Government Welfare State: Creating Dependency

[nehalem256]

You're not intelligent, at all. Especially if you think government welfare incentivizes people to have 15 kids, an extreme example that never happens and adds nothing meaningful to the deficit. There are so few, limited examples of people having children for the gov't subsidies that it's pointless and inane to bring up these isolated examples.

Did you read the OP?

While yes the case of this woman is an extreme example a single mother, with no job skills, is going to have an awfully hard time supporting even one child without government bailouts.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Well in all fairness it is both that suffer from this problem at this point, so I see where you are coming from, but with respect to the claim made in the OP the private sector is the problem.

This is all brought about by government. Encouraging this behavior by subsidizing it. Not to mention the "government" doesn't feel the sting like working folk. We foot that bill by taxation whether you agree with those policies or not. If there was no crutch for her to lean on (the taxpayer) she wouldn't be able to feed that many children or herself for that matter. So before she gets to child (say #3 for the sake of argument) she is understanding that it is unaffordable to continue birthing children. The mentality now stand "as long as I have children I have housing and food". Remove the handouts and this sort of thing goes away.

We are seeing records set on Wall Street yet peoples' wages are still frozen in many places, hiring has not picked up at all, and more and more people are deciding it isn't even worth it to remain in the workforce. You cannot blame that on government. They are not the companies earning record profits. So I really fail to see your point with this post other than to declare your ideaological counter-stance against my post.

Businesses are in business to make money. They have no moral obligation to anyone. Yet because government is often on their side they continue to exist through bailouts and special tax rates and even a net tax of 0. It seems "government" is allowing some to enjoy priveledges individuals do not get. Get those thieves out of your paycheck and you have more to live on. Not to mention BS like the above goes away because they no longer have your money to toy with. People like the above wont magically be left out in the cold though as there are plenty of well off people who instead of paying Beltway bandits their ransom would then have that money to give as they see fit. You do see the power in that? So does the "government".

 

[First]

The mentality now stand "as long as I have children I have housing and food". Remove the handouts and this sort of thing goes away.

lol

 

[Don Vito Corleone]

Personally I think it is completely wrongheaded to allow able-bodied people to remain on public assistance indefinitely. We have created cultures of seemingly permanent poverty among the very people these programs were intended to help.

In Minnesota, where I live, we have the greatest disparity in unemployment as between white people and black people in the United States. We are not a particularly racist state. I can only conclude that our historically generous social welfare programs are the principal reason for this.

I can think of nothing more humiliating and debilitating than giving people a poverty-level wage that lets generation after generation just keep its heads above water.

 

[Gunslinger08]

Personally I think it is completely wrongheaded to allow able-bodied people to remain on public assistance indefinitely. We have created cultures of seemingly permanent poverty among the very people these programs were intended to help.

I would agree and I don't really see how anyone could possibly disagree. Those who need assistance and are not disabled should be limited by date and/or dollar amount. The problem is that people will work extremely hard to make this not happen, so that they don't lose their free ride. The media will find those who still refuse to work after losing unemployment/welfare benefits and portray them as dying on the streets due to heartless politicians and fiscal conservatives. As usual, emotions win out over logic.

 

[boomerang]

Compulsory sterilization should be a requirement for people to keep receiving welfare benefits for more than 3 years.

I can hear the cries now of the "right" to adopt. We'll have taxpayer funded adoptions. There is no winning with progressives. Scorched earth policy is the best with them.

 

[Pr0d1gy]

This is all brought about by government. Encouraging this behavior by subsidizing it. Not to mention the "government" doesn't feel the sting like working folk. We foot that bill by taxation whether you agree with those policies or not. If there was no crutch for her to lean on (the taxpayer) she wouldn't be able to feed that many children or herself for that matter. So before she gets to child (say #3 for the sake of argument) she is understanding that it is unaffordable to continue birthing children. The mentality now stand "as long as I have children I have housing and food". Remove the handouts and this sort of thing goes away.



