Started By
Message

re: Welfare. Discussion starts here, let's see where it takes us.

Posted on 3/19/14 at 10:55 am to
Posted by DynastyDawg
Relf-Coast
Member since Jan 2013
10886 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 10:55 am to
quote:

Guys like Rep. Stephen Fincher from Tennessee that has received millions in farm subsidies.



I didn't read the whole thing but this means he gets tax breaks for owning and operating a farm, and wants the government to help add more insurance for farmers?

So he works, gets tax breaks, instead of sitting on his arse and receives welfare checks...

Help me understand, because I'm sure I'm not getting the entirety of that story...
Posted by The Spleen
Member since Dec 2010
38865 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 10:56 am to
quote:

I don't have a problem with vilifying people who are able to work and game the system instead.

I don't have a problem vilifying the rich who game the system either.


That's fair, but I'd rather vilify the system and work to improve the system so it can no longer be gamed. Cutting funding to a system because some people choose to game it is a lazy approach and doesn't fix the underlying issue. I'd even argue that it might make the problem worse.
Posted by Duke
Twin Lakes, CO
Member since Jan 2008
35623 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 10:58 am to
quote:

I believe in social safety nets. I don't agree with welfare's current form. I don't agree with food stamps being a blank debit card you can use however you choose. I don't agree with welfare making people comfortable. I think the epidemic of overspending doesn't need to start with addressing welfare, but I think it should get there eventually. There are much bigger problems than the overspending relating to welfare. I essentially disagree with the arguments presented by both sides.



Now here's somebody talking some sense.
Posted by taylormade
Tumbleton
Member since Jan 2011
9802 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 10:59 am to
Great Research!!
quote:

DynastyDawg




this blows on so many levels...

Posted by The Spleen
Member since Dec 2010
38865 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:02 am to
quote:

I didn't read the whole thing but this means he gets tax breaks for owning and operating a farm, and wants the government to help add more insurance for farmers?

So he works, gets tax breaks, instead of sitting on his arse and receives welfare checks...

Help me understand, because I'm sure I'm not getting the entirety of that story...



More than just tax breaks. Many farm subsidies are direct payments from the government, for various reasons.

quote:

In 2012 alone, the congressman was cut a government check for a $70,000 direct payment. Direct payments are issued automatically, regardless of need, and go predominantly to the largest, most profitable farm operations in the country.


Posted by Vols&Shaft83
Throbbing Member
Member since Dec 2012
69908 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:06 am to
quote:

what do you guys think of drug testing welfare recipients? 


It's one of those things that sounds good, but is pretty useless in implementation. Will end up costing the states more money than it saves.

A real solution would be to require able-bodied welfare recipients to perform community service before receiving checks, if they received welfare longer than 3 months.
Posted by DynastyDawg
Relf-Coast
Member since Jan 2013
10886 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:10 am to
quote:

I believe the ballooning of those numbers has quite a bit to do with the recession and fallout from it. It's been stagnant at the bottom and food prices aren't getting lower.


While it probably got worse after the recession, it was still what could be classified as a major problem prior to that happening.

quote:

You can thank Ethanol subsidies for that. There's actually a decent argument that ethanol subsidies were a major player in the recession, but that's for another topic another day.


A whooooooooole 'nother topic

quote:

Still, it's a high number of people receiving benefits


Exactly. Even if some of these numbers were cut in half it would still be a problem.

quote:

I think Welfare is too hyper-politicized. It's just another issue to keep us fighting with each other. More sinister, it shines a light into the bad side of greed that drives our economy. Can't let people who need help have some of MY money! At the same time abuse of the system is a drain on the economy and gives the other side all the more reason to rail against it. It's really just a symptom of the larger problems within our economy.



Here I agree with you, but sometimes, much to my own chagrin.

I agree that it overshadows other things, but at the same time I guess my pride takes over at other times. It's hard to swallow that last year I gave uncle sam almost 20k. Then I get in line at Wal-Mart and see some cracked out POS with two buggy loads of prime rib and all sorts of other shite, none of which is Great Value brand.
Posted by DynastyDawg
Relf-Coast
Member since Jan 2013
10886 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:12 am to
quote:

Many farm subsidies are direct payments from the government, for various reasons.


quote:

In 2012 alone, the congressman was cut a government check for a $70,000 direct payment. Direct payments are issued automatically, regardless of need, and go predominantly to the largest, most profitable farm operations in the country.


Well then... that is quite odd. What are the stipulations to receive such payments?
Posted by Mizz-SEC
Inbred Huntin' In The SEC
Member since Jun 2013
19243 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:19 am to

There's nothing to discuss.

The hollowing out of the middle class has been a 30+ year project.

The systematic outsourcing of decent paying manufacturing jobs by Big Business purely for maximum profit has led to a permanently stunted underclass of the under-educated whose choices are 25-30 hours a week at McDonald's, Walmart and the like, or welfare.

Not everyone has the skills or wherewithall to go to college / start their own business / pick themselves up by their bootstraps. A percentage are indeed lazy scum that wouldn't work, no matter the pay. Then there's a percentage more who would like to work and not rely on the government, but those jobs are gone.

Since business prefers to keep their up front costs low via outsourcing and low wages, they shouldn't bitch about taking care of them on the backside as an outcropping of what's been sewn.

