
-
-
-
59th and Morgan Rd housing division project is back again!- Latest: CutBaitNBlowSh*tUp4ALivin
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
