Section 8 housing vouchers

[Train]

Originally posted by: Jeff7
What would happen if we'd spend $2-3 trillion fighting poverty?

We already did, its actually more like $8 trillion since Carter, and you know what it has accomplished? Nothing, its making things worse by funding welfare babies and teaching generational dependence on the govt.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

 

[Slew Foot]

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Daycare, that's what grandma is for.

Take a lesson from Asian cultures, keep your family intact instead of tossing your parents into a nursing home, you wont have to chase dollars as much.

When I lost my wife I was already 33, my parents were and mother-in law were already into their 60's and retired / approaching retirement. There is only so much that I could expect of them and frankly is it not their job to babysit my son while I work. They work for 40+ years, it is now their time and I wouldn't dream of taking it away.

When she died I was working a fulltime job that happened to be a night shift. With help of family I continued that job for about a year as a dayshift was not available, but as it was a night shift I only got to see my then 1 year old son 3 days a week. He was no longer the happy baby he had been and relations with relatives were getting stressed. As a result I ended up taking a buyout during a layoff cycle so I could be a fulltime dad and continued to work part time from home for almost 2 years. I have been back to work and finally started using daycare 18 months ago. As a side note I have a very happy 5 year old. I was lucky enough to keep it all together with help of friends and family, but there is no way that the first year could have continued with tearing my extended family apart.

You are partially right, some of the other cultures are well known for taking care of family members, but that doesn't work so well with American culture that waits longer before starting a family. I would never and hate the idea of having 60 and 70 year old grandparents keep up with a toddler fulltime.

Well I suppose that's a difference that wont change, both mine and my wife parents are absolutely dying to take care of our soon to be children.

 

[Uhtrinity]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Daycare, that's what grandma is for.

Take a lesson from Asian cultures, keep your family intact instead of tossing your parents into a nursing home, you wont have to chase dollars as much.

When I lost my wife I was already 33, my parents were and mother-in law were already into their 60's and retired / approaching retirement. There is only so much that I could expect of them and frankly is it not their job to babysit my son while I work. They work for 40+ years, it is now their time and I wouldn't dream of taking it away.

When she died I was working a fulltime job that happened to be a night shift. With help of family I continued that job for about a year as a dayshift was not available, but as it was a night shift I only got to see my then 1 year old son 3 days a week. He was no longer the happy baby he had been and relations with relatives were getting stressed. As a result I ended up taking a buyout during a layoff cycle so I could be a fulltime dad and continued to work part time from home for almost 2 years. I have been back to work and finally started using daycare 18 months ago. As a side note I have a very happy 5 year old. I was lucky enough to keep it all together with help of friends and family, but there is no way that the first year could have continued with tearing my extended family apart.

You are partially right, some of the other cultures are well known for taking care of family members, but that doesn't work so well with American culture that waits longer before starting a family. I would never and hate the idea of having 60 and 70 year old grandparents keep up with a toddler fulltime.

Well I suppose that's a difference that wont change, both mine and my wife parents are absolutely dying to take care of our soon to be children.

8 hours a day, 7 days a week for a year or more? After my wife died there was no shortage of volunteers to help, that trickled down after the first six months and went to almost zero by one year. Now there is only one person who volunteers (my mother in law) and that is one weekend a month. If a babysitter is needed on occasion that is one thing, but expecting full time free daycare is another.

My whole point is that all the people on these systems aren't lazy do-nothings and they all can't be stereotyped as such. We live in a day and age where one parent might disappear for various reasons leaving the responsible one to take up the slack, that is where section 8 really comes in. Living on it the rest of their life - No, but having it for enough years to get a child into school so daycare is no longer a major issues - Yes. I have now been a single parent for almost 4.5 years and I'm finally transitioning back into full time work. In my opinion I would have been a terrible parent to do it any other way. I was lucky, had the situation been slightly different I very well could have been on this program.

