Plea for help

[Nicole_in_somd]

We're not opening up anything; we're shutting down the lazy, irresponsible, unstable people who drop their kids off on somoene else because they don't want or can't take care of them anymore. Period!

No one is telling you "how" to raise your kids, per se. It's not a matter of "put them to bed at this time; discipline them this way; etc." It's basic criteria to determine if you have the fundamentals of being a parent and being able to provide for your family. Period!

Oh to answer your question. No I do not recieve nor have I ever recieved welfare. I make well into the 6 figures all on my own. I have two kids that I support all on my own as well.

 

[Nicole_in_somd]

I due time CC, in due time.

Our rights are being chiseled away one by one. Thanks to dumbazzes that think like you, will we soon have none.

Exactly my point. Do not take the rights away from everyone because of others. If welfare is a problem deal with that.

 

[crabcake]

I due time CC, in due time.

Our rights are being chiseled away one by one. Thanks to dumbazzes that think like you, will we soon have none.

You would still have the right to have kids ... pump 'em out like a pez dispenser for all I care. Just don't come crying to me or the government to take care of your problems when you can't. :shrug: It's not about stripping people of their rights; it's about making people accountable for their actions. If you choose to screw, don't screw me by becoming a leech on society. :shrug:

 

[crabcake]

Where did I say that? I had enough sense to plan for my retirement. I could retire now if I wanted to.

Also I am aganist lifers on welfare too. I do not think families should be allowed to stay on welfare or have kid after kid either. I do have a problem with the government stepping in to evaluate if I am allowed to have kids. Even if it is only for people that may think they are going to ask for assitance down the road or not it will not stop there.

You will also have to deal with the religious leaders and communites. Maybe I am not making my self clear I do not like it anymore than you do.

Franklin Roosevelt first set up welfare during the Great Depression. Because the people were starving and riots were strating to rise everywhere.

In order to prevent a revolution, Roosevelt e started the welfare system to prevent the American government from being overthrown.

What would happen if all the people currently receiving public assistance decided to band together and riot because of this screening? Not just them but what about the Catholic Church? Or other religions? You say they do not matter, yes they do and if you think about it more you will realize to what extent they do.

I will not get into a debate about what to do about these women, because I would need to do more research on the subject, check the statistics out and evaluate alternatives before I assume anything.

Also, How do they get welfare? Well, if you need welfare you have to prove it. This should require an even more laborious process then we have today. While you don’t just go up and say I have a kid and I want a check and food stamps and poof there it is but it could be restrictive even more.

So if you want to do something then why not at the process? Welfare, education, business subsidies and bailouts, infrastructure, job training and placement these are not things guaranteed by the Constitution or the Bill of Rights so work it from there.

There is actually an incentive for low-income women to have children out of wedlock. There is a disincentive for people to find work, gain better skills, because they lose their welfare benefits.

Reform for our welfare was and still underway. You can’t ban it because there are people out there that really need it. But you can set the time on welfare even stricter. You can make the people involved attend job training and placement and no repeat offenders after so many times.

What role does religion play in ensuring someone has demonstrated sufficient responsibility to parent? Religion and government are separate entities. You can go to the church for your assistance if you need it and didn't "pass the criteria" Uncle Sam imposes to get welfare. But religious preference isn't one of the criteria I suggested in my proposal. :shrug:

 

[crabcake]

Exactly my point. Do not take the rights away from everyone because of others. If welfare is a problem deal with that.

How many times do I have to post it? You don't lose the right to have kids ... you just give up access to public assistance if you don't get a "license".

People drive cars every day without a license ... they still drive, but they get in trouble if they get caught.

Don't you think that people who fail to adequately provide for their own flesh and blood should also be penalized?

"Welfare" isn't a problem. People are the problem because they are dependent on others to clean up their messes, fix their problems, provide for their families when they don't want to, etc. So yes, let's "fix the problem" and fix people!

 

[sockgirl77]

I'm thirsty. Gevalia anyone?

 

[Nicole_in_somd]

I am not out to change your mind. You have the right to your opinion just as I am to mine. I am out to voice my opinion.

Originally Posted by Nicole_in_somd
do you really think that your tax dollars are supporting all those people on welfare?

Uhh, yea! I pay taxes. Taxes pay for assistance programs (as well as a plethora of other things). Do you think the gov't pulls money for welfare out of it's ass?


Did I even come close to giving you the impression I think the government pulls it out of their ass? A small portion of your tax dollar along with all the other unhappy tax payers. Let me rephrase that. How much tax do you think you pay towards welfare in a given year?


Why is everything so extreme with you? Let’s talk about this logically.

I'm not "extreme". I'm talking about real situations with real potential solutions. You didn't offer one except to say " what about my freedom of religion" ... what does your religion have to do with the government? NADA ... liberals make damn sure of that.

