|
|
Post by Noble Work on Jun 29, 2011 11:37:40 GMT -5
If public assistance is used on a limited basis as the temporary assistance it is intended to be, then I have no problem with it. Unfortunately, anyone working with the general public knows that a ridiculous number of folks are choosing to live generation after generation on it. Folks are even fighting to have their children declared disabled just so that they can receive an additional couple hundred SSI dollars a month. They are already paying next to nothing in housing, utilities, food, childcare and healthcare.  The system should be reformed with the goal being to end the cycle of dependency, a problem that I believe has had the most detrimental impact on the AA community. I agree. To use the system in the time of need. But NOT abuse. I believe in it was Clinton's era when an applicant had to work a certain amount of hours to get FS. I'm sure that's not the only qualification and/or there may be other exclusions to this but to me that is/was a way to limit or absorb some of the abuse. Then again there are loopholes in everything. |
|
|
|
Post by Rare_Commodity on Aug 23, 2011 10:39:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Cambist on Aug 25, 2011 10:03:59 GMT -5
Food stamps have become "low wage support." is about the most profound thing i've read about this phenomenon in a while. My question is this, when SNAP benefits are cut and the economy is still on life support, and jobs have still not been created....what then?
I almost threw up when the lady whose husband had been laid off said that she was reluctant to apply for assistance because of the national deficit. WHY ARE PEOPLE THINKING ABOUT THE DEFICIT!? I swear...if states like Alabama, Mississippi, New Mexico, Georgia, Texas, and my beloved Arkansas elect Republicans to any government position, we get exactly what we deserve.
The philosophy in America today is that if you are not wealthy its because you (or your parents) didn't work hard enough and the only way to inspire you to do so is to starve you. The wealthy (moreso those elected officials who have sworn allegience to them) dont want the government to provide anything they can provide for themselves. So roads, fire, police, military, etc...are fine. Food, housing, education assistance, public schools, etc...are bad. If you can't afford to send your child to a private school, then you need to work harder....that's their philosophy
|
|
|
|
Post by LogAKAlly <3'n Keef on Sept 15, 2011 23:48:56 GMT -5
At the bolded...when you say things like this, it makes me really curious to know how old you are. (OMG...I feel so old for what I'm about to say) If you live long enough, you might come to develop a different outlook (either through your own personal experience or that of someone close to you)...sometimes life has a way of knocking you flat on your a$$ when you least expect it, despite how smart, driven, hard-working, and educated you are. Everybody on public assistance isn't lazy & mooching...and in fact, many folks at one time were gainfully employed and paid into that very system, and plan to eventually be gainfully employed and again paying into it. Things aren't always as black & white as they seem...and I would guess that the percentage of people abusing the system is nowhere near as high as we would think...those are just the only stories we hear. How do you feel about it? I was reading this article www.star-telegram.com/2011/06/20/3166840/man-kills-ex-girlfriend-her-friend.html and some of the comments made were about how that's what they expect from black woman. Living on public assistance and settling for past criminals. Personally I am against it. Each person should set goals and have to struggle to get where they need. Why should they be handed a "get by" card because they choose to take the easy way out? I understand that not everyone possesses the skills or capacity to want or obtain more but no excuse.
Have you ever bought food stamps lol? EXALT. |
|
