Why should I respect people on benefits?
I’m not going to force you to like it, but I will implore you to leave the matter be. Yes, you do work hard, and you do add value to your society, but what business is it of yours what others do? Some work. Some don’t. ’tis life, lad/lass. The ability to live off benefits are there to reduce anxiety should it ever happen that you don’t get/have a job. Will there be people that find it easier not to get one in the first place then? Yes.I will however, kindly, inform you that there are other categories than physical and mental illnesses that may prevent certain people from getting a job. Firstly there is the very definition of what a physical and mental illness is. Is anxiety an illness? Is asthma an illness? Are the jobs, whether liked or not, within the skillset of everyone applying?No. A physical illness does not always equal an inability to work. A debilitating characteristic may not be sufficient to be called a mental illness, yet it may prevent a person from getting a job. A fully functional human being may be kept from working because they lack the skillset necessary to apply for the available jobs. Yes, laziness may sometimes be part of why some are jobless. I do not demand that you like it. But I do demand you show sufficient respect as a human individual towards other humans to leave the matter be, as it would be difficult for you to see a big enough part of the picture to know which is the reason behind their unemployment.I hope this helps.
What would happen if the welfare state in America was eliminated?
Desperate people do desperate things. If your children are hungry you will steal for them. If your only choice to get money for shelter is to take it you will do just that so you don't freeze to death. The ranks of the working poor would become enraged. These are the people that are working enough to maybe pay for some things but get assistance to pay for food, child care, utilities, or are getting training so they can get off assistance. Eliminating this type of help would result is a mass of people far greater than the middle and upper classes becoming disenfranchised. The last time this happened it gave birth to the Progressive Movement, take that and add the 1960's along with much more rioting and that will give you a idea of what it would look like.I don't see social safety net programs as a hand-out, I see them as insurance for my own safety. Desperate people do desperate things and I would rather balance the budget in ways that don't result in canceling my safety insurance policy. " The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." ~Thomas Jefferson. Id rather be on the side of the people, all of the people instead of being a tyrant that didn't know when to stop taking.Oh and just to really hit home why this country was founded in the first place please indulge me one more time as I turn to Jefferson yet again:"Experience declares that man is the only animal which devours his own kind, for I can apply no milder term to the governments of Europe, and to the general prey of the rich on the poor."
When will liberals stop denying that social welfare programs only make a country poorer?
When my mother was sixteen years old, she was raped. Nine months later, I was born.Her parents weren’t living on the streets, but they weren’t wealthy either. They couldn’t help her out much, nor did they feel inclined to - they disowned her, kicked her out, and left her to fend for herself. Her rapist - my father - took off, leaving my mother a single parent. She never had a chance. No matter what she did, she would be poor.Tell me, what was her bad decision?Social welfare meant WIC. It meant housing assistance, and heating supplements, and Headstart, and Medicaid. It meant my mother wasn’t homeless with an infant. It meant that my mother could afford to finish high school and still feed her child and herself. It meant that a Minnesota winter wouldn’t kill us in our sleep. It meant that her financial circumstances wouldn’t keep me from learning to read, so that I could hope for more than a minimum wage job for the rest of my life, which would perpetuate the cycle of poverty and leave me reliant on government aid in my adult years. It meant that when I came down with ear infections, or when an ectopic pregnancy nearly killed my mother, she didn’t have to choose between going hungry for a month or rolling the dice that a health issue wouldn’t get even worse.We weren’t living in the lap of luxury. Social welfare meant our basic human needs were met. It meant that I could grow up to be a contributing, tax-paying member of society. Without social welfare, I could very well be dead, or mentally delayed from early childhood malnutrition, or simply stuck on the lowest rung of the social ladder with no way up - no education, no skills, and no extra funds to channel towards climbing out of a pit I hadn’t even dug. Don’t try and tell me that my mother’s sheer bad luck meant that I - a child at the time - didn’t deserve advantages like food, shelter, healthcare.Get your head out of your ass. People in poverty are human beings, and denying them help when they need it means - gasp! - more people in poverty, for longer periods at a stretch. It means generations of poverty instead of letting them have at least a chance at getting ahead. Yeah. That sounds like a real rich country to me, too.
What would happen if the USA got rid of all its welfare services?
