View Full Version : Taking advantage of the system rant/vent
Nina_
06-06-2013, 07:08 PM
Well then they can financially support their children so I don't have to. When they make a "choice" to have a child on welfare it takes away my choice not to have to support it. I am tired of supporting these choices. Sure there is accidental pregnancies more often than not it's because the two people weren't using birth control. The father should be supporting the kid, along with the mother, but more often than not these piece of shit men don't pay. There is also abortion and adoption. I know many poor people who chose to work when they had a baby not take any form of welfare. I know others who worked and got some assistance and I had no issues with this.
You say "they can financially support their children so I don't have to." Well, 1) they CAN'T financially support their children, and if they could, welfare would not exist and 2) you say YOU have to support these children as if you are single handedly and voluntarily paying to support millions of children whose parents cannot support them. Do you understand that welfare is funded through tax dollars, and that is why you pay into welfare? You are not being solely targeted to take care of kids who aren't yours, you are paying taxes because that's your duty as a citizen. Do you have any idea how much of your tax dollars go towards welfare? A whopping 3 percent. You are forking over a heaping 10 cents a day to support kids on welfare (these numbers are averaged). How dare the government make you spend such money.
Churches don't turn away people who need help. In fact I know of many churches that run food pantries regardless of religious belief. Yes I would like charity to go from government based to church or organization based because they can run it better and more of the people who need help will get it.
If you are speaking on behalf of all churches, this is simply not true. It is a fact that there are churches who DO turn people away because of their beliefs (gays, people who've gotten abortions, even blacks... these groups of people have all been historically known to be turned away from churches and private organizations). Is it fair? No. Is it common? Probably not. But it does happen. Churches and private organizations aren't the answer to everything.
I know MANY people who have kids with many partners and no they are no different than wild animals. In fact wild animals are better because they know no better, People are supposed to know better. Everytime I meet a man with more than one baby mama (I'm talking out of wedlock babies)I think scum and 99% of the time I am right. What happens to those who have multiple babies out of wedlock? gangs and crime for one. I'm not talking those who get divorced and remarried, but those who keep having kids, like the piece of shit man I knew who had 5 babies from 3 different women he never married and all were on welfare because he refused to pay.
Children deserve two parents. I know this isn't always possible but too many are deprived of a dad.
I also know people who have kids with multiple people, and while I disagree with some of their life choices, I'm not going to call them animals. My dad has five kids from three different women, three of the kids being conceived out of wedlock. The first woman he impregnated was on drugs and wanted to have an abortion. He, being pro-life, talked the woman out of having the abortion knowing that this woman would not be in the child's life. He raised my sister (who because of her mom's drug use consequently has cerebral palsy and is confined to a wheelchair) without help from my sister's mother. He has always been there for each and every one of his kids even when the mothers were not. He is one of the most dependable people I know. So, it is an incorrect assumption that everyone who has children from multiple people is somehow worthy of being called an animal (or 99 percent of them as you say). I don't think that saying children deserve two parents is helping your argument at all, by the way. Regardless of how many parents children deserve, some children do not have two parents or even one; some have both parents but are still in need of help. How many parents a child has or deserves is not the issue here... the issue is whether or not the children deserve to eat and be financially cared for.
Why complain about such a miniscule percent of your taxes going towards feeding people who are poor/oppressed rather than the fact that 25 percent of your taxes go towards the war? Hm...
Kellydancer
06-06-2013, 08:00 PM
You say "they can financially support their children so I don't have to." Well, 1) they CAN'T financially support their children, and if they could, welfare would not exist and 2) you say YOU have to support these children as if you are single handedly and voluntarily paying to support millions of children whose parents cannot support them. Do you understand that welfare is funded through tax dollars, and that is why you pay into welfare? You are not being solely targeted to take care of kids who aren't yours, you are paying taxes because that's your duty as a citizen. Do you have any idea how much of your tax dollars go towards welfare? A whopping 3 percent. You are forking over a heaping 10 cents a day to support kids on welfare (these numbers are averaged). How dare the government make you spend such money.
I would rather spend it on social programs I support, like food pantries and homeless. Nope, I don't feel sorry for those who keep making babies on welfare. Not when so many people I know have DIED because they couldn't get assistance, like my aunt. They choose not to support themselves.
If you are speaking on behalf of all churches, this is simply not true. It is a fact that there are churches who DO turn people away because of their beliefs (gays, people who've gotten abortions, even blacks... these groups of people have all been historically known to be turned away from churches and private organizations). Is it fair? No. Is it common? Probably not. But it does happen. Churches and private organizations aren't the answer to everything.
There are non religious organizations as well. Yes they can run it better than government because government wastes money like the IRS scandal. I worked in government and have seen the waste.
I also know people who have kids with multiple people, and while I disagree with some of their life choices, I'm not going to call them animals. My dad has five kids from three different women, three of the kids being conceived out of wedlock. The first woman he impregnated was on drugs and wanted to have an abortion. He, being pro-life, talked the woman out of having the abortion knowing that this woman would not be in the child's life. He raised my sister (who because of her mom's drug use consequently has cerebral palsy and is confined to a wheelchair) without help from my sister's mother. He has always been there for each and every one of his kids even when the mothers were not. He is one of the most dependable people I know. So, it is an incorrect assumption that everyone who has children from multiple people is somehow worthy of being called an animal (or 99 percent of them as you say). I don't think that saying children deserve two parents is helping your argument at all, by the way. Regardless of how many parents children deserve, some children do not have two parents or even one; some have both parents but are still in need of help. How many parents a child has or deserves is not the issue here... the issue is whether or not the children deserve to eat and be financially cared for.
It was great your dad raised your sister but stats show most men who have kids out of wedlock do not support them. That is very wrong. I couldn't begin to mention all the loser men I have known with multiple baby mamas who were not supporting them. The children deserve to be cared for, but the parents need to work hard. My parents certainly did and they are married 45 years.
Why complain about such a miniscule percent of your taxes going towards feeding people who are poor/oppressed rather than the fact that 25 percent of your taxes go towards the war? Hm...
