Official Targets Welfare Abuse

[Agrooreo]

Welfare reform is dreadfully needed. I hear about it everyday since my mother is a case worker for our states welfare system. However this is not the way to go about it. If the state can not force a inmate or person under arrest to go under a medical procedure to acquire evidence that is embedded in their person(i.e. if a suspect was shot in a robbery and doesn't want the bullet out, they cant make him see a doctor to take it out) then how can we chopped someones nuts off for having kids to abuse the welfare system.

I also dont agree with taking a persons nuts just cause they dont pay child support. It wouldn't take that much. Make every father who is behind more than 5,000$ on childsupport face a minimum of 5 yrs in prison and everyone would pay simple as that. Or if they didn't we wouldn't have to worry about them breeding any time soon.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Ornery
Now that the former Chardon Municipal Court Judge is retired from the bench, he's pulling no punches

• "I don't care whether or not you put these people in prison; they should be castrated," he said.
  
  "People should not be allowed to have any more children once they've shown they're incompetent of taking care of the ones they have," he added. "Those people are saying, 'Let the government pay for this.' We're already paying for the children, the day care, the health benefits, the Family First council and other crap like that at an extremely high cost. It needs to stop."
  
  "This is not abortion, this is different. If you cannot take care of a child, you shouldn't be allowed to have more. I don't care how many kids you have, I don't want to pay for them."

If I lived in Geauga County, he'd get my vote! :thumbsup:

If you lived in Berlin in the 1930's....

Did you recently become a liberal? LOL

BTW, while the views in the OP are a bit extreme, I think the message is a good one.

Day after day I meet people who clearly scam the system. I recently took a credit application from a woman who had over $110,000 a year. Some was from welfare, housing subsidy, etc. The real shocker was that she had claim to 8 kids she was getting in excess of $800ea, per month for, from Govt. I told her, "you do quite well".
She laughed and said.."I got all the hook-ups!" All I could say is wow, just wow. She was not buying a large transporter for kids, but a Mercedes for her self.
America is the only country I know of, where you can drive to bankruptcy court in a "Benz" :Q

 

[techs]

Originally posted by: Ronstang

Originally posted by: conjur
Welfare reform is still needed but this draconian measure is just insanity.

People complain of the Chinese restricting births and complain of the little-discussed Indian practice of killing newborns if they're female but they're fine with something like this?

There is nothing draconion about simply not paying people to sit around and make babies. If they don't want to support themselves then the consequences are their own doing. If there was no promise of free money to the non-producers then they would be forced to face a simple fact the rest of us do every day.....better yourself and get a job or starve.

This thread is about someone advocating the forced sterilization of anyone who has a child while needing public assistance. Not about economic disincentives.

 

[compuwiz1]

Originally posted by: techs

Originally posted by: Ronstang

Originally posted by: conjur
Welfare reform is still needed but this draconian measure is just insanity.

People complain of the Chinese restricting births and complain of the little-discussed Indian practice of killing newborns if they're female but they're fine with something like this?

There is nothing draconion about simply not paying people to sit around and make babies. If they don't want to support themselves then the consequences are their own doing. If there was no promise of free money to the non-producers then they would be forced to face a simple fact the rest of us do every day.....better yourself and get a job or starve.

This thread is about someone advocating the forced sterilization of anyone who has a child while needing public assistance. Not about economic disincentives.

So? Maybe they're right. If we can breed people who do not have the common sense to know when to stop breeding, then this cannot go on with impunity...someone has to intervene. And, please, I don't want to hear about all the spirit childeren up there who need bodies, ok morons.......

 

[tw1164]

How about a plan where the mothers would recieve an increase in monthly welfare payments for using norplants? When she is able to support herself and her children she can have the norplants removed. It could cost less then her having a second child.

 

[Tripleshot]

Originally posted by: Ronstang
If you are on government assisstance because you have ONE child you can't take care of and you get pregnant and have another your assisstance should STOP immediately. Why do liberals always think the taxpayer is supposed to accept the responsibility for the bad decisions of people who do not contribute to society? It is simply absurd. People like this were extremely uncommon 100 years ago when the family of the idiot or private charity were the only recourse for those too stupid to live a productive life. Liberals and their "votes for assisstance" program known as welfare does nothing but increase the amount of people that need the program by rewarding STUPID behavior.

I see, you lump all people on welfare in one catagory and want to cut them off. I got news for you, each case is different and each person is an individual that has needs, and unlike you that have no welfare need, survival is the usual prime factor motivating these people to swallow their pride and seek assistance. Welfare case workers manage the affairs of these people and assist them towards self suffeciency. There is a life time cap on financial assistance imposed at the nat'l level in 1995 by a conservative congress and a Democrat President.

