Is there a viable solution to getting people off lifetime govt assistance?

[JEDI]

Thx to Bill Clinton, there's now a 5yr limit on welfare.
unfortunately, moochers found another way. They are turning to SSI (social security disability).
I have a learning disability -> pay me

one easy way is mandatory birth control for those on govt assistance.
stop the creation of the next generation.
but that's not viable.

and since that's not viable, sterilization is def out of the question.


So any viable solutions?

 

[ImpulsE69]

This subject just reminds me why I hate humanity.

 

[IronWing]

Maybe teach these freeloading asshats to post in the correct forum?

 

[JEDI]

Maybe teach these freeloading asshats to post in the correct forum?

damn it.. thought I posted in Politics.
mods- please move. thx

 

[Jaskalas]

Welfare for labor & education / training?
Perhaps it should be a very thorough work program.

Essentially what I'm saying is if you want a roof and some food... that it's provided in exchange for labor program participation. And no, nothing like what we have now. Don't feed people to be unemployed and begging private employers. Participants are enlisted into a labor service. Government employs them.

 

[Rakehellion]

So any viable solutions?

So this thread has literally no content except "I hate X group of people. Please pay attention to me."

Neat.

 

[1sikbITCH]

Thx to Bill Clinton, there's now a 5yr limit on welfare.
unfortunately, moochers found another way. They are turning to SSI (social security disability).
I have a learning disability -> pay me

one easy way is mandatory birth control for those on govt assistance.
stop the creation of the next generation.
but that's not viable.

and since that's not viable, sterilization is def out of the question.


So any viable solutions?

SSI is not Social Security Disability (which is paid to you out of your own retirement fund). SSI is Supplemental Security Income. If you collect SSI you are getting a welfare benefit funded by taxpayer money. You have been found to be disabled but have not paid into Social Security because instead of working and trying to be a productive citizen you put all your energy into exploiting the system. So instead of Social Security paying you back your own money they are paying you back using MY MONEY. It is reasonable to be pissed off about this; I work in the field, I'm normally pretty liberal socially but I too am pissed off with the current state of the SSI program.

Children or young people who were born with disabilities and never even had a chance to contribute should receive SSI. Medical bills for a child with severe health issues could bury many families. Not lumping these children into the "deadbeat" pile. We should help those who are truly helpless and I'm happy to pay taxes towards that.

Social Security Disability is NOT a welfare program. Instead, the government is giving you back your money they snatched out out of your paycheck all those years (the money is in your Retirement, Survivor, and Disability Insurance fund). People on Social Security Disability are workers who could not make it to retirement age and so the government starts their check early. They just call it "disability" until they hit their retirement age.

Not the same thing at all and nothing anybody should be ashamed about as long as they didn't scam the system.

As for your question: I think they really should add some stricter basic requirements you have to pass even to apply for SSI, and psych impairments in particular should be rewritten so that someone with "depression and anxiety" isn't down on the corner playing dice all day drinking up my money (that's my job!). Not to say that depression cannot be debilitating, I'm saying if you're 18 y/o, in and out of shelters and pregnant with your 3rd child it's no wonder your depressed! Grrr!!! Not having the social skills to apply for a job because you've never left the bedroom except to go to the fridge isn't a medical condition. It's just poor life skills.

Edit- I'll point out that in our city there are both black and white and mixed sections of the city and many people of both races call us looking to "play the game". It's a poor thing, not a black thing.

 

[senseamp]

I am more concerned about health care costing $1 Trillion more per year than it should in the US, than mincing words on who is disabled and who isn't.

 

[TheGardener]

When 80% of the population is classified disabled and there is not enough money coming in from working people, the whole system will collapse. That's the beginning of how it will start to get solved.

 

[NaughtyGeek]

So long as we continue to subject ourselves to Global Labor Arbitrage this will be a problem that cannot be fixed. Tack on to that the ever increasing amount of automation available and it only compounds the matter.

The original intent of Globalization, as it was sold to us anyway, was to get American businesses into worldwide markets thereby adding jobs, money and American products to those markets. This was to be able to produce the goods at a low enough cost that the newly employed population centers would become new consumers of American goods.

However, what actually happened was our businesses leveraged the low cost labor/materials to import their products back into the US at a lower cost to produce and thus fattened their bottom lines and consumers lapped it up because goods were slightly cheaper.

