Should welfare recipients be allowed to have luxury items?

Page 8 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

CitizenKain

Diamond Member
Jul 6, 2000
4,480
14
76
50 years ago Americans had values and principles and were typically Christian. No one worried that if bum showed up, because we didn't have serial killers or thrill killers or people that just don't care if you live or die. 50 years ago the tramp came to your back door (not the front door, that would be presumptuous) to ask if you had any work he could do to EARN a meal. Things were a lot different. Now tramps and bums are entitled; they aren't gratefully looking to chop some wood for a meal, they're demanding a home, support, cable TV and the Internet. Now tramps and bums are hard to distinguish from the teenager who shoots the clerk AFTER getting the money, the convict who rapes your wife and daughter and then sets them on fire, the perv who kidnaps and rapes children and then buries them alive. 50 years ago America had a LOT less evil.
.

That is such a giant load of shit that if it was anyone else writing it, I'd say its satire.

Sure, America was a fantastic place if you were a white male. Not so great for anyone else. Seriously, do you not think people were murdered back then? That there weren't any serial killers or thrill killers? Where do people come up with this shit?
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
That is such a giant load of shit that if it was anyone else writing it, I'd say its satire.

Sure, America was a fantastic place if you were a white male. Not so great for anyone else. Seriously, do you not think people were murdered back then? That there weren't any serial killers or thrill killers? Where do people come up with this shit?

You are a complete delusional idiot if you think that there was anything even remotely close to the level of random violence back then as there is now.
 

nonlnear

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,497
0
76
One problem is how the rules are set up. You are allowed to have 1 car and 1 home but no value limits are set on those items. Part of the reason for that is it is too heavy a burden on the government to determine what is an appropriate home value limit for one part of town vs another, or one state to another.

For example to get assistance in NC you have to meet the following for family of 4:
It would be an onerous burden to track the value of every car out there, not to mention that a government imposed standard would have to be a hard cutoff and somebody somewhere would have a vehicle that doesn't fit the profile, leading to a ridiculous imposition. However it would be a very simple mater to put a limit on the amount that a vehicle could be financed for, and a maximum monthly payment on any lien or lease on a vehicle. If you own your Caddy free and clear, no problem. If you're paying $600/month on your Lexus, no dice. Maybe no car loans worth more than $20000 and no monthly payments above $300 to pull some numbers out of a smelly place. (I'd personally set the total loan max a good deal lower than $20000, but the is Amer'kuh where modesty is politically intractable.)
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,764
347
126
It would be an onerous burden to track the value of every car out there, not to mention that a government imposed standard would have to be a hard cutoff and somebody somewhere would have a vehicle that doesn't fit the profile, leading to a ridiculous imposition. However it would be a very simple mater to put a limit on the amount that a vehicle could be financed for, and a maximum monthly payment on any lien or lease on a vehicle. If you own your Caddy free and clear, no problem. If you're paying $600/month on your Lexus, no dice. Maybe no car loans worth more than $20000 and no monthly payments above $300 to pull some numbers out of a smelly place. (I'd personally set the total loan max a good deal lower than $20000, but the is Amer'kuh where modesty is politically intractable.)

Such a limit presently exists; The database with registered vehicles is cross referenced with recipients. Anything with a taxed value exceeding 13k hurts your benefits.

And yes, it is an impossibly poor system where by you only need to transfer the title to a trusted 3rd entity in-order to avoid the problem.


As for your idea; which is great: they simply don't do it. They don't care how much credit you access or why: it just isn't counted as income.
 

nonlnear

Platinum Member
Jan 31, 2008
2,497
0
76
And yes, it is an impossibly poor system where by you only need to transfer the title to a trusted 3rd entity in-order to avoid the problem.
At first glance this loophole seems hard to avoid, but it's possible. While I have no objection to poor people on welfare having nice things if they truly are gifts, or if they previously owned them, or if they are stupid enough to save up for them while living on the dole. If somebody's brother gives a nice car that the recipient doesn't want to sell, whatever. However a welfare recipient should be absolutely forbidden from making any kind of payment to the registered owner of a vehicle that the welfare recipient drives frequently, or any payments to any lien holder on such a vehicle, or any payments of such a person's other debts, expenses, etc. I would make that a lifetime exclusion from welfare benefits. A bounty of $10,000 for snitches would go a long way to eradicating that little problem.
 

Zebo

Elite Member
Jul 29, 2001
39,398
19
81
Crime is way down. Been falling since FBI kept stats. It's probably because of social welfare system. When society cares about you, you care about society.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,764
347
126
Crime is way down. Been falling since FBI kept stats. It's probably because of social welfare system. When society cares about you, you care about society.