I am opposed to the wars and if this was a thread about the wars I would state as such. I have also mentioned I was opposed to the bank bailouts as well.
A few years ago my aunt died of cancer (a treatable one)because she couldn't afford insurance. She applied for medicaid but because she didn't have dependent kids she was turned down. She was a wonderful person dead too early because of the system yet taxes keep going up because many people don't want to work and instead want to be freeloaders. That's not everyone on welfare but certainly many. I'd rather have her here today instead of the gang members (many of which were raised on welfare by single moms).
I'm not against helping those in need, what I am against is the system and how many fraud the system (like the zumba instructor). I can give so many examples I know or have seen, like this woman trying to buy electronics with a Link Card or a friend's mother selling food stamps back in the 80's to buy booze.
Smurfette
06-06-2013, 09:53 PM
Children deserve two parents. I know this isn't always possible but too many are deprived of a dad.
Children also deserve to be fed and clothed and cared for, regardless of the bad choices and irresponsibility of their parents. That is what welfare is for.
Kellydancer
06-06-2013, 10:18 PM
I never said they shouldn't but no parents don't deserve welfare just because they are parents. The parents need to work so they can properly support the kids. There were times my parents lost a job and they took anything (including fast food and retail)just to pay the bills. My aunt didn't deserve to die because she didn't have dependent kids.
Smurfette
06-07-2013, 07:40 AM
But welfare is not about rewarding the parents for having kids, it's about making sure the kids are able to eat and not go homeless. Not everyone is able to find a job in this economy, not even in retail or fast food. Plus most of the time, those low paid jobs simply don't provide enough money to support a family. And daycare is a HUGE expense as well. You can't just look at a single mom with three kids and no family support system who lives in an impoverished area and say "well just get a job then". Yes, in a perfect world that woman would've avoided pregnancy, or gotten married to a man who sticks around to support her, but we don't live in a perfect world and there will always be situations like that. What I'm arguing is that her children shouldn't have to go hungry because of it. That's where government aid comes in, to help her buy groceries and pay bills, etc.
I don't know the specific rules for every state, but I'm pretty sure that all or most actually require you to be actively looking for a job or attending classes, you have to meet with a caseworker on a weekly basis to prove you're doing these things, and you have to jump through a bunch of hoops. I looked into getting it years ago after I had my son and it seemed like a big complicated pain in the ass for not very much money. I'm pretty sure that 99% of people on welfare would rather NOT be on it. It's not glamorous and the amount of money people get really is a pittance. Hell I probably get more money back in random tax credits/benefits throughout the year here in Canada than people on welfare get down there, and I'm not even on government aid.
Kellydancer
06-07-2013, 11:13 AM
But in many cases it IS rewarding the parents (usually a single mom with no baby daddy in sight)for doing something wrong. If someone can't find a job then either don't have kids (or have sex)or if they receive welfare then work for it. If they can't find a job then I am okay with them volunteering instead of an actual job. What I am NOT okay with them doing is sitting on their butt doing nothing. Illinois has a serious welfare problem and it is draining our resources not to mention the serious gang problem. There is no excuse to have several kids while on welfare, none. I get going on welfare because they made a mistake, but many people I have known had babies while they were on welfare. Is that fair that taxes go up because someone refused to use birth control, abstain or picked a piece of shit man to sleep with? Not at all and am sick of seeing this again and again.
Is it fair that my aunt died because the system doesn't help those like her but instead spends money on people who often refuse to better themselves? She was worth far more than someone with multiple kids out of wedlock who has been on welfare for years.
GlamourRouge
06-19-2013, 12:05 PM
But in many cases it IS rewarding the parents (usually a single mom with no baby daddy in sight)for doing something wrong.
$300-$500 per month for a maximum of 5 years isn't rewarding the parents. If you don't have any other or extra income, you almost HAVE to spend that on the child. Toiletries, schooling costs (yes, even public school!), clothing (yes, even thrift store clothing is expensive! $10 for a dress last time I went thrifting), etc.
Second, its pretty pointless to argue this because other people have argued this a zillion times, but many people lose their job or are forced to quit to take care of their sick babies or to go to back school, or whatever millions of other reasons people are unemployed.
Third, people are not psychic. They cannot tell that the man they marry (or date or whatever) will run away or stay forever. You personally, could get married tomorrow to a man who seems perfect and then have a baby, and the man could randomly run off forever even though he gave 0 warning signs. It happens ALL the time. People are not dumb, typically lol. You cannot predict the future. Even a man who gets married and claims he won't run away, could end up meeting someone who is a better match for himself, and end up leaving his current partner. Mariage worked so well in the 1950s and before because by like age 15, you had already met everyone you would meet in your lifetime. And women and men depended on each other for cooking/cleaning/childcare (women) and income/food/necessities (men). The world isn't like that anymore so people often leave randomly, cheat, or they meet someone better. Men and women don't depend on each other like they used to, so that's why most relationships do not work out. The world isn't really built for long-term commitment anymore, and that's okay.
Fourth, the biggest issue regarding pregnancy is that birth control fails. Even with perfect use! Many people don't even realize they are pregnant til its too late to have an abortion, and many do not even believe in abortion. There wouldn't be whole series of shows like "I Didn't Know I Was Pregnant" and stuff, if birth control didn't fail all the time with perfect use. I am pretty sure it fails FAR more often than even the stastics lead everyone to believe.
What baffles me (and others I'm sure is)... I thought you were really religious? If you got pregnant, I assume you would not have an abortion either. I don't understand how someone could claim to be super religious and conservative, but then chastise women for keeping a baby when they accidently get pregnant on birth control.
Kellydancer
06-19-2013, 04:10 PM
I probably wouldn't have an abortion but I have always been super picky with men I sleep with. I am tired of those who aren't and have babies with men they know won't stick around. So yes they knew and didn't care. That's why women need to have a backup plan (and money)in case he bails so she can support it so tax payers don't have to. If she has questions then don't have sex or use alternatives like oral sex.
