As the new saying goes: Oh SNAP!

[djAdvocate]

Dec 18, 2013 22:09:49 GMT -5 @xmascookie said:

Right. I have attended many gestating child showers.

i said "generally". 

ba·by
ˈbābē/
noun
noun: baby; plural noun: babies

1.
a very young child, esp. one newly or recently born.
"his wife's just had a baby"
synonyms: infant, newborn, child, tot, little one; More

[zibazinski]

These people arent weak, they are lazy and they USE their children to stay LAZY. Trying to already figure out how she can get another child on food stamps. Unreal. Instead of trying to help them make something of themselves. That's a GREAT mother there. On this board we have a mother who has actually let her parents raise her baby so far. Why? Because its the best thing for her child. Maybe she could have quit her job and live off taxpayers, even had another baby or two while she was at it just to make sure that check kept coming. Instead she made the sacrifice and it is one, to do what she thinks is best for her child. Not her, but her child. She doesn't use her child as a means of support, she supports her child.

[Miss Tequila]

Dec 19, 2013 7:15:00 GMT -5 deminmaine said:

Tsk, tsk, what to do with the surplus population.....

Are there no workhouses?  Are there no prisons? 

Or, as someone else said, There will be poor always, pathetically struggling....

Not a new problem, or an easy one to resolve.

Of course, yet another person once said, paraphrased, A society is judged by how it treats its weakest members....

I agree witih that statement.  I just disagree that making an entire class of people dependent on the government is treating them well. 

[Deleted]

To which class are you referring? Children? 

Here are lots of 'classes' recieving food stamps I think...

[Value Buy]

I would really like everyone feeling sorry for the permanent food stamp users to take a day trip to any large supermarket in a large northern city on the fifth of the month and observe buying patterns of the food stamp users.

Do not go before 2 pm. They do not get out and about before then.

Observe the shopping carts what they have, and observe what they leave behind at the checkout when the card is maxed out, because they have no idea what food actually costs.

Guarenteed what is taken off the order because they cannot pay will be the quality food items leaving the chips cookies and soda on the cart.

Maybe then, you will realize the system needs a definite tweaking of the entire system.

I said tweaking, not destruction of the food stamp program.

[Deleted]

I've said plenty of times I wish Snap was more like WIC... But, MANUFACTURERS and RETAILERS don't want that ...

You understand that many, many people who get good stamps ARE WORkING! .... Thus why they might not be able to shop till after 3....

[Miss Tequila]

Dec 19, 2013 8:39:08 GMT -5 oped said:

To which class are you referring? Children? 

Here are lots of 'classes' recieving food stamps I think...

I'm not talking about children.  I'm talking about people like the family in the article.  Not only has the mom always been dependent on the government, she has grown children that are not self-sufficient, either.  To me, THAT is what is wrong with our welfare system and which the left doesn't seem to want to acknowledge or address. 

I have no problem with someone who needs TEMPORARY assistance.  But that is not what we have created.  Look to the inner-city ghettos.  How many of those people are or will ever be productive members of society?  That is the "class" that I am talking about.  We created that mentality and it needs to end.  We need to stop the "but that is all they know so we can't expect more from them".  How is that helping anyone?  Guess what, I grew up poor in government housing yet managed to become succesful in life.  But we are dooming these people to life on teh government dole by pitying them and expecting absolutely nothing from them.

And sadly, the children in this story and others just like them will probably also wind up depending on the system....

[mmhmm]

I don't see this as being the fault of any political party.  There are Democrats who are pro-life.  I know a few.  There are Republicans who are pro-choice.  I know a few of those, too.  If you use a broad brush you're going to end up with a pretty lousy picture, I'm afraid.  People make individual decisions.  Some of them are good decisions and some aren't.  Some make more good decisions than bad, and some go the other way.  In neither case is it somebody else's fault, IMO.

[mmhmm]

Dec 18, 2013 11:39:27 GMT -5 shelby said:

Does anyone have statistics on the average number of children in a welfare recipient home? I am not opposed to incentivizing BC at all. But wondering how much effect this would have overall.

I was able to find this, shelby:

"The average number of persons in TANF families was 2.4, including an average of 1.8 recipient children. One in two recipient families had only one child. Less than eight percent of families had more than three children. The average number of children in closed-case families was 1.8. Nearly one in two closed-case families had one child, and only seven percent had more than three children."

link to article

[Tennesseer]

Value Buy said: "I would really like everyone feeling sorry for the permanent food stamp users to take a day trip to any large supermarket in a large northern city on the fifth of the month and observe buying patterns of the food stamp users.Do not go before 2 pm. They do not get out and about before then.

