hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Oct 24, 2012 16:11:06 GMT -5
Part of the reason we have so much "need" is that we are (and have been) rapidly expanding what we classify as a need.
People NEED soda, cigarettes, snack foods, prepackaged food, etc. We can't limit food stamps and other programs to provide actual needs when it comes to food because that's just not "fair", those people deserve and "need" the same kinds of foods that hte rest of us purchase.
People "need" cable, internet, a television.
They "need" a cell phone.
They NEED a home with lots of space, they can't just live in a small cramped home for free, they need something larger.
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Oct 24, 2012 16:48:30 GMT -5
My contract job is coming to an end, so I am now actively looking for more work, both online and locally. This is what I do when I can't afford food - I am scrambling looking for a job and staying up all night hoping I find what I need. When the FS card is refilled every month and the money is handed to you, you do not have as much of a feeling of need to go look to help yourself. And, after long enough, you start to doubt if you even can.. Shasta - I'm a bit confused. I though you stated on another thread that FS is based on earned income and that those who work get much more than those who don't work, which is why seniors rarely qualify? Did I misunderstand? Just trying to understand how it works and how it works against those trying to help themselves. I think it was on the confronting those using FS thread... I agree with you that the system seems to be stacked to encourage dependence in some ways...
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 14:43:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2012 17:22:17 GMT -5
My contract job is coming to an end, so I am now actively looking for more work, both online and locally. This is what I do when I can't afford food - I am scrambling looking for a job and staying up all night hoping I find what I need. When the FS card is refilled every month and the money is handed to you, you do not have as much of a feeling of need to go look to help yourself. And, after long enough, you start to doubt if you even can.. Shasta - I'm a bit confused. I though you stated on another thread that FS is based on earned income and that those who work get much more than those who don't work, which is why seniors rarely qualify? Did I misunderstand? Just trying to understand how it works and how it works against those trying to help themselves. I think it was on the confronting those using FS thread... I agree with you that the system seems to be stacked to encourage dependence in some ways... I get $1000 a month from SS for survivor's benefits for my DS. Food stamps were helpful, but once our income had to include DS's job, we were disqualified. It was nice for the couple months we had them because we ate higher quality foods. We eat more pasta and cheaper foods now.
|
|
Opti
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 10:45:38 GMT -5
Posts: 39,716
Location: New Jersey
Mini-Profile Name Color: c28523
Mini-Profile Text Color: 990033
|
Post by Opti on Oct 24, 2012 17:45:34 GMT -5
I don't think every person in the government wants that, but I think some parties and people do. Some of them are very powerful. What better way to garantee a cohort of grateful voters than to have them dependent on you to feed, house, and clothe them, and give them medical coverage? I think that is a short-sighted view & I really don't think any politicians hold that view despite people claiming as such. Most people in poverty would love anyone that managed to actually get them out of poverty & out of the cycle of dependence & got them great careers with a future. A politician that did that would earn far more votes than any reasonable welfare policy. I agree. I don't think government wants lots of people to support despite the PR and beliefs of Republicans and those on the right. While it is true some people will choose to live at a low level and work the system I think there are far more that would rather not. The world of work changes drastically compared to even 10, 20 years ago. What is a good thing to get training in and what employers find desireable changes season to season. Because employers no longer want to train people or keep them when business is slow we have gluts and dearths of appropriately trained employees on a regular basis. Add to that the outsourcing of jobs to other countries, models to cut costs, jobs and one's education can be out fashion just like last season's coat. As a country we do not try some of the employment tacks that work pretty well in other small countries. I'm not sure how well say Denmark's or Singapore's model will work in a larger country but given their low unemployment model perhaps we should try.
|
|
mrsdutt
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 12, 2012 7:39:38 GMT -5
Posts: 2,097
|
Post by mrsdutt on Oct 24, 2012 18:30:04 GMT -5
Message deleted by lduttinger.
|
|
mrsdutt
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 12, 2012 7:39:38 GMT -5
Posts: 2,097
|
Post by mrsdutt on Oct 24, 2012 18:45:46 GMT -5
Post deleted. I misunderstood the question.