This thread isn't about me or religious people but those who take advantage of the system. No I don't want to support those who freeload off the system. I don't know many people who do. Religious people have no problem helping those who fell on hard times but not to help those who refuse to help themselves (and not talking people like disabled or elderly).
Smurfette
06-19-2013, 04:37 PM
But how do you know they knew and didn't care? You weren't there. Everyone's situation is different. Many guys will be sweet and loving and awesome until faced with a problem such as an unplanned pregnancy, and only then will they show their true colors. Like GlamourRouge said, women aren't psychic. Yes I agree that every woman SHOULD have a backup plan and money saved up, but that's not always possible for people with low incomes who are barely surviving as it is. What you are saying is that if women don't plan their lives perfectly and foresee every possible event that might happen, then they don't deserve help. But that is unrealistic and kind of cruel.
Kellydancer
06-19-2013, 04:49 PM
No, it's not cruel it's called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. If one can't afford a kid, don't have one. Common sense to most. There is birth control and yes I know sometimes it fails but a huge percentage of people don't use it at all. There is abstaining from sex and there is doing other sexual things that can't cause pregnancy. Nope, instead many people decide to have kids and go on welfare. I have seen it again and again and yes I know people who intentionally get pregnant to get welfare. Most women who get pregnant know he won't stick around, only many use the excuse "oh he was nice". I don't buy it and I have seen it repeatedly. For those who truly had an accident then I feel for them but the women who KEEP having babies on welfare? They did it to themselves and my sympathy is limited. If one isn't sure of the man don't have sex until one is financially ready. Better yet pick men who will stick around (and I guarantee more than likely they are the ones who wait to have sex).
I have repeatedly stated I am not against welfare I am for severe limits. If one gets welfare they should be forced to work for it (volunteering would be acceptable), and I like the rules for unemployment applied to welfare where they have to prove they are searching for work. If they have a baby while on welfare then they get penalized somehow instead of extra goodies. Also, the dads need to be responsible and forced to pay for the kids. There is no excuse to be on welfare for years, and no excuse to have several babies while receiving welfare. I am not sympathetic towards women who have babies with men who already have out of wedlock children. She should have known better.
Aniela
06-19-2013, 07:51 PM
I am all for very strict limits on welfare, but Kelly I think what's got sm ppl fired up abt your posts is that you seem to take for granted that women who get knocked up out of wedlock knew the guys they were w/ wouldn't stick around. That's the impression I'm getting from sm of your recent posts.
I am not denying that there are ppl out there who have kids w/ the main/sole purpose of getting welfare, b/c I've seen it happen myself. I know birth control isn't infallible - I've been pregnant twice while on the Pill, taking it 100% correctly. But we only know ppl as well as they allow us to, re: your comment abt women getting knocked up by guys who already have kids out of wedlock - as Smurfette pointed out, women aren't psychic. Yes everyone does *immensely* stupid things, but it seems to me you're trying to pigeonhole every woman who gets knocked up & goes on welfare. Ppl don't always disclose the little things like, "Oh I had a kid from relationship w/ Whoever"
I also gotta say I took issue w/ your "I prob wouldn't have an abortion but I am super picky abt the men I sleep w/" sounds like you're putting yourself on a bit of a pedestal there. Ok, so let's say you're doing everything right (& ftm completely taking welfare out of the equation) you're on birth control, & w/ a guy you're convinced is the elusive standup guy who will be there thru everything -- then the birth control fails, & you're pregnant, & the guy gets a case of the ass & says "you deal w/ this shit" My point is you can have done everything right & shit like that is still going to happen sm times, b/c you can't always predict the behaviour of others.
Now w/ all that being said, I am 1000000% behind you on your suggestions for welfare limits.
Kellydancer
06-19-2013, 09:48 PM
But the thing is most women knew a guy wouldn't stick around and still slept with him. For every one woman who sleeps with a guy who then bails and she is left holding the bag there are probably 20+ who knew damn well he wouldn't stick around and still slept with him. I know several cases personally, including someone who slept with a guy right away who had 4 out of wedlock babies by 3 women. Should tax payers be forced to pay for his kids? hell no, he should be. Yes I realize SOME men seem like great guys then disappear but the majority of the women I know who got pregnant by the disappearing dad knew he wouldn't stick around. Yes I do put myself on a pedestal when it comes to this issue because I managed to not get myself pregnant. I either abstained, used birth control or was careful to sleep with men I knew would stick around. However, there is also this thing called supporting one's self and no woman should have to depend on a man to support her. If people get pregnant on a form of birth control then obviously that one isn't working for them (and the pill is one with a higher rate of failure than doctors would have you believe as it fails while using other forms of medication.)
People are forgetting this thread is about me, it's about people taking advantage of the system. No, someone making hundreds a night shouldn't be getting ANY form of welfare. Yes that is abuse. There is no excuse for those people who have multiple babies on welfare, that's called irresponsible behavior. There have been cases here of welfare fraud, including one moocher who was putting off her wedding so her baby could be born on welfare and another who admitted dancing and spending $200 on clothes while admitting she was getting welfare. Meanwhile we cut funding the to the elderly and disabled along with many who really need it while supporting those the OP mentioned. Also, they are cutting college education to the military and veterans but not to those on welfare and veteran deserve college more than anyone on welfare.
For those who seem to think I am entitled, actually no I have seen so many cases of welfare abuse and yes it is real. I saw my childhood neighborhood go from upper middle class to low income and saw women with multiple children on welfare. I saw girls getting pregnant at 16 and not caring if baby daddy stuck around. I saw guys getting girls pregnant and not supporting them. I saw having to pay the dentist more because he started getting medicaid patients and since medicaid doesn't pay the full price it meant I paid more. I saw myself needing medical care and applying for medicaid and being turned down while several people who didn't need it received it.
“If you find yourself condemning your "brother", you can be sure that it is not him you condemn. It is some shamed part of yourself you have not acknowledged. Perceiving inadequacy in your "brother" cannot make you feel better, for it merely aggravates your own sense of unworthiness.
Neither justice nor salvation are to be gained by attacking your brother. Please see this for what it is. Every nail you pound into your brother’s hand holds you to the cross.”