Observe the shopping carts what they have, and observe what they leave behind at the checkout when the card is maxed out, because they have no idea what food actually costs.Guarenteed what is taken off the order because they cannot pay will be the quality food items leaving the chips cookies and soda on the cart.Maybe then, you will realize the system needs a definite tweaking of the entire system.I said tweaking, not destruction of the food stamp program."


Down ìn the southern states you have to go to the supermarket around 6 am to observe what the food stamp users are buying on the 5th.  Too hot around 2 pm in the summer time to be out and about.  At 2 pm, they are sleeping off the prime rib and king crab legs with drawn butter they ate for breakfast.

[Deleted]

Until the government decides to provide the data as to what food foods stamps are actually paying for we are all free to speculate.

It would be easy to gather and publish and yet it isn't.

 Does anyone know what is the reason given that that data isn't provided?

[mmhmm]

There's a problem here that isn't often mentioned.  Who deals with these folks from the time they sign up for assistance to the time they no longer require it (if that time comes)?  Social workers do, and their salaries are abysmal.  Furthermore, there aren't enough of them.  The piles of files on their desks are mountainous most of the time.  Where are they to get the time to actually physically examine every household and every individual requesting assistance?  Yet, in order to do this properly, that's what would be required.  It would be required not only for those entering the program, but for those currently on the program.  Who's going to do this?  Do we get the go-getters applying for the position of social worker (usually requires a master's degree) with the pay we offer and the workloads they're expected to juggle?  I think not, and I understand why.  Who here would do that job (have to have a master's, huge workload, lousy pay)?

To stop all this is going to take money up-front.  I've said this before.


ETA:  I should add I know folks who do this job, despite the associated problems.  They do it because, to them, it's almost a calling.  They want to help.  Too often, they find themselves so bogged down they simply burn out.

[luckyme]

My daughter is in a youth program.  She needed to join it in order to get the free summer camp.  They are being trained as camp counselors and eventually she will be paid for it.

The program is for low income.  The teens are considered "at risk", just by the low income status.  The program tries very hard to show these kids a different life.  They take them on field trips, museums, college visits, etc.  The last college trip, they had 20 kids sign up.

My DD came home and told me how wonderful it was.  They had a personal guide, who spoke with them about their interests, and possible future careers, they had free lunch, were given backpacks, etc.  

Sadly only 5 kids went, out of 20.  I can see an emergency, and a few couldn't make it, but 15!  

I think the problem was probably because it was a Sat, and the time was 8:30 am.  So either the kids didn't want to get up, or the parents didn't want to get up, or both.  

My DD wasn't thrilled about it either, nor was I.  But, I told her you made a commitment and you honor that, so you ARE going.  

Same thing with the elementary school.  They have a bus pick up the kids from the low income housing.  It is a block and a half from the school!  Why?

Because if they don't, large numbers of the kids who live there never come to school.  I've met a few who are just poor, but the majority I meet have far more issues than poverty.

It is the whole culture of laziness.  Many of these people shouldn't be allowed to parent because they have no clue what that even means.  And throwing money at these people, or programs, just isn't going to fix that.  

[swamp]

Dec 19, 2013 7:22:17 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

These people arent weak, they are lazy and they USE their children to stay LAZY. Trying to already figure out how she can get another child on food stamps. Unreal. Instead of trying to help them make something of themselves. That's a GREAT mother there. On this board we have a mother who has actually let her parents raise her baby so far. Why? Because its the best thing for her child. Maybe she could have quit her job and live off taxpayers, even had another baby or two while she was at it just to make sure that check kept coming. Instead she made the sacrifice and it is one, to do what she thinks is best for her child. Not her, but her child. She doesn't use her child as a means of support, she supports her child.

Generalize much?

[Miss Tequila]

Dec 19, 2013 10:53:09 GMT -5 swamp said:

Dec 19, 2013 7:22:17 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

These people arent weak, they are lazy and they USE their children to stay LAZY. Trying to already figure out how she can get another child on food stamps. Unreal. Instead of trying to help them make something of themselves. That's a GREAT mother there. On this board we have a mother who has actually let her parents raise her baby so far. Why? Because its the best thing for her child. Maybe she could have quit her job and live off taxpayers, even had another baby or two while she was at it just to make sure that check kept coming. Instead she made the sacrifice and it is one, to do what she thinks is best for her child. Not her, but her child. She doesn't use her child as a means of support, she supports her child.

Generalize much?