Businesses are in business to make money. They have no moral obligation to anyone. Yet because government is often on their side they continue to exist through bailouts and special tax rates and even a net tax of 0. It seems "government" is allowing some to enjoy priveledges individuals do not get. Get those thieves out of your paycheck and you have more to live on. Not to mention BS like the above goes away because they no longer have your money to toy with. People like the above wont magically be left out in the cold though as there are plenty of well off people who instead of paying Beltway bandits their ransom would then have that money to give as they see fit. You do see the power in that? So does the "government".

lol

Yeah First, it's laughable at best but he will believe in and support his corporate masters to the last breath. Next he will tell us all that the retirement age needs to be raised.

 

[NoStateofMind]

Yeah First, it's laughable at best but he will believe in and support his corporate masters to the last breath. Next he will tell us all that the retirement age needs to be raised.

You have me confused with someone else apparently.

 

[OverVolt]

Idiocracy guys. Its got electrolytes.

That movie is really not that far off. The birthrate in America is not that high. The only people having lots of kids are all poor and then those kids also have a ton of kids probably in highschool and so on.

 

[First]

Idiocracy guys. Its got electrolytes.

That movie is really not that far off. The birthrate in America is not that high. The only people having lots of kids are all poor and then those kids also have a ton of kids probably in highschool and so on.

lol

 

[nehalem256]

Idiocracy guys. Its got electrolytes.

That movie is really not that far off. The birthrate in America is not that high. The only people having lots of kids are all poor and then those kids also have a ton of kids probably in highschool and so on.

This is actually an important point. Even if say responsible college educated individuals had the same number of children as say women like the OP they would still be out-breed due to the longer generation time.

 

[child of wonder]

Idiocracy guys. Its got electrolytes.

That movie is really not that far off. The birthrate in America is not that high. The only people having lots of kids are all poor and then those kids also have a ton of kids probably in highschool and so on.

Correct. Idiocracy is a documentary, not a comedy.

If you don't smoke Tarlytons -- FUCK YOU!

 

[piasabird]

If you pay women to have children, that is what they will do.

Can't Fix Stupid!

 

[finglobes]

When I was hearing all the food stamp commercials before election I realized just how brazenly Obama does politics the way drug dealers groom kids for business

 

[Harrod]

Another update http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=mT6smpCV8DQ&feature=endscreen

Apparently she's in a 6 br house now and got tazed.....

Also she's working on kid number 16 now...

I love the T2 theme song that starts playing half-way though the video.

 

[nehalem256]

If you pay women to have children, that is what they will do.

Can't Fix Stupid!

Sure you can. They fix dogs all the time

 

[Steeplerot]

So sad workers buy into old racist conspiracies like this. Big gubburmunt dependence. What is funny is these folks never even think. Why would politicians care about the poor. Poor people have ZERO political power. Except for the occasional prop for liberals and endless demonization.Cowards always shit on the weaker to cover up their own transgressions.

 

[Incorruptible]

I love the T2 theme song that starts playing half-way though the video.

Just realized that lol

That guy doing the commentary totally destroyed that piece of shit. Good for him

 

[Attic]

Folks in the middle should be getting the most attention for policy. Then poor, then wealthy.

Right now it's Wealthy, then poor, then the middle get crapped on.

 

[Incorruptible]

Folks in the middle should be getting the most attention for policy. Then poor, then wealthy.

Right now it's Wealthy, then poor, then the middle get crapped on.

That's one of the main problems we have. Too many liberals care about the poor while not caring at all about the middle class.

 

[nehalem256]

So sad workers buy into old racist conspiracies like this. Big gubburmunt dependence. What is funny is these folks never even think. Why would politicians care about the poor. Poor people have ZERO political power. Except for the occasional prop for liberals and endless demonization.Cowards always shit on the weaker to cover up their own transgressions.

Because poor people vote? Why wouldn't you want to pander for the votes of families with 15 children?:awe:

I mean if Obama spends time pandering to illegal immigrants it obviously makes sense to pander to poor people.

 

[Aikouka]

Problem is, as soon as you jack the minimum wage for food service workers, the price of that food goes up to cover those costs. So then your minimum wage has to go up, then the price of that food goes up, and you've created a vicious cycle.