— Paul Ferrini on judging others from “Love Without Conditions”
ToeOfTheCamel
06-20-2013, 08:58 AM
I disagree with that quote to an extent. I question its relevancy. I see what it means, and how it would apply to certain situations, but the fact is that sometimes people around us do fucked up shit. This example will be way out of the park, but that quote implies that we perhaps should not condemn, say, pedophiles and murderes, essentially, because we are then actually revealing our own inner child molesters and murderers. I say that quote, while insightful, will not apply here.
Kellydancer
06-20-2013, 10:32 AM
Want unlimited welfare? here's two cases that disgust me:
1. Man has 22 kids by 14 women. http://www.newschannel5.com/story/22500729/deadbeat-dad-fathers-22-children-by-14-women. He's not paying for the kids, welfare is. He should be thrown in prison and castrated and the women he got pregnant should be sterilized as well. There is no excuse for this and the women should have known better (or are too stupid to breed).
2. An ILLEGAL has been on welfare 20 years and has 7 kids. http://standwitharizona.com/blog/2013/05/30/outrage-illegal-alien-with-7-kids-got-food-stamps-housing-social-security-for-20-years/. This leech should have been deported.
This whole judging thing seems to only be against people more conservative. If I attack a welfare queen then I am judgmental but if others attack me for my views such as not dating men with children then apparently they aren't judgmental. WRONG. However in my case I have every right to be judgmental because people who abuse the welfare system are ruining society. I'm not hurting anyone by my dating preferences. I'm not against welfare (which seems to be a point some either can't read or ignore)am against freeloading on welfare which is a big difference.
Smurfette
06-20-2013, 11:45 AM
People are judging you because your comments indicate a lack of empathy and compassion for people. But I guess you just have a different way of looking at situations. Personally, I don't feel the slightest bit of outrage over the illegal immigrant with seven children. Sorry but I believe there are better places to direct my anger than towards a woman born in a poor country who tried to flee to America to live a better life, and now she has children that are surviving on taxpayer money. If taxpayer money is spent on anything I'd prefer it being spent on feeding children, regardless of their origins or the crimes of their parents. I have a very very hard time looking down my nose at illegal immigrants considering most of my husband's family lives in squalor in Honduras. They live in tiny dirty huts with little to eat, and no hope for a better life. His mother left to the US and then to Canada and worked her ass off for many years to give him a better life. The only reason she was able to come legally is because she served in the military or something and they allowed her to come, otherwise she might have been an illegal immigrant too.
I like to put myself in other people's shoes and not judge them if I don't know the whole story or don't know what they're going through. Yes, that deadbeat dad IS sickening but the solution to that is not to castrate and forcibly sterilize people. There are complex societal problems affecting poor black people in the ghetto that lead to this sort of thing happening. Lack of education, lack of opportunities, poor sex ed, crime, drugs, racial profiling, no jobs, no mobility, etc. Fix those problems and welfare fraud will go down. But instead people just look on the surface, get disgusted at the idea of welfare queens and then conclude that they're just lazy and they don't deserve help. I can't believe people get so bent out of shape over the couple of pennies taken out of their paychecks to be directed towards feeding and housing poor people. of all things.
ToeOfTheCamel
06-20-2013, 12:25 PM
There's been some really good insight in this thread; thank you guys for your input. It was good food for thought. My own opinion of people who, in my own definition, abuse the welfare system has not changed (people who make enough money to support themselves without aid, but continue to collect it anyway). Poverty is complex, and children who were born of poor decision and circumstance should not have to starve because of it (which was my opinion regardless of this thread). I do think that a lot of women do accidentally on purpose "forget" to use contraception correctly, for a variety of reasons, lack of available contraception (shout out to PP) being a VERY small contributing factor to unplanned pregnancy resulting in births today. This whole thing could be argued into the ground....
Welfare is for people who NEED it (which was my original point).
Loopholes for receiving welfare should be closed (check income better. This is how the girls I know skirt around it.)
Aid should be better regulated (provide resources for affordable childcare, resources for finding work, resources for affording/obtaining education, resources for better prevention of pregnancy and why it's important not to get pregnant, and perhaps mandatory classes on the aforementioned)
Kellydancer
06-20-2013, 01:29 PM
People are judging you because your comments indicate a lack of empathy and compassion for people. But I guess you just have a different way of looking at situations. Personally, I don't feel the slightest bit of outrage over the illegal immigrant with seven children. Sorry but I believe there are better places to direct my anger than towards a woman born in a poor country who tried to flee to America to live a better life, and now she has children that are surviving on taxpayer money. If taxpayer money is spent on anything I'd prefer it being spent on feeding children, regardless of their origins or the crimes of their parents. I have a very very hard time looking down my nose at illegal immigrants considering most of my husband's family lives in squalor in Honduras. They live in tiny dirty huts with little to eat, and no hope for a better life. His mother left to the US and then to Canada and worked her ass off for many years to give him a better life. The only reason she was able to come legally is because she served in the military or something and they allowed her to come, otherwise she might have been an illegal immigrant too.
I like to put myself in other people's shoes and not judge them if I don't know the whole story or don't know what they're going through. Yes, that deadbeat dad IS sickening but the solution to that is not to castrate and forcibly sterilize people. There are complex societal problems affecting poor black people in the ghetto that lead to this sort of thing happening. Lack of education, lack of opportunities, poor sex ed, crime, drugs, racial profiling, no jobs, no mobility, etc. Fix those problems and welfare fraud will go down. But instead people just look on the surface, get disgusted at the idea of welfare queens and then conclude that they're just lazy and they don't deserve help. I can't believe people get so bent out of shape over the couple of pennies taken out of their paychecks to be directed towards feeding and housing poor people. of all things.