Zib and Pat seem to be the two that generalize the most about the other side...Pat with her constant "republicans are evil" and Zib with her constant attacks on..well, pretty much anyone and everyone ...they kind of balance each other out

[swamp]

Dec 19, 2013 10:57:40 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Dec 19, 2013 10:53:09 GMT -5 swamp said:

Generalize much?

Zib and Pat seem to be the two that generalize the most about the other side...Pat with her constant "republicans are evil" and Zib with her constant attacks on..well, pretty much anyone and everyone ...they kind of balance each other out

The Yin and Yang of generalizations.

[Miss Tequila]

Dec 19, 2013 10:59:16 GMT -5 swamp said:

Dec 19, 2013 10:57:40 GMT -5 Miss Tequila said:

Zib and Pat seem to be the two that generalize the most about the other side...Pat with her constant "republicans are evil" and Zib with her constant attacks on..well, pretty much anyone and everyone ...they kind of balance each other out

The Yin and Yang of generalizations.

Ebony and Ivory....damn it, now that song is playing in my head....

[billisonboard]

It is comforting to know that Americans in the Twenty-first Century are finally going to solve the problem of laziness which has plagued humankind since the dawn of time.

[zibazinski]

[jkapp]

Dec 19, 2013 11:07:48 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

It is comforting to know that Americans in the Twenty-first Century are finally going to solve the problem of laziness which has plagued humankind since the dawn of time.

You can't solve the problem...but it's not a good idea to enable it either

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Dec 18, 2013 22:09:49 GMT -5 @xmascookie said:

Right. I have attended many gestating child showers.

Politics.  It infects everything.  If the term "baby" is used, some "pro-choice" people's foundation can be shaken by that.  They're VERY insecure in their position because the foundation of their position is quite flimsy. 

[AgeOfEnlightenmentSCP]

Dec 19, 2013 11:56:06 GMT -5 jkapp said:

Dec 19, 2013 11:07:48 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

It is comforting to know that Americans in the Twenty-first Century are finally going to solve the problem of laziness which has plagued humankind since the dawn of time.

You can't solve the problem...but it's not a good idea to enable it either

I'm primarily interested in solving the problem of using taxpayer's money to enable it.  If a few misguided people want to do it with their own money- God bless them.  It's a (marginally) free country.  It's (still for the time being mostly) their money.

[The Captain]

A little late but for those who think the concern about the increase in the number of poor children receiving SSI is a "myth"

www.disabilityscoop.com/2011/10/28/congress-childrens-ssi/

The GAO has raised concerns about it.  


Critics, however, worry that the program has morphed into an alternative welfare system for children with hard-to-measure behavioral, mental, and learning disabilities and is vulnerable to abuse when the nation can least afford it.

The report raised questions about the sharp increase in children receiving benefits for speech and language delay, as early as their toddler years. Investigators said some speech specialists they consulted were surprised by this growth and wondered whether it had become a “provisional diagnosis for very young children’’ when something is concerning about the child but nobody can pinpoint the reason.

- See more at: www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/articles/2012/05/24/childrens_disability_program_fails_to_do_timely_eligibility_reviews_gao_says_in_draft_report/?page=2#sthash.qgblNgjz.dpuf

[Deleted]

Dec 19, 2013 11:56:06 GMT -5 jkapp said:

Dec 19, 2013 11:07:48 GMT -5 billisonboard said:

It is comforting to know that Americans in the Twenty-first Century are finally going to solve the problem of laziness which has plagued humankind since the dawn of time.

You can't solve the problem...but it's not a good idea to enable it either

bingo

and we have a winnah!

the incentives should be to get off the system....not stay on them

a helping hand UP......

the OP story is just one of many.....we have heard and read many like it......

families stuck in the rut of poverty and despair.....and no idea, or inclination on climbing out

i am putting together a 501(3c) proposal for an idea i have had for awhile.....

met with a number of possible contributors yesterday.....this topic was one on the agenda

there are no easy answers....but what we are doing now is not working....PERIOD

my idea will take a couple of million to get off the ground......as the saying "go big or stay home" applies here

as i progress (if i do) i will let you know how we are doing.....

[The Captain]

One-third of the children receiving SSI benefits in December 2002, whose awards had been granted in the previous 24 months, had come from TANF families.

www.ssa.gov/policy/docs/ssb/v65n3/v65n3p14.html


Apparently approximately 1/2 of children who received SSI for disability are no longer eligible once they reach adulthood because the criteria used to measure children vs adults is different.  Behavioral or speech impediments which are considered disabling to a child are not so much so to an adult.

Interesting.

[michelyn8]

Dec 19, 2013 12:27:22 GMT -5 The Captain said:

A little late but for those who think the concern about the increase in the number of poor children receiving SSI is a "myth"

www.disabilityscoop.com/2011/10/28/congress-childrens-ssi/

The GAO has raised concerns about it.  


