History_Buff
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2001
- Messages
- 6,529
You realize that this exact sort of system (either a Guaranteed Minimum Income or a Negative Income Tax) was supported by one of your favorite economists?
Shaming the bottom-feeders.
- Thread starter Mouthwash
- Start date
- Status
You realize that this exact sort of system (either a Guaranteed Minimum Income or a Negative Income Tax) was supported by one of your favorite economists?
Because we're a modern, industrialized, wealthy nation who should be capable of lending a helping hand to those in need. I won't go off on my usual tangent about how it should be at the state rather than federal level, though. For the purposes of this thread, just accept that we have the means and therefore have a societal obligation to lend that helping hand.
Oh, sorry then. I freely admit one of my greatest online weaknesses is not getting online sarcasm or subtlety. I usually assume most comments are about as direct as a 2x4 to the head. Unless you're just saying this after the fact...
History_Buff
Deity
- Joined
- Aug 12, 2001
- Messages
- 6,529
How is that a tangible benefit?
SS-18 ICBM
Oscillator
I was addressing the main topic, not the notion of drug-testing for welfare recipients. As for that, what exactly are the figures for drug use among them?
I suppose it could mean less complaints about welfare, and thus less lost votes for those who support such programs. Maybe even extending such programs would cost less political capital.
Puck Nutty
Prince
Where do you draw the line? I would bet that a single person on welfare receives less benefit from public services than a couple with 4 kids attending public school. Why single out the unemployed or those on disability? Is it just the thought of someone receiving a physical cheque from the state that makes it seem necessary?
While we're at it, why not all public employees, including elected officials, judges, etc. Heck, it'll be a drug test-a-palooza.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
I was actually quite satisfied with the qualifications for receiving the assistance, and how often it had to be renewed. There was an automatic trigger so that after I got a raise, and combined with the EBT savings, I was able to start adding to my savings account, the aid declined until I had saved enough money and made enough money that it ended entirely.
Plus I found out that a local farmers' market would match my EBT amount with their special token things, so I was getting double the help with buying veggies and other fresh and local stuff. But that was after I moved, my rent went down, and I finished paying off an ER bill, so by then I was already through the worst of it.
I worked to put that food in my mouth, thank you very much. It's the system of using money as the universal exchanger of labor for commodities that you and your ilk so insist upon that required me to get additional aid.
I'm with JR on that one. Start with those on corporate welfare, and then work your way down.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
I agree; however, the problem is identifying those truly in need as opposed to the leech that just simply wants to suck away the life of the rest of us for no return or gain.
The levels of fraud found in these programs is beyond atrocious.
So what to do?
Sometimes you can be insightful, Borachio. I will neither confirm nor deny any accusation of my motives over making this thread.
Well, what I do is stew about my neighbors who abuse it and about them on #fiftychat. Not sure what else is to be done.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
More willingness to aid and support the programs involved.
Not sure how you couldn't connect that.
I meant doing something actually effective about it.
Goodfella
Showing results for
Yeah, we don't need you to. The motives are pretty clear. Off the top of my head:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=12324701&postcount=17
Too bad that other thread got deleted.
No cool brah.
Cheezy the Wiz
Socialist In A Hurry
Fixed that for you.
Yes, because money is the universal medium of exchange. It is the commodification of one's labor, used to obtain commodities, and then used again to supply one with their (supposedly) equivalent labor value, after work has been performed.
Problem is, wages aren't actually equivalent to the entirety of one's labor value performed, because most of that gets stolen by the capitalist. You are actually paid a very small amount of the labor value you exert.
You have apparently missed the part where I am a communist?
As if those believing that government aid is being wasted on drugs are going to believe the government saying it isn't.
Borachio
Way past lunacy
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2012
- Messages
- 26,698
Oh I'm impressed!
If attention is what you're after, attention is what you got and no mistake.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Contrary to what you believe, I don't think it would be as much a waste as you think; and I think it'd actually do quite a bit to quell people complaining about people on welfare.
'Course if you think actions that could help put such aid programs in a more positive light are worthless, then /oh well.
Well, I'm pretty sure they believe how much fraud and waste are involved in those programs.
Goodfella
Showing results for
If you check the figure I gave on the previous page then you'll see that these people you mention are pretty much just ignorant and I'm doubtful that there's much we can do to change their minds. At the same time, thousands of people who aren't on drugs and may have never been on drugs in their entire lives would be subjected to an invasive search and seizure.
- Status
