Other Resources The Political Joe » Philadelphia Rss Feed  
Moderators: k9car363, alicefoeller Reply
Show Per page
 
 
of 5
 
 
2016-08-01 9:39 AM
in reply to: ChineseDemocracy

User image

Pro
9391
500020002000100100100252525
Omaha, NE
Subject: RE: Philadelphia

Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy
Originally posted by velocomp

Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy
Originally posted by velocomp

Originally posted by ChineseDemocracy  I was most affected by the, "Sorry, not my responsibility. Not my govt.'s responsibility" comments. The sentimental part of me is reminded of Pink Floyd's tune, "On the Turning Away." It's easy to chastise the irresponsible procreators...but whether we like it or not, our society had a hand in creating that irresponsible adult who decided to create children they couldn't afford to feed. I guess we could just listen to our Trumpian ids and angrily proclaim, "Cut 'em off! No more freebies! Fend for your selves! It's not our responsibility to feed, clothe, and school your children!!" We could probably write a 1000 page report detailing the negative impacts this would have on society... Or, we could work towards ensuring we have social programs available, quality schools, early intervention (universal kindergarten that for some reason Conservatives oppose), AND Planned Parenthood to ensure female reproductive services are available to ALL women regardless of income level. We could ensure the next generation is more educated and empowered to make better choices. Just saying.

I think we simplify this too much.  I believe it comes down to how much help should they receive.  And I think that we have created a "safety" net, that ends up encouraging this bad behavior (have 1 child get x$, 2 children get xx$.  And this leads people in these situations to the end result.  That is why I think it is more important to fix the system by clipping it's wings then continue down this road of encouraging bad behavior.

The same thing holds true for unemployment benefits and wellfare.  In many cases it is more important to not work to get the most benefits possible than it is to work to make a better future for yourself.  To me that is the sad part.  Personally I would be more in favor of forcing people to work for their benefits.  They could clean up parks, remove grafitti, all sorts of odd jobs.  They could work minimal hours (say 2-4 4 hour shifts so as not to interupt their primary job search.  Imagine all the good they could do for society, and it would definitely motivate them to find a job so they don't have to keep doing those jobs.

 

Yes, but then there's that pesky problem of raising kids, ya know food, clothes, time spent together. Back when "Workfare" was being rolled out, there were many stories of single moms being bussed out of the ghetto to where jobs existed, long bus rides, long hours, giving their kids more time to roam around parentless...it is soo much more complicated than just "cutting them off" or "clipping their wings." How about a compromise that will never pass? Go back to the days of gov. surplus cheese and cheap pasta and beans and rice. Surplus fruits and veggies too. No more EBT cards. It'll never happen because the food industry makes a killing on food stamps. But I like that idea. btw, you've got unemployable folks out there, simply unemployable. Wanna throw 'en in jail? That'll cost us even more. Wanna hire 'em? I wouldn't in my business. It's so complicated.

You bring up some good points, especially about what to do with kids.  But there has to be an answer.  I also do like the surplus food idea, but your right.  It would never pass because people would feel it was mean.

As for the unemployable.  Again, I say let them either do odd jobs for their wellfare or cut them off.  This would be only for those that actually could work.  Those that are determined to be unable to work (and they do exist), we do have to take care of.

I actually think there's a different reason why my plan to shift it from an EBT card to surplus food would fail...and it has more to do with the food industries. Those businesses would lose a LOT of business. From an economic standpoint, it would be a losing proposition for big food businesses, especially packaged crap food manufacturers. Unfortunately, the system's so perverted that we have "food" being purchased on food stamps that is devoid of nutritional value, and even the kids on stamps are hooked. Try getting them to eat beans and rice with surplus fruits and veggies? There'd be riots in the streets and a huge spike in crime. There's no easy answer unfortunately. btw, once you "cut them off" from welfare benefits, be prepared for a spike in crime and a spike in your prison population which WILL cost LOTS of money.

The whole entitlements discussion is really difficult because there's no question that many people truly need assistance for whatever reason.  There's also no question that many people abuse the programs that are put in place to help the needy (what I grew up in).  So it's easy to say "get rid of it all" but that hurts the truly needy.  You can say no fraud is too much just give more and more and more (what we've been doing) and it hurts all of us and teaches people at a young age to game the system rather than be a part of it.



New Thread
Other Resources The Political Joe » Philadelphia Rss Feed  
Show Per page
 
 
of 5
 
 
RELATED ARTICLES
date : January 1, 2008
author : Team BT
comments : 0
Complete course preview of the Philadelphia Women's Only Triathlon in Pennsylvania featuring a Sprint and a Duathlon race. Mark your calendars!