With free money, why would anyone work in America?

reply to post by whatsecret


They should FINE women who keep having children without fathers or without the finance for them.

I am a woman and this isnt cruel. This would teach a very valueable lesson infact.

They should also make it so only women with enough savings or enough imput into the system meaning they worked prior to having babies can get benefits.

So its more of a hierachy. They should threaten vasectomys if women continue.

Im sorry to be harsh but there is worse things in life.

People should feel lucky to have 1 or 2 kids not have a brood. Its selfish ...

And if men refuse to work they should cancel their benefits and chuck them into another country and invite immigrants in who want to work.

Why all this pussy footing around..

Back in the early nineteen hundreds, a person could work at a mine or factory for five years and buy forty acres and build a house with their money earned. After that they could sell a little of what they produced on the land to pay for what they could not grow and for going out occasionally The land provided all the wood for heat, the wood for the house, and their food. A person only had to work about half as much as we do now. They had fun, they would go to barn dances and gatherings that cost hardly nothing. Could even make your own mead or wine. People call this new way of living their hobby nowadays.

reply to post by whatsecret


Our "leaders" are not socialists. Socialism is an economic system, not a form of government.

Obama is a neo-liberal.

"Liberalism is not socialism and never will be" Winston Churchill, Party candidate for the Liberal Party 1908.

Socialism is not free money, it is the workers ownership of the means of production.

People not understanding political, and economic systems, is how the Nazi's got voted into office. We need to learn from our history, not keep repeating it.

I think the most disgusting part of all of this is (as in the video) the overall attitude and "bragging" that girl did. It used to be that in situations of assistance.... ex - help a stranger change tire or whatever... a person getting help would be grateful. That vid showed them expecting it, almost demanding. Entitlement issues. Makes me want to vomit.

reply to post by luciddream

The thing is, while trying to cut down the bad apples, we will also cut down on the people that really need it to move on ahead.

I disagree.. It's not rocket science to figure out who can or cannot work for a living. On the other hand if nothing is done very soon everyone will be in a lot more trouble. America is broke, and it's time the young and healthy get off the tax payers backs. It's also time to hold the government accountable for wasting tax money. I just don't see any way of doing it though...

reply to post by Tankgirl


Its called being spoilt.

reply to post by FreedomEntered

yes she was a great example of a spoiled rotten one
Oh and she's going to teach her kids to have to same attitude.
Also the video was going over all the junk food fed to the poor kids, she could at least feed them decent real food since that's what it's for. Oh wait that will make me go into the whole obesity epidemic.

reply to post by Tankgirl


Yes, true its even quite cruel to these kids. I dont believe any hard working tax payer deserves to support such life as these.

reply to post by whatsecret


Young and Healthy can't find jobs they studied for because all the old people are still in the force!! My lab has 3 young people(under 30), rest 12-13 of them are above 50-60.


Im working under a person who is 59, has BSc from 1980s, weak in computers, slow, does not know the theory behind what he does, he is pretty much a robot, doing his work on memorized instinct and making 3-4x as much as me.

i have a BSc from 2009 and pretty much know the theory involving everything we do, as well as how to do them efficiently.


I guess they are on the field because they can't afford to retire.... its a messed up economy.

Originally posted by Flatfish
While I agree with everything you said, I truly believe that those who would cheat the system are stealing from us all and should be prosecuted for doing so without delay.

And punish them how? Take away their XBox? Put them in prison? Build workhouses?
No matter what you think of, it costs money, and it costs more money than just giving the lazy people the bare minimum.

However you look at this, the tax paying, working people will have to pay for the solution, and as the only real solution is a change in ethics and morals, that will take education and social change.

Originally posted by Flatfish
On the other hand, I don't see how the EBT could be the cause of the fraud you referred to and I don't believe that we should punish those who honestly need the help because of the bad deeds of those who would cheat the system.

