movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by movingforward on Oct 25, 2012 17:31:20 GMT -5
I don't have any children so my taxes ALWAYS go to educate someone else's kids. Sometimes I feel like I should get a tax break for being a single person but accept that living in a civilized society means paying taxes and often they may be for things one doesn't fully support or personally benefit from. For example, I didn't support going to war with Iraq but nonetheless my money went there...
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,087
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Oct 25, 2012 17:37:35 GMT -5
Mich, I think they were using the WIC for the formula payments. My understanding was that the WIC program wanted her to try BF before providing formula vouchers. He said they were just going to have the doctor say that the child wasn't thriving on BF (even though they weren't going to BF at all) to get more $$$ vouchers. I don't know exactly how the WIC program works... this is just based on what he was saying to do to get more $$. Some of my relatives have worked for WIC and they said that some women (not this woman) see various formula types as "prestigious" and providing status so they would lie and say that their child ONLY could use one particular type of formula (which was always the expensive one where the govt had to provide more to pay for). Being as I'm not a mom, don't shop for formula, and don't live in a location where people are judged by the brand of formula they were feeding their child, it was kinda of confusing to me. I guess it would be akin to insisting that you can only drink Coke or Pepsi because your friends will judge you as poorly if you have Sam's Choice Cola... At any rate, it always involved lying to a doctor or the worker ("My child absolutely CANNOT exist on Smart Start. Only Enfamil works") to get the taxpayers to pick up a more expensive tab.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Oct 25, 2012 17:55:41 GMT -5
Mich, I think they were using the WIC for the formula payments. My understanding was that the WIC program wanted her to try BF before providing formula vouchers. He said they were just going to have the doctor say that the child wasn't thriving on BF (even though they weren't going to BF at all) to get more $$$ vouchers. I don't know exactly how the WIC program works... this is just based on what he was saying to do to get more $$.
This makes no sense. They'd either get WIC vouchers for formula, or increased WIC food allotment for the mother's nutrition. It's not an 'and' situation, but an 'either/or' situation.
They also may be receiving WIC since they already have small children.
You don't get food $$....you get specific foods. For instance, you get so many gallons of milk, lbs of cheese, eggs, peanut butter, cereal, etc. If you don't use it, you lose it.
|
|
milee
Senior Associate
Joined: Jan 17, 2012 13:20:00 GMT -5
Posts: 12,344
|
Post by milee on Oct 25, 2012 17:57:16 GMT -5
You don't get food $$....you get specific foods. For instance, you get so many gallons of milk, lbs of cheese, eggs, peanut butter, cereal, etc. If you don't use it, you lose it. And I know this one is beating a dead, dead horse... but that's how the food stamp program should be run as well, IMHO. You need food? Of course we'll feed you - certain healthy foods.
|
|
Plain Old Petunia
Senior Member
bloom where you are planted
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 2:09:44 GMT -5
Posts: 4,840
|
Post by Plain Old Petunia on Oct 25, 2012 18:19:26 GMT -5
I don't have any children so my taxes ALWAYS go to educate someone else's kids. Sometimes I feel like I should get a tax break for being a single person but accept that living in a civilized society means paying taxes and often they may be for things one doesn't fully support or personally benefit from. For example, I didn't support going to war with Iraq but nonetheless my money went there... And look where this acceptance has gotten our society, in regards to creating generation after generation of welfare dependents. Would it be a better society if only the children of the wealthy received an education? It varies by state of course, but the average cost is $10,615 per year per student. www.npr.org/blogs/money/2012/06/21/155515613/how-much-does-the-government-spend-to-send-a-kid-to-school I'd have never attended a single day. How about you?
|
|
Plain Old Petunia
Senior Member
bloom where you are planted
Joined: Dec 21, 2010 2:09:44 GMT -5
Posts: 4,840
|
Post by Plain Old Petunia on Oct 25, 2012 18:30:58 GMT -5
I wasn't referring to educating our kids. You said she shouldn't accept that she must pay taxes in order to educate other people's children, because that acceptance leads to generational welfare.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 25, 2012 18:50:22 GMT -5
Lone, my mention of public school was only to emphasize that no man is an island...
We all use taxpayer-funded resources and VERY few of us pay enough to "pay our fair share." So unless you're a 1%-er, you're probably not paying for *all* your choices.
|
|
resolution
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 13:09:56 GMT -5
Posts: 7,240
Mini-Profile Name Color: 305b2b
|
Post by resolution on Oct 25, 2012 19:20:14 GMT -5
I'm sorry, but my grandfather and his siblings were in an actual orphanage in this country during the 1930s. I think that isn't such the great plan it is touted to be... My great uncle (grandmother's brother) was in one too, and when he aged out he became a bank robber and a murderer. However he may have ended up like that without the orphanage, there is no way of knowing.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 25, 2012 19:58:23 GMT -5
A civilized society? What do you think people would do if welfare were completely ended? I pay almost $2K a year in property taxes and I don't have kids. What do I get from that? But I pay those taxes because I think educating all children, not just children whose parents can afford $10K+/year, is important (and because I don't want to lose my house ) Our current welfare system needs some major reform. I think we can all agree on that. But ending it entirely or removing kids from their families when their parents fall on hard times is not the answer.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 22,084
|
Post by giramomma on Oct 25, 2012 20:06:18 GMT -5
Actually a big reason they can't afford them is due to their own choices. We can't have the kid's share a room. We have to pay for every kid's education. We can't downgrade our lifestyle & be a single income family, but we can't afford additional daycare either. People could have a lot more kids if they wanted. I don't care that they aren't, but it is due to the choices they are making. Edited to fix my ridiculous double negative. Yea grammar! Actually, I don't agree with this. We have a VERY downgraded life. No cable, prepaid cells, eat out once a month for $50, my kids wear mostly 2nd hand clothing, adults spend $600 a year max on clothing, etc. Child #1 has a 3Ds, and that's the ONLY gaming system we have in the house. #2 has gotten mostly garage sale/craigslist gifts for her first 5 years of life. Kids #2 and #3 will have to share a bedroom. We each fill up our cars ONCE a month, taking alternative forms of transportation as much as we can. IOW, we are the people that get made fun of all the time on the your money board for doing the "right" thing all of the freaking time. We DO send our kids to private school, and that's a need, not a want. (We'd spend just as much on a tutor for our kids as we do for private school tuition.) Our only other splurge is vacationing. In my county, the average house goes for 220K, and taxes run 400/month on a house that expensive. Daycare for an infant in a good center will run you 1300/month. We just had our third, and let me tell you we are getting close to being strapped. There's no way we can afford another one. As it is, we have to "find" another $400 in our budget to pay for daycare for #3. Honestly, I don't know where that money is going to come from. And I'm scare sh*tless. I don't regret the presence of having a 3rd child, but I DO regret making a decision based on emotions. Generally, I never bring emotions into financial decisions. And now, it's come to bite me in the ass. DH works part time because he wouldn't make enough at a full time job to cover daycare costs for 3 kids, increased gas costs and parking costs. I can't work anymore. I work 6 days a week. (Last year, while I was pregnant, it was 7. ). I haven't gotten a raise in my job for 4 years. We recently had to pay more in benefits, which completely ate up my promotion. I don't complain, because my benefits are still good. If we downgraded our lifestyle, we'd live in an area of town where there was open prostitution and day time drug deals and where sex offenders were aplenty. There is hardly anymore fat to cut. Financially, it would have been much better for us to stop at two kids. And trust me, if for some reason the planets align and we would get pregnant with a 4th (I have fertility issues and I'm on birth control so it would be a bit of a miracle), I would never, ever consider the extra child a blessing.
|
|
hoops902
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 22, 2010 13:21:29 GMT -5
Posts: 11,978
|
Post by hoops902 on Oct 25, 2012 20:25:27 GMT -5
::We DO send our kids to private school, and that's a need, not a want. (We'd spend just as much on a tutor for our kids as we do for private school tuition.) ::
You're so ridiculously far from leading a "VERY" downgraded life. Sending your kids to a private school is a want. And this point illustrates what is so wrong in general in so many areas, people think that just because they REALLY want it, it becomes a need. It doesn't.
I wrote a lot more, but it came out a lot meaner than I intended it to be. The jist of it being, you're not exactly slumming it with private school and vacationing.
|
|
midjd
Administrator
Your Money Admin
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 14:09:23 GMT -5
Posts: 17,719
|
Post by midjd on Oct 25, 2012 20:34:50 GMT -5
What's your criteria for "truly poor"? Just curious.
|
|
Mardi Gras Audrey
Senior Member
So well rounded, I'm pointless...
Joined: Dec 25, 2010 18:49:31 GMT -5
Posts: 2,087
|
Post by Mardi Gras Audrey on Oct 25, 2012 22:48:49 GMT -5
This makes no sense. They'd either get WIC vouchers for formula, or increased WIC food allotment for the mother's nutrition. It's not an 'and' situation, but an 'either/or' situation. They also may be receiving WIC since they already have small children. You don't get food $$....you get specific foods. For instance, you get so many gallons of milk, lbs of cheese, eggs, peanut butter, cereal, etc. If you don't use it, you lose it. Mich, the dollar value of the additional food allocation for a breastfeeding mother is nowhere near the amount that it costs the govt to provide the formula. In this table, it shows what the packages are. www.fns.usda.gov/wic/benefitsandservices/foodpkgallowances.HTMSo, for breastfeeding, you get an additional 48 oz of juice, 8 qts of milk, 1 lb of cheese, and 30 oz of canned fish. Alternatively, they get 806 oz of reconstituted liquid formula. Going by Walmart prices, that looks to be $100-$150 a month (Any moms here who buy formula can correct me if I am not doing the math right). The food allowance probably costs like $40 more. (A gallon of milk is what $3? 1 lb of cheese is $4? etc.). So that works out to an extra amount that the taxpayer has to pay of $100 a month. Now, I know it is "only $100" but multiply that by many people and it adds up. The part that I think most people would have a problem with is that they would probably be making different decisions if it was THEIR $100 a month (and not WIC's). the husband told me himself that his wife just didn't want to breastfeed so they figured that it was okay to just get WIC to pay for it because she didn't want to. This obviously wasn't the intent of the system, because the WIC folks were encouraging them to breastfeed and needed a doctor's note to get the formula. So they lied to the doctor and said that the child wasn't thriving while breastfeeding (Of course she isn't going to thrive when you aren't feeding her!). This is the kind of attitude that pisses most taxpayers off. When you make decisions to waste resources and money because it is provided by the taxpayer, that's not cool. If you want to make wasteful decisions with your own funds, go for it. But when someone else is paying the bill? I guess then it's a free-for-all.... We see the same things in healthcare (People who have no copay or don't see the costs of their care use more resources) and even landlords see it when they include utilities in the rent price (How much water and electricity do tenants conserve when they aren't paying the bill directly? None... they have little to no incentive to).
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Oct 26, 2012 1:03:58 GMT -5
I don't know.
On one hand, i dono't like the government deciding who is a fit parent and who is not. I don't think being poor and/or receiving assistance is the best (or should be the only) critera.
On the other, I think some people are underestimating the problem. There are literally millions of kids out there who aren't provided for or loved like most of us are or were. Teachers are increasingly having to play the role of parent. Schools have to provide food the kids not only for lunch, but for breakfast. AND have to provide food for the kids in the summer. Otherwise they don't eat. They show up to school without any school supplies or adequate clothing.
The thing is the time to intervene isn't when the kid is a teenager and in trouble with the law and has all kinds of emotional damage. It's too late by then.
So I really don't know the answer.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 19:15:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 6:02:26 GMT -5
I agree with most of the comment above me. I came from this country about 40 years ago, without the skill of speaking the language. Only thing I was depends on was my ability and will to make it to reach American dream.I went through many trials and failed attempt to reach who I am. But I know, how hard it can be for some people..... Not everyone has a will or coping mechanism to successful in their life. Over the period those hard times, I have develop much of empathy for the whom, weaker and not capable of taking care of themselves. I try to not to look at their shortcoming in their life. Instead, their positive aspect of their standing. I understands, not everyone is same as I am or have the ability. America has the best opportunity in the world, for everyone to succeed. If that is what ones really want. Especially, now. Country is struggling with slow economy and high debt. We have to modify social program and others.Everything need to be cut. We all have to shall the responsibility, of short coming of politician.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 6:59:46 GMT -5
Funny enough, when my dad and his siblings came here, there was no welfare of any sort. Rich society women taught immigrants English. He did a lot of menial jobs to support his two sisters through secretarial school and his brother through college and law school. They all made something of themselves, didn't have babies they couldn't support, didn't become criminals. Embraced this country and its customs. He'd be horrified today at what has happened.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 19:15:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 8:07:40 GMT -5
I have zero issue with those that truly cannot take care of themselves
I have little issue with those that use these programs as short term remedies for issues that have cropped up
But, i have major issues with those that start on these programs, and continue on them for LONG periods of time
You need assistance...fine You with your care/social worker need a plan on how to meet your own needs though
We cannot continue to enable those that just find it easier to live this way....and as more and more receive benefits, fewer and fewer are paying for them
And that in itself is where the major crux of the problem is....not enough people paying, and too many taking
|
|
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 26, 2012 8:29:53 GMT -5
::We DO send our kids to private school, and that's a need, not a want. (We'd spend just as much on a tutor for our kids as we do for private school tuition.) :: You're so ridiculously far from leading a "VERY" downgraded life. Sending your kids to a private school is a want. And this point illustrates what is so wrong in general in so many areas, people think that just because they REALLY want it, it becomes a need. It doesn't. I wrote a lot more, but it came out a lot meaner than I intended it to be. The jist of it being, you're not exactly slumming it with private school and vacationing. Hoops, most of the time I agree with you but you are the one who is ridiculously off point. In some areas sending your kids to a private school is a need if you want them to have a half way decent education, that is part of the RESPONSIBILITY of a good parent. I'm not talking an uppity boarding school like you seem to think, but rather a school where the kids can learn instead of dealing with: 1. Gangs 2. A population where 60-80% is on supplemental food assistance for breakfast and lunch (the range varies by school for my district) 3. Severe behavorial problems 4. Metal detectors to get into the facility 5. A population of whom more than 50% in some areas don't speak english so the limited resources have to be used to teach them in their native langage. Does that sound like a school to you? To me it sounds like a prision, here let me change that: 6. Because of NCLB any student not failing, even a medicore one, will not get any individual attention because the teachers will put their limited resources to the ones who are falling behind. The above is not bullshit, it is reality in many areas of the country. So yes, if there in ANY way I can keep my kid out of that environment you better Damn well believe I will.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 19:15:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 8:31:59 GMT -5
Mich, I think they were using the WIC for the formula payments. My understanding was that the WIC program wanted her to try BF before providing formula vouchers. He said they were just going to have the doctor say that the child wasn't thriving on BF (even though they weren't going to BF at all) to get more $$$ vouchers. I don't know exactly how the WIC program works... this is just based on what he was saying to do to get more $$. Some of my relatives have worked for WIC and they said that some women (not this woman) see various formula types as "prestigious" and providing status so they would lie and say that their child ONLY could use one particular type of formula (which was always the expensive one where the govt had to provide more to pay for).Being as I'm not a mom, don't shop for formula, and don't live in a location where people are judged by the brand of formula they were feeding their child, it was kinda of confusing to me. I guess it would be akin to insisting that you can only drink Coke or Pepsi because your friends will judge you as poorly if you have Sam's Choice Cola... At any rate, it always involved lying to a doctor or the worker ("My child absolutely CANNOT exist on Smart Start. Only Enfamil works") to get the taxpayers to pick up a more expensive tab. Except the only way WIC would pay more is if the child has a medical reason for needing the higher cost formula (lactose intolerant etc), and if your relatives were so sure there was fraud, why did they not report it? And it is not just the parents lying to the doctor but the doctor lying.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 19:15:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 8:34:21 GMT -5
This makes no sense. They'd either get WIC vouchers for formula, or increased WIC food allotment for the mother's nutrition. It's not an 'and' situation, but an 'either/or' situation. They also may be receiving WIC since they already have small children. You don't get food $$....you get specific foods. For instance, you get so many gallons of milk, lbs of cheese, eggs, peanut butter, cereal, etc. If you don't use it, you lose it. Mich, the dollar value of the additional food allocation for a breastfeeding mother is nowhere near the amount that it costs the govt to provide the formula. In this table, it shows what the packages are. www.fns.usda.gov/wic/benefitsandservices/foodpkgallowances.HTMSo, for breastfeeding, you get an additional 48 oz of juice, 8 qts of milk, 1 lb of cheese, and 30 oz of canned fish. Alternatively, they get 806 oz of reconstituted liquid formula. Going by Walmart prices, that looks to be $100-$150 a month (Any moms here who buy formula can correct me if I am not doing the math right). The food allowance probably costs like $40 more. (A gallon of milk is what $3? 1 lb of cheese is $4? etc.). So that works out to an extra amount that the taxpayer has to pay of $100 a month. Now, I know it is "only $100" but multiply that by many people and it adds up. The part that I think most people would have a problem with is that they would probably be making different decisions if it was THEIR $100 a month (and not WIC's). the husband told me himself that his wife just didn't want to breastfeed so they figured that it was okay to just get WIC to pay for it because she didn't want to. This obviously wasn't the intent of the system, because the WIC folks were encouraging them to breastfeed and needed a doctor's note to get the formula. So they lied to the doctor and said that the child wasn't thriving while breastfeeding (Of course she isn't going to thrive when you aren't feeding her!). This is the kind of attitude that pisses most taxpayers off. When you make decisions to waste resources and money because it is provided by the taxpayer, that's not cool. If you want to make wasteful decisions with your own funds, go for it. But when someone else is paying the bill? I guess then it's a free-for-all.... We see the same things in healthcare (People who have no copay or don't see the costs of their care use more resources) and even landlords see it when they include utilities in the rent price (How much water and electricity do tenants conserve when they aren't paying the bill directly? None... they have little to no incentive to). So did you report them for fraud and neglect?
|
|
taz157
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 20:50:06 GMT -5
Posts: 12,932
|
Post by taz157 on Oct 26, 2012 8:37:51 GMT -5
I have zero issue with those that truly cannot take care of themselves I have little issue with those that use these programs as short term remedies for issues that have cropped up But, i have major issues with those that start on these programs, and continue on them for LONG periods of time You need assistance...fine You with your care/social worker need a plan on how to meet your own needs though We cannot continue to enable those that just find it easier to live this way....and as more and more receive benefits, fewer and fewer are paying for them And that in itself is where the major crux of the problem is....not enough people paying, and too many taking
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 9:38:07 GMT -5
No kidding, look at California! More takers than givers creates a bad situation.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 9:40:57 GMT -5
Welfare for a very limited time and you can work as well. Two years max, no penalty for having a job but no more babies, period. You can have sex without having babies and you have no right to have babies when someone else has to support them. Welfare should be for those physically and/or mentally disabled. Not for those who choose a lifestyle at taxpayer expense.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Sept 28, 2024 19:15:45 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2012 9:44:32 GMT -5
Funny enough, when my dad and his siblings came here, there was no welfare of any sort. Rich society women taught immigrants English. He did a lot of menial jobs to support his two sisters through secretarial school and his brother through college and law school. They all made something of themselves, didn't have babies they couldn't support, didn't become criminals. Embraced this country and its customs. He'd be horrified today at what has happened. zib, In a way, even I am younger. It's very hard for me to understand what happened to this country, that I was dreaming of all of my childhood years. I never took a dime from the government. I was working, month after I came over here.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 9:47:43 GMT -5
With few exceptions, most immigrants did come here, embrace customs, and work hard. No welfare should be for immigrants under ANY circumstances and certainly nothing for illegals, even if they did manage to have an anchor baby.
|
|
giramomma
Distinguished Associate
Joined: Feb 3, 2011 11:25:27 GMT -5
Posts: 22,084
|
Post by giramomma on Oct 26, 2012 9:49:26 GMT -5
::We DO send our kids to private school, and that's a need, not a want. (We'd spend just as much on a tutor for our kids as we do for private school tuition.) :: Y Hoops, most of the time I agree with you but you are the one who is ridiculously off point. In some areas sending your kids to a private school is a need if you want them to have a half way decent education, that is part of the RESPONSIBILITY of a good parent. I'm not talking an uppity boarding school like you seem to think, but rather a school where the kids can learn instead of dealing with: 1. Gangs 2. A population where 60-80% is on supplemental food assistance for breakfast and lunch (the range varies by school for my district) 3. Severe behavorial problems 4. Metal detectors to get into the facility 5. A population of whom more than 50% in some areas don't speak english so the limited resources have to be used to teach them in their native langage. Does that sound like a school to you? To me it sounds like a prision, here let me change that: 6. Because of NCLB any student not failing, even a medicore one, will not get any individual attention because the teachers will put their limited resources to the ones who are falling behind. The above is not bullshit, it is reality in many areas of the country. So yes, if there in ANY way I can keep my kid out of that environment you better Damn well believe I will. This is actually our problem. We live in a nice middle class neighborhood. The neighborhood school gets most of the kids bussed in from the poor areas, and therefore the poverty rate is something like 80%. The district released readings scores, and our local elementary school had the worst reading scores in the whole district, performing well below (15 points) below the national average. Our choices are to either hire a tutor and send our kid to public school, or send them to private. We chose private school because then our kids won't have to spend more time out of school in a learning environment with a tutor. And, our private school tuition IS rather reasonable. IF we were interested in homeschooling, we would have done that instead. We're just not cut out to teach our kids everything they need to know. Do you really think I can go to the school board and say "Please, stop bussing the poor kids to our school. Let our elementary school truly be a neighborhood school where only the middle class kids from our area can attend. I'd like my kids to get a decent education" How far will that get me?
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 9:51:22 GMT -5
Unfortunately, no where. Your normal well behaved child has no rights in a public school system.
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by movingforward on Oct 26, 2012 9:52:52 GMT -5
I have zero issue with those that truly cannot take care of themselves I have little issue with those that use these programs as short term remedies for issues that have cropped up But, i have major issues with those that start on these programs, and continue on them for LONG periods of time You need assistance...fine You with your care/social worker need a plan on how to meet your own needs though We cannot continue to enable those that just find it easier to live this way....and as more and more receive benefits, fewer and fewer are paying for them And that in itself is where the major crux of the problem is....not enough people paying, and too many taking I think most everyone can agree with these statements but getting us there is the problem. As others have stated I believe a sliding scale for welfare would actually wean people off keep them off longer. I personally would like to see more medical centers like some of the Walmarts have established for low-income families to be able to obtain reasonable healthcare for things like strep throat, etc. and be gravitated toward using those type of facilities as opposed to clogging up the emergency rooms. Of course, healthcare is a whole other issue and we don't really know what is going to happen on that end.
|
|
movingforward
Junior Associate
Joined: Sept 15, 2011 12:48:31 GMT -5
Posts: 8,384
|
Post by movingforward on Oct 26, 2012 10:03:10 GMT -5
"Do you really think I can go to the school board and say "Please, stop bussing the poor kids to our school. Let our elementary school truly be a neighborhood school where only the middle class kids from our area can attend. I'd like my kids to get a decent education" How far will that get me?"
I am not sure I understand why busing poor kids into your neighborhood is not allowing your kids to get a decent education. I am only asking because where I grew up they bused low-income kids into our neighborhood school and I don't believe it had any affect on my education. Granted that was over 20 yrs ago but I still got a good education. If you were smart and studied hard you ended up in AP or college prep courses. The fact that poor kids also went to the school had no bearing on what education you received. We had a very high % of our class go on to college, including a number of those poor kids that were bused in...
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,909
|
Post by zibazinski on Oct 26, 2012 10:06:22 GMT -5
Things have changed dramatically in even the last ten years. The public classroom of today is not the public classroom of twenty years ago. Not even remotely.
|
|