Hellobee Boards

@Adira: I guess what I mean is I have read numerous articles that present a different picture...without doing more research into the one article you provided I cant just take it for truth...there is research and facts to support both sides of every argument usually...it takes some digging to determine what you believe and what you do not find to be reliable. I simply havent had the opportunity to look into what you presented so I cant so "oh wow - you are right I was so wrong"...

I just have to say a huge whoa to so many of these comments. Yikes.

@Mrs D: It seems to me that you're open to the discussion, I don't think any of us have all the answers, but I do think part of the problem is that we do look at the people on welfare through the lenses of our own experience. It used to seem outrageous to me that people recieving aid couldn't make the food stamps last the month, until I learned about all the restrictions they may have while living in a shelter, or how they had to travel to the store or how they had no belongings because their house burned down and they don't have money to buy a frying pan.

I agree that monitoring is a good idea, but I get stuck on what the rules should be, which is why I come back to the all or none solution.

@sunny: Exactly. Also, in Canada we get tax exemptions on enrolling our kids in sports activities up to $1000 -- low income families wouldn't even get to use those tax credits since most wouldn't be able to afford sending their kids to these programs.

@Mrs D: So you seem to trust your anecdotal experience over actual research data - so you don't even believe studies that support your beliefs? Also, the rich get richer not by working hard, but because their money is working for them through investments - and they are the ones who benefit from the lower tax on capital gains.

@Mrs D: I can't imagine that someone on a strict grocery budget isn't looking at the what's on sale in the store they currently are shopping in.

As for couponing, I've tried it and I found that it is incredibly time consuming and that to do it effectively, it requires stockpiling. I don't think someone in a shelter/crisis housing has the ability to stockpile due to budget and space constraints.

@Ree723: I was just thinking that. This whole "i pulled myself up by my bootstraps so others should too" mentality lacks empathy. I could very well say that since my parents came to this country with maybe $100 to their name and were able to do very well for themselves - but that was not just only due to hard work, but good business decisions, community support and luck. I know people who have had to fall back on assistance temporarily because of poor decisions no fault of their own and just bad luck. These programs are there for a reason.

@Mrs D: Well, the 2.6% number comes from the Department of Labor, so, the government, so I'd guess you wouldn't believe it, based on the source.

WOW.

I support higher taxes. Quality of life for ALL is important to me. Even for those who suffer from ailments that I don't know of or understand myself. Just because I think someone LOOKS lazy, doesn't mean they ARE lazy. Having compassion and empathy is something more people need in this world. I hope those people who are doing so well for themselves never fall on hard times.

I don't understand how giving your own money to charity solves the healthcare crisis in the US. There will still be people who don't receive that money and are uninsured. Peoplelosing their homes, going bankrupt or into massive debt because of medically necessary procedures. That is just mind boggling to me.

@Mrs D: I don't disagree that theres plenty of strange tax laws but deducting your student loan interest at most would save you $600. You say you donate to charity, which at a higher income level, you have more ability to do and take advantage of those deductions than those taking advantage of loan interest deduction. And any income over 118000 isn't going to have social security tax. There's plenty of positives for a higher income. As for investments or other ways to put your money away, those are all personal decisions, if you choose not to keep your money by those methods that's your choice.

Part of the point of taxation is to keep money circulating. So theres a lot of ways to protect your money from as high of a rate of taxation but it does have requirements associated with it to keep money invested in our economy.

@jedeve: I think everyones opinions are valid - just because I may not agree doesnt mean I dont listen and hear them out. I hope if I have proven anything its that I am open to solutions...not that I am close minded.

Selling Stamps: As the daughter and daughter in law of recovering alcoholics I am familiar with the disease. I personally view it as an illness similar to any other mental illness that requires medical rehabilitation. In my view of the world these people - the ones who want help and to be helped - would fall into the category of those who NEED help. My personal hope would be that these individuals would fall into the category of those that would benefit from realigning resources to those who want it and want to do right by it. Although I am being perceived as a cold and heartless individual by many here - which I can see - I would hope that a corrected system would allow for funding to such centers.