 

[rpanic]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: rpanic
Was watching on the local morning news there was this line of like a thousand plus people to get Section 8 housing vouchers they were all standing in line since the day before. Now I can see helping out a seriously disabled person, but being stupid, making bad choices in life, having no ambition, or not speaking English doesn?t cut it. Paying an able bodied person just because they don?t make much seems wrong, how much you make is a personal choice for the most part, if you need more money get another job. It irritates me that I work my ass off and my tax dollars are going pay for some other persons rent.

How is the amount of money you make entirely a personal choice? We like to talk a lot in this country about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, but the dirty little secret is that most people who use that kind of language have never had to actually do that. Given your casual disdain for everyone, I'm willing to bet you were born into the middle class and are still there...big fucking accomplishment. And if that's not your story, it sure as hell is for most people who talk down to poor folks. You think it's easy for someone born into poverty, with crappy schools and no prospect of attending college to just "get another job"? Well gee, I'm not making enough working the register at Wal-Mart, maybe I should apply for one of those CEO jobs. Nah, I'll just sit here and enjoy my free ride! You really think that's what happens in this country, you think section 8 housing is such a great deal that people are staying poor to cash in?

Well of course you don't, you think this way for the same reason all economic conservatives think this way. You're some middle management gomer or some such who likes a system that says he's hot shit because he can live in a McMansion and drive a decent car, despite having been born into an economic class that made that an almost certainty. Poor people can't be poor because they've had a tough life, because if THEY aren't poor because they're stupid, YOU can't be well off because you're smart. The ideology that we get to claim all responsibility for our lot in life is popular not because it allows us to harangue poor people, but because it allows us to take credit for everything that's happened in our lives. You're like the pretty girl who really wants to believe that guys talk to her because she's interesting.

Let's just forget ideology and political bullshit and you wanting to make it sound like you're some sort of super hard worker and look at the facts. All the talk about "handouts" aside, being poor would not seem to be a real treat. Section 8 housing isn't the Ritz, welfare isn't like having a trust fund, and for the most part, pretty much everything about not having any money is worse than having it. You want to make the experience even more soul crushing than it is now? Hey, whatever helps pump up your ego...but I'm telling you, I think being poor sucks plenty already, I'm not sure the problem is that being poor is so awesome nobody wants to give it up. Maybe a better approach would be to try to provide the resources so poor people can help themselves rather than the "tough love" approach. Just a thought...but then again, I want to reduce the number of poor people, not participate in the conservative love-fest.

Was wondering when your liberal response/personal attack would pop up.

I never said that the amount of money was entirely a personal choice I said in most part. Most people that are chronically poor are that way because they know of nothing else. Giving someone handouts for the rest of their life isn?t going to make them change all the government is doing at that point is becoming a giant enabler to perpetual poverty; generations of people that will always expect the government to help them get by.

I know poverty sucks I had to deal with it growing up with a single mom in a shitty area. I don?t have a casual disdain for everyone just leaches and Illegals. I have had a hard fucked up childhood and my parents did not contribute to any of my successes they were both alcoholics that treated me as an obligation most of the time and had little concept of self sacrifice or gave a shit about my future. I had to make a CHOICE to be different and CHANGE my situation and raise my kid differently than the way I was.

What is sad is you always seem to think people are helpless and cannot make proper choices or help the way they are. A poor person might be poor because of their parents, but do you really think they will change with handouts. You are far more extreme liberal than I am conservative. I would probably be as liberal as you if it wasn?t for how screwed up our government works, and seeing the country being drained dry by both sides.

I know there are people that need help to think otherwise would be silly, I got a lot of help with my financial aid for college and escaped what I came from but with my help at least the government has received a big return. From what I have seen more than half are just leaching and abusing the system. I don?t see how any sort of welfare that goes on for more than a year or two is helpful. People that go on section 8 stay on it forever, same with a lot of people on welfare but I don?t even want to get into the farce the welfare in this country has become.

 

[Slew Foot]

Originally posted by: Uhtrinity

8 hours a day, 7 days a week for a year or more? After my wife died there was no shortage of volunteers to help, that trickled down after the first six months and went to almost zero by one year. Now there is only one person who volunteers (my mother in law) and that is one weekend a month. If a babysitter is needed on occasion that is one thing, but expecting full time free daycare is another.