By the way, what the hell do you know about welfare 100 years ago? And guess what? there are as as many "conservatives" on welfare as there are "liberals" by your standards. Poverty doesn't descriminate. Your knee jerk opnion does though.:roll:

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Ronstang

Originally posted by: conjur
Welfare reform is still needed but this draconian measure is just insanity.

People complain of the Chinese restricting births and complain of the little-discussed Indian practice of killing newborns if they're female but they're fine with something like this?

There is nothing draconion about simply not paying people to sit around and make babies. If they don't want to support themselves then the consequences are their own doing. If there was no promise of free money to the non-producers then they would be forced to face a simple fact the rest of us do every day.....better yourself and get a job or starve.

Did you bother to read the OP?

"I don't care whether or not you put these people in prison; they should be castrated," he said.

 

[OutHouse]

Originally posted by: Ronstang
If you are on government assisstance because you have ONE child you can't take care of and you get pregnant and have another your assisstance should STOP immediately. Why do liberals always think the taxpayer is supposed to accept the responsibility for the bad decisions of people who do not contribute to society? It is simply absurd. People like this were extremely uncommon 100 years ago when the family of the idiot or private charity were the only recourse for those too stupid to live a productive life. Liberals and their "votes for assisstance" program known as welfare does nothing but increase the amount of people that need the program by rewarding STUPID behavior.

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[DaveSimmons]

Originally posted by: tw1164
How about a plan where the mothers would recieve an increase in monthly welfare payments for using norplants? When she is able to support herself and her children she can have the norplants removed. It could cost less then her having a second child.

This would be a great idea except that fundies think every sperm is sacred and that this will encourage the women to "sin" instead of practicing abstinence.

Plus there are all the clueless bleeding hearts who think voluntary birth control is "exactly the same" as the Nazis sending the mentally impaired to the gas chamber.

So the wacko extermists on both the left and right opponse common sense.

 

[Ornery]

Originally posted by: Agrooreo

...how can we chopped someones nuts off for having kids to abuse the welfare system.

I also dont agree with taking a persons nuts just cause they dont pay child support. It wouldn't take that much. Make every father who is behind more than 5,000$ on childsupport face a minimum of 5 yrs in prison and everyone would pay simple as that. Or if they didn't we wouldn't have to worry about them breeding any time soon.

Originally posted by: conjur

Did you bother to read the OP?

"I don't care whether or not you put these people in prison; they should be castrated," he said.

Did you two bother to read the follow up on 12/15/2005 06:41 PM:

Originally posted by: Ornery

Questions posed concerning commissioner's 'sterilization plan'

• He advocates a choice for males who are found to be guilty of neglecting to pay child support. That choice is either five years in jail, or probation, with the caveat that probation entails undergoing a reversible vasectomy.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: tw1164
How about a plan where the mothers would recieve an increase in monthly welfare payments for using norplants? When she is able to support herself and her children she can have the norplants removed. It could cost less then her having a second child.

You can do that without increasing monthly welfare payments. Why should the state pay for her recreational activity?

 

[Vic]

Eugenics has a long history in the US

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: tw1164
How about a plan where the mothers would recieve an increase in monthly welfare payments for using norplants? When she is able to support herself and her children she can have the norplants removed. It could cost less then her having a second child.

You can do that without increasing monthly welfare payments. Why should the state pay for her recreational activity?

You obviously are an ignorant individual (well that's a forgone conclusion based on your posts) What makes you think that taking care of little sh!t elves who cry most of the night is a pleasurable experience, especially on the pittance they get for welfare?

 

[Ornery]

Reckless people shouldn't be parents

• The national media have picked up on the passion and notoriety with which Painesville Municipal Court Judge Michael A. Cicconetti metes out in his sentences for convicted criminals.
  
  Geauga County Commissioner Craig Albert, who traded the bench on Chardon Municipal Court for his current position, has voiced his mind on a social vice he sees as the "greatest threat" to the United States' well-being.
  
  The News-Herald reported a week ago about Albert explaining his views on child assistance programs and subsequent welfare reform. We also covered his participation Wednesday night with Geauga County Job and Family Services Director Tim Taylor as part of the Middlefield Public Library "Evening of Civil Discourse" series.
  
  Albert's venting on the subject, strictly on his own, not representing his commission colleagues, is summed up as such: Individuals or couples on public assistance who continue having children waste taxpayers' money and should face penalties through medical means, which he prefaced in his "Sterilization Plan."
  
