(02-10-2015 11:10 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 09:30 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 08:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 08:30 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Are you suggesting that people on welfare aren't poor?

A significant portion of them aren't.

Nope. I saw a Medicaid patient today with an iPhone. I've seen Medicaid patients before where the patient and parent are both playing on iPads.

so if you have 99 bucks you're no longer poor?

Plus the $100/month phone plan...?

(02-11-2015 08:00 AM)dfarr Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 11:10 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 09:30 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 08:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 08:30 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Are you suggesting that people on welfare aren't poor?

A significant portion of them aren't.

Nope. I saw a Medicaid patient today with an iPhone. I've seen Medicaid patients before where the patient and parent are both playing on iPads.

so if you have 99 bucks you're no longer poor?

Plus the $100/month phone plan...?

There is a whole "Black Market" out there of stolen SIM cards and cell phones that get used up in short order and easily replaced with another on the cheap leaving someone else holding the bag.

(02-10-2015 07:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What's wrong with being proud of being able to take care of our poor?

Nothing wrong with helping those that need help.

The rub comes with those that don't help themselves of which there are too many, AND the fact that the safety net systems we have set up now are in no way designed to encourage getting off the dole. In fact, it's my belief that it is now used as a way to ensure that this group becomes a voting bloc for those that hand out the most freebies.

The old give a fish or teach to fish parable comes to mind - and we need to have way to encourage those that are reluctant to learn fishing.

(02-10-2015 11:10 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 09:30 PM)dfarr Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 08:40 PM)Kaplony Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 08:30 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Are you suggesting that people on welfare aren't poor?

A significant portion of them aren't.

Nope. I saw a Medicaid patient today with an iPhone. I've seen Medicaid patients before where the patient and parent are both playing on iPads.

so if you have 99 bucks you're no longer poor?

Not if you can blow it on an iphone or ipad and afford the data package as well.

(02-10-2015 11:11 PM)UofMemphis Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 10:01 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 07:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What's wrong with being proud of being able to take care of our poor?

We should be ashamed to have to subsidize the incomes of "able bodied" Americans...not be proud of it.

I want every American who needs food stamps, to get them...

17 to 47 million, not good what happened.

(02-10-2015 07:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What's wrong with being proud of being able to take care of our poor?

It's good to help the poor, but asinine to actually brag about having damn near 47 million on govt assistance. It speaks to other issues and should be embarrassing to the govt, not something to brag about.

(02-11-2015 08:11 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 07:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What's wrong with being proud of being able to take care of our poor?

Nothing wrong with helping those that need help.

The rub comes with those that don't help themselves of which there are too many, AND the fact that the safety net systems we have set up now are in no way designed to encourage getting off the dole. In fact, it's my belief that it is now used as a way to ensure that this group becomes a voting bloc for those that hand out the most freebies.

The old give a fish or teach to fish parable comes to mind - and we need to have way to encourage those that are reluctant to learn fishing.

But the statistics state otherwise. The vast majority of people on welfare only stay on it for a short period of time and eventually become productive, tax paying citizens.

(02-11-2015 10:13 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 08:11 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 07:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What's wrong with being proud of being able to take care of our poor?

Nothing wrong with helping those that need help.

The rub comes with those that don't help themselves of which there are too many, AND the fact that the safety net systems we have set up now are in no way designed to encourage getting off the dole. In fact, it's my belief that it is now used as a way to ensure that this group becomes a voting bloc for those that hand out the most freebies.

The old give a fish or teach to fish parable comes to mind - and we need to have way to encourage those that are reluctant to learn fishing.

But the statistics state otherwise. The vast majority of people on welfare only stay on it for a short period of time and eventually become productive, tax paying citizens.

Yep. The sad thing is that the anecdotal existence of those who abused the system is more compelling to many people than the actual data of those it helps. There are most certainly people on welfare who don't actually qualify/aren't using it as intended/etc, but that happens with literally everything and using it as an argument welfares existence is asinine.

(02-11-2015 10:16 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 10:13 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 08:11 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 07:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What's wrong with being proud of being able to take care of our poor?

Nothing wrong with helping those that need help.