My comments don't indicate a lack of sympathy at all because I stated I WASN'T OPPOSED TO WELFARE. No I don't want to support freeloaders. No the Illegal SHOULDN'T BE HERE and TAXPAYERS SHOULDN'T BE SUPPORTING THIS BITCH. She didn't want a better life, she wanted taxpayer money. Because I don't want to support these people doesn't mean I am not sympathetic. There is NO excuse for either of these cases, NONE. I know plenty of people who managed to get out of the ghetto so no excuse. Sure it's hard but many schools give scholarships if they work hard. Your mother in law worked hard and came here legally so that is different than this scum who came here ILLEGALLY and doesn't work. The guy is an example of welfare kings to the extreme and I shudder that pieces of shit like him have babies instead of good people.
I'd rather spend tax payer money on veterans who are losing their benefits, elderly and disabled, NOT an illegal bitch who shouldn't be here or a piece of shit loser man who makes babies he can't afford. Send her back to Mexico (and btw "making a better life" should NEVER mean coming here for welfare)and send that man to prison.
I DID live in an area with low income and most didn't want to work. If they don't want to work why is it my problem? More illegitimate children on welfare means more crime.
Kellydancer
06-20-2013, 01:36 PM
There's been some really good insight in this thread; thank you guys for your input. It was good food for thought. My own opinion of people who, in my own definition, abuse the welfare system has not changed (people who make enough money to support themselves without aid, but continue to collect it anyway). Poverty is complex, and children who were born of poor decision and circumstance should not have to starve because of it (which was my opinion regardless of this thread). I do think that a lot of women do accidentally on purpose "forget" to use contraception correctly, for a variety of reasons, lack of available contraception (shout out to PP) being a VERY small contributing factor to unplanned pregnancy resulting in births today. This whole thing could be argued into the ground....
Welfare is for people who NEED it (which was my original point).
Loopholes for receiving welfare should be closed (check income better. This is how the girls I know skirt around it.)
Aid should be better regulated (provide resources for affordable childcare, resources for finding work, resources for affording/obtaining education, resources for better prevention of pregnancy and why it's important not to get pregnant, and perhaps mandatory classes on the aforementioned)
As you can see the "free welfare for all no matter the reasons" leftists come out of the woodwork. I have to wonder how many either use or used the system or actually pay taxes. Yet if people say they don't want to support freeloaders then of course they are evil, unsympathetic, etc. Yes many women do intentionally get pregnant and yes many do it for welfare. I have seen this repeatedly. I don't want people to starve (and I don't know anyone who does)but am tired of paying for the mistakes those who shouldn't be making babies but does anyway. I don't know many people who want to completely eliminate welfare but many of us have seen the abuse offhand and wants stricter rules. There is NO excuse for someone having many kids on welfare and not working for years.
ToeOfTheCamel
06-20-2013, 02:41 PM
I wish a knew a little more about how a person's income and number of children factors into the amount of cash-aid, food stamps, etc. that they receive. It would be a good semi-solution to give less money per child every time a new one is "accidentally" conceived. If someone is receiving $500 per month and has one kid, then instead of an additional $500 for the next one to pop out, only receive an additional $100....That might encourage a lower low-income birth rate. The gov't can't force people not to reproduce, but they could make it less convenient...
I used $500 as an example number, because I know a girl who receives that much for one healthy child and does not claim any income for taxes (HOW DO YOU GET AWAY WITH THAT).
GlamourRouge
06-20-2013, 03:15 PM
As you can see the "free welfare for all no matter the reasons" leftists come out of the woodwork. I have to wonder how many either use or used the system or actually pay taxes
I know this is indirectly directed at me (and maybe others) because this is like the third time its happened in a thread like this where I commented and then you wrote that, but I would like to say... I am a libertarian, but I do have some liberalness thrown in because i LIVED the childhood where we needed to be on welfare. And people judged at first glance and though we didn't need it, but we did. So you sincerely cannot judge people because you do not know what is going on behind the scenes, and they are not obligated to tell you.
Secondly, you keep making that taxes comment over and over again in every thread where someone says welfare is a good thing. Juuuust so you know, cam girls are issued 1099s for EVERY cent they make, and its automatically generated. If they cannot send it to your address (if its sent back or you don't receive it), then they suspend your account and you cannot work or get paid. If you don't pay taxes on a 1099, you will 100% be audited because the IRS also receives a copy of the 1099 before you even get yours. So please stop making that comment.
I DID live in an area with low income and most didn't want to work. If they don't want to work why is it my problem? More illegitimate children on welfare means more crime.
And I lived in the projects and most people did work, could not work (handicap or other illness), or were in school.
And no, more illegitimate children on welfare does not mean more crime lol. There's probably 10x as much crime in rich neighborhoods, you just never hear about it and its a different kind of crime. In fact, there was a study done that said the more money you have, the more immoral you are.
GlamourRouge
06-20-2013, 03:19 PM
I wish a knew a little more about how a person's income and number of children factors into the amount of cash-aid, food stamps, etc. that they receive. It would be a good semi-solution to give less money per child every time a new one is "accidentally" conceived.
You can only get welfare for 5 years maximum, regardless of # of children. And ACTUALLY, pretty sure most people get on welfare when their kids are older anyway, and they don't have new ones. Even if someone immediately got on welfare when they had a baby, it would take another year until the 2nd is born, and then another year til the 3rd is born. Where safety is concerned, you'd only be able to have 3 or so in that 5 year span. Maaaaybe 4. But someone who already has 8 kids who gets on welfare and doesn't have new ones, would get more money than someone who does that, FYI.
If someone is receiving $500 per month and has one kid, then instead of an additional $500 for the next one to pop out, only receive an additional $100.
That's how it already works. Well, at least you get the most for the first one. When my mom was on welfare (with just me) it was only $302 per month in an expensive area of California, but that was also back in the 90s. But that wasn't even near enough money. Its not like people are ballin' when they are on welfare lol.
I disagree with that quote to an extent. I question its relevancy. I see what it means, and how it would apply to certain situations, but the fact is that sometimes people around us do fucked up shit. This example will be way out of the park, but that quote implies that we perhaps should not condemn, say, pedophiles and murderes, essentially, because we are then actually revealing our own inner child molesters and murderers. I say that quote, while insightful, will not apply here.