My whole point is that all the people on these systems aren't lazy do-nothings and they all can't be stereotyped as such. We live in a day and age where one parent might disappear for various reasons leaving the responsible one to take up the slack, that is where section 8 really comes in. Living on it the rest of their life - No, but having it for enough years to get a child into school so daycare is no longer a major issues - Yes. I have now been a single parent for almost 4.5 years and I'm finally transitioning back into full time work. In my opinion I would have been a terrible parent to do it any other way. I was lucky, had the situation been slightly different I very well could have been on this program.

Yes, theyve even asked to move in with us but I had to draw the line there. But I suppose its largely cultural, my grandma lived with us while I was growing up and she took care of me while my parents worked.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Daycare, that's what grandma is for.

Take a lesson from Asian cultures, keep your family intact instead of tossing your parents into a nursing home, you wont have to chase dollars as much.

And if Grandma does not live nearby?

 

[ericlp]

Originally posted by: Robor
Hey if you think those people have the easy life why fight it? If you can't beat them, join them!

Yeah, and just think those same people that are standing around waiting for a hand out are already on medicade, social security, food stamps and any other free handout the government is giving out ....

These people go to local supermarket to buy fresh t-bones and crab legs to eat in their section 8 homes.

Meanwhile they laugh at the workers that get up every day .... 8-5 job with shrinking pay and benefits.

Hey, OP keep up the good work and remember to pay your taxes they are all depending on you! hahahaha

 

[Gabornski]

There are definitely people that need section 8 but I am not sure what the percentages are. My only personal experience is someone I know. She can't work because of a bad back caused by a car accident but has no problems riding a jet ski. She was happy when she had her second kid(by a different father than the first one) because she would now qualify for a bigger place. She is now pregnant with kid #3 with guy #3. She has been trying to get pregnant so it's not like it was a mistake. Who knows if guy #3 will stick around so us taxpayers probably get to foot the bill again. I am not against people who really need the help. The big question is how do you determine which ones really need and deserve it. People like uhtrinity I believe have valid reasons for needing help. But other people just work the system with no intention of trying to get off the dole. I don't understand people like the above gal that wants to keep popping out kids knowing they can't be supported. With 2 fathers already not in the picture you would think she would at least wait for marriage to be sure there will be a father there to support the child. Maybe I am just old fashioned. OK, my rant is done.

G

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy

Originally posted by: Slew Foot
Daycare, that's what grandma is for.

Take a lesson from Asian cultures, keep your family intact instead of tossing your parents into a nursing home, you wont have to chase dollars as much.

And if Grandma does not live nearby?

Move her.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Jeff7
What would happen if we'd spend $2-3 trillion fighting poverty?

We already did, its actually more like $8 trillion since Carter, and you know what it has accomplished? Nothing, its making things worse by funding welfare babies and teaching generational dependence on the govt.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Well, we need to spend more trillions. We need a program where anyone making less than $15/hour is provided with government sponsored and paid healthcare. No pre-existing conditions, no limits. No money out of pocket for those people. Also, anyone making less than $15/hr is given a grant to boost their wage UP to $15/hr. So, you know, they can live. That is the cutting point: $15/hr. Anything below that, everything from housing to healthcare to gas is subsidized.

If unemployment is a problem, we need federal funding to build factories to build widgets. Along with that we need a super-warehouse to store them all. The market makes no determination as to whether or not we actually NEED widgets, because it's the government's job to probide real wage jobs. So we will. Of course all the employees of said factory and warehouse will make $15/hr.

Along with those subsidies we need to pass legislation forcing top-tier collages to eliminate theyre tough admission standards, so that those below $15/hr can get free ride education to wherever they want. I mean, a good education shouldnt be just for the rich right?

edit: forgot to add: this program will paid for completely by anyone making more than $300,000/year, and the increase they pay rises with their income. And its based on gross, not net. Those rich fuckers wont get away with loopholes, and they SHOULD pay for the good of the country.