  Observers might dub Albert pro-choice in certain regards. For men convicted of neglecting to pay child support, Albert advocates five years in jail or probation, the latter dovetailing with undergoing a vasectomy. He favors mandatory contraception for mothers who apply for public assistance and tubal ligation for women already on the government dole who become pregnant.
  
  The choice is the person's to make; the penalties form a menu Albert hopes will nourish people's mind in underscoring the need for accountability.
  
  The reversible aspect of the aforementioned surgeries, according to Albert, is a way out for an individual who later proves he or she can fulfill his or her role in parenting responsibly, that is, without a public handout.
  
  Conversing with many of the 60 people who attended the forum Wednesday, Albert reiterated his goal of raising awareness of the issue. He and Taylor also agreed the problem does not prevail in Geauga County, but rather the nation as a whole.
  
  Taylor said that although the current welfare system has ways to go in breaking the cycle of poverty, welfare has made some transitions into workfare. With more programs aimed at young children on assistance, the system needs more time and support to continue to work inroads at cracking that cycle.
  
  Forced sterilization raises red flags constitutionally, ethically, medically and socially. An initial reaction might take into account the much-reported sterilization measures China imposes on its citizens in family planning, with a preference for male babies to help hold and firm up the Asian-tiger teeth as the largest communist nation on Earth.
  
  Albert admits his ideas might not mean a solution. It's easy to understand why they can be viewed as extreme.
  
  Bainbridge Township resident Patricia Denny expressed her sadness that "this conversation is taking place." She recalled her tenure teaching school in Cleveland, saying children on welfare were there only because they were born.
  
  The fact that such a problem has become so prevalent to elicit Albert's obviously heartfelt response in the first place ought to make all Americans think, maybe even a little ashamed, in this land our Founding Fathers left us loaded with opportunity.
  
  Albert's rationale, maybe not his exact solution, merits more consideration. This spilling of his guts on so mammoth a take in the "War on Poverty" begun four decades ago and carried out by our federal, state and county budgets ought to matter more highly in our elected officials' minds. They control the purse by which our executive public servants run the welfare bureaucracy.
  
  Singer Michael Jackson, long before he took social deviancy to new levels even as a parent, wrote this phrase in "Wanna Be Startin' Somethin'," from his record-breaking "Thriller" album in 1982:
  "If you can't feed your baby, then don't have a baby. And don't think maybe, if you can't feed your baby."
  
  Regardless of whether you like Jackson's music or Albert for his opinions, the bottom line is the sentiment expressed by both is correct: Be accountable, especially as a mother or father, for there is no more important job in life in all of humanity.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: zendari
You can do that without increasing monthly welfare payments. Why should the state pay for her recreational activity?

You obviously are an ignorant individual (well that's a forgone conclusion based on your posts) What makes you think that taking care of little sh!t elves who cry most of the night is a pleasurable experience, especially on the pittance they get for welfare?

There are certain simple methods to avoid creating little sh!t elves.

 

[Vic]

Sh!t happens.

 

[Meuge]

Originally posted by: zendari

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: zendari
You can do that without increasing monthly welfare payments. Why should the state pay for her recreational activity?

You obviously are an ignorant individual (well that's a forgone conclusion based on your posts) What makes you think that taking care of little sh!t elves who cry most of the night is a pleasurable experience, especially on the pittance they get for welfare?

There are certain simple methods to avoid creating little sh!t elves.

And wouldn't the world have been better had your parents used them!

P.S. People you support would gladly get rid of all those simple methods.

 

[zendari]

Originally posted by: Meuge

Originally posted by: zendari
There are certain simple methods to avoid creating little sh!t elves.

And wouldn't the world have been better had your parents used them!

P.S. People you support would gladly get rid of all those simple methods.

Get rid of? No, not for the most part. Not sell themselves on the free market? Perhaps.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: compuwiz1

Originally posted by: Red Dawn

Originally posted by: Ornery
Now that the former Chardon Municipal Court Judge is retired from the bench, he's pulling no punches

• "I don't care whether or not you put these people in prison; they should be castrated," he said.
  
  "People should not be allowed to have any more children once they've shown they're incompetent of taking care of the ones they have," he added. "Those people are saying, 'Let the government pay for this.' We're already paying for the children, the day care, the health benefits, the Family First council and other crap like that at an extremely high cost. It needs to stop."
  