The quote doesnt say dont throw people in jail for ffs!!! It is talking about walking around condemning each other constantly in our heads and out loud to others. Gossiping and judging as a habit of a cycle of internal hating.
If someone is obsessing about the poor, welfare mothers, others people's lives etc. it is only a subconscious projection of their own insecurity. These are the same people who are constantly beating up and hating themselves. So they take a break from beating themselves down to beat someone else down. While they are obsessing about them they are not taking care of your own responsibilities either.
You can sit and try to justify it all you want. Come up with a million excuses. But at the end of the day if you were living below the poverty line you too would go get welfare.
So instead of bitching about the poor, go to a mirror and take a good look at yourself. Because at the end of the day, no one is taking responsibility for their own actions if they are beating themselves and others down.
Kellydancer
06-20-2013, 03:51 PM
I know this is indirectly directed at me (and maybe others) because this is like the third time its happened in a thread like this where I commented and then you wrote that, but I would like to say... I am a libertarian, but I do have some liberalness thrown in because i LIVED the childhood where we needed to be on welfare. And people judged at first glance and though we didn't need it, but we did. So you sincerely cannot judge people because you do not know what is going on behind the scenes, and they are not obligated to tell you.
Secondly, you keep making that taxes comment over and over again in every thread where someone says welfare is a good thing. Juuuust so you know, cam girls are issued 1099s for EVERY cent they make, and its automatically generated. If they cannot send it to your address (if its sent back or you don't receive it), then they suspend your account and you cannot work or get paid. If you don't pay taxes on a 1099, you will 100% be audited because the IRS also receives a copy of the 1099 before you even get yours. So please stop making that comment.
And I lived in the projects and most people did work, could not work (handicap or other illness), or were in school.
And no, more illegitimate children on welfare does not mean more crime lol. There's probably 10x as much crime in rich neighborhoods, you just never hear about it and its a different kind of crime. In fact, there was a study done that said the more money you have, the more immoral you are.
Just because I write something doesn't mean it is aimed at you. In fact I don't care enough about anyone to aim any comment at anyone. However you seem to be interested in me since in several thread you pop up to disagree with something I wrote. If someone is a Libertarian they support less taxes and less financial help NOT more. I don't know your personal experience, but there are many people who are on welfare because they are too lazy to work. I have seen this REPEATEDLY and if one is abled bodied and receiving welfare there is no excuse not to better one's self. There is college, trade school, even volunteering so if one doesn't like their situation then they need to change it. I don't like my particular job so I am going back to college. Not to mention there are part time jobs out there like McDonalds and Wal-Mart, not the greatest but I worked these jobs in high school and early college so they are options.
Yes, illegitimacy does cause crime. I too lived in an area that was crime ridden and guess what? the majority of the gang leaders were in fact from single moms. There are stats out there that prove this. Here's the first one I found: "From 50 to 85 percent of gang members come either from a single-parent home, or one in which no parent resides". people.missouristate.edu/MichaelCarlie/what_i.../gangs/.../family.htm. There was an article in the paper today from the Sun-Times (hardly a right wing paper by any means)that also talks about this. Children need their fathers.
Kellydancer
06-20-2013, 03:55 PM
I wish a knew a little more about how a person's income and number of children factors into the amount of cash-aid, food stamps, etc. that they receive. It would be a good semi-solution to give less money per child every time a new one is "accidentally" conceived. If someone is receiving $500 per month and has one kid, then instead of an additional $500 for the next one to pop out, only receive an additional $100....That might encourage a lower low-income birth rate. The gov't can't force people not to reproduce, but they could make it less convenient...
I used $500 as an example number, because I know a girl who receives that much for one healthy child and does not claim any income for taxes (HOW DO YOU GET AWAY WITH THAT).
I used to know Illinois' rates because I worked for a social agency years ago but in Illinois not only do you get more in Link Card (Illinois food stamps)you also get additional in terms of housing allowance, medical and WIC. A friend used to get several hundred dollars a month between food stamps, cash money, housing and utilities.
GlamourRouge
06-20-2013, 11:39 PM
Just because I write something doesn't mean it is aimed at you.
In fact I don't care enough about anyone to aim any comment at anyone.
However you seem to be interested in me since in several thread you pop up to disagree with something I wrote.
If someone is a Libertarian they support less taxes and less financial help NOT more.
Yes, illegitimacy does cause crime. I too lived in an area that was crime ridden and guess what? the majority of the gang leaders were in fact from single moms. There are stats out there that prove this. Here's the first one I found: "From 50 to 85 percent of gang members come either from a single-parent home, or one in which no parent resides". people.missouristate.edu/MichaelCarlie/what_i.../gangs/.../family.htm. There was an article in the paper today from the Sun-Times (hardly a right wing paper by any means)that also talks about this.
Children need their fathers.
Well this will be my last post on it, but here goes:
That's because you write the same thing in every welfare post (this is like #3 or 4) right after I comment saying I am for it. You always write that people who are for welfare and people who don't pay taxes (which makes no sense at all).
I only disagree with you on this because this is like thread #3 or 4 on welfare, and they have all been closed or removed.
I am well aware what a Libertarian is, but like I said, given my own experience, children NEED money to survive as they cannot get a job. Death is the other option. So I do favor welfare because I know the experience of needing it.
Many people on welfare have been to college, even completed college. And many people on welfare already work full time. But its often not enough. In the Bay Area for example, a shitty one bedroom will run you nearly $1,500. Thats more than most people make working full time somewhere, after taxes (almost 10% tax rate in CA).
That link doesn't work. Gangs are cultural. And I used to live in a neighborhood with gangs and if you are not apart of the gang or the enemy, they leave you alone. Many are home owners (look at East LA).
What does children needing their fathers have to do with anything? Secondly, no they really do not. I could have spent more time with mine, but I chose not to. And people die randomly anyway.