 

[lozina]

Hey if you guys like to spend your hard earned dollars helping out the "needy" that's what charities are for. The rest of us should be allowed to enjoy the fruits of our labor.

 

[heyheybooboo]

This thread now qualifies for a Section 8

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
This thread now qualifies for a Section 8

lol

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Jeff7
What would happen if we'd spend $2-3 trillion fighting poverty?

We already did, its actually more like $8 trillion since Carter, and you know what it has accomplished? Nothing, its making things worse by funding welfare babies and teaching generational dependence on the govt.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Well, we need to spend more trillions. We need a program where anyone making less than $15/hour is provided with government sponsored and paid healthcare. No pre-existing conditions, no limits. No money out of pocket for those people. Also, anyone making less than $15/hr is given a grant to boost their wage UP to $15/hr. So, you know, they can live. That is the cutting point: $15/hr. Anything below that, everything from housing to healthcare to gas is subsidized.

If unemployment is a problem, we need federal funding to build factories to build widgets. Along with that we need a super-warehouse to store them all. The market makes no determination as to whether or not we actually NEED widgets, because it's the government's job to probide real wage jobs. So we will. Of course all the employees of said factory and warehouse will make $15/hr.

Along with those subsidies we need to pass legislation forcing top-tier collages to eliminate theyre tough admission standards, so that those below $15/hr can get free ride education to wherever they want. I mean, a good education shouldnt be just for the rich right?

edit: forgot to add: this program will paid for completely by anyone making more than $300,000/year, and the increase they pay rises with their income. And its based on gross, not net. Those rich fuckers wont get away with loopholes, and they SHOULD pay for the good of the country.

If that had a snowballs chance in hell of working, it would have already been done. its been tried in several variations, and as I pointed out already, only makes the problem worse, which in turn requires more money, then more, a downward spiral into a tanked economy.

Using simplistic cliche's about rich people, taxation, and poverty, is a pretty dangerous line of thinking. It's far too short sighted to be practical.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Jeff7
What would happen if we'd spend $2-3 trillion fighting poverty?

We already did, its actually more like $8 trillion since Carter, and you know what it has accomplished? Nothing, its making things worse by funding welfare babies and teaching generational dependence on the govt.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Well, we need to spend more trillions. We need a program where anyone making less than $15/hour is provided with government sponsored and paid healthcare. No pre-existing conditions, no limits. No money out of pocket for those people. Also, anyone making less than $15/hr is given a grant to boost their wage UP to $15/hr. So, you know, they can live. That is the cutting point: $15/hr. Anything below that, everything from housing to healthcare to gas is subsidized.

If unemployment is a problem, we need federal funding to build factories to build widgets. Along with that we need a super-warehouse to store them all. The market makes no determination as to whether or not we actually NEED widgets, because it's the government's job to probide real wage jobs. So we will. Of course all the employees of said factory and warehouse will make $15/hr.

Along with those subsidies we need to pass legislation forcing top-tier collages to eliminate theyre tough admission standards, so that those below $15/hr can get free ride education to wherever they want. I mean, a good education shouldnt be just for the rich right?

edit: forgot to add: this program will paid for completely by anyone making more than $300,000/year, and the increase they pay rises with their income. And its based on gross, not net. Those rich fuckers wont get away with loopholes, and they SHOULD pay for the good of the country.

If that had a snowballs chance in hell of working, it would have already been done. its been tried in several variations, and as I pointed out already, only makes the problem worse, which in turn requires more money, then more, a downward spiral into a tanked economy.

Using simplistic cliche's about rich people, taxation, and poverty, is a pretty dangerous line of thinking. It's far too short sighted to be practical.

Train: check your batteries

But, given so many threads about this kind of thing, many people certainly think my above scenario is how it SHOULD be.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Jeff7
What would happen if we'd spend $2-3 trillion fighting poverty?

We already did, its actually more like $8 trillion since Carter, and you know what it has accomplished? Nothing, its making things worse by funding welfare babies and teaching generational dependence on the govt.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Well, we need to spend more trillions. We need a program where anyone making less than $15/hour is provided with government sponsored and paid healthcare. No pre-existing conditions, no limits. No money out of pocket for those people. Also, anyone making less than $15/hr is given a grant to boost their wage UP to $15/hr. So, you know, they can live. That is the cutting point: $15/hr. Anything below that, everything from housing to healthcare to gas is subsidized.