Posted by Duke
Twin Lakes, CO
Member since Jan 2008
35623 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:19 am to
quote:


While it probably got worse after the recession


SNAP: 26 million in 2007 to 47 million in 2013. I'd say it got a tad worse.

quote:

it was still what could be classified as a major problem prior to that happening.


Major is overstating it IMO. No sense arguing semantics though, I'm not interesting in that endless loop this afternoon.

quote:


I agree that it overshadows other things, but at the same time I guess my pride takes over at other times. It's hard to swallow that last year I gave uncle sam almost 20k.


That's why it is an easy issue for political forces to exploit. It's not a useful productive division, but it sure as shite motivates people to get to the polls. It's not that I don't think we need to seriously rethink how our safety net operates, but there are bigger problems with more useful cuts to make that will also help in reducing the welfare costs.

Posted by UMTigerRebel
Member since Feb 2013
9819 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:24 am to
quote:

The systematic outsourcing of decent paying manufacturing jobs by Big Business purely for maximum profit has led to a permanently stunted underclass of the under-educated whose choices are 25-30 hours a week at McDonald's, Walmart and the like, or welfare.

Not everyone has the skills or wherewithall to go to college / start their own business / pick themselves up by their bootstraps. A percentage are indeed lazy scum that wouldn't work, no matter the pay. Then there's a percentage more who would like to work and not rely on the government, but those jobs are gone.


Well said.
Posted by DynastyDawg
Relf-Coast
Member since Jan 2013
10886 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:26 am to
quote:

SNAP: 26 million in 2007 to 47 million in 2013. I'd say it got a tad worse.


Obama. That's really not the direction I hope to point this in after saying that but the fact that he has pushed that agenda is hard to deny.

quote:

It's not that I don't think we need to seriously rethink how our safety net operates, but there are bigger problems with more useful cuts to make that will also help in reducing the welfare costs.



True, true. Really, honestly, I just want a balanced budget. Not a budget for over the amount of tax dollars we are projected to receive. I want a balanced budget. I want to see our national debt go down. I know it's unreasonable to ask for it to disappear in the near future or really ever for that matter but it would be nice to see less wasteful spending and a lower national debt instead of that bitch climbing 3 trillion per year.
Posted by The Spleen
Member since Dec 2010
38865 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:27 am to
quote:

It's hard to swallow that last year I gave uncle sam almost 20k. Then I get in line at Wal-Mart and see some cracked out POS with two buggy loads of prime rib and all sorts of other shite, none of which is Great Value brand.


That used to piss me off as well. I worked in a grocery store in high school and part of college and saw it all the time. Then I had a friend get divorced, and lose her job soon after. Her ex-husband was a deadbeat and pretty much abandoned her and their 3 kids without providing any child support. She got the new Yukon in the divorce, which was bought with cash while married. She had to get on food stamps to make ends meet. She wasn't who you'd expect to use food stamps. Attractive, soccer mom type in a brand new Yukon. I realized everyone's situation is different and I couldn't care less now how someone pays for their food, nor what they actually buy. I don't know the circumstances that led them to apply for and receive government assistance.
Posted by Duke
Twin Lakes, CO
Member since Jan 2008
35623 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:34 am to
A balanced budget isn't going to happen nor should it. Sometimes you gotta use the credit card.

Though if we don't really slow the card down now, we could be looking at a problem down the road.
Posted by DynastyDawg
Relf-Coast
Member since Jan 2013
10886 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:35 am to
I'm really not trying to pick holes in your story or start an argument here, but wouldn't you think selling the Yukon (since it's paid for) and getting a vehicle that isn't as expensive to help make ends meet before using food stamps while looking for another job?
Posted by DynastyDawg
Relf-Coast
Member since Jan 2013
10886 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:37 am to
I understand what you're saying. Sometimes you do have to use the credit card, but that's just it, it's a credit card. In the government's case, you're most likely never going to have to "pay the balance" but it is also not meant to be used as a way to "make ends meet."
Posted by The Spleen
Member since Dec 2010
38865 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:41 am to
That's a fair question, and I should have said so originally, but she did eventually trade the Yukon in for an older minivan. This was a few weeks after first getting on food stamps, and a few weeks before finding another job. She was pretty humiliated having to get on food stamps, and said she'd drive to the Walmart on the other side of town to shop because she wanted to avoid all the judgmental eyes at the store near her apartment in a nicer part of town.
Posted by DynastyDawg
Relf-Coast
Member since Jan 2013
10886 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:45 am to


Some cases are understandable, and from what you have explained I would say it would be fairly reasonable to assume she then didn't live off food stamps and other welfare for the rest of her life.

Your friend seems a pretty far distance from the POS I encounter at the check out line in the local grocery store.
Posted by Duke
Twin Lakes, CO
Member since Jan 2008
35623 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:47 am to
Our problem is using the credit card to buy stupid stuff.
Posted by DynastyDawg
Relf-Coast
Member since Jan 2013
10886 posts
Posted on 3/19/14 at 11:50 am to
frickin Fact.
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 8Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow SECRant for SEC Football News
Follow us on Twitter and Facebook to get the latest updates on SEC Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitter