Supreme Court rules against Rick Scott
Forums › General Discussion › Supreme Court rules against Rick Scott-
Cazzo wrote:
White folks got by on religious and private charities and state and local programs. We turned our back on entire ethnic groups and left them to fend for themselves in their own segregated communities. Many children starved, many older people died in the streets. Then the dust bowl and Great Depression happened and all of those small local charities collapsed and never fully recovered. Millions of young, able-bodied men scraping for survival and no jobs to be had. So the federal government put them to work, building projects like the Hoover damn. We decided as a society that we needed a welfare system better equipped to handle the inevitable future economic downturns in a way that wasn't such a shock to the system...YOU wrote:
Let me rephrase. We had no national welfare system for 150 years. How did we ever survive?✂️
-
...Smooth out the inevitable peaks and valleys of the capitalist market cycle. We went even further in the 1960's when we finally were forced to stop turning our backs on the needs of ethnic and racial minorities. Perhaps too far, some say. So we pulled back some in sweeping reforms in 1998. And here we are. Welfare costs are higher now because the middle class is imploding. That's by design, and how it will remain until the captains of industry decide The American worker is worth investing in again. Cause and effect.
-
⌖꓄ɧɑ☠Ᏸυʈϲɧɑ⌖ wrote:
Of course there are limits in welfare...in every state. That's just silly propaganda. Tell me your state and I'll even find the info for you. This is the problem with the welfare "debate". One side seems to be arguing with pre-1998 reform talking points and anecdotal evidence, the other side is arguing with facts.Well since since its on the forum why not. The problem with welfare in my home state is there is no limitation to it.
-
Fnord sry.
-
I'm not Addi. I guarantee you there is a lifetime limit on benefits, a work requirement and strict asset and means testing. You are provably wrong, yet you choose to remain willfully and stubbornly ignorant. How's that working out for you? Sounds like not too well, I'll bet your tax contribution is a fart in the wind compared to mine. No one is living the high life off of your hard work, that's for sure. I'll give you the same advice I gave Mack. If you think you see fraud, report it. If you sit on your ass and do nothing, you are part if the problem.
-
Repot what that theres too many people sitting on their asses while i work to pay for that. Im no millionaire but i do pretty well. I pay my taxes and I'll be damed if i continually watch people debate that theres a limitation on it where i live. You try and take on the state and say that too many people are on welfare see how far that gets you.
-
Okay Butcha, here you go:
In your state, there is a 21-month lifetime limit on Temporary Family Assistance (TFA), or cash benefits. The maximum benefit for a family of 3 is $543 a month.
SAGA, or cash assistance for the physically disabled, has one program for the temporarily disabled that has a time limit of 6 months. The maximum benefit is $212 a month.
These are the only two cash assistance programs in your state. SNAP, which is a federally run program has a lifetime limit of 60 months. All of these programs are aggressively means and asset tested and have a work or job search requirement. You basically have to prove you have less than $3000 in cash and assets, not including your home, and your car must be worth less than $9500. Your income just be less than the poverty level for TFA and less than $500 per quarter for SAGA. This is not your grandfather's welfare system anymore.
-
⌖꓄ɧɑ☠Ᏸυʈϲɧɑ⌖ wrote:
Reporting welfare fraud would be beneficial to the state. I'm sure they wouldn't mind.Repot what that theres too many people sitting on their asses while i work to pay for that. Im no millionaire but i do pretty well. I pay my taxes and I'll be damed if i continually watch people debate that theres a limitation on it where i live. You try and take on the state and say that too many people are on welfare see how far that gets you.
-
Fnord:
These are the only two cash assistance programs in your state. SNAP, which is a federally run program has a lifetime limit of 60 months.
That's not accurate at all in Texas brother. I have no idea how it's done, but you can stay on SNAP longer than 60 months.
-
★fnord★ wrote:
Government assistance equaled the opportunity to work, not paying somebody for simply existing. I believe far more people would be on board with government assistance if people were working for the money they were getting just like i am.Cazzo wrote:
✂️ So the federal government put them to work, building projects like the Hoover damn. We decided as a society that we needed a welfare system better equipped to handle the inevitable future economic downturns in a way that wasn't such a shock to the system...YOU wrote:
Let me rephrase. We had no national welfare system for 150 years. How did we ever survive?✂️
-
I imagine that's true if you are dishonesty gaming the system as you've said your girlfriend is. I was more trying to address Butcha's assertion that people in his state can legally sit on their butts and do nothing from cradle to grave. In his state and in Texas, apparently if you meet the work requirements, have a dependant child and remain broke as shit the government will make sure you have the means to at least keep your child from starving. If you sit on your butt and don't at least pretend to take steps towards self-sufficiency, or the government finds out that you have a $45,000 SUV in your boyfriend's name...it's adios. At least that's how the law is written. I do know some temporary exceptions were made due to the recession.