If unemployment is a problem, we need federal funding to build factories to build widgets. Along with that we need a super-warehouse to store them all. The market makes no determination as to whether or not we actually NEED widgets, because it's the government's job to probide real wage jobs. So we will. Of course all the employees of said factory and warehouse will make $15/hr.

Along with those subsidies we need to pass legislation forcing top-tier collages to eliminate theyre tough admission standards, so that those below $15/hr can get free ride education to wherever they want. I mean, a good education shouldnt be just for the rich right?

edit: forgot to add: this program will paid for completely by anyone making more than $300,000/year, and the increase they pay rises with their income. And its based on gross, not net. Those rich fuckers wont get away with loopholes, and they SHOULD pay for the good of the country.

If that had a snowballs chance in hell of working, it would have already been done. its been tried in several variations, and as I pointed out already, only makes the problem worse, which in turn requires more money, then more, a downward spiral into a tanked economy.

Using simplistic cliche's about rich people, taxation, and poverty, is a pretty dangerous line of thinking. It's far too short sighted to be practical.

Train: check your batteries

But, given so many threads about this kind of thing, many people certainly think my above scenario is how it SHOULD be.

Well I feel bad for them, either uninformed or well informed of the REAL goal of socialism: total control in the hands of a few.

In either case, its against what america stands for: Freedom.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Jeff7
What would happen if we'd spend $2-3 trillion fighting poverty?

We already did, its actually more like $8 trillion since Carter, and you know what it has accomplished? Nothing, its making things worse by funding welfare babies and teaching generational dependence on the govt.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Well, we need to spend more trillions. We need a program where anyone making less than $15/hour is provided with government sponsored and paid healthcare. No pre-existing conditions, no limits. No money out of pocket for those people. Also, anyone making less than $15/hr is given a grant to boost their wage UP to $15/hr. So, you know, they can live. That is the cutting point: $15/hr. Anything below that, everything from housing to healthcare to gas is subsidized.

If unemployment is a problem, we need federal funding to build factories to build widgets. Along with that we need a super-warehouse to store them all. The market makes no determination as to whether or not we actually NEED widgets, because it's the government's job to probide real wage jobs. So we will. Of course all the employees of said factory and warehouse will make $15/hr.

Along with those subsidies we need to pass legislation forcing top-tier collages to eliminate theyre tough admission standards, so that those below $15/hr can get free ride education to wherever they want. I mean, a good education shouldnt be just for the rich right?

edit: forgot to add: this program will paid for completely by anyone making more than $300,000/year, and the increase they pay rises with their income. And its based on gross, not net. Those rich fuckers wont get away with loopholes, and they SHOULD pay for the good of the country.

If that had a snowballs chance in hell of working, it would have already been done. its been tried in several variations, and as I pointed out already, only makes the problem worse, which in turn requires more money, then more, a downward spiral into a tanked economy.

Using simplistic cliche's about rich people, taxation, and poverty, is a pretty dangerous line of thinking. It's far too short sighted to be practical.

Train: check your batteries

But, given so many threads about this kind of thing, many people certainly think my above scenario is how it SHOULD be.

Well I feel bad for them, either uninformed or well informed of the REAL goal of socialism: total control in the hands of a few.

In either case, its against what america stands for: Freedom.

Well there IS another solution also Ive thought about. The biggest thing we hear day in and day out is the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The broad solution is to add money to the poor's coffers and subtract money from the rich's. Here's how we do it:

Create a Consumer Cost Index (CCI). Every person will get a Cost Index Card (CIC) to transact any kind of business within the borders. The way it works is, depending on your income, you are assigned a Cost Index Factor (CIF). When you make purchases, whether it be a car, a house, rent an apartment, or buy gas or food, you must present your CIC. The price of what you are buying is adjusted per your CIF score. So, if joe schmoe who makes 28k/year goes to buy gas, he will pay say, $2.00/gal. If richie rich who makes say, $500,000/year buys gas, he will pay $6.00/gal. If joe goes to rent an apartment, he will pay say, $400/mo. If richie rents that same apartment, he will pay say, $3,000/mo. I mean, he can afford it right?

Its a brilliant plan that doesnt involve taxes. Buy having the rich pay more, it reduces their coffers, and by having the poor pay less, it increases theirs.

Brilliant.

 

[Train]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
...
Create a Consumer Cost Index (CCI). Every person will get a Cost Index Card (CIC) to transact any kind of business within the borders. The way it works is, depending on your income, you are assigned a Cost Index Factor (CIF). When you make purchases, whether it be a car, a house, rent an apartment, or buy gas or food, you must present your CIC. The price of what you are buying is adjusted per your CIF score. So, if joe schmoe who makes 28k/year goes to buy gas, he will pay say, $2.00/gal. If richie rich who makes say, $500,000/year buys gas, he will pay $6.00/gal. If joe goes to rent an apartment, he will pay say, $400/mo. If richie rents that same apartment, he will pay say, $3,000/mo. I mean, he can afford it right?

Its a brilliant plan that doesnt involve taxes. Buy having the rich pay more, it reduces their coffers, and by having the poor pay less, it increases theirs.

Brilliant.

sigh. Can you say fraud? Not to mention the mega bureacracy that would have to be set up to set the prices.

Ok poor guy buys gas for $2, sells it to rich guy for $5, but its unreported income, so his price to buy stuff never goes up. Or rich guy just stops reporting income til he's in the low paying bracket. Theres a million holes.

The more you try to control an economy the more of a blackmarket there will be. Its estimated that the black market in Germany accounts for 20% of thier total economy. And a lot of it is legal stuff, not like the US where the black market is pretty much limited to illegal things like drugs and hookers. Not only is the govt missing out on 20% of total taxable business, they are further hurting those who stay legit.

Best thing is to stay out of business as much as possible and let everything work out on its own.

 

[jersiq]

Originally posted by: FallenHero

Then tell me why the section 8 housing in every town I have experienced and talked to other people about always turns to shit the moment that they go section 8.

That's a function of crappy landlords. Whether Section 8 or not, it's the landlords who determine "appropriate behavior" for their rental.

Remove the Section 8, and the problem will still remain, just that the crummy landlord will not have a guaranteed check coming in.

My sister is on Section 8, 2 children, and unable to get anything more than a job at minimum wage. She cannot afford to go to school to improve her situation, and take care of her children.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Maybe everyone should step away from their computers and go work on a Habitat house ...

 

[jpeyton]

Originally posted by: blackangst1
Well, we need to spend more trillions.

I got a better idea: how about a $600 handout to help every taxpayer buy gas and groceries?

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: rpanic

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: rpanic
Was watching on the local morning news there was this line of like a thousand plus people to get Section 8 housing vouchers they were all standing in line since the day before. Now I can see helping out a seriously disabled person, but being stupid, making bad choices in life, having no ambition, or not speaking English doesn?t cut it. Paying an able bodied person just because they don?t make much seems wrong, how much you make is a personal choice for the most part, if you need more money get another job. It irritates me that I work my ass off and my tax dollars are going pay for some other persons rent.

Oh so you know that every person there was lazy, stupid, speak no english, etc...?

Could not be they hit hard times and lost their house recently, lost their job, just moved to the US legally and need a place, etc...

No that can;t be. They are just all lazy. But since its such a good deal why don;t you leave your job and get in line. Tell me how that works out for ya.

Considering that the average wait is years to get on the program I would say yes. This isn?t for people that just fell on hard times it?s for someone that has never and will never change. Most the people do have a job making minimum wage. Sometimes it takes up to 5 to 7 years, if someone is waiting that long for it I doubt their situation will ever change and they will be leaching to the day they die.

See, liberals don't think, they just act on feelings.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: Slew Foot

Originally posted by: Rainsford

Originally posted by: rpanic
Was watching on the local morning news there was this line of like a thousand plus people to get Section 8 housing vouchers they were all standing in line since the day before. Now I can see helping out a seriously disabled person, but being stupid, making bad choices in life, having no ambition, or not speaking English doesn?t cut it. Paying an able bodied person just because they don?t make much seems wrong, how much you make is a personal choice for the most part, if you need more money get another job. It irritates me that I work my ass off and my tax dollars are going pay for some other persons rent.

How is the amount of money you make entirely a personal choice? We like to talk a lot in this country about pulling yourself up by your bootstraps, but the dirty little secret is that most people who use that kind of language have never had to actually do that. Given your casual disdain for everyone, I'm willing to bet you were born into the middle class and are still there...big fucking accomplishment. And if that's not your story, it sure as hell is for most people who talk down to poor folks. You think it's easy for someone born into poverty, with crappy schools and no prospect of attending college to just "get another job"? Well gee, I'm not making enough working the register at Wal-Mart, maybe I should apply for one of those CEO jobs. Nah, I'll just sit here and enjoy my free ride! You really think that's what happens in this country, you think section 8 housing is such a great deal that people are staying poor to cash in?

Well of course you don't, you think this way for the same reason all economic conservatives think this way. You're some middle management gomer or some such who likes a system that says he's hot shit because he can live in a McMansion and drive a decent car, despite having been born into an economic class that made that an almost certainty. Poor people can't be poor because they've had a tough life, because if THEY aren't poor because they're stupid, YOU can't be well off because you're smart. The ideology that we get to claim all responsibility for our lot in life is popular not because it allows us to harangue poor people, but because it allows us to take credit for everything that's happened in our lives. You're like the pretty girl who really wants to believe that guys talk to her because she's interesting.

Let's just forget ideology and political bullshit and you wanting to make it sound like you're some sort of super hard worker and look at the facts. All the talk about "handouts" aside, being poor would not seem to be a real treat. Section 8 housing isn't the Ritz, welfare isn't like having a trust fund, and for the most part, pretty much everything about not having any money is worse than having it. You want to make the experience even more soul crushing than it is now? Hey, whatever helps pump up your ego...but I'm telling you, I think being poor sucks plenty already, I'm not sure the problem is that being poor is so awesome nobody wants to give it up. Maybe a better approach would be to try to provide the resources so poor people can help themselves rather than the "tough love" approach. Just a thought...but then again, I want to reduce the number of poor people, not participate in the conservative love-fest.

Heh, my parents came to the country wihth $1000 in their name. They lived with our cousins for a year until my mom got a job for min wage and then moved into a small apartment in downtown milwaukee. My dad soon got a job with an engineering firm for about 20K/yr, he took night classes to advance his degree, and eventually made his way up the corporate ladder to own his own company.

Poor people dont want to work hard to gain in society (not all, most), they want it handed to them on a platter.

But it's NOT being handed to them on a platter, that's what's so silly about your argument. You can preach that "poor people don't want to work hard" line all day, but do you REALLY think being poor is so great that people just can't be bothered to get a better job?

And like I said, your story is by far the exception...the biggest concentration of "pull yourself up by your bootstraps" ideology I've ever met was among the spoiled punks that went to my high school in one of the richer suburbs of Minneapolis. And nothing I've seen since then has convinced me that there is a large group of people out there who are qualified to talk down to poor people the way they do.

Edit: If some people like your parents can go from being poor to being better off, that's great, more power to them. But what makes you think circumstances and abilities and opportunities are identical for everyone?

You're right, their opportunities weren't identical. In fact it was 10x harder for immigrant who couldn't speak the language.

 

[xeemzor]

Originally posted by: JS80

Originally posted by: rpanic

Originally posted by: Marlin1975

Originally posted by: rpanic
Was watching on the local morning news there was this line of like a thousand plus people to get Section 8 housing vouchers they were all standing in line since the day before. Now I can see helping out a seriously disabled person, but being stupid, making bad choices in life, having no ambition, or not speaking English doesn?t cut it. Paying an able bodied person just because they don?t make much seems wrong, how much you make is a personal choice for the most part, if you need more money get another job. It irritates me that I work my ass off and my tax dollars are going pay for some other persons rent.

Oh so you know that every person there was lazy, stupid, speak no english, etc...?

Could not be they hit hard times and lost their house recently, lost their job, just moved to the US legally and need a place, etc...

No that can;t be. They are just all lazy. But since its such a good deal why don;t you leave your job and get in line. Tell me how that works out for ya.

Considering that the average wait is years to get on the program I would say yes. This isn?t for people that just fell on hard times it?s for someone that has never and will never change. Most the people do have a job making minimum wage. Sometimes it takes up to 5 to 7 years, if someone is waiting that long for it I doubt their situation will ever change and they will be leaching to the day they die.

See, liberals don't think, they just act on feelings.

Both conservatives and liberals have come up with their fair share of dumb programs/policies. Personally, I'm a fan of a civil society.

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Train

Originally posted by: Jeff7
What would happen if we'd spend $2-3 trillion fighting poverty?

We already did, its actually more like $8 trillion since Carter, and you know what it has accomplished? Nothing, its making things worse by funding welfare babies and teaching generational dependence on the govt.

The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Well, we need to spend more trillions. We need a program where anyone making less than $15/hour is provided with government sponsored and paid healthcare. No pre-existing conditions, no limits. No money out of pocket for those people. Also, anyone making less than $15/hr is given a grant to boost their wage UP to $15/hr. So, you know, they can live. That is the cutting point: $15/hr. Anything below that, everything from housing to healthcare to gas is subsidized.

If unemployment is a problem, we need federal funding to build factories to build widgets. Along with that we need a super-warehouse to store them all. The market makes no determination as to whether or not we actually NEED widgets, because it's the government's job to probide real wage jobs. So we will. Of course all the employees of said factory and warehouse will make $15/hr.

Along with those subsidies we need to pass legislation forcing top-tier collages to eliminate theyre tough admission standards, so that those below $15/hr can get free ride education to wherever they want. I mean, a good education shouldnt be just for the rich right?

edit: forgot to add: this program will paid for completely by anyone making more than $300,000/year, and the increase they pay rises with their income. And its based on gross, not net. Those rich fuckers wont get away with loopholes, and they SHOULD pay for the good of the country.

If that had a snowballs chance in hell of working, it would have already been done. its been tried in several variations, and as I pointed out already, only makes the problem worse, which in turn requires more money, then more, a downward spiral into a tanked economy.

Using simplistic cliche's about rich people, taxation, and poverty, is a pretty dangerous line of thinking. It's far too short sighted to be practical.

Train: check your batteries

But, given so many threads about this kind of thing, many people certainly think my above scenario is how it SHOULD be.

Well I feel bad for them, either uninformed or well informed of the REAL goal of socialism: total control in the hands of a few.

In either case, its against what america stands for: Freedom.

Well there IS another solution also Ive thought about. The biggest thing we hear day in and day out is the rich are getting richer and the poor are getting poorer. The broad solution is to add money to the poor's coffers and subtract money from the rich's. Here's how we do it:

Create a Consumer Cost Index (CCI). Every person will get a Cost Index Card (CIC) to transact any kind of business within the borders. The way it works is, depending on your income, you are assigned a Cost Index Factor (CIF). When you make purchases, whether it be a car, a house, rent an apartment, or buy gas or food, you must present your CIC. The price of what you are buying is adjusted per your CIF score. So, if joe schmoe who makes 28k/year goes to buy gas, he will pay say, $2.00/gal. If richie rich who makes say, $500,000/year buys gas, he will pay $6.00/gal. If joe goes to rent an apartment, he will pay say, $400/mo. If richie rents that same apartment, he will pay say, $3,000/mo. I mean, he can afford it right?

Its a brilliant plan that doesnt involve taxes. Buy having the rich pay more, it reduces their coffers, and by having the poor pay less, it increases theirs.

Brilliant.

dude communism doesn't work
why are you so insistent on telling people what to do and controlling others' lives?