You are offering your solution and I am responding to that. What is the point of you stating you solution if no one can comment back or ask questions? As a women and a mother I feel strongly about my right to have children. That is where my problem is.

You are proposing that the government screen me as a fit parent. So what will that entail?

It entails a review of your mental, physical, financial, emotional status as well as classes in parenting. Can you provide a stable home for a child? Can you pay for daycare? Food? Medical care? etc? Do you have a stable employment history? Do you have a criminal record? etc ... I didn't draft an application during the luncheon today, mind you ... but hearing about the abuse and neglect sure got me thinking about it.

I think that is a great idea to offer classes in parenting. Don’t they do that already?
These are great ideas but no in the sense where it can prohibit you from having children. If they could afford all this at the time of the screening then what would be the purpose? You said the purpose of the screening is for those that do not file will be denied benefits. So if at the time they passed then later need to apply they would have to go through the entire process again? More government red tape. More tax payers money on a useless program. It just will not work out the way you think it will. This will only cause more problems. Possible legal suits and would be almost impossible to mange.


You will have to have funding to start this program up and sustain it. How much do you think that will cost?

I had to actually work this afternoon, so I didn't have time to research salaries, supplies, application printing costs, space needs, county/city/state/federal roles and responsibilities, etc. But I'm going to take a stab and say it'll be around the same or less than we spend in welfare addicts, and even if it's more, the end result is a more educated generation of parents who are more responsible in terms of providing for their own children, and THAT is something I'd be okay with my tax dollars paying for vs some lazy government leech.

Then come back to me when you have done your research and have the data to back that up. Because if you instill a program like this it will not eliminate the welfare system. It will only be another useless program and double the work. If you want educated parents fine that is a great idea. But why not make it mandatory as a requirement to receive short term welfare assistance? Not all parents on welfare are bad parents. Have programs that will work directly with the welfare recipients. Because trying to anticipate future recipients is not going to work.

What type of personnel will be needed to run this program? What will be the requirements for the jobs and how much do you think that will cost?


See previous response.


Your previous response did not answer this. Who should the personnel consist of? Doctors, Psychologist, psychiatrist? At what price do you think this will cost?

What should be the criteria of passing and failing?

See earlier answer.
Another cop out

Who should determine that?
Societal common sense. It's not rocket science ... can't support your kid? Oh well, you don't get to have one. Have a criminal history of physical abuse/assault? Tough luck! Keep your pecker in your pants!

Not logical. How exactly are you going to keep them from reproducing? What is next mandatory sterilization?

Again what happens if the parent passes said screening and still ends up as a loser parent and on welfare? That is costing us twice as much as before.

As I said before, few people just decide one day to become a government leech. Those who are chronic teet-suckers have similiar qualities that are not too hard to identify as potential indicators. That's not to say that a person who "passes" won't hit hard times. But "hard times" are one thing; being a lazy teet sucker is something entirely different.


But then you fall under the discrimination problems and you know as well as I do that will be the first thing they will protest. You are trying to keep them down. Just like Aids. Some are complaining that was a man made virus to keep the black man from reproducing. Not insinuating that black families are the only participants of welfare but using that as an example.

Again I am for getting Welfare under control but that is not in my opinion the way to go.

 

[Nicole_in_somd]

You would still have the right to have kids ... pump 'em out like a pez dispenser for all I care. Just don't come crying to me or the government to take care of your problems when you can't. :shrug: It's not about stripping people of their rights; it's about making people accountable for their actions. If you choose to screw, don't screw me by becoming a leech on society. :shrug:

It is not about making people responsible for their actions. Because they ones that are taking advantage of the system now will be able to snake through anything that program would be set up to stop. They know how to work around it.

 

[Nicole_in_somd]

What role does religion play in ensuring someone has demonstrated sufficient responsibility to parent? Religion and government are separate entities. You can go to the church for your assistance if you need it and didn't "pass the criteria" Uncle Sam imposes to get welfare. But religious preference isn't one of the criteria I suggested in my proposal. :shrug:

You are kidding me right? You really do not see the connection with religion and procreation? You also naive if you believe the government and religion are separate entities. The Catholic church alone has more pull in the governement then you think. Go forth and multiply will ring out loudly in all religions. You are trespassing on tricky grounds with that one.

 

[Nicole_in_somd]

I'm thirsty. Gevalia anyone?

I am looking for a nice hot and spicy bloody mary. With lots of hot sauce

 

[sockgirl77]

I am looking for a nice hot and spicy bloody mary. With lots of hot sauce

Eew. Will that rot your teeth?

 

[CandaceMM]

I'm sorry to interrupt, but I think that Wenchy's post was hysterical. HAHAHAHA!

 

[Nicole_in_somd]

Eew. Will that rot your teeth?

but at least it has tomato juice in it that is healthy for ya.

 

[Nicole_in_somd]

I'm sorry to interrupt, but I think that Wenchy's post was hysterical. HAHAHAHA!