People who start at minimum wage CAN earn their way up. If they do a good job for their employer, they're rewarded with raises or with good recommendations so that they can move to a better paying job. Those who don't do a good job don't deserve the raises you want to give them.

I recall posting before about Karl Weber (sociologist), and his remarks on how we need the poor. Frankly, I still think they're absolutely right. Society needs people that can perform the menial, service-oriented tasks that keep society running. Now, I agree that raising minimum wage should have an effect on the bottom line since their bottom line (i.e. labor costs) will go up. What sort of effect with that have on the middle class? Cost of living wage increases might help them, but that's a bit of an uncertainty.

Now, I'm certainly not against the idea of assisting the lower class. Without social assistance programs, you could just imagine the squalor in which most of these people would be living. It reminds me of a month or so ago when I was in Kroger, and I was talking to the cashier. It started off talking about how busy it was in the store, and it lead to her having to go to her next job after that, but that was okay because the $200-per-paycheck healthcare costs were great. Damn... what could I possibly bitch about after that?

In a sense, we either either have two choices... raise the bottom line or pay for social programs. The latter is probably the easier choice to swallow because it essentially becomes a variable price depending on your tax bracket.

Well, I guess there is technically a third choice... let the lower class suffer and grovel at our feet! :twisted:

 

[brandonb]

Everyone knows well that McDonalds Inc, Toco Bell Inc, Wendys Inc, Walmart Inc and all the others would do just fine profit wise after paying a decent living wage. And that wage of at least 11 dollars an hour. Period.

After all... Lincoln DID free the slaves. Its about time American companies do the same.

FFS, you need to get a job! Its plain obvious you have never worked for a company. Are you a government worker? I can predict the answer. So you think the 3 dollar raise on 1 million employees that Walmart employs is not going to effect profits? What world do you live in? Liberal land?

 

[nehalem256]

I recall posting before about Karl Weber (sociologist), and his remarks on how we need the poor. Frankly, I still think they're absolutely right. Society needs people that can perform the menial, service-oriented tasks that keep society running. Now, I agree that raising minimum wage should have an effect on the bottom line since their bottom line (i.e. labor costs) will go up. What sort of effect with that have on the middle class? Cost of living wage increases might help them, but that's a bit of an uncertainty.

There is essentially no cost of living increase that would help this woman. And while we may "need" the poor I think we could get by on a lot less of them.

Now, I'm certainly not against the idea of assisting the lower class. Without social assistance programs, you could just imagine the squalor in which most of these people would be living. It reminds me of a month or so ago when I was in Kroger, and I was talking to the cashier. It started off talking about how busy it was in the store, and it lead to her having to go to her next job after that, but that was okay because the $200-per-paycheck healthcare costs were great. Damn... what could I possibly bitch about after that?

In a sense, we either either have two choices... raise the bottom line or pay for social programs. The latter is probably the easier choice to swallow because it essentially becomes a variable price depending on your tax bracket.

Well, I guess there is technically a third choice... let the lower class suffer and grovel at our feet! :twisted:

I hesitate to call women like this "people". I mean did you miss the part where:

McElroy said a pair of officers attempted to question one of Angel’s sons about a rock throwing incident, when several family members, including Angel, her 21-year-old daughter, also named Angel, and two 13-year-olds attacked the officers.

It turned into such a “fracas” (to quote the news article) that police called for backup, and one of the backup officers used a taser on Ms. Adams, who was eight months pregnant with her 16th child.
She claimed to be the victim of “police brutality,” because she’s always got to be the victim of something other than her own stupidity, I guess.

http://theothermccain.com/2012/07/0...r-the-man-who-fathered-10-of-her-15-children/

So not only can she not feed her children, but she cannot even raise them to be semi-decent human beings.

 

[nehalem256]

FFS, you need to get a job! Its plain obvious you have never worked for a company. Are you a government worker? I can predict the answer. So you think the 3 dollar raise on 1 million employees that Walmart employs is not going to effect profits? What world do you live in? Liberal land?

I have not looked at the numbers for the fast-food restaurants.

But for Walmart say I think 90%+ of the costs are for inventory. Which means even if you doubled wages the cost of goods would go up less than 10%.