|
|
weltschmerz
Community Leader
Joined: Jul 25, 2011 13:37:39 GMT -5
Posts: 38,962
|
Post by weltschmerz on Oct 24, 2012 19:08:01 GMT -5
Milee, I would love to start a business. How do you get the funding to do so? -------------- According to Mitt Romney, you borrow money from your parents.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Oct 24, 2012 19:30:14 GMT -5
Milee, I would love to start a business. How do you get the funding to do so? -------------- According to Mitt Romney, you borrow money from your parents. Nice in if you can get it, but I didn't get a dime from my parents. It would be interesting to see a study of successful business owners versus failed businesses; my guess is that the successful group would involve more people who had to earn their own way and the failed group would involve more people that were given - or had other easy access to - funds.
|
|
Tired Tess
Well-Known Member
I'm so ready to wrap it up.
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 8:47:41 GMT -5
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by Tired Tess on Oct 24, 2012 19:37:28 GMT -5
What I question is unemployment benefits. My girlfriend had her job eliminated and was able to collect for two years. She had worked at her job for 12 years. My DH had his job eliminated and also collected unemployment for two years. He worked for his company for 34 years.
Shouldn't there be some type of scale on how long you can collect? DH worked almost 3 times as long as our friend and got the same amount of money.
Something doesn't seem right with this.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 24, 2012 19:41:53 GMT -5
But you could argue that the longer you work somewhere, the more time you ostensibly have to build up a cushion, and the less you "need"... not necessarily true, but another way to look at it.
|
|
jaya3300
Established Member
Joined: May 26, 2012 20:13:51 GMT -5
Posts: 293
|
Post by jaya3300 on Oct 24, 2012 19:50:49 GMT -5
Cause we all were born with different levels of talent, drive, ambition, intelligence, morals, work ethics, and parental advantages. When you add a crappy economy to that mix, you end up with alot of people in need.
It's more complicated then "they're all lazy", "all poor people are scammers" and "government wants them dependent". If it were that "simple" then there'd be no more poverty cause we'd fix it already.
|
|
doxieluvr
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 11:28:59 GMT -5
Posts: 5,458
|
Post by doxieluvr on Oct 24, 2012 20:25:55 GMT -5
Cause we all were born with different levels of talent, drive, ambition, intelligence, morals, work ethics, and parental advantages. When you add a crappy economy to that mix, you end up with alot of people in need. It's more complicated then "they're all lazy", "all poor people are scammers" and "government wants them dependent". If it were that "simple" then there'd be no more poverty cause we'd fix it already. So how do you get money to start a business if you can't borrow from your parents or a bank? How do you start it without money to fund the initial out lay of costs?
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Oct 24, 2012 20:51:55 GMT -5
So how do you get money to start a business if you can't borrow from your parents or a bank? How do you start it without money to fund the initial out lay of costs? Did you miss my response? I'll repeat it - years of good decisions and sacrifice. If you can't do that, getting a loan to start the business isn't going to help you because you won't have the skills it takes to keep the business going. You'll be like the lottery winners who are broke 3 years later. Funny how the statistics for failed businesses are similar to the number of lottery winners who end up bankrupt (around 80% IIRC.) Your problem isn't getting a loan or winning the lottery, it's figuring out to how make good choices and delay gratification so you can build something successful for the long term.
|
|
susanb
Well-Known Member
Joined: Jun 21, 2012 14:16:56 GMT -5
Posts: 1,430
|
Post by susanb on Oct 24, 2012 21:06:01 GMT -5
Doxie, my DH started a business without help from his parents or a bank. From what you have said, he came from a much less privileged background than you did. How did he get the money to start his own business?
1. He went to a state school and got scholarships in years 2-4 2. He didn't have children or get married until he was 38 3. He spent nearly all of his time working (he still works 70+ hours a week) 4. He only had ONE CAR until he was 36 5. He saved money by sacrificing. Even though he owned his own home, he had three roommates, and he lived on less than 20k a year for many years even though he was making a good deal more. Three years ago, we lived on less than 15k because we had to sacrifice to make payroll.
Clearly, he didn't do all of this on his own. He had help from taxpayers in the form of state funded education. He had help from his parents who bought him his first car (the did not give him one dollar to start his business). You had both of the same opportunities. YOU have chosen not to make as much of the opportunities you have been given.