I love wenchy. Great posts and great sense of humor

 

[crabcake]

Uhh, yea! I pay taxes. Taxes pay for assistance programs (as well as a plethora of other things). Do you think the gov't pulls money for welfare out of it's ass?


You are offering your solution and I am responding to that. What is the point of you stating you solution if no one can comment back or ask questions? As a women and a mother I feel strongly about my right to have children. That is where my problem is.



I think that is a great idea to offer classes in parenting. Don’t they do that already?
These are great ideas but no in the sense where it can prohibit you from having children. If they could afford all this at the time of the screening then what would be the purpose? You said the purpose of the screening is for those that do not file will be denied benefits. So if at the time they passed then later need to apply they would have to go through the entire process again? More government red tape. More tax payers money on a useless program. It just will not work out the way you think it will. This will only cause more problems. Possible legal suits and would be almost impossible to mange.

Then come back to me when you have done your research and have the data to back that up. Because if you instill a program like this it will not eliminate the welfare system. It will only be another useless program and double the work. If you want educated parents fine that is a great idea. But why not make it mandatory as a requirement to receive short term welfare assistance? Not all parents on welfare are bad parents. Have programs that will work directly with the welfare recipients. Because trying to anticipate future recipients is not going to work.

Your previous response did not answer this. Who should the personnel consist of? Doctors, Psychologist, psychiatrist? At what price do you think this will cost?


Another cop out


Not logical. How exactly are you going to keep them from reproducing? What is next mandatory sterilization?

But then you fall under the discrimination problems and you know as well as I do that will be the first thing they will protest. You are trying to keep them down. Just like Aids. Some are complaining that was a man made virus to keep the black man from reproducing. Not insinuating that black families are the only participants of welfare but using that as an example.

Again I am for getting Welfare under control but that is not in my opinion the way to go.

You must've glazed over the part where I said I thought about this during a luncheon today. I apologize that I didn't take the afternoon off work to draft a master plan ready to put into practice tomorrow that fully meets your expectations and answers every question that might pop in your brain. I'll do better next time.

I posted it for discussion which is what we're doing. Do I have all the answers? No. But I have suggestions, which as of yet, you've not offered. YOU put something better together and come back to me when you at least offer a possible solution.

 

[Dougstermd]

here is one


I need some things for my new home. I just moved outa my tent camper and now I need some home furnishings.

1) a nice used 50 inch tv
2) surround sound
3) a bed for my daughters room
4) some curtains
5) oh screw it you get the point I need everthing

 

[sockgirl77]

You must've glazed over the part where I said I thought about this during a luncheon today. I apologize that I didn't take the afternoon off work to draft a master plan ready to put into practice tomorrow that fully meets your expectations and answers every question that might pop in your brain. I'll do better next time.

I posted it for discussion which is what we're doing. Do I have all the answers? No. But I have suggestions, which as of yet, you've not offered. YOU put something better together and come back to me when you at least offer a possible solution.

May I offer a possible solution?

 

[crabcake]

It is not about making people responsible for their actions. Because they ones that are taking advantage of the system now will be able to snake through anything that program would be set up to stop. They know how to work around it.

It IS about people accepting responsibility for their actions. And if they won't do it willingly, you force them to be accountable by removing the crutch they depend on to continue -- welfare. It's not rocket science. It's kind of hard to erase a criminal record, bad credit, poor employment history ... faking a stable residence is probably the least difficult of all the things I've mentioned, but it's still traceable by tax records. But they can't weasel into a system that isn't available to them.

You keep saying that the government is too involved, but all these things are areas the government already has a hand in, in terms of records. It's not hard to do a search of these databases to determine someone's viability to provide a stable environment. Hell, the government spends more time processing passports for people to travel on vacation or for work than they do verifying someone is a viable parent.

 

[Dougstermd]

It IS about people accepting responsibility for their actions. And if they won't do it willingly, you force them to be accountable by removing the crutch they depend on to continue -- welfare. It's not rocket science. It's kind of hard to erase a criminal record, bad credit, poor employment history ... faking a stable residence is probably the least difficult of all the things I've mentioned, but it's still traceable by tax records. But they can't weasel into a system that isn't available to them.

You keep saying that the government is too involved, but all these things are areas the government already has a hand in, in terms of records. It's not hard to do a search of these databases to determine someone's viability to provide a stable environment. Hell, the government spends more time processing passports for people to travel on vacation or for work than they do verifying someone is a viable parent.

that av is confusing me.

That is the one Morgy used last Turkey Season

 

[BS Gal]

I've seen quite a few people go on disability that honestly deserved it, had worked long and hard and had a bad stroke of health. Then I've seen others that just get on the disability bandwagon and don't really deserve it. They are healthy, but decide to take the easy way out. It's not only people that have kids that are dragging us down. Hell, I could go on disability if I wanted. My pride keeps me from doing so.