Now we have a glut of low/no skilled labor and no jobs for them because we sent it all where labor could be had for pennies a day with no environmental/safety standards to adhere to. Everyone who has skills wants to cry and blame the low/no skilled laborers for their "lack of effort" and pat themselves on the back for working hard for what they have with no consideration of what it may take someone else to get there not least of which is intelligence.

Now with all that in place, we set up a system that makes it economically viable for someone to work part time or not at all while still enjoying the lifestyle of someone making $60,000 a year. If you had no marketable skills or were lazy as shit, would you sign up? I bet you would.

So, what's the solution then? Well, it comes down to whether or not you believe that someone who is willing to work is deserving of a living wage. If not, then we'll continue on the Government tit train and laugh about the mooches. If so, then it's time to make noise to your representatives in the Government that a product coming into this country has to be priced to reflect what it would have cost to manufacture it here. If that happens, factories open back up here and people in other countries get the benefits that were originally intended from Globalization.

 

[senseamp]

AI and robotics are going to create a lot more moochers.

 

[Moonbeam]

We live in a competitive world that rewards competitive people, people who will do whatever it takes to win, people who will sacrifice their souls, eat their neighbors children, turn in their parents to the thought police, postpone all earthly pleasures permanently, if necessary to win. We live in a society, in short, that in order to win, there MUST BE people you stepped over to win, people you had to out-compete, people you were better able to narrow down the dimensions of life you were willing to enjoy to hone the knife you were able to out cut them with before they could cut you out.

We have created a world in which only those who can compete in commerce, win in business, be self sufficient. have the time and resources to go to special schools, join special groups of privilege, know the right people, come from the right background, get lucky, and on and on.

Because we have caused money to be a requirement for survival, we have made the making of money our God and created a value system in which only those who can make it are worthy of life. But we did not evolve as humans that way. We evolved as small collections, families and tribes that split up the functions required to live communally such that the kinds of folk who would in our world be the winners, could only win with the support of others. One couldn't acquire a trophy bride, a butler, maid or cook, a warm skin to wear in winter, or the best stone tools, because you had a lot of money.

A whole range of social skills, social sharing, and social responsibility went with survival.

We have created a world of competitive individuals at war with each other in the economic field, with the all mighty dollar as the goal, and for there to be a few highly successful winners there must be massive numbers of losers, And this is the structure the advantaged keep in place for as long as they can until it rots from within which it will if it isn't fixed.

 

[BonzaiDuck]

We live in a competitive world that rewards competitive people, people who will do whatever it takes to win, people who will sacrifice their souls, eat their neighbors children, turn in their parents to the thought police, postpone all earthly pleasures permanently, if necessary to win. We live in a society, in short, that in order to win, there MUST BE people you stepped over to win, people you had to out compete, people you were better able to narrow down the dimensions of life you were willing to enjoy to hone the knife you were able to out cut them with before they could cut you out.

We have created a world in which only those who can compete in commerce, win in business, be self sufficient. have the time and resources to go to special schools, join special groups of privilege, know the right people, come from the right background, get lucky, and on and on.

Because we have caused money to be a requirement for survival, we have made the making of money our God and created a value system in which only those who can make it are worthy of life. But we did not evolve as humans that way. We evolved as small collections, families and tribes that split up the functions required to live communally such that the kinds of folk who would in our world be the winners, could only win with the support of others. One couldn't acquire a trophy bride, a butler made or cook, a warm skin to wear in winter, or the best stone tools, because you had a lot of money.

A whole range of social skills, social sharing, and social responsibility went with survival.

We have created a world of competitive individuals at war with each other in the economic field, with the all mighty dollar as the goal, and for there to be a few highly successful winners there must be massive numbers of losers, And this is the structure the advantaged keep in place for as long as they can until it rots from within which it will if it isn't fixed.

I wouldn't disagree with that. Public Opinion about government spending has shifted due to a perception that we're no longer funding "pure public goods" whereby beneficiaries cannot be quantifiably separated. This slowly arose with the safety net.

I personally worked in an effort to sample welfare cases in some four states to adjust federal-to-state transfers according to the levels of fraud, incorrect payments or errors in the state welfare caseloads.

I saw real poverty. I also reported instances of fraud and error with great dedication.

