Am I the only one on here bothered by this?

Page 4 of 10 [ 145 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 ... 10  Next

marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

03 Jul 2010, 6:49 pm

mcg wrote:
marshall wrote:
mcg wrote:
Sure, people "need" it, but if you're concerned about the health of the overall economy then a welfare state is the last thing you need.

But this thread is talking about the welfare of people with disabilities, NOT the general population. Would it help the economy if those people who legitimately CAN'T work just shoot themselves in the head so the rest of us can save a few pennies on our taxes? :roll:
Just because someone won't kick down your door, point a gun at you, and cart you off to jail if you don't feel like handing your money over to a huge bureaucratic institution doesn't mean that those who legitimately CAN'T work will not receive help. As a believer in freedom, I would fight with all of my power to protect YOUR right to spend YOUR OWN money on charity.

You're living in a fantasy world. You're silly "freedom" is a myth. That's philosophy though and I don't have the time to delve into it.

Also it's not entirely *your* money since you benefit from living in something called a *society* with many public functions. Therefore, instead of pointing a gun at you and carting you off to jail for refusing to pay taxes, they should just make you go live off in the woods somewhere, build your own shelter, grow your own food, etc.

Quote:
Historically, people with a true need have always been taken care of in America by family members, neighbors, or private charities, long before SSI existed.

Really?



mcg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 538
Location: Sacramento

03 Jul 2010, 7:55 pm

marshall wrote:
You're living in a fantasy world. You're silly "freedom" is a myth. That's philosophy though and I don't have the time to delve into it.

I think I see where you're going with this, so I am going to hereby define freedom as "the protection against EXPLICIT coercion for every human against every other human". You can try to argue that freedom in some other sense of the word does not exist, but whatever that definition of freedom is, it's not what I am referring to when I say that freedom is that which ultimately maximizes the satisfaction of each individual's unique wants and needs in a society.

marshall wrote:
Also it's not entirely *your* money since you benefit from living in something called a *society* with many public functions. Therefore, instead of pointing a gun at you and carting you off to jail for refusing to pay taxes, they should just make you go live off in the woods somewhere, build your own shelter, grow your own food, etc.

I disagree. There are many more people who, under the current system, get a free ride or pay for things that they receive no benefit from (what a 'benefit' is unique to an individual, as it the cost associated with the implementation of a specific public good). Under a free-market system there may still be a few free riders but there would be far fewer than there are currently.

marshall wrote:
Really?
Yes, absolutely. And in addition to that fact, less people NEEDED charity because lack of minimum wage laws allowed almost anybody to find work.



bee33
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Apr 2008
Age: 60
Gender: Female
Posts: 3,862

03 Jul 2010, 7:55 pm

mcg wrote:
bee33 wrote:
mcg wrote:
but if you're concerned about the health of the overall economy then a welfare state is the last thing you need.
The US spends nearly half of the federal budget on the military. Do we need that many bombs and armaments? Wouldn't it be more humane to use tax money to help the people who need help?

No, we don't and I certainly do not support forcibly taking people's money to pay for bombs (or ANYTHING for that matter). That doesn't relate at all to the issue at hand, though.
Uh, yes we do actually spend close to half of the federal budget on the military.



mcg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Jan 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 538
Location: Sacramento

03 Jul 2010, 7:57 pm

bee33 wrote:
mcg wrote:
bee33 wrote:
mcg wrote:
but if you're concerned about the health of the overall economy then a welfare state is the last thing you need.
The US spends nearly half of the federal budget on the military. Do we need that many bombs and armaments? Wouldn't it be more humane to use tax money to help the people who need help?

No, we don't and I certainly do not support forcibly taking people's money to pay for bombs (or ANYTHING for that matter). That doesn't relate at all to the issue at hand, though.
Uh, yes we do actually spend close to half of the federal budget on the military.
I was agreeing with you that we do not need so many bombs, not denying the fact that we spend an insane amount of money on the militarily.



Galt1957
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jun 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 75
Location: United States of America

03 Jul 2010, 8:04 pm

I am wholly opposed to any state welfare programs, because of the simple fact that it is stealing from one to give to another. The government has no right to steal money from someone who works in order to give to another person, no matter what the intentions or circumstances.


_________________
Who is John Galt?


jmnixon95
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,931
Location: 미국

03 Jul 2010, 8:09 pm

No.



Last edited by jmnixon95 on 03 Jul 2010, 11:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

ellomo
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 121

03 Jul 2010, 8:48 pm

I was going to post another reply discussing this but the naivety on this subject being displayed by those having a winge about having to pay makes doing so a waste of time I believe.

The arguments are not based on facts they are based on feelings (jealousy and resentment is what I see).

IMO the people bitching here want to be thankful their life is so easy they can take time out to worry about what other people are 'getting' in the first place.