Kellydancer
06-21-2013, 12:01 PM
Yes children DO need their fathers. Yes kids without them grow up involved in far more crime, gangs, etc than those with married parents. I work with kids on the side and see a BIG difference between kids who have divorced parents, those with dad in the picture and those with dad nowhere to be found. The kids with married parents are far better adjusted. Some of you seem to think dads aren't needed but they are. Yes children need money but that is the responsibility of their parents, not tax payers. I understand a parent needing help because they temporarily fell on hard times or are disabled. I do not understand a parent choosing not to work and instead getting welfare and I definitely don't understand a man not paying for his children. In fact a man who doesn't pay for his kid is no man at all and should be sent to prison. Once again if someone knows a man won't stick around (and most women know they won't)then why have sex with him? There are posts on this forum alone that I can point to where a woman says something like "he's got baby mama drama and has to go to court to pay child support". Common sense says not to have anything to do with these men yet women again and again have sex with them (case in point the man with 14 baby mamas and 22 children). Yes I feel sorry for the kids but nope no sympathy for the women who should know better. Sure gangs are a cultural thing but where did most of them come from? FATHERLESS FAMILIES.
Yes you do follow me around in many threads and I am not talking about welfare. I can point to many other topics where I posted something and you disagreed with me. However that is going off topic but you seem to like arguing at times with me and not sure why (nor do I care).
GlamourRouge
06-21-2013, 02:19 PM
Yes children DO need their fathers. Yes kids without them grow up involved in far more crime, gangs, etc than those with married parents.
That's because of a single parent family having a lower income. But a sex worker can easily make the same amount as a 2-parent household.
That's outdated anyway though. They are tearing down projects and low income neighborhoods right and left (or they are gentrifying rapidly), and being replaced by mixed incoming housing where often some of the apartments/condos/townhouses/cottages are for sale and half or more are renting for the current market rates (i.e. not low income).
Crime is lower than its ever been, and decreasing. Teen birth rates are lower than they've ever been, and decreasing. People are having fewer children than ever before. YET the rates of divorce are HIGHER than they have ever been, and I believe its up to 50%+ now. The rate of non-married people with children are higher than ever. Coincidence? No. And these facts are the opposite of your theory.
SOURCES:
Birthrate for U.S. teens is lowest in history http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/story/2012-04-09/CDC-teen-birth/54140178/1
U.S. Birth Rate Hits All-Time Low - See the links on these sites: http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/rick-newman/2012/12/03/why-a-falling-birth-rate-is-a-big-problem and http://usgovinfo.about.com/cs/censusstatistic/a/aabirthrate.htm
(this is a source you'll like): "US crime rate at lowest point in decades. Why America is safer now: The crime rate for serious crimes, including murder, rape, and assault, has dropped significantly since the early 1990s in part because of changes in technology and policing, experts say." http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Justice/2012/0109/US-crime-rate-at-lowest-point-in-decades.-Why-America-is-safer-now and http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2010/0524/US-crime-rate-is-down-six-key-reasons
Kellydancer
06-21-2013, 03:04 PM
Guess where the low income people move? to the suburbs. In Illinois 54% of all babies are born on Medicaid and crime might be going down in some areas but definitely not Chicago. Besides financial reasons it is bad for a child to be raised without two parents. A child needs both parents and that is something I will never change my mind about. No, the facts about divorce going up and more non married people with children is not the opposite of my theory. I know divorce is going up and yes I do stigmatize those who have babies out of wedlock or divorce because it does affect everything. I would NEVER date a man who is a never married or divorced dad and part of it is because I am strongly opposed to children being raised without both parents in a two parent home. I don't care that society is changing, it is NOT changing for the better.
http://www.cnn.com/2013/02/15/health/trauma-centers-guns
"crime rates are on the decline but not in Chicago".
http://thinkprogress.org/health/2012/03/12/442443/illinois-medicaid-maternity-benefits/?mobile=nc
Stat about 54% of medicaid births. Crime aside this means that taxpayers pay more and more. Even if they don't grow up into crimes 54% of all births is scary.
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1446
GlamourRouge
06-21-2013, 05:08 PM
Guess where the low income people move? to the suburbs.
Besides financial reasons it is bad for a child to be raised without two parents.
"crime rates are on the decline but not in Chicago".
Stat about 54% of medicaid births.
Even if they don't grow up into crimes 54% of all births is scary.
http://www.catholicculture.org/culture/library/view.cfm?recnum=1446
lol the suburbs holds some of the wealthiest people ever. There is more crime in big cities than anywhere else, and a lot of people in big cities are low income because the cost of living is so high. So that makes no sense.
Is it bad for children to be raised without 2 parents for FINANCIAL reasons? What? Those aren't exactly correlated. Like I said, a sexworker could make more than most 2 parents could. Or 2 parents could both work minimum wage jobs totaling 48k per year, while someone who was a single parent could make 60k. What even. lol. SECOND, using that argument, the 2 parents do NOT have to get or ever be married. Or even stay together. 2 parents could separate and still raise 1 child. THIRD, you can still have a father figure if you don't have a father. People die, you know. Or separate. And FOURTH, I still don't think a father is really that necessary is. A caregiver is necessary obviously. I would be curious what you would think about lesbian couples adopting, or a woman leaving her male S/O for a woman because that will probably be my plan one day lol.
Medicaid is available to low income families. There could be 2 parents, 1 parent, full time workers, ones who don't even work. Both parents could work full time minimum wage jobs and get approved for medicaid.
54% of low income people having kids shouldn't be scary. If those low income people weren't working low income jobs, no one else would. I mean, what do you think people who work at McDonalds actually make? They are obviously low income. And we NEED people to work those jobs.
Not everyone wants to or plans to get married. Period.
That last link you gave is using data from the late 80s and the 90s. That data is 20 years old, pre-internet, and very outdated. The 90s were also HORRIBLE for crime- especially the early 90s, but things have changed. And using your argument, additionally, that was the peak of low income housing and the projects, and most have been torn down or gentrified. So they don't even exist anymore.
