Welfare abuse would be cut in half if they just did a complete audit, or better yet, cancel it to everyone, then make everyone reapply and vet them correctly.
Discussing politics and religion
- Thread starter Floorist
- Start date
Help Support Flooring Forum - DIY & Professional:
No doubt, but also cut subsidies to corporations cus...... wait for it....."corporations are people too!"
Nick
In Remembrance
And man do they get the Welfare ..
Nick
In Remembrance
One of local congresswoman ran on a platform of doing away with gov. handouts. Turned out her family farm gets $300,000 a year in farm subsidies. She's republican , got elected anyway.
Nick
In Remembrance
Figures ..
Havasu, people on Welfare actually have to keep applying & updating their status. I know people who get WIC, SNAP, & other assitance who have to keep going to some place out of town (scheduling unpaid days off from work) to drive to the place on the scheduled day-- IF their employers let them have that day off-- where they sit for hours past their appointment time & then finally get in to go over the paperwork to justify continuing to get the aid. For people with no vehicles of their own (because they can't afford them) with no public transportation (either bc it isn't affordable or isn't available) it can be very difficult. Plus it can cost them $ from missing work. If their employers refuse to let them have the days off they might not be able to get an appointment rescheduled in time to avoid losing their benefits. The system is a total p.i.t.a. I realize that it is to keep up-to-date, but it would be nice if there was a more efficient method that didn't involve people missing work.
In Missouri until a couple years ago, people met with a caseworker in their office. Now it is done over the phone and the case worker might be 300 miles away.
The welfare system is just full of fraud. It needs a complete revamp. I know men that claim 10 kids, his wife claims the same amount. Since they are not legally married, nobody knows they only have one kid. It may be a hardship, but shutting it down and starting over is the only way. IMHO
I would have to look up more info on the instances of fraud & such. I just know that it is tough for the people who legitimately need it. Dumping it & restarting it might sound fine in theory, but it can be life or death for some people. If they don't get the $ they could lose their homes/apartments, transportation, & possibly their jobs. Even with welfare, I know people who struggle to make ends meet-- and these are families where both parents work. The pay is just so crappy & prices/taxes just so high that they can't seem to catch up on bills.
I do agree that the system needs to be fixed, but I don't think halting it entirely is feasible-- especially with how long it takes our government to do things. If they stopped it to redo it later, it could be months or even years. Perhaps they could make a new plan & phase it in over time.
I don't think the people who are using it the way it is intended & who are not exploiting the system should be punished because there are people who abuse it-- just like I don't think law abiding responsible gun owners should be punished for people who misuse their guns.
I do wish there were ways to make employers pay their employees living wages without it causing them to jack up prices or fire employees. I wish there was a reasonable affordable incentive they could give to corporations who pay employees well & give them medical benefits & such. Right now with FICA, it can be a deterrent for raising wages & hiring more employees. But then, our welfare system seems to punish people who while making it more profitable for people who don't work. I know there is no perfect system, but we need something that rewards people for working without punishing people who are unemployed but don't qualify for unemployment or who have not been able to get a job by the deadline or who are unable to work but don't technically qualify for disability. I just don't know what the solution would be though.
I also think we need to revisit the whole Citizens United case & make it so our legislators