You talk about socialism and that your boss should pay you more. Do you really think that you should have the same benefits as people who have worked 70+ hours a week, assume far more risk and have sacrificed for years? Really?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 14:43:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2012 21:11:40 GMT -5
This is something I’ve been thinking about for a while. I realize I may come across as “on a high horse” and uncompassionate, but I feel the need to pose the question and hopefully gain some insight. The recent federal government statistic of spending more than 1 trillion dollars on welfare benefits is really eye opening. And keep in mind the statistic did not include state spending on welfare, social security, medicare, or even private charity. I realize there may be some disagreement over how Medicare and social security should be considered, so for the sake of argument we don’t have to include them in “welfare” but even without that, the amount of money being spent on “the poor” is truly staggering in this country. So I guess I have a few questions along those lines. Why is there so much need? I realize this may be a strange question. Yes I realize some people are physically or mentally incapable of working and being self-sufficient due to medical issues. And I realize otherwise healthy and productive citizens can get blindsided by medical costs. And I realize shit happens, people get laid off, and I realize people born poor face challenges and are likely to end up poor. But when you think about it, this is nothing new. Yet the amount of money we spend on “the poor” keeps growing and the ranks of those on government assistance seem to swell and never decrease. So basically, how come the amount of the money we spend on the needy continues to grow, yet the ranks of the needy never shrink? And as a follow up question, How much is too much to spend on “the poor?” And why is the amount we spend on the poor never enough? For the record I’m not really advocating for anything. I’m not saying get rid of all social programs and let the poor die in the streets or anything like that. I think we have a responsibility to help the poor, but it seems like the more money we spend the more the ranks of the poor swell, instead of the opposite. Because you can no longer go squat on a plot of land and grow your own food. You need to pay someone for everything it takes to sustain life from the right to sleep on a square of real estate that someone owns to the right to eat food that someone else owns. We spend more money on everything, it is called inflation. And the numbers of poor may go up but the percentage is fairly consistant. Sorry if someone else made these points, I got here late and don't have the patience to read the whole thread.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Oct 24, 2012 21:14:45 GMT -5
What I question is unemployment benefits. My girlfriend had her job eliminated and was able to collect for two years. She had worked at her job for 12 years. My DH had his job eliminated and also collected unemployment for two years. He worked for his company for 34 years. Shouldn't there be some type of scale on how long you can collect? DH worked almost 3 times as long as our friend and got the same amount of money. Something doesn't seem right with this. Unemployment isn't meant to be some kind of pension or severance, it's meant to provide you with some money until you can find a job. What you're suggesting would be like saying if you and I had equal homes that were destroyed, but I owned mine 3x as long, I should get a higher insurance payout because I owned it longer...even though length of ownership has nothing to do with it.
|
|
damnotagain
Well-Known Member
Joined: Oct 19, 2012 21:18:44 GMT -5
Posts: 1,211
|
Post by damnotagain on Oct 24, 2012 21:51:08 GMT -5
Americans are some of the hardest working people in the world. To bad we are lowering our standard of living , to raise the rest of the worlds up.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,866
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 24, 2012 21:54:34 GMT -5
Unemployment should be like welfare should be. Limited to a certain amount f time. Plus, you should have to be 21 to collect either and then after your set time, not again for 10 years. My girlfriend is mortified because her son got some girl pregnant, so they're shacked up and she qualifies for all sorts of bennies while living with baby daddy. She says she thought she raised her son better than that but as more and more people figure out how to scam taxpayers, it is what it s.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 14:43:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2012 22:04:25 GMT -5
Unemployment should be like welfare should be. Limited to a certain amount f time. Plus, you should have to be 21 to collect either and then after your set time, not again for 10 years. My girlfriend is mortified because her son got some girl pregnant, so they're shacked up and she qualifies for all sorts of bennies while living with baby daddy. She says she thought she raised her son better than that but as more and more people figure out how to scam taxpayers, it is what it s. And, those who do not report the scammers are just as bad.
|
|
cronewitch
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 21:44:20 GMT -5
Posts: 5,974
|
Post by cronewitch on Oct 24, 2012 22:17:50 GMT -5
I see the problem being people who are marginal not being forced to do what it takes to make a living. As a fresh high school grad my first job was cleaning a house full time for a family. Then I saved my wages and got a room in an old house sharing a bath with other rooms. I cooked on a hot plate and had a tiny frig. I made a living at minimum wage but if I couldn't I would have found a weekend job too. I didn't own anything except a single suitcase of clothing when I left home and it took my 6 months to move up to a studio apartment and buy things like bedding and dishes. I worked my tail off at work and got pay raises about once a month so went from 1.25 to 1.65 an hour in 6 months. I didn't apply for any kind of welfare, I don't know if I could have gotten any but I didn't need any. I walked everywhere, no tv, no phone not even a radio because I was trying to buy things I needed.
Now a kid will not have the self confidence to catch a ride to the city and think they can support themselves. They expect to have bedding, dishes, tv, telephone, and even a car with car insurance or they just will not even try. My great nephew is 20 hasn't even tried to leave home, he is in the National Guard now in basic training but he has a truck and cell phone. If he gets a girl pregnant all of them will expect the government to make sure they have food, shelter, transportation and cell phones without once learning how to get by with what they can earn. They push people to apply for benefits like WIC and free school lunches.
It is easier to accept the welfare than to hustle. My cousin and is wife are both on SSI and have never had to work. He can't always walk but he could have learned an office skill, she is mentally ill but she can clean houses if she wants to. He has bought and sold cars on eBay so could have attempted to do something more to earn money on his good days but they don't have to. They have managed to raise two boys without working and live pretty well. The government makes it hard to get on your feet if you are disabled, he for example has his life depending on keeping Medicaid without insurance he would die from Hemophilia or Hep C.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 14:43:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 24, 2012 22:18:19 GMT -5
Can we go back to the OP premise? Please link to the source of the trillion dollar number so that I may know exactly what is considered in that number to be 'welfare' Thanks.
|
|
Tired Tess
Well-Known Member
I'm so ready to wrap it up.
Joined: Jan 16, 2011 8:47:41 GMT -5
Posts: 1,313
|
Post by Tired Tess on Oct 25, 2012 6:53:19 GMT -5
No, hoops I wasn't suggesting that. If I pay for more insurance on my home, and if it is destroyed, then I should get more money to help rebuild.
JD, I wouldn't argue that the longer you work somewhere, the more time you ostensibly have to build up a cushion, and the less you "need". My savings is my business. If I have three children and you have one, I shouldn't get a bigger pay check. So, just wondering, why someone who works 12 years gets the same unemployment as someone who works 34 years.
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 6,998
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Oct 25, 2012 7:08:35 GMT -5
No, hoops I wasn't suggesting that. If I pay for more insurance on my home, and if it is destroyed, then I should get more money to help rebuild. JD, I wouldn't argue that the longer you work somewhere, the more time you ostensibly have to build up a cushion, and the less you "need". My savings is my business. If I have three children and you have one, I shouldn't get a bigger pay check. So, just wondering, why someone who works 12 years gets the same unemployment as someone who works 34 years. Unemployment is a form of insurance. If we both have the same term life policy and I die after paying on it for one year and you die after paying on it for five years, we would both get the same amount of insurance we had bought, rather than having it based on how long we had the policy. The federal welfare component of this will be going away at the end of the year so the people filing today will never see more than the normal 26 weeks. For the other programs, I don't know how accurate this is but I have heard that a lot of them had their roots in the war on poverty in the early 60's. At that time they were for widows and most people believed a widow should stay home and raise her kids. So the disincentives to go out and work were built in from the very beginning.
|
|
doxieluvr
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 11:28:59 GMT -5
Posts: 5,458
|
Post by doxieluvr on Oct 25, 2012 7:53:44 GMT -5
Unemployment insurance should be paid by the employee, not the employer. People with long enough job histories shouldn't pay a premium any more. (As they woul have paid enough in to cover unemployment compensation if they lose a job) People on and off unemployment should pay a higher premium. It's just numbers and wouldn't be hard to figure out. It should be paid by employers to prevent them from getting rid of people willy nilly. Firing or laying someone off should hurt an employers pocketbook. It is not an employees fault for being layed off.
|
|
doxieluvr
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 30, 2010 11:28:59 GMT -5
Posts: 5,458
|
Post by doxieluvr on Oct 25, 2012 7:56:32 GMT -5
So how do you get money to start a business if you can't borrow from your parents or a bank? How do you start it without money to fund the initial out lay of costs? Did you miss my response? I'll repeat it - years of good decisions and sacrifice. If you can't do that, getting a loan to start the business isn't going to help you because you won't have the skills it takes to keep the business going. You'll be like the lottery winners who are broke 3 years later. Funny how the statistics for failed businesses are similar to the number of lottery winners who end up bankrupt (around 80% IIRC.) Your problem isn't getting a loan or winning the lottery, it's figuring out to how make good choices and delay gratification so you can build something successful for the long term. Well clearly I cant go back and change that I already have kids. I do have to work at my primary job until I could get a business generating income. So whats the best way to get the initial money?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 14:43:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2012 8:02:21 GMT -5
how did this become a Doxie thread?
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 14:43:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2012 8:06:50 GMT -5
Milee, I would love to start a business. How do you get the funding to do so? -------------- According to Mitt Romney, you borrow money from your parents. Nice in if you can get it, but I didn't get a dime from my parents. It would be interesting to see a study of successful business owners versus failed businesses; my guess is that the successful group would involve more people who had to earn their own way and the failed group would involve more people that were given - or had other easy access to - funds. i would agree we seem to value things differently when earned, versus given the sweat equity makes a difference.....and you know how long you saved and sacrificed to put the money together to finally take the plunge, versus poppa writing a check and saying "have fun"
|
|
The Captain
Junior Associate
Hugs are good...
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 16:21:23 GMT -5
Posts: 8,717
Location: State of confusion
Favorite Drink: Whinnnne
|
Post by The Captain on Oct 25, 2012 8:11:08 GMT -5
Shasta - I'm a bit confused. I though you stated on another thread that FS is based on earned income and that those who work get much more than those who don't work, which is why seniors rarely qualify? Did I misunderstand? Just trying to understand how it works and how it works against those trying to help themselves. I think it was on the confronting those using FS thread... I agree with you that the system seems to be stacked to encourage dependence in some ways... I get $1000 a month from SS for survivor's benefits for my DS. Food stamps were helpful, but once our income had to include DS's job, we were disqualified. It was nice for the couple months we had them because we ate higher quality foods. We eat more pasta and cheaper foods now. Shasta - didn't understand/realize that about the SS survivor's benefits. Thanks for clarifying things.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: May 3, 2024 14:43:37 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 25, 2012 8:16:33 GMT -5
Unemployment insurance should be paid by the employee, not the employer. People with long enough job histories shouldn't pay a premium any more. (As they woul have paid enough in to cover unemployment compensation if they lose a job) People on and off unemployment should pay a higher premium. It's just numbers and wouldn't be hard to figure out. It should be paid by employers to prevent them from getting rid of people willy nilly. Firing or laying someone off should hurt an employers pocketbook. It is not an employees fault for being layed off. you truly believe that employers fire or layoff employees just because they can? hiring people costs a lot of money.....i would MUCH rather save a current employee, than try to find a new one the productivity loss is huge....training and getting the new employee up to speed is a bane on my office i try everything i know first.....and then, only after figuring out that the employee will not work out, do i cut the ties and i HATE firing people.....
|
|
sheilaincali
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 17:55:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,131
|
Post by sheilaincali on Oct 25, 2012 8:36:12 GMT -5
Unemployment insurance should be paid by the employee, not the employer. People with long enough job histories shouldn't pay a premium any more. (As they woul have paid enough in to cover unemployment compensation if they lose a job) People on and off unemployment should pay a higher premium. It's just numbers and wouldn't be hard to figure out. It should be paid by employers to prevent them from getting rid of people willy nilly. Firing or laying someone off should hurt an employers pocketbook. It is not an employees fault for being layed off. It does hurt the employer's pocketbook. Every year the state reviews my employees, the UE claims, what they paid out, etc and they determine what my unemployment rate is for the following year. I work in the road construction industry in Minnesota. We are only allowed to pave concrete roads from basically April until the end of November. So my people get laid off every year. I figured it out for another thread and what I as the employer paid as unemployment tax and what my employees received as benefits was almost even. So you can bet that the next year my rates went up.
|
|