Peace ellomo



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,752
Location: Turkey

03 Jul 2010, 9:51 pm

mcg wrote:
marshall wrote:
You're living in a fantasy world. You're silly "freedom" is a myth. That's philosophy though and I don't have the time to delve into it.

I think I see where you're going with this, so I am going to hereby define freedom as "the protection against EXPLICIT coercion for every human against every other human". You can try to argue that freedom in some other sense of the word does not exist, but whatever that definition of freedom is, it's not what I am referring to when I say that freedom is that which ultimately maximizes the satisfaction of each individual's unique wants and needs in a society.

marshall wrote:
Also it's not entirely *your* money since you benefit from living in something called a *society* with many public functions. Therefore, instead of pointing a gun at you and carting you off to jail for refusing to pay taxes, they should just make you go live off in the woods somewhere, build your own shelter, grow your own food, etc.

I disagree. There are many more people who, under the current system, get a free ride or pay for things that they receive no benefit from (what a 'benefit' is unique to an individual, as it the cost associated with the implementation of a specific public good). Under a free-market system there may still be a few free riders but there would be far fewer than there are currently.

marshall wrote:
Really?
Yes, absolutely. And in addition to that fact, less people NEEDED charity because lack of minimum wage laws allowed almost anybody to find work.

I just can't understand how you right-wingers think. We've already through time periods where society followed your ideals and in those times if you were poor then life SUCKED much worse than it does now. In addition the NUMBER of poor in terms of percentage of the population was much higher. Why you would want to take the world back to that boggles my mind.

The main problem is people aren't inherently charitable. If you allow the people who already have the means to accumulate wealth to have complete freedom to do whatever they want then eventually you form a ruling class who's only concern is to exploit the rest to the maximum extent possible. Basically the ones with all the money have very little to lose from lost labor while the rest face starvation if they refuse to work. Eventually people wake up and see the inherent unfairness and exploitation going on in this situation and violence/revolution ensues. This is basically what happened during the 19th century and what lead to the rise of communism. The present system is a compromise between socialist ideals and free-market ideals because we've already learned from history that either one by itself ultimately fails.



NearlyaHuman
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 21 Jun 2010
Gender: Female
Posts: 102

03 Jul 2010, 10:04 pm

The people who are strongly against having government social assistance, are people who have never really experienced true poverty or homelessness themselves.
It is very rare for someone to stick to their ideals to the point where they say "even though I'm qualified, I refuse this welfare because I don't believe in it. I will sleep in the gutter and eat rotten contaminated food from the garbage, and wear dirty clothes." When you are actually in that situation, you see things differently. Hunger will overpower shame, and your political affiliations.

It just doesn't work to say peoples families should just look after them. A lot of people either don't have families, or they have a family of jerks.
Sometimes old people are left with no family, and no way to work.

During the recession, many people stopped giving. A lot of food-banks are empty. Just when the need is the highest.

IF there are not social services, hungry people get desperate. Crime increases. And don't say "they could just get a job", because clearly there are not enough jobs for everyone.

If you don't believe in helping people, believe in it for the reason that it prevents people from having to rob banks, and break into other peoples houses, or sell drugs.

It costs FAR LESS to give someone a basic amount for food and a place to sleep, than it does to keep someone IN JAIL.


_________________
-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
http://beingnearlyhuman.blogspot.com


Danielismyname
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Apr 2007
Age: 43
Gender: Male
Posts: 8,565

03 Jul 2010, 10:28 pm

jmnixon95 wrote:
..., I think you're just too lazy to work.


Please come here and say that to my face. My mother would probably drop you before I had the chance to.

"Just" AS (verbal autism) and OCD here.



jmnixon95
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Dec 2009
Gender: Female
Posts: 20,931
Location: 미국

03 Jul 2010, 10:32 pm

Danielismyname wrote:
jmnixon95 wrote:
..., I think you're just too lazy to work.


Please come here and say that to my face. My mother would probably drop you before I had the chance to.

"Just" AS (verbal autism) and OCD here.



Sorry, I didn't mean to sound so harsh. I was just going based on experience. I've known many, many Aspies and they were all able to work. Even mediocre jobs (waiting tables, cashiering, etc.), if not complex jobs in the field of their interests.
And I have AS, ADHD, and possible OCD. It hasn't inhibited me.



wendigopsychosis
Velociraptor
Velociraptor

User avatar

Joined: 11 Apr 2010
Age: 33
Gender: Female
Posts: 471
Location: United States

03 Jul 2010, 10:55 pm

I agree that those with Asperger's on disability confuse me... I think they're moochers, to be honest.
There are of course those further along the spectrum who, for whatever reason, are unable to seek employment due to their disability. I'm totally fine with them collecting for it. It's those who don't have any real reason for not having a job other than "it's hard" that bother me. (I'll admit that I still can't find a job, but that's no reason for me to file for a monthly government check. I could probably try harder...)


