Need to work for your handout

[ivwshane]

We aren't making money off of the prison industry. Inmate labor goes to reducing their cost for taxpayers. The private prison situation is rather questionable though.

So private companies who contract out work to prisoners don't make any money off of them? You might want to tell these companies, I'm pretty sure they aren't using prisoners for humanitarian reasons.

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2008/07/what-do-prisoners-make-victorias-secret

 

[Jhhnn]

I would be all in favor of this program if the government guaranteed a (minimum wage) job for everyone who was getting food stamps, and provided daycare for any dependents of the recipient. The job would have to be accessible through public transportation, and transportation must be accessible by walking.

They could set up public gardens where communities could grow local produce, or pick up litter along smaller highways. They could do postal service mail sorting. They could cook food for homeless shelters or sort donations at food banks. They could remove graffiti.

There are lots of things that our government could pay these people to do, but currently don't do. Of course, providing jobs would cost more, but then we'd be providing an opportunity for these people instead of just a handout. Teach a man to fish and all that.

OH, GOD! Creeping Soshulism! Big Brother! How could Wall St possibly profit from that?

 

[Subyman]

So private companies who contract out work to prisoners don't make any money off of them? You might want to tell these companies, I'm pretty sure they aren't using prisoners for humanitarian reasons.

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2008/07/what-do-prisoners-make-victorias-secret

Notice the "We" in my post. The person I was responding to was talking about the government making money off of them, which is why I explicitly stated private prisons are questionable.

 

[werepossum]

funny how people go apeshit because poor people and a fraction of those who are scammers, need a little assistance.

but when the bankers in wall street gambled and lost during the sub prime era, and we footed the bill for their mea culpa, in which they still continued to give themselves big bonuses, we don't give two shits?

pretty sad.

edit:

oh, i can't remember wall street doing shit to get their billions in tax payer handouts now did they?

Everybody gave two shits about bankers being bailed out and continuing to give themselves bonuses. It's just that some of us grudgingly admit that Obama may have had valid reasons to structure the bailouts as he did rather than as structured bankruptcies, even if we really, really don't like it. Sometimes politics requiring doing things we'd rather not do for people we'd rather not help to avoid something worse. Much as I hate the "too big to fail" banks being bailed out and rather than being broken up being helped to become even bigger as they gobbled up those companies not "too big to fail", I can accept that the consequences of not doing so (or at least, the risk of consequences) could possibly justify that if one is looking at all the information and projections.

Also, these are people who are suffering acute rather than chronic inability to support themselves. This is an attempt to make them help themselves as much as an attempt to change their parasitic behavior.

I like it. Get people working, get them involved. I think half of the legitimately lazy people are probably lazy because they simply have nothing to be proud about/live for/are fucking depressed or whatever.

It gets them involved, seratonin pumping, and for at least some percentage of them, can turn them into useful, productive, and even successful citizens--and they never would have thought that possible. If they just drop out and don't even try, well, no harm really. If they have no dependents, then they only hurt themselves. More tacos for me. Win-win.

File this under: "Yet another government program telling people what is best for them" that I like.

:thumbsup:

Exactly, and well said, although I prefer burritos. Unless it's those tacos made with Dorito shells. And they have sour cream.

Best case, they receive job training that helps them earn a job good enough to not need assistance. Worst case, at least they have to do something for someone besides themselves.

 

[BoberFett]

Lefty tears. So delicious.

 

[ivwshane]

Lefty tears. So delicious.

Wow look! Another awesome comment by our up and coming right wing troll!

Congrats bobber your skill is improving, you'll be surpassing incorruptibles level in no time!

 

[runzwithsizorz]

"We aren't making money off of the prison industry. Inmate labor goes to reducing their cost for taxpayers. The private prison situation is rather questionable though."

Notice the "We" in my post. The person I was responding to was talking about the government making money off of them, which is why I explicitly stated private prisons are questionable.

I do not wish to start an argument, but as an example; the California state prison system receives in taxes around $60.000 per inmate. Are we to believe it really costs that much? If I were to tell you that my cost, with *zero profit* to install a water heater in your home was $3000, would you believe me? If a state can tax this much per inmate, what would be it's incentive to allow someone receiving benefits, or making less than $10.000 a year to roam free?
Also, on a federal level, less than 1/3 of the money collected for welfare, food stamps, ETC actually make it to the people it was collected to help. Are we to believe that the costs to administer consumed 2/3 of what was collected? If so, IMO, you're doing it wrong.
One more thing, why, oh why, does our government have huge, and I mean HUGH!!! stores of food when so many of our children go hungry?

 

[theeedude]

Lefty tears. So delicious.

More like tears of working American who will get shit canned because someone working for food stamps will do their job. Yummy.

 

[DCal430]

Double Post

 

[cabri]

More like tears of working American who will get shit canned because someone working for food stamps will do their job. Yummy.

Apparently you have a serious lack of understand of the value of work.

And also of reading comprehension.

 

[DCal430]

Made even harder when republicans cut funding for planned parenthood, shut down abortion clinics, etc.

Planned Parenthood charges people for all of their services, they really aren't cheaper than a normal clinic.

 

[cabri]

Made even harder when republicans cut funding for planned parenthood, shut down abortion clinics, etc.