Considering other aspects of all spending at the federal and state levels, bitching about welfare recipients is the least-productive dialog we can have.

Also, as a "student" of propaganda during the Cold War, and long ago absorbing Marshall McLuhan's book or his remark that "The medium IS the message," I wonder a bit about our money and the American psyche. "In God We Trust:" Is He green?

Disregarding the money altered during the early Cold War to make a statement, it seems that way, no matter what.

By the way. An economist named Lester Thurow wrote a book criticizing our economy as involving too much of a zero-sum game. You can apply that notion selectively howsoever you are inclined.

 

[cubby1223]

The original intent of Globalization, as it was sold to us anyway, was to get American businesses into worldwide markets thereby adding jobs, money and American products to those markets. This was to be able to produce the goods at a low enough cost that the newly employed population centers would become new consumers of American goods.

That's just playing the victim. Globalization was going to happen regardless of your personal feelings about it. It was a natural progression due to the increasing technological abilities of transportation and communication.

So, what's the solution then? Well, it comes down to whether or not you believe that someone who is willing to work is deserving of a living wage. If not, then we'll continue on the Government tit train and laugh about the mooches. If so, then it's time to make noise to your representatives in the Government that a product coming into this country has to be priced to reflect what it would have cost to manufacture it here. If that happens, factories open back up here and people in other countries get the benefits that were originally intended from Globalization.

Low-skill manufacturing for minimum wage is not an answer to our economic issues. In my opinion. If you think it is, go ahead and fight for it. Just accept that I will not.

We have created a world of competitive individuals at war with each other in the economic field, with the all mighty dollar as the goal, and for there to be a few highly successful winners there must be massive numbers of losers, And this is the structure the advantaged keep in place for as long as they can until it rots from within which it will if it isn't fixed.

Can you name a time in human history when competition was not necessary for survival? You can't? What a shame, thought you might have actually been onto something there. Instead you continue with more of the same nothingness.

It really is quite shocking to think about all the things you might actually be able to do and accomplish in this world if you could only focus your time on something productive for a change.

 

[Blackjack200]

I am more concerned about health care costing $1 Trillion more per year than it should in the US, than mincing words on who is disabled and who isn't.

Why worry about problems like that when we can rage at all the poors that have TVs and refrigerators?

 

[Moonbeam]

Can you name a time in human history when competition was not necessary for survival? You can't? What a shame, thought you might have actually been onto something there. Instead you continue with more of the same nothingness.

It really is quite shocking to think about all the things you might actually be able to do and accomplish in this world if you could only focus your time on something productive for a change.

You can only reason within the limits of your knowledge which is a tremendous disadvantage for you. I have acquired, through hard work, a rather more massive base of understanding, a more eclectic one, and a more holistically accurate one, obviously, in comparison to your own, such that, regarding your point on competition, I can easily straighten you out, God willing that your CBD doesn't interfere.

You are quite right, and irrelevantly so, with regard to man's evolutionary history via survival of the fittest, the success in breeding conferred by traits that promote competitive survivability. What you rail to take into account is that humans are a social primate species and that which leads to the survival of the group is where successful mutations will collect.

A primatologist studying baboons in the wild observed a troop of them being hunted by a leopard. Two large males dropped back and waited for the leopard. They jumped out of a tree one on the neck and one on the body and were both immediately killed, but not before fatally wounding the leopard. The genes for that behavior are carried in the troop, which survived possibly much greater carnage and loss.

Similarly, I am in a far better position than you are, in my opinion, to determine what is or isn't productive. Please come down from the thin upper branches the imaginary leopards of your oversized amygdala have conjured to be right on your tail, before you fall and crack your head. I will protect you with the enormous mental muscles I have worked so hard and paid such a price to attain.

 

[brianmanahan]

I have acquired, through hard work, a rather more massive base of understanding, a more eclectic one

this is gold

 

[JEDIYoda]

this is gold

so instead of being at home and mooching off your parents, you should take Moonbeam`s example ands get yourself a job!!

 

[flexy]

Rather than worrying about people who are potentially (getting) on lifetime welfare, reduce the numbers of potential welfare recipients right at the start.

You do this by providing education, training etc. with the goal to increase their chances on the job market.

In the evil socialist countries in Europe (at least those that I know), receiving welfare or unemployment is MORE than just "someone getting money". It also includes things like training courses where people learn how to apply for jobs, resume writing etc...and of course general training /education.

It's also things like supporting people who want to found a business with a loan to help them start a business. Eg. a welfare recipient can submit a business plan, the plan is looked over and analyzed and the person might get a loan to help them start the business.

"Socialist" countries in EU go actually through a lot of effort to get people AWAY from welfare/unemployment, this is always the ultimate goal.

"Sterilization" is of course an idiotic "idea" which I'd expect from someone like Trump or supporters.

 

[brianmanahan]

so instead of being at home and mooching off your parents, you should take Moonbeam`s example ands get yourself a job!!

i did that 10 years ago

13 years left and i should need one anymore

 

[ivwshane]

Before I address your question I would need to know how big the problem is.

So what information do you have on this subject? How many people are possibly gaining the system? How does the current system handle fraud of this type? What are the consequences of being caught? How much money is this costing us?

 

[Jhhnn]

That's just playing the victim. Globalization was going to happen regardless of your personal feelings about it. It was a natural progression due to the increasing technological abilities of transportation and communication.

True. Globalization per se isn't the problem. How we as a society have chosen to deal with it is.

Low-skill manufacturing for minimum wage is not an answer to our economic issues. In my opinion. If you think it is, go ahead and fight for it. Just accept that I will not.

What makes you think that the people who run the economy, the people at the top, see any real issues wrt the economy? They're doing better than ever.

What sort of jobs would you propose instead? I mean, if you want to preserve our work for a living model of how to distribute goods & services? What if offshoring and automation have made that notion irrelevant for a lot of people in the aggregate? What if the Job Creators don't need for everybody to work?

It's not like we can have a society where having a job is both a necessity & a privilege, is it?

Can you name a time in human history when competition was not necessary for survival? You can't? What a shame, thought you might have actually been onto something there. Instead you continue with more of the same nothingness.

Sounds great, if you ignore the enormous disparity of economic power in the world today.

It really is quite shocking to think about all the things you might actually be able to do and accomplish in this world if you could only focus your time on something productive for a change.

Imagine yourself in the same position.

 

[Moonbeam]

this is gold

There is nothing I enjoy more than demonstrating to massively egotistical people what they look like. My real achievement, if you can call it that, lies in the fact that I managed to discover that I don't know anything. You might be amazed to discover what a mouse in a world full of peacocks can learn about what causes them to preen.

You, for example, will be job free in 13 years, provided, of course, that your bubble doesn't burst in the meantime or you don't die of cancer etc.

A great miser who had accumulated fortune dinars was visited by the Angel of Death. Time to go, the Angel said. Wait, said the miser, I can offer you a fortune in gold if you spare me. No said the Angel of Death. Can I buy an hour then ask the man. No said the Angel. Then please allow me one moment to leave a note, to which the Angel of Death acquiesced. On the note was written these words: For a million gold dinars I could not buy an hour of life. "Know oh Mankind, the value of your time."

 

[Mai72]

Why would they want to get off welfare/SSI when they have it good? Free healthcare, food stamps and rental assistance. Plus, they can work under the table for added income.

Who is going to pay them well to make it worthwhile? Most are poorly educated.

 

[unokitty]

Not On the Job, Not Looking Either

...more than 92 million Americans — 37% of the civilian population aged 16 and over — are neither employed nor unemployed, but fall in the category of “not in the labor force.” That means they aren’t working now but haven’t looked for work recently enough to be counted as unemployed. While that’s not quite a record — figures have been a bit higher earlier this year — the share of folks not in the labor force remains near all-time highs.

Why? You might think legions of retiring Baby Boomers are to blame, or perhaps the swelling ranks of laid-off workers who’ve grown discouraged about their re-employment prospects. While both of those groups doubtless are important (though just how important is debated by labor economists), our analysis of Bureau of Labor Statistics data suggests another key factor: Teens and young adults aren’t as interested in entering the work force as they used to be...

There's an election coming up.

Just watch the politicians compete to give away more free stuff...

Free college! Free student loans! Free SSI! Free ObamaCare...

Though, if you already have a job, no ObamaCare subsidy for you...

So, just shut up and pay your taxes.

How do you expect politicians to get elected if they can't give away your money?

Uno