Critics, however, worry that the program has morphed into an alternative welfare system for children with hard-to-measure behavioral, mental, and learning disabilities and is vulnerable to abuse when the nation can least afford it.

The report raised questions about the sharp increase in children receiving benefits for speech and language delay, as early as their toddler years. Investigators said some speech specialists they consulted were surprised by this growth and wondered whether it had become a “provisional diagnosis for very young children’’ when something is concerning about the child but nobody can pinpoint the reason.

- See more at: www.boston.com/lifestyle/health/articles/2012/05/24/childrens_disability_program_fails_to_do_timely_eligibility_reviews_gao_says_in_draft_report/?page=2#sthash.qgblNgjz.dpuf

The ex-BF's mother or mother-in-law suggested he apply for SSI based on his older daughter's speech/language/learning issues.  My reaction was not appreciated.  I saw it as an insult to her actually.  She does have learning issues but like the boy as portrayed in The Blind Side, if you read the material to her or explain something to her, she picks right up on it and does not forget it. She is smart as a whip but just needs to be taught differently than most children. And to top it off, she wants to learn things, talked about going to college, and has a dream to become a vet or at least a job where she can work with animals. 

There are so many truly disabled people those funds could help, why waste them one someone who is perfectly capable of becoming a productive member of society but needs a slightly altered route?

[The Captain]

michelyn8 - my point exactly.  I've also taken exception before to certain, behaviors (I can't come up with a better word) being considered a disability just because it's "different" from the general population.

I'm trying to find out the percentage of younger (below SS age) adults who moved onto SSI when the welfare to work requirements went into effect.  

I realize to a certain extent there is a cause and effect (if you can't work due to a disability then yes, you should get SSI) but I suspect the percentages before and after the welfare reforms took place are statistically different.

[michelyn8]

Dec 19, 2013 13:33:12 GMT -5 The Captain said:

michelyn8 - my point exactly.  I've also taken exception before to certain, behaviors (I can't come up with a better word) being considered a disability just because it's "different" from the general population.

I'm trying to find out the percentage of younger (below SS age) adults who moved onto SSI when the welfare to work requirements went into effect.  

I realize to a certain extent there is a cause and effect (if you can't work due to a disability then yes, you should get SSI) but I suspect the percentages before and after the welfare reforms took place are statistically different.

I'd be interested in seeing that also.  It seems that I meet more and more people who are some type of disability but are capable of working at some kind of job at least part-time.

Back to the OP - did anyone else catch that the lady in this article was working two jobs at one time but quit because the combined income was to high for further assistance but too low to cover her expenses?  Seems to me that despite her bad choices, she did make an effort at one time but just gave up because of the "penalty" of losing all benefits when she did try to improve things.  And while I don't condone the 6 kids by 5 different men, I think she deserves a little credit for staying off drugs, keeping her kids off drugs (so far) and her willingness to help family - although I also think some of her "family" is taking advantage of her good heart which is making her situation worse (ie: sister dumping her own toddlers on her to care for).

[The Captain]

Dec 18, 2013 10:18:29 GMT -5 oped said:

So long as YOU take the short term pain and not the kids...  

How ow many needy children do you currently take in? How many hours do you currently spend mentoring? 

Our foster system sucks. Take the kids away and put them where?  

Unless you are volunteering... 

Somehow I lost several posts on this.

Once I started a family I devoted almost all of my resources to providing for them.  I still volunteer on the board of an animal shelter and at DD's school when I can.  I also do taxes for low income families when I can squeeze it in.

I work over 50 hours a week and commute 20 hours a week to make sure my family is provided for.  

Before I had DD I volunteered at various times at an animal shelter,  hospital, nursing home, Junior Achievement and Big Sisters.  When I was a big sister I witnessed firsthand how the parents use the kids to support them, not the other way around as it should be.  Those parents make sure the cards are staked against the kids even before they get started in life and you want to support continuing that, really?

A parent should make sure their kids are not needy.  If they are not capable of that they should not keep having them.

 

[The Captain]

Dec 18, 2013 21:57:00 GMT -5 djAdvocate said:

Dec 18, 2013 19:27:37 GMT -5 Tennesseer said:

Some killed their unwanted children and fed them to dogs and wolves.

Infantcide

such a waste!@

art-bin.com/art/omodest.html

You are aware of the historical context and the reason for Swift writing this piece?  Then I'm sure you can appreciate the true irony of you bringing that paper into this discussion.

www.victorianweb.org/previctorian/swift/proposal1.html