Let's see --massive homelessness -- millions of the working poor use their paycheck to cover rent, relying on welfare for food. But hunger wins. Within a few months, landlords would be going broke all over the country.housing prices collapse -- a large percentage of houses and apartments are rented to the working poor. With mass evictions comes landlords unable to cover mortgages. Foreclosures soar and the frail housing market collapses again.with far less tax money going to poor people, let's assume the government uses the cash to pay down debt instead of offering tax rebates. This drops interest rates and frees up capital for business loans. That would be stimulative, but with far fewer consumers, the economy is sliding into massive recession. Business will contract, not expand.the recession will go world wide quickly, just as it did in 2008, but with fragile economies around the world, the damage would be far worse.homelessness drives up crime. Since state income usually is tied to sales tax (way down) and property tax (declining), states will cut programs for everything but police and prisons. The results will be more cops and far more inmates, driving up costs dramatically.restless homeless voters make for an unhappy electorate. Tax cuts, when they do come, only benefit people who pay taxes, so that will not satisfy them. A series of increasingly progressive candidates will arise to power with populist messages.within a few years, the president and congress will face a massive political backlash. They will be voted out of power in an election similar to 1932.This time, instead of New Deal reforms that allowed rich people to keep their possessions, the anger would be so great that waves of socialism would sweep the country. Unions would roar back in offices and factories and workplaces around the country. The likelihood of civil war would loom large.Good luck with that.
Obama says he will "let the Bush tax cuts expire." So, explain to me how he will lower your taxes?
It's always interesting how Democrats define "fair taxes". They don't believe in equality in it's true definition. It's 45% for you, but 30% for me because I make less. They like to play fast and loose with the definitions.
If I quit my job and collect welfare, will you welfare collectors feel threatened that I'm not paying taxes.?
I'm in the same position as you paying for college on my own. I make about 25k a year but spend that much on school every year and pay my own h insurance. If I quit my job I'd be eligible for Pell Grants and a bunch of other handouts that would essentially pay my school off without me working or taking a loan, not to mention free h insurance as well. My choices are keep working and paying for school myself or quit and use governmental handouts to pay for my school. The system should not work like this, as to motivate me into becoming a worthless drain on society. Welfare and the slew of other handouts work just the same, they make it so it's not even worth working given you get just about the same amount as if you were working a dead-end job. The system is a joke.
Why do so many liberals support the welfare system but don't collect it?
It has come to me that one of the major differences between conservatives and progressives is empathy, or the lack thereof. Progressives feel a need to help those less fortunate than themselves, even if they themselves had never been in that person’s situation. Conservatives come from the school of everyone is equal from the standpoint of just being born and should be self sufficient and should pull themselves up by their bootstraps, supposedly as they believe our Founding Fathers had envisioned. Until that conservative has to personally experience the pain or misfortune of those they formerly looked down upon. A classic case is of this is Republican Senator from Ohio, Rob Portman, formerly one of the most anti-gay politicians in the Congress, until his son came out of the closet. And do you think hard core conservatives Lynne and Dick Cheney would support gay rights if their daughter Mary wasn’t gay?But the conservatives that really get me are the ones that have personally benefited from progressive policies that still campaign against them. There have been several cases where Republican politicians have expressed their support of appealing the ACA, only to have children of their own with preexisting conditions that have benefited from it. And in the most outrageous case of hypocrisy, Republican congressman Scott DesJarlis from Tennessee is a family practice physician and had been very vocal about being being pro-life. Yet this fine formerly married, upstanding representative, has had multiple affairs with patients, coworkers and a drug company representative. Not only that, but he encouraged at least one of the women he had an affair with AND his now exwife to have abortions.Read that, progressives or Democrats do not have to walk a mile in somebody’s shoes in order to be motivated to care for that individual. They do it because it’s the right thing to do.
I'm considering voting Republican because I don't want my tax dollars going to welfare recipients who are too lazy to find a job. Can you say anything to change my mind?
I’m not going to try to change your mind. Just leave you with this passing thought.You will almost certainly be on welfare of some kind 20 years from now. Automation is progressing at a rapid rate. Physical tasks continue to become automatable, and artificial intelligence continues to advance. A poll carried out this very month of IT experts found that most believed that a majority of business process can be automated in as little as five years. The 2020’s are going to see automation cut into massive amounts of jobs. There will eventually be very little work for the majority of people, who will be dependent on the government to survive.I agree that welfare abuse happens today. By all means, feel free to attack it and address these issues. But don’t completely abolish welfare, because it’ll probably be keeping you alive in the not-all-that-distant future.
Why are republicans so against welfare?
i have always voted & supported republicans in presidential & midterm elections because i believe we shouldn't raise taxes on job creators or increase wasteful spending while in a reccesion. but ive been deeply angered by alot of republicans who have called people on welfare "scumbags" and "robbers' & 'cheats' this makes me mad because i have family members who have always worked hard & have done their best & have paid their taxes, but have lost thier jobs from the reccesion, and have familys to feed but cant afford it, so they use wic & food stamps. they work hard & dont just slack off like the GOP has said. why are republicans so against giving welfare to people like my family who need it?