Many causes I think; including increase in education, decrease in the urban poor population and the generally increasing size of the leviathan above us all.

A bounty of $10,000 for snitches would go a long way to eradicating that little problem.
This is a great idea!
 

Siddhartha

Lifer
Oct 17, 1999
12,505
3
81
Luxury items include things like:
cell phones
flat screen HDTVs
air conditioning
current generation game consoles
cars less than say 5 years old

...anything else you care to add.

As long as recipients of Middle Class and Corporate welfare are treated the same way.
 

paperfist

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2000
6,517
280
126
www.the-teh.com
+1 No cash, just vouchers for the things you need.

Don't know if this was already addressed, but that doesn't work. At least here in NY some on welfare sell their 'food stamps' for $00.50 on a $1.00 so they can buy crack or smokes. Real nice use of my tax dollars.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,764
347
126
Don't know if this was already addressed, but that doesn't work. At least here in NY some on welfare sell their 'food stamps' for $00.50 on a $1.00 so they can buy crack or smokes. Real nice use of my tax dollars.

Here in Texas it's on a credit-card that only approved stores can use for particular items; Violation of this is major bad mo-jo for the retailer.


The question is: Are booze and smokes something we let people spend government money on?
 

paperfist

Diamond Member
Nov 30, 2000
6,517
280
126
www.the-teh.com
Here in Texas it's on a credit-card that only approved stores can use for particular items; Violation of this is major bad mo-jo for the retailer.


The question is: Are booze and smokes something we let people spend government money on?

If it's 'government' money then it's laundered money because it starts off life as tax payer money :)

It's a violation to do that here in NY and a few local stores were busted for it. On the other hand the welfare recipients got a slap on the wrist.

And no, they shouldn't get any 'perks' while on welfare. I don't mean people in actual need of help, I mean people who have made a career of being on welfare, popping out a baby here and there to get another $3k back on their taxes while they paid -$20k into the system.
 

Dr. Zaus

Lifer
Oct 16, 2008
11,764
347
126
get another $3k back on their taxes while they paid -$20k into the system
you think this happens don't you?

NO joke; you really think this is the way things happen... in real life...


Well.. I know you do; because I thought that way, before I met people outside of my little world.
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
As far as "same advantages" - in public education it should be a pretty level playing field for children.

I don't agree with this. I think it should solely be based on the tax base. If you don't have it, you will have to double up with another school.

Thing is they not only want equal education, but equal facilities, equal classroom size, etc.

Despite all equality, schools in depressed areas do terribily worse than those in nice ones. So now the little people cry out let's bus them to those schools.

The kids still do terrible.

There is a lot to this and sadly it does come down to money. In poorer families, most kids do whatever the fuck they want. At dinner even if it's a group meal, the topic is not what the kids did, but anything but it.

Over summers, there is nothing for them.

In better income families, the parents have more time. Dinner revolves around "did you do your homework" and even better challenging them with self-knowledge.

Summer's still revolve around paying attention to the kids and throwing 'lessons' their way.

Every summer / break the poorer kids knowledge regresses, the richer kids stays at least even if not slightly better in some cases. By the end of 12 years the difference is dramatic.

There is a lot on this topic. I had a close friend that did a paper on this in college.

This is another case of no one wanting to touch the real issue.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
Luxury items include things like:
cell phones
flat screen HDTVs
air conditioning
current generation game consoles
cars less than say 5 years old

...anything else you care to add.

This is moronic. Cell phones are not luxury items anymore, they are essential safety tools. Ever get stranded, and need to call AAA? And flat screens? Guess what, people own TVs here in America, and they DONT EVEN SELL CRTs anymore. You want a TV? You get a flat-screen. There is no other type. And air conditioning? I would probably die without it in the summer. Especially among the elderly, where there is a greater chance of a heatstroke. Limit current-gen game consoles? Why not PCs? Is entertainment forbidden? Communication? Why not prohibit phones and TVs and computers entirely. Force the "welfare set" to become AMISH, and farm the land.
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
A social safety net should supply you only with necessities. The following are not necessities: a TV of any sort, especially with cable/satellite/other subscription service; a console or computer from any generation; an internet connection; a car of any age; cigarettes; alcohol; pets, especially a pack of large dogs; soda, especially enough to fill a vending machine. I lived large chunks of last year in temporary housing without any of these things except a laptop, and I only used that for work (not much else to do with it without internet), so it can indeed be done. In fact, it was amazing how much work I got done without all of these other things as distractions.

Another stupid post. Part of the political discourse of this country is done via television. Cutting welfare recipients off from the political process is draconian and unfair. Likewise with the internet. Many people get their news via the internet, and get this - filling out gov't forms over the internet, SAVES THE GOVT MONEY, compared to mailing and processing forms by mail. Besides, computer technology is cheap. Anybody can pick up a serviceable computer on craigslist or from the Dell Outlet cheap. Prohibiting computers and the internet is entirely un-democratic. Want to bring back the poll tax too?
 