I agree with everything you say about eating healthy and food stamps - I just always view more education on these topics as better.

I think I should further clarify to you that to me a homeless person is a NEED no matter what. They have found themselves in these circumstances which I have thankfully never been in and need help to get out of. I think while they represent the easiest "point the finger" of abusers I dont think they are the real problem at all - and I think in many cases they are the "exceptions" to many of the "rules" I may have mentioned. I guess its hard to explain for me but a homeless person has slipped so far through the cracks of society that at initial glance you cannot determine if they want help or not - so you have to offer it. Once you have helped them to a certain point (I dont know what that point is) then you can start to assess do they want the help or not. In the beginning you cannot simply blame a homeless alcoholic for abusing the system to feed his addiction which helps him survive - first you would have to help them to get them to a point where you can truly understand what they want. Not sure that makes sense...

As for the children - its the biggest issue and the one that I think is hardest to answer. How to help the children when you have an adult who is abusing the system. Its a lose lose. If the adult is taking the money...the kid is not getting it. Giving the adult more money does not guarantee it gets to the kid either. Its awful - and I honestly dont know what the answer is.

@Ree723: People cheat the system - all systems - on both sides. This will always be the case. I do not think abolishing the system is right - I think reviewing it to determine what is and is not working is what should be done...both for the tax system and for the social welfare systems!

@pinkcupcake: And those are only the people who are trying. Don't forget about those messed up addicts who don't want help! Let them die!

@jedeve: Thanks for sharing and I find your findings interesting. And I don't mean this to discredit, but to get your thoughts on what I have witnessed and if this would be "found" by the government.

Also apologies, as maybe I'm going down a rabbit hole that really is off topic.

We have a "family member" whose girlfriend is a SNAP recipient. She does not work, she has three children. The father of the three children is deceased. She is living expense free with members of my family (she's not contributing to household expenses such as rent or utilities). I don't know how much her SNAP benefit is, but I know it's being utilized to feed more than her children and her. I also know that she's not reporting that she has a significant other that is providing for her. Her children are all in school and she spends her day in front of the TV or internet. Where she lives is a poverty stricken area. I'm just curious how the government would know that she's using her benefits for more than her. Or if there are any requirements with SNAP for her to be trying to work (she's not disabled). This person makes a myriad of poor choices which have led to her current situation. As an example, I suspect she doesn't have a high school diploma, which likely makes employment challenging. I know she doesn't hold a valid drivers license (though she drives a car daily).

I think these are the examples that so many of us see and are referencing here. While they may not make up the majority it feels like abuse and lack of motivation to get out of the "system". And I just don't know how the statistics pick these people up.

eta: I'm not saying that I don't think she is entitled, I just don't feel like her full story is known by the agencies that are giving her benefits. And for the record, I'd love for this person to get a GED and drivers license and a job, but I don't see any motivation to do so on her part. I'd personally write the check for it!

@MamaG: I would be very interested to hear as well! I've seen studies where the fraud percentages are cited as being very very small, but it's hard to believe that when you see it smacking you in the face. I could share a similar story of a friend from high school. Her father didn't work, he wasn't disabled, but they received food stamps and other assistance and he had big screen TVs, guitars, etc. and she was always trying to get others to share their lunches and squirreling away anything she could (like apples or granola bars, anything that would keep in her backpack for a day or two) because she didn't get enough to eat at home. Often her meals were some uncooked ramen or a can of spaghetti-o's or whatever.

Stuff like that makes it hard to trust the system, even though I do believe the studies and I understand that the fraud rate is very low.

FWIW, she is also on assistance as an adult and does not work. She could, but doesn't. She's covered in tattoos and often brags on social media about her assistance.

