Global Skeptic
King
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2012
- Messages
- 618
That might not possible, you might be able to minimize it, but remove that is properly not possible.
Shaming the bottom-feeders.
- Thread starter Mouthwash
- Start date
- Status
That might not possible, you might be able to minimize it, but remove that is properly not possible.
Arctic Daishi
Warlord
True, it would be virtually impossible to eliminate all of those who abuse the system and the waste involved.
The OP seems to be under the impression that the people on welfare care that they're taking hard-working people's money. Certainly some of them do, and those are the ones who work hard to become self-sufficient, but those aren't the people who are going to be on welfare for months, and these people don't need to be constantly reminded of their benefactors. However, those who don't care and just want "a free lunch," likely won't care, regardless of how much you rub it in their face.
Like I said, this is a question for behaviour economics.
Formaldehyde
Both Fair And Balanced
What do you think was done decades ago for the most part?
BornInCantaloup
Agent of Chaos
Using shame as a social incentive is an interesting idea but I doubt the conditions are met, nowadays, any place, for it to work properly.
Shame is opposed to honour. In a society that honour structures (e.g. feudal), then shame could, conceivably, be a driving force (even though a negative one).
However, honour has long lost its place in our societies, as a sentiment, as a value, as a concept. Honourless societies are also shameless and, thus, shame can't ever be a driving force to them.
Homo economicus... do you feel shame or honour? No, of course not, for you are rational and driven by wealth.
ps: and don't mistake pride for honour
Shame is opposed to honour. In a society that honour structures (e.g. feudal), then shame could, conceivably, be a driving force (even though a negative one).
However, honour has long lost its place in our societies, as a sentiment, as a value, as a concept. Honourless societies are also shameless and, thus, shame can't ever be a driving force to them.
Homo economicus... do you feel shame or honour? No, of course not, for you are rational and driven by wealth.
ps: and don't mistake pride for honour
Then the rich should stop taking other people's money and let them keep their own.
We keep trying that. But then idiots keep trying to enact policies like drug testing and shaming the recipients.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
You've obviously never eaten the stuff the Army calls 'food'.
They change your degree to liberal arts until you get clean.
And I love the 'the rich steal your money' thing that's going on here. Very funny indeed.
Presumably it at least saves you a couple dollars per day on coffee?
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Army coffee is the kind of coffee a spoon will stand up in without support...and then melt if its left in the coffee too long.
I rather pay for generic Folgers and a cheap ass coffee maker and drink that to be honest.
Again, imagine the worst restaurant food you've ever had..... and realize its worse than that.
I has gotten better in recent years, but man, it's the kind of stuff that would make Gordon Ramsey go ballistic. It's pretty bad. For example, when the Army initially came out with it's field ration meal; the MRE (Meal Ready to Eat) we always call them Meals Refused by Ethiopians.
He-ey! I have fond memories of the dehydrated pork! And the chocolate paste we used to make by grouping our accessory packets together... just, well okay not yummy but hey, it worked. 
EDIT: Ahh, memories! http://www.mreinfo.com/reviews/mre/1982-pork-patty.html
EDIT: Ahh, memories! http://www.mreinfo.com/reviews/mre/1982-pork-patty.html
Proving you don't need drugs to engage in altering perception of reality.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
I'm pretty sure that doing drugs is a pre-requisite for a liberal arts degree, Jolly. But I don't disagree with your premise in practice.
He-ey! I have fond memories of the dehydrated pork! And the chocolate paste we used to make by grouping our accessory packets together... just, well okay not yummy but hey, it worked.
EDIT: Ahh, memories! http://www.mreinfo.com/reviews/mre/1982-pork-patty.html
Yeah, the Pork Pattie was pretty awful. Only thing I ever thought that was worth eating was the John Wayne bar.
And it's sad, 'cause young soldiers today have no idea wth that was.
2 of the 4 steps in the legal research and writing process work better if you are under the influence. The other two steps require sobriety.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Reminds me of an old episode of 'WKRP in Cincinnati' where one DJ got high and the other got drunk and they measured reaction times. Funny stuff.
Berzerker
Deity
I remember that episode, just not the 2 participants
anyway, seems to me like a violation of the 4th amendment probable cause requirement and its unreasonable.
anyway, seems to me like a violation of the 4th amendment probable cause requirement and its unreasonable.
MobBoss
Off-Topic Overlord
Doesn't apply, its not an investigation, search or seizure. Again, its voluntary based upon reciprocity of those receiving aid. Nothing more than simple Quid Pro Quo.
Old Hippy
Deity
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2011
- Messages
- 3,606
seems the knee jerk reaction is 'drug test them' while there are probaly more unemployed sleeping in after staying up all night playing computer games, should we start checking their PC time, in case they are spending our hard earned tax dollars on games, maybe their libary cards too, to make sure they are not reading to many books every week...
FriendlyFire
Codex WMDicanious
Sure. While we are at it, lets add in those with Government guaranteed student loans still outstanding.
I mean we gotta be consistent, right?
But I though Republicans are against any sort of "background checks" especially for "freedom fighters" in Iran or Afghanistan. 2nd Admendment rights and all that ?
Berzerker
Deity
these drug tests are investigations searching for and seizing evidence of illegal drug use without probable cause, getting a subsidy doesn't nullify the 4th amendment
Perfection
The Great Head.
People can be on drugs and still truly in need. To make aid contingent on that is going to prevent it from going to people who need it, and isn't going to stop those who don't need it.
You're not going to save money because you have to enforce this with drug testing programs, and you're going to cut off people who truly need the assistance from receiving it.
- Status