_________________
:heart: I'm an author and public speaker on autism, gender, and sexuality :heart:
:heart: Read my articles @ http://kirstenlindsmith.wordpress.com :heart:
:heart: Follow updates @ https://www.facebook.com/pages/Kirsten- ... 9135232493 :heart:


Who_Am_I
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 Aug 2005
Age: 41
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,632
Location: Australia

03 Jul 2010, 11:23 pm

No, I'm not bothered by a few of my tax dollars going to help people survive. Also, I'd rather put up with a few people abusing the system that have help denied to those who need it.
I would say what I think of people who judge whether or not people are abusing the system and whether or not they're capable of work without knowing more than... let's see, nothing about their circumstances, but I'm pretty sure that it'd get me banned.
I dislike self-righteousness very much; even more so when it's based on a position of ignorance.


_________________
Music Theory 101: Cadences.
Authentic cadence: V-I
Plagal cadence: IV-I
Deceptive cadence: V- ANYTHING BUT I ! !! !
Beethoven cadence: V-I-V-I-V-V-V-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I
-I-I-I-I-I-I-I-I! I! I! I I I


azurecrayon
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Mar 2010
Age: 53
Gender: Female
Posts: 742

03 Jul 2010, 11:32 pm

my job as a property manager/residential leasing agent means i get to see people and their income sources all the time. i have quite a few tenants receiving ssi, no idea on whether they are asd or not since its illegal for me to ask.

its not just a matter of finding a job for a lot of people. i live in michigan, we rank 50th out of 51 when it comes to unemployment rates. full time work here can be difficult to come by. standard ssi amount is $674, so for a lot of people, ssi means more than they could get working. and like someone else said, ssi for a lot of people means medicaid. in the majority of states, being on ssi automatically qualifies you for medicaid. if you need mental health or medical services for your as or any other conditions, staying on ssi may be the most reasonable alternative for health coverage.

yes, there are a lot of people who are able-bodied and on ssi. most of those i see are very young people, 18-19 years old. that leads me to believe that they are people whose parents got them on ssi at a young age, and they havent been re-evaluated yet as adults. i even had one tenant like this that lost her ssi when she was re-evaluated. she suddenly had no income and ended up moving back in with her mother.

the majority of ssi recipients i see have obvious conditions of various sorts that qualify them. missing limbs, mental deficiencies, or those that you know have some mental disability of some kind just by their behavior.

overall, i dont worry too much about those on ssi. as, like many other things, is an invisible disability. just because *i* dont see something wrong with someone doesnt mean they dont get all freaky out of my sight. ive had tenants on ssi who seemed perfectly "normal"..... until they went off their meds O.o suddenly the need for ssi was clear.



ellomo
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jun 2010
Age: 55
Gender: Male
Posts: 121

03 Jul 2010, 11:40 pm

wendigopsychosis wrote:
(I'll admit that I still can't find a job, but that's no reason for me to file for a monthly government check. I could probably try harder...)



If you don't have a job what do you live on?



Todesking
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 22 Apr 2010
Age: 54
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,088
Location: Depew NY

04 Jul 2010, 12:02 am

I have worked two long term jobs in my life. The first one was a low paying resteraunt job with no medical insurance. For nine years I put up with idiots tormenting me because they thought I was weird and they did not want me working with them. For those nine years I applied to many different good paying jobs like Motorolla for an example but I could not pass the entry level tests they made you take to get the jobs. I had to sit with people I did not know cramped shoulder to shoulder to take a test I had no idea what was in it.I suffer social anxiety and have issues with being touched, I could not consentrate for the life of me. It was mostly math I scored really high on the reading but totally failed the math and technical parts. They said it did not matter I was not needed for the posistion because of it. So I tried to get a job through a temp service they too needed me take a test which I failed at each temp service. The only temp service that would take me was a bottom of the barrel temp service that sent me to the jobs you would expect illegal aliens to do for low pay.

I got lucky they sent me to a job that hired me as a machine operator which I sucked at but their metal polisher quit so they decided to see if I could do it. I kicked ass at it so they hired me fulltime. They kept me for nine years but now they have no polishing jobs for me and they could not use me as a machine operator so they let me go in October of 09. I have put out 67 resumes with nothing but rejection letters and e-mails. The interviews I had I was a sweaty, nervous, and stammering mess. I appeared to be the exact embodyment of what they are not looking for. I was scheduled for job training on July 6 but I have been so nervous about the whole thing I have been getting sick. 8O I am going in for an evaluation Aug 6th if i am autistic or have Aspergers I am going to consider SSI.

If you think I am a lazy bum then F' you!. I have spent the past 22 years pursuing jobs and the right to be treated like a human being but no one will give me a chance. I am either too weird, too slow, or unskilled enough for a descent job. I have never made enough money to move out of my parents house. At least my last job gave me medical insurance for the first time of my life so I can finally get a diagnosis for Aspergers or whatever is screwed up with me. :x