-
4nick8r wrote:
"[If] Government assistance equaled the opportunity to work, not paying somebody for simply existing. I believe far more people would be on board with government assistance if people were working for the money they were getting just like i am."You're absolutely right, it would be great if we could do that again like the CCC and the WPA programs of the 1930s. We have crumbling infrastructure all over the country and unemployed able-bodied young men and women looking for steady work. We just need to introduce them to each other. Only problem is that cries from the right of the dreaded bogeyman of socialism would be deafening in today's political climate, making it impossible to get off the ground. Not to mention that reducing unemployment would tighten up the labor market and drive wages up, and nobody wants that. Well, nobody who owns our politicians at least.
-
Wait wait wait; the people that aren't working today, is because they don't want to. Longest I've been out of work is 4 hours. It may not have been what I wanted or where I wanted, but it paid bills and put food in my family's belly
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
4 hours? I know for a fact that's not true. Apparently there was a time when you were costing the taxpayers $100+ a day to feed, house and clothe you. If there is anyone who should understand that life does not always go according to plan, it's you. And before you cry foul...if you want keep bring up your personal anecdotes to argue that this country should not help it's own citizens, then I will use your personal anecdotes to argue otherwise. The truth is that, contrary to your gut feeling on the subject, there are 3 people looking for work for every job available. Conservative and liberal economists alike agree on the fact that there are currently not enough jobs for the workforce we have. If the basic information you base your opinions on is wrong, what does it say about your opinions?Wait wait wait; the people that aren't working today, is because they don't want to. Longest I've been out of work is 4 hours. ✂️
-
Ok, so it's off-topic, but I have to ask...Mack, if you feel that strongly about welfare & disapprove of the way your girlfriend is living (cheating the system or whatever), why are you still with your girlfriend?
-
★fnord★ wrote:
True, but every city I know of has graffiti that needs to be painted over, trash that needs be picked up, vacant lots that could be weeded. The list goes on and on of services a city could use, that they can't afford to pay the city workers to do. Why not put people to work who are already collecting a paycheck. Oh wait, you answered that: politicians.4nick8r wrote:
"[If] Government assistance equaled the opportunity to work, not paying somebody for simply existing. I believe far more people would be on board with government assistance if people were working for the money they were getting just like i am."✂️like the CCC and the WPA programs of the 1930s. We have crumbling infrastructure all over the country. ✂️ Not to mention that reducing unemployment would tighten up the labor market and drive wages up, and nobody wants that. Well, nobody who owns our politicians at least.
-
★fnord★ wrote:
It's not fair to blame the right or the left. Every politician realizes when they cut funding for anything it's going to affect who votes for them. We need politicians who are willing to do what's right, not just what they think will get them reelected. Both parties are equally guilty in my opinion.4nick8r wrote:
"[If] Government assistance equaled the opportunity to work, not paying somebody for simply existing. I believe far more people would be on board with government assistance if people were working for the money they were getting just like i am."✂️Only problem is that cries from the right of the dreaded bogeyman of socialism would be deafening in today's political climate, making it impossible to get off the ground. ✂️
-
4nick8r wrote: ✂️Both parties are equally guilty in my opinion.
All good points. I especially like your idea of putting people to work cleaning up graffiti and blight. I think it would have a direct and substantial positive effect on economic growth in the communities that it was tried in, not to mention keep people in a work-a-day mindset and ready to re-enter the job market when more jobs become available. Although ask people of both major political parties if the government should be the employer of last resort, and I think you'll find a distinct split along party lines. There is radical disagreement as to the question of exactly what the role of government should be, that is undeniable. You'd think we would have figured this big picture stuff out by now, but for some reason we have to keep re-litigating concepts that were considered more or less settled by both parties 30 years ago. Strange times we live in. -
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
That's a pile of bullshit.Wait wait wait; the people that aren't working today, is because they don't want to
-
༺☠Ꮹཞ༏ཀ☠༻ wrote:
And based on absolutely no evidence.ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
That's a pile of bullshit.Wait wait wait; the people that aren't working today, is because they don't want to
-
☣ 🎸ӈɪƖƖßıƖƖγ🎸☣ wrote:
༺☠Ꮹཞ༏ཀ☠༻ wrote:
And based on absolutely no evidence.ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
That's a pile of bullshit.Wait wait wait; the people that aren't working today, is because they don't want to
Want to start at $14 an hour? McDonald's Odessa is hiring. Want to start at $16 an hour? Pioneer drilling has 3 rigs stacked cause they can't find enough people. Job I'm on right now pays $390 a day and we need 17 more people just for the west Texas district (contractors). Don't like hot weather? Dickinson ND mcdonalds pays $16 an hour to start and the company I contract to needs 22 people there paying $450 a day. If your 5 years past graduation and you're making minimum wage, it's your own damn fault. Not mine.
-
Mystery wrote:
Ok, so it's off-topic, but I have to ask...Mack, if you feel that strongly about welfare & disapprove of the way your girlfriend is living (cheating the system or whatever), why are you still with your girlfriend?
I still don't see her as cheating the system. She is following the rule, I just don't agree with the rule. But, she's the best thing that ever happened to me other than my daughters. She doesn't let the money go to my head, always there if I need to talk, and is UNBELIEVABLY hot!!!! She helped me get through a rough divorce and I'll be eternally grateful. And a few other reasons 😈😈😈
-
Lol, I was looking at Dickinson, ND demographics and I found this review:
"I moved here awhile back for a job and I regret it everyday. Thankfully, I'm moving away soon. This town is so conservative and xenophobic it consistently leaves me amazed. I have lived many places in my life, mostly small-sized cities, and I have never felt more uneasy anywhere. If you are not a Christian, a Republican or someone who thinks McDonalds is the best thing on the planet, then you probably won't fit in here. There has been outright hostility to me voicing some of my rather tame liberal views. I have never been treated like that. ✂️Nightlife? Nope, unless you count a couple worthless bars. In fact, the one and only time my wife and I went into one of these places some drunk meathead grabbed her butt within 5 minutes. I am not kidding. On the other hand, if you are a conservative, and you dislike people who are not White and Christian than this might be a good place for you."
Sounds like a regular Galt's Gulch
-
Like I said, may not be where you want to be, but works out there. Did he mention what the unemployment rate was? In Odessa last year, it was 2.9%. The lowest in the nation.
-
I'm on a drilling rig outside of Carlsbad NM now. Working 12 hour shifts 7 days a week. I'll be here a minimum of 20 days. You think I wanted to hug my little girls and tell them I'll be back when the jobs done? Fuck no! But, I know that it benefits them. This kind of money isn't available back home, so I go to where the work is. My point is that if a 35 year old uneducated convicted felon can make $390 a day, anybody can.
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
You were ranting two days ago about how she doesn't need assistance and that you are subsidizing her extravagent lifestyle in a way that she is not accurately reporting to the government. By everything you've said, her benefits are based on a pack of lies. That IS cheating the system. If you didn't personally know her and she wasn't like, super totally hot. If you read about her in the newspaper, you would think she was a giant scum-sucking leach and part of the problem with the entitlement culture. I sure do. You lament that people are living the good life off of your taxes. Those people are her!!! She probably sucks up your entire $15,000 tax liability.I still don't see her as cheating the system. She is following the rule, I just don't agree with the rule.✂️
-
I think I found a solution for you, Mack. It was staring you in the face this whole time. Your girlfriend needs to move to Dickinson, ND and get a job at McDonalds, and stop being a drain on society. If it's good enough for those other people on the welfare rolls then it's good enough for her, right? Tell me where I'm wrong.
-
★fnord★ wrote:
I think I found a solution for you, Mack. It was staring you in the face this whole time. Your girlfriend needs to move to Dickinson, ND and get a job at McDonalds, and stop being a drain on society. If it's good enough for those other people on the welfare rolls then it's good enough for her, right? Tell me where I'm wrong.
I didn't say she was gaming the system. She's following the rules exactly how they're written. I just believe the rules need to be changed.
-
Nowhere in the application does it ask how much your boyfriend makes. Doesn't ask if I put gas in her car. Doesn't ask what I pay for. Do I think it should? Yes. But as it's written, she's doing what the law says she can do.
-
ᎷᎪᏟᏦᎷᎬᏟᎻ ᎪᎠᎠ ᏦᎷ wrote:
It you are living together then the way the law is written, she is committing fraud. If not, there is a part of the application where she has to disclose assets and other income. All those designer clothes and bags, that $45,000 SUV. She's told the government about those assets and the money you give her? If you are not in the same household, the IRS considers everything you buy her gifts, or taxable income. From everything you've told me, she is clearly violating the law. She is a welfare fraud investigator's wet dream. Also if you are now in NM with that illegal gun, now you've got to watch out for every law officer, not just the Feds. I'd be scared shirtless if I were you on several fronts. I don't know how you do it.Nowhere in the application does it ask how much your boyfriend makes. Doesn't ask if I put gas in her car. Doesn't ask what I pay for.✂️
![[][]](https://turfwarsapp.com/img/app/ajax-forbutton.gif)
Purchase Respect Points NEW! · Support · Turf Map · Terms · Privacy
©2021 MeanFreePath LLC