  "This is not abortion, this is different. If you cannot take care of a child, you shouldn't be allowed to have more. I don't care how many kids you have, I don't want to pay for them."

If I lived in Geauga County, he'd get my vote! :thumbsup:

If you lived in Berlin in the 1930's....

Did you recently become a liberal? LOL

BTW, while the views in the OP are a bit extreme, I think the message is a good one.

Day after day I meet people who clearly scam the system. I recently took a credit application from a woman who had over $110,000 a year. Some was from welfare, housing subsidy, etc. The real shocker was that she had claim to 8 kids she was getting in excess of $800ea, per month for, from Govt. I told her, "you do quite well".
She laughed and said.."I got all the hook-ups!" All I could say is wow, just wow. She was not buying a large transporter for kids, but a Mercedes for her self.
America is the only country I know of, where you can drive to bankruptcy court in a "Benz" :Q

Apocryphal BS. no one on welfare gets $800 month cash let alone for each child $800.

82 percent of all families receiving TANF have three or fewer people in the family; 11 percent have four, and 7 percent have more than four.

Maximum monthly benefit for family of three: $280

Poverty level for a family of three: $1,157/month

http://www2.state.ga.us/Departments/DHR/tanfg.html

I essence you're in a world of hurt if your forced to be on welfare.

 

[Engineer]

I don't know to what level of "cutting off" that I support but I think that people who abuse the system and continually have more and more children should not gain a single cent more. Get off your butt and quit screwing and get a job. Screw "me and my tax money" once, shame on you...screw me twice or more, shame on me (and you)!

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Starbuck1975

Meh small potatoes welfare is like 1% fed, nothing compared to the payola Bush is raping the taxpayer for his already well-healed buddies in Iraq. That said no matter how small, nothing should be free - breeds sloth.

Blah blah blah...Bush...blah blah blah...Halliburton...blah blah blah...oil...blah blah blah...fascist...blah blah blah...obligatory Nazi reference.

This thread has nothing to do with Bush.

That's your opinion not mine. I see them both as pissing away hard earned tax payers money however ones a hell of a lot cheaper though so does'nt warrant as much bitching by me.

Funding
? In FY 2004, $17 billion is available for TANF.

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/opa/fact_sheets/tanf_factsheet.html

Is 17 Billion even a month of playing in the sand over there? Surley it's not even 1% of federal budget

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: Ornery

Originally posted by: Agrooreo

...how can we chopped someones nuts off for having kids to abuse the welfare system.

I also dont agree with taking a persons nuts just cause they dont pay child support. It wouldn't take that much. Make every father who is behind more than 5,000$ on childsupport face a minimum of 5 yrs in prison and everyone would pay simple as that. Or if they didn't we wouldn't have to worry about them breeding any time soon.

Originally posted by: conjur

Did you bother to read the OP?

"I don't care whether or not you put these people in prison; they should be castrated," he said.

Did you two bother to read the follow up on 12/15/2005 06:41 PM:

Originally posted by: Ornery

Questions posed concerning commissioner's 'sterilization plan'

• He advocates a choice for males who are found to be guilty of neglecting to pay child support. That choice is either five years in jail, or probation, with the caveat that probation entails undergoing a reversible vasectomy.

Typical, "Oh, I didn't really mean what I said before...what I really mean is..." BS

:roll:

 

[Ornery]

1. What he said SHOULD happen and what his PLAN is, are two different things. I agree with both.

 

[Moonbeam]

Well I have been reading Vic's thread on how Capitalism and free markets improve the lives of everybody because, when a low skilled job is lost, a higher skilled one opens up, such that by studying a bit people get better jobs and more pay and this goes on and on.

As I told him, the, I can see a future in which people have brains the size of a football field and study for a thousand years for those incredible multi billion jobs of the future and all thanks to cumulative competitive pressures just like Darwin said.

So it seem pretty damn obvious to me, as a brilliantly logician and thinker, that the speed with which we evolve is the key, if, that is, as a country we want to stay ahead in the productivity game.

It becomes an ineluctable fact, therefore, that we need to accelerate our evolution and we need to do it fast, and we also know just how to do it. Of course we have to play God.

So just as a minimum, it seems to me, we should start by sterilizing everybody who doesn't finish high school, the bottom half of graduating women, and the bottom 90% of men and to do so for as many centuries as is required until everybody who is born is smart enough to do anything or, on the contrary, competition is no longer deemed to be where it's at.

 

[Tom]

If all the poor people just died off tomorrow, no one in this thread would be any better off.

You'd all just be closer to the bottom of the ladder than you are now.

Thank a poor person today !