@avivoca: I'm truthfully not agruing but the way I see it - I find time to coupon/sale hunt/base my meals around sale products and I work 60+ hours most weeks. I take care of a toddler - many weekends I do all of this single parenting style (at least during the day time hours) - and am 35+ weeks pregnant. I'm not saying I am the same as them but why hold these people to different standards than ourselves? If we want them to be equals - and we want to provide for them so they can be more "equal" to us why not expect them to exercise some of the same precautions with their benefits that we exercise with our own income?

I'm sure its coming out wrong - and I am sure I'll be attacked for saying that...just the way my evil brain processes it

@catomd00: I couldn't agree more, you got a whole host of politicians to recommend? It would be radical change in Washington (and not just at the very top as President). IMO, our current government (not exclusively President) is inefficient and we are digging a deeper hole each day. I'm all for efficiency and getting the good to the people and getting rid of waste.

@catomd00: From an outsider's perspective, I agree that this is the solution. Maybe it's naive to expect people to elect someone who actually cares about society and helping those who need help, rather than lining their own pockets, or the pockets of those who support them, i.e., banks, special interest groups, and the military industrial complex. It's absolutely ridiculous how much the U.S. spends on defence, and how much time and money is spend on elections.

@Lawbee11: It may be obvious, but I Bernie, too. And I'm a little jealous that he's an elected official (and running for higher office) in your country instead of my own!

@catomd00: @MamaG: @astro bee: I would very much support more transparency and less corruption at the top! Politicians should be held to account.

More generally, though, I do think it's a fallacy to say only government is corrupt. There is a reason there was a financial crisis in 2008. There's a reason there is no more Enron or Leiman Brothers. There's a reason Bernie Madoff is in federal custody. Power, whether public or private, can and often does breed incentive for corruption. And this is EXACTLY why I think the government should be trusted to administer universal servers like healthcare. Because, in theory, there is a mechanism for controlling the corruption: citizen participation via VOTING. But, then again, this would require substantially more people to actually participate in the process than actually do, especially on the local level. A knowledgeable and informed citizenry that demands better of its elected officials the best tool we have against corruption. Demand elected officials be transparent in their donations, refuse money they see as tainted, and practice what they preach. I suspect that Trump and Sanders are so popular because both are doing just that-refusing to be bought.

What incentives are there for for-profit companies to be efficient and administer programs fairly? None, except the fear of going out of business. But thst doesn't stop them from ruining lives in the process (see Madoff, above). It might balance itself out eventually, macro-economically speaking, but it is unethical.

Also, I love that people give to charity, but unless that charity provides health coverage to those who can't afford it, or food to struggling families, or pays for someone's daycare, I see that as a related, yet distinct issue from a basic social safety net. Your donation, however generous, is unlikely to go nearly as far for as comparable spending by the government, simply because of the number of people you can reach. This is less true than say, the Gates Foundation, or the Ford Foundation, but I don't think that's the level of donation we are talking about here.

@snowjewlz: rigt? The fact that I am paying for those asshats to sit in prison right now with a pretty penny in their pocket annoys me to no end. Ethics reform better get passed this year, that's for damn sure.

@Mrs D: You're arguing the pronunciation of potatoes to me. A prison is still a prison, an army is still an army, and interference is still interference whether governmental or corporate. Each has plenty of corruption that's been associated with it. You're arguing for more interference which whoever is doing it restricts freedoms and can easily start being applied to more and more people.

As for equality, no one has argued that everyone is equal in training, athletics, motivation, IQ, etc. you've argued about you and your husbands student loans and how you feel punished for pursuing higher education. But you didn't have to go to such expensive places, you could have worked more, that was a choice, just like an iPhone. You know what my husband and I did. We got athletic and academic scholarships and worked and came out without loans and were paid to get through our degrees. Maybe loan assistance shouldnt be available, only those that have gumption and motivation and work ethic to make it through.