Interesting that the Democrats have had no problem ignoring legal restrictions when spending money

 

[Subyman]

I do not wish to start an argument, but as an example; the California state prison system receives in taxes around $60.000 per inmate. Are we to believe it really costs that much? If I were to tell you that my cost, with *zero profit* to install a water heater in your home was $3000, would you believe me? If a state can tax this much per inmate, what would be it's incentive to allow someone receiving benefits, or making less than $10.000 a year to roam free?
Also, on a federal level, less than 1/3 of the money collected for welfare, food stamps, ETC actually make it to the people it was collected to help. Are we to believe that the costs to administer consumed 2/3 of what was collected? If so, IMO, you're doing it wrong.
One more thing, why, oh why, does our government have huge, and I mean HUGH!!! stores of food when so many of our children go hungry?

That is a lot of questions there. To be clear on my position, there is no way any state makes a surplus from the prison system.

 

[werepossum]

I do not wish to start an argument, but as an example; the California state prison system receives in taxes around $60.000 per inmate. Are we to believe it really costs that much? If I were to tell you that my cost, with *zero profit* to install a water heater in your home was $3000, would you believe me? If a state can tax this much per inmate, what would be it's incentive to allow someone receiving benefits, or making less than $10.000 a year to roam free?
Also, on a federal level, less than 1/3 of the money collected for welfare, food stamps, ETC actually make it to the people it was collected to help. Are we to believe that the costs to administer consumed 2/3 of what was collected? If so, IMO, you're doing it wrong.
One more thing, why, oh why, does our government have huge, and I mean HUGH!!! stores of food when so many of our children go hungry?

Because even in government, some people are bright enough to remember 1816. Especially after they banned such stockpiles for the rest of us.

 

[zephyrprime]

Only 2,680 out of 9000 were willing to work for their welfare. Pretty amazing. That means that a lot of those people on food stamps were phonies and just milking the system. I think that people on welfare should indeed be made to work for their benefits. However, I think the rate of reimbursement should be at minimum wage. It's unjust that the state can basically get these people to work at an effective rate of ~$2.58/hr.

 

[nickqt]

Only 2,680 out of 9000 were willing to work for their welfare. Pretty amazing. That means that a lot of those people on food stamps were phonies and just milking the system. I think that people on welfare should indeed be made to work for their benefits. However, I think the rate of reimbursement should be at minimum wage. It's unjust that the state can basically get these people to work at an effective rate of ~$2.58/hr.

In one sentence, they're lazy.

In another, you judge it unjust that someone work for $2.58 an hour.

Cognitive dissonance at work. Hooray!

 

[Vic]

Food stamps are a 'handout' to agribusiness. SNAP stabilizes crop prices by ensuring surpluses are sold 'off the market.'
That some poor people get to eat using the program is purely incidental.

 

[zephyrprime]

In one sentence, they're lazy.

In another, you judge it unjust that someone work for $2.58 an hour.

Cognitive dissonance at work. Hooray!

I never said they were lazy. I said they were milking the system. A logical thing to do. It is us the electorate that is foolish enough to allow it.

 

[Atreus21]

I like it. Get people working, get them involved. I think half of the legitimately lazy people are probably lazy because they simply have nothing to be proud about/live for/are fucking depressed or whatever.

It gets them involved, seratonin pumping, and for at least some percentage of them, can turn them into useful, productive, and even successful citizens--and they never would have thought that possible. If they just drop out and don't even try, well, no harm really. If they have no dependents, then they only hurt themselves. More tacos for me. Win-win.

File this under: "Yet another government program telling people what is best for them" that I like.

:thumbsup:

I have to agree here too.

 

[DCal430]

Food stamps are a 'handout' to agribusiness. SNAP stabilizes crop prices by ensuring surpluses are sold 'off the market.'
That some poor people get to eat using the program is purely incidental.

I support the SNAP, but this is really stretching it, as many SNAP benefits are used on items without surplus risk. Also SNAP isn't limited to agribusiness items.

 

[DCal430]

Better than SNAP though would be removing the asset limit test and providing more actual cash. The asset test leaves these people unable to save.

 

[Jhhnn]

Food stamps are a 'handout' to agribusiness. SNAP stabilizes crop prices by ensuring surpluses are sold 'off the market.'
That some poor people get to eat using the program is purely incidental.

They're that & more. The economy of small town Mississippi, for example, would collapse w/o federal funds. There is a lower limit to the amount of business that can support commerce of any kind. Stores close, services disappear & depopulation occurs in regions with a scarcity of employment. People in Appalachia will end up growing opium poppies to eke out a living, just like desperately poor people in other regions of the world.

 

[realibrad]

They're that & more. The economy of small town Mississippi, for example, would collapse w/o federal funds. There is a lower limit to the amount of business that can support commerce of any kind. Stores close, services disappear & depopulation occurs in regions with a scarcity of employment. People in Appalachia will end up growing opium poppies to eke out a living, just like desperately poor people in other regions of the world.

HAHAHA

That is the most amazingly dumb thing I have heard in a while. Jesus that is dumb.

 

[theeedude]

Strong dollar just killed red states' aspirations to become competitive with third world labor by cutting taxes and making their citizens more desperate for work. That is just too bad, so sad

 

[Jhhnn]

HAHAHA

That is the most amazingly dumb thing I have heard in a while. Jesus that is dumb.

It's just deeper than your intellect can possibly plumb.