I've noticed that a lot of people on ATS who scream about the social welfare systems are generally just selfish themselves, and think they should not have to contribute to their society at all. There are a lot of people in the USA who think they should not have to pay taxes for these systems, but they also refuse to accept that without these systems they would be paying far more in tax to prevent rioting, looting, violent crime, disease... these people only need to look back a couple of hundred years to see what society was like before social systems were available.

There were only two classes back then - those living in squalor, and those living in luxury. Most of those currently screaming about having to pay tax for social systems would themselves be living in squalor in a nation without those protections.

Originally posted by Flatfish
IMO, the only viable answer to the problem is strict enforcement of the rules and the funding to carry out said enforcement. Secondly, punishment must include jail time, especially for those who are defrauding the system on a mass scale or in the name of others.

And then you end up with 3 million more people in prison, and a hell of a lot more money having to be gathered in taxes to pay for it.
It costs less to have those 3 million out there claiming benefits than it will cost to put those three million people out of their homes and in a prison.

Originally posted by Flatfish
I truly believe that in the long run, we'll save money over what's being lost now to cheats while preserving the safety net for those who are down on their luck.

No you wouldn't.
This is a failure in basic economics.
If there are 3 million people defrauding the system right now (that's just a random number, I have no idea of the suggested statistics) and each of them is claiming $50 a week through fraud, and you then prosecute them and hold them accountable... you'll be paying police to arrest them, increased detention facilities, requiring expansion of police detention facilities, courts to process them, lawyers to argue the case - thousands of which will be deemed to be worthy of arguing and therefore costing thousands - judges to make the ruling, transport to the prison, a new prison to add to the already overcrowded and bloated US prison system, another few hundred thousand guards across the country, food, water and power for all those new inmates...

You see? You're locking someone up for fraud worth $50 a week, and you'll be wasting another $100 a week on the process of arresting and imprisoning them.

And then what happens when you release those 3 million people and they STILL cannot find work because they now have a criminal record?

The only way to fix this problem is through a change in morals and ethics in society. It should become a taboo to be claiming benefits when you don't need to be. People should have social pressure to be supporting themselves rather than sitting on their behind expecting others to pay for them.

And, this all takes investment in communities where there is no work.

It's great telling a load of poor people that they should be working, but they need a job to go to, and one that actually pays them more than a slave wage while a fat CEO makes the millions that SHOULD be going to the people actually doing the work.

Perfect example... The Walmart family is worth billions, and their staff make peanuts. The inequality is right there for all to see, but it's somehow admirable to make obscene amounts of money for doing absolutely nothing.

Originally posted by 0zzymand0s
reply to post by whatsecret

 

What is your argument? That Food Stamps are NOT a subsidy designed to stimulate demand for goods and services at street level?

Look - this is all rudimentary economic theory. The grocery stores, distribution centers, truckers, farmers, inspectors, et al - get paid. Their pay is used to cover their mortgage, rent, fuel, utilities, food, clothing, medical bills and entertainment expenses.Those dollars in turn circulate into the pockets of others, who meet their obligations. Eventually, everyone gets paid - including garage door installers* like you.

Less cash in circulation at street level, means less money in your pocket too. If there isn't any demand, no one hires, prices drop, and companies go out of business until equilibrium is reached.

You can giggle about it if you like, but that's how the actual economy works.

*or whatever it is you do.

And to answer your completely off topic question: My family volunteers time at a local Salvation Army kitchen several times a year, including Thanksgiving, and I'd rather give money to a junkie on the street than give a single dime to a fat cat who will drop it in a foreign account and pay no taxes on it.

Because even the black market cash economy benefits the cycle of debits and payments described above, whereas investments in off-shore accounts contribute nothing to my local economy.

edit on 14-5-2013 by 0zzymand0s because: (no reason given)

It is a failing economic theory as discussed here:

Are you seriously comparing the food stamp program to vandalism?

What is military spending then? Terrorism?