VirtualLarry

No Lifer
Aug 25, 2001
56,548
10,171
126
I see what the OP is driving at here. The bottom line however is that the system in place now encourages fraud. Instead of increasing budgets to up enforcement and play with requirements, lets put an end to this crap once and for all. Raise taxes on EVERYBODY. Poor people, rich people, middle class, everybody. With the increased revenue, provide basic necessities to EVERYBODY. Power voucher, water voucher, food voucher etc. No more complaining about the poor getting all those unfair advantages. We all know the government is much better at managing our money right?

You mean turn America into Cuba?
 

alkemyst

No Lifer
Feb 13, 2001
83,769
19
81
So let's get this straight for a welfare person to survive they need:

AC: who sets the temps and type? Should the home be cooled to comfortable or survivable temps. Should it be shut down all hours between 8am and 6pm?

TV: I can agree. What size though? 13" LCD should be plenty.

Gaming Consoles: seriously? chances are there will be a lot of welfare kids where one is...they can't play outside.

Computers: How many to a home, gaming rigs?

Cell phones: Ok...do they all need them? How many minutes do they get? Do they get texting and data?

Seriously?!?!?
 

xj0hnx

Diamond Member
Dec 18, 2007
9,262
3
76
Some of the people in this thread remind me of the humans in WALL-E, I mean holy cow what did humans do back when you had to walk to the next room, and Jesus, changing your own clothes? The audacity.

I don't think anyone is calling for poor people not to have an of those items, just that it's pretty ridiculous that they can afford non-essentials like big screen TV's, call phones, gaming consoles, 30K cars, but yet still need welfare. The entitlement mentality is disgusting.
 

96Firebird

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 2010
5,714
316
126
And flat screens? Guess what, people own TVs here in America, and they DONT EVEN SELL CRTs anymore. You want a TV? You get a flat-screen. There is no other type.

Who says they need new TVs? Can't they buy cheap, used CRTs from a garage sale or the Salvation Army?
 

bfdd

Lifer
Feb 3, 2007
13,312
1
0
Illegals get picked up and generally make 10 bucks an hour, sometimes more. How come we don't see welfare recipients lined up with the illegals trying to make a buck? Oh yeah because most are lazy pieces of shit who think they are above doing that kind of work. Not ALL are like this, there are plenty of hardworking people who need a hand and I believe we should always try to help those who help themselves. The rest though? No excuse.
 

Carmen813

Diamond Member
May 18, 2007
3,189
0
76
50 years ago Americans had values and principles and were typically Christian. No one worried that if bum showed up, because we didn't have serial killers or thrill killers or people that just don't care if you live or die. 50 years ago the tramp came to your back door (not the front door, that would be presumptuous) to ask if you had any work he could do to EARN a meal. Things were a lot different. Now tramps and bums are entitled; they aren't gratefully looking to chop some wood for a meal, they're demanding a home, support, cable TV and the Internet. Now tramps and bums are hard to distinguish from the teenager who shoots the clerk AFTER getting the money, the convict who rapes your wife and daughter and then sets them on fire, the perv who kidnaps and rapes children and then buries them alive. 50 years ago America had a LOT less evil.

I always knew you loved JFK.

I see no reason welfare recipients shouldn't be "allowed" to have "luxury" items.
 

Hayabusa Rider

Admin Emeritus & Elite Member
Jan 26, 2000
50,879
4,266
126
I always knew you loved JFK.

I see no reason welfare recipients shouldn't be "allowed" to have "luxury" items.

I haven't read the whole of the thread, so I'll start with you :p

I suppose it is situational. I don't know what constitutes "luxury" lets take some real world examples.

Person "A" is given a modest car to get from place to place. I consider that fine. If they can budget to afford buying one, I'm good with that.

Person "B" (a real life person I know) wins a fully loaded Hummer at a Casino he goes to every week. He tells us it's a 65K car that he has registered in a friends name so he doesn't have that counted as an asset. He usually tells us how he defrauds us each time he comes in then waives the copay for his medication as he buys beer and cigarettes because "he doesn't have the dollar".

I'm ok with the first. The second? Guess!
 

96Firebird

Diamond Member
Nov 8, 2010
5,714
316
126
He usually tells us how he defrauds us each time he comes in then waives the copay for his medication as he buys beer and cigarettes because "he doesn't have the dollar".

My girlfriends sees this all the time, as she works as a pharmacy tech. Sometimes the pharmacist will say something about it to the person, but it won't change anything. Why pay the dollar copay when someone else can?