Kellydancer
06-21-2013, 05:20 PM
There is MANY bad things for having just one parent and financial is only one reason. Kids NEED both parents, not just one. If people are having babies on Medicaid they shouldn't have them to begin with! Common sense that many seem to lack. If one is working a low paying job common sense says not to have babies. Of course sex workers make more money but I would bet most on Medicaid aren't sex workers. Not to mention in Illinois the majority of babies on medicaid are from single moms because it is hard to get assistance if a couple is married. I don't care if people get married but then they shouldn't be having babies either they can't support. Of course parents die, but in most cases where dad is not around it's because he abandoned the woman.
Btw there are suburbs in Chicago with very low income and very high crime so this idea that the suburbs are better than city living is way off base. Many of the wealthiest people live in Chicago itself, especially the Gold Coast where condos go in the millions.
Aurora14
06-24-2013, 02:12 AM
I've stayed out of this conversation, but feel a need to jump in at this point. I think the thing that originally irked Kellydancer was this from the original post:
They make me mad. More than a handful of them are hardworking single mothers of one child each. They all make more than enough money to cover all of their expenses, their children's expenses, and then some. Some even have regs who basically give them allowances to the tune of a thousand or so. I know this based on the nice homes in the nice neighborhoods they live in and the fucking designer shit they tote everywhere (I'm all about discount, personally) and the convo's they carry on the phone with custies. I am not assuming anything about income. These are things I KNOW. WHAT KILLS ME is that all but one of these otherwise valiant women whom I otherwise respect wholly (god bless her) receive welfare, food stamps, and free Medicare!! FUCK! You're going to spend copious amounts of money, THOUSANDS UPON THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS on COSMETIC SURGERY and GUCCI/BEBE/LOUIS V and have TAXPAYERS PAY FOR YOUR ESSENTIALS?! Oh my god. In my opinion, and it's only my opinion, government aid is for people who are too poor to afford necessary things like FOOD, ANNUAL CHECKUPS, and FUCKING MILK. It's for people whose kids would otherwise basically starve and go without medical care for complete lack of funds. Christ on a fucking STICK it irrrrks me because A: I, unlike them, claim all my money and pay the taxes that give them these free things while they're out spending 2k on fucking purses and B: there ARE people who truly need that service and this country is already in debt! I know they all make more money than me - they sell way more dances than I do usually and collect the same amount of tips. Moreover, if you're using a third of what you make every shift to support an expensive powdery habit and complaining about "I got a baby to feed" WHAT THE FUCK is wrong there? Clip coupons for fuck's sake! Do not ever tell me about feeding your kid and getting new WIC or foodstamps while you stomp around in your LV shoes that cost you a month's worth of food! Gov't aid is not for comfort, it is not for getting ahead, it is for desperate need and lack of adequate income. There is no lack of adequate income here.
I was sent a letter from my local aid office about a year ago. They were advertising what assistance they give. In the state of Illinois if you are a single person with no dependents you have to make under $10,500 per year to qualify for any state aid. The qualifying amount goes up roughly $1,500 for each additional person. A link card (food stamps) starts at $250 for one person and goes up $200 for each additional person. I worked in a local pharmacy that accepted link and let me tell you, it's maddening to watch someone who has a $750 balance on their card buy candy, chips and soda (with link) ask if we sell blunts and then complain about their $2.00 copay for medication and proceed to get into their Hummer.
We understand that welfare has its place. And if run correctly could be a great program. But we see so much more abuse of the system while we have family members that can't get a single break. I have an aunt that has been fighting for disability and public aid for 4 years. She can barely walk and yes, her husband does work, but he doesn't make enough to cover medical expenses and support their family. We have a large family, so everyone tries to help her and her family. But we all have children too and can only do so much for her.
People accepting public aid should be doing so because they need to, not taking advantage and living lavish lives. PERIOD It may not bother some people that this is happening, but it should. We pay into these programs to help people having a rough spot in their life. Not to finance BA's and fancy upscale lifestyles.
ToeOfTheCamel
06-25-2013, 12:09 AM
Thank you, Aurora, for being the only person to have a relevant reply to this...Everyone else seemed to miss the point entirely, go way off-base, and get angry. I'm not anti-welfare, I don't judge people who actually NEED welfare, and I'm not jealous of anyone (wtf?). I'm pretty sure, regardless of how fired-up anyone got her, that Kellydancer feels the same....
GlamourRouge
06-25-2013, 01:17 AM
This is also like thread #4 on this exact issue in the last like 2 months (all other have been closed or usually removed completely). So no, no one was missing the point. Just bringing up things written in previous threads perhaps.
ToeOfTheCamel
06-25-2013, 10:03 AM
I'd thought my point was really clear. Everyone who replied after about the 1st page took this as an anti-welfare post and ran with that. That's why I quit the thread for a while. It wasn't even relevant anymore....
And there's probably good reasons for those previous threads being closed, so they probably shouldn't have been resurrected here.
Kellydancer
06-25-2013, 12:29 PM
Thank you, Aurora, for being the only person to have a relevant reply to this...Everyone else seemed to miss the point entirely, go way off-base, and get angry. I'm not anti-welfare, I don't judge people who actually NEED welfare, and I'm not jealous of anyone (wtf?). I'm pretty sure, regardless of how fired-up anyone got her, that Kellydancer feels the same....
Exactly. I have tried stating that no I am not anti-welfare but anti abusing the system and several attacked me by stating I must be opposed to welfare. I realize some people need it but if one is using drugs, buying fancy purses and the like while getting assistance they definitely don't need it. They should be using their money instead of buying drugs and purses on feeding their kids. I mentioned this before but last year while Christmas shopping I saw a woman trying to buy electronics using her Link Card (Illinois card for welfare and food stamps). When it was rejected she pulled out a wad of money. Someone might say I don't know her story but to me there is no story because if she has money to buy electronics (and she was buying a lot)she shouldn't be on assistance. At the same time I had just lost my job and didn't have a lot of money to buy many presents at all.
Btw, Aurora14, completely on the mark. I too have seen countless people who need assistance be denied while those who don't get accepted. I know people who are disabled and applied for help and were told they weren't disabled enough. Meanwhile I know people who could work and choose not to or those who work under the table get assistance and abuse the system. No I don't want to pay for these people, I'd rather pay for those who truly need help.