The rub comes with those that don't help themselves of which there are too many, AND the fact that the safety net systems we have set up now are in no way designed to encourage getting off the dole. In fact, it's my belief that it is now used as a way to ensure that this group becomes a voting bloc for those that hand out the most freebies.

The old give a fish or teach to fish parable comes to mind - and we need to have way to encourage those that are reluctant to learn fishing.

But the statistics state otherwise. The vast majority of people on welfare only stay on it for a short period of time and eventually become productive, tax paying citizens.

Yep. The sad thing is that the anecdotal existence of those who abused the system is more compelling to many people than the actual data of those it helps. There are most certainly people on welfare who don't actually qualify/aren't using it as intended/etc, but that happens with literally everything and using it as an argument welfares existence is asinine.

That is the problem.

Welfare has to be 100% perfect or some people will want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

(02-10-2015 08:30 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  Are you suggesting that people on welfare aren't poor?

Abuse is rampant.

Well the problem is that even at 100% efficacy, there are those who would wish to remove it altogether on ideological grounds. Which is fine, but they use egregiously outlying anecdotes to intentionally misrepresent the average welfare recipient in order to encourage others to not support it either, which is then the problem.

(02-11-2015 10:33 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Abuse is rampant.

Not as rampant as you'd think. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but any evidence that it exists to a higher degree than say, insurance fraud exists?

(02-11-2015 10:34 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 10:33 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Abuse is rampant.

Not as rampant as you'd think. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but any evidence that it exists to a higher degree than say, insurance fraud exists?

Insurance fraud is rampant.

Logic fail kid

Awesome! Let them eat cheese!!!!

(02-11-2015 10:35 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 10:34 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 10:33 AM)HeartOfDixie Wrote:  Abuse is rampant.

Not as rampant as you'd think. That doesn't mean it doesn't exist, but any evidence that it exists to a higher degree than say, insurance fraud exists?

Insurance fraud is rampant.

Logic fail kid

What percentage of users being fraudulent would you accept? And by that I mean clearly, not to make it legal or nonpunishable, just that with every system there will be some level of fraud or waste. What level is acceptable to you?

(02-10-2015 07:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What's wrong with being proud of being able to take care of our poor?

The people no longer on it because they no longer need it would be a number to brag about.

Assuming it has gone up.

It would be great if we instituted some very simple reforms that actually helped people get off of it. You can start with how they calculate how much you get in terms of public assistance. Let them get ahead for 6-12 months

(02-11-2015 10:30 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 10:16 AM)UCF08 Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 10:13 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(02-11-2015 08:11 AM)Crebman Wrote:  

(02-10-2015 07:50 PM)Fitbud Wrote:  What's wrong with being proud of being able to take care of our poor?

Nothing wrong with helping those that need help.

The rub comes with those that don't help themselves of which there are too many, AND the fact that the safety net systems we have set up now are in no way designed to encourage getting off the dole. In fact, it's my belief that it is now used as a way to ensure that this group becomes a voting bloc for those that hand out the most freebies.

The old give a fish or teach to fish parable comes to mind - and we need to have way to encourage those that are reluctant to learn fishing.

But the statistics state otherwise. The vast majority of people on welfare only stay on it for a short period of time and eventually become productive, tax paying citizens.

Yep. The sad thing is that the anecdotal existence of those who abused the system is more compelling to many people than the actual data of those it helps. There are most certainly people on welfare who don't actually qualify/aren't using it as intended/etc, but that happens with literally everything and using it as an argument welfares existence is asinine.

That is the problem.

Welfare has to be 100% perfect or some people will want to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Look, there is a certain percentage of the population that goes on welfare and is only on it for a limited time and gets off. There is also a certain percentage that is on welfare perennially to the point it is generational.

People don't have an issue helping folks with both their time and money in times of need - look at how much folks give to charity. The heartburn occurs when one witnesses the abuse of the system AND the giving is not a choice, but mandated.

Anecdotal is what people see with their own eyes - and it's not all that hard to find. Why should people ignore it when they have seen abuses of the system?

Quote: Anecdotal is what people see with their own eyes - and it's not all that hard to find. Why should people ignore it when they have seen abuses of the system?

If you can't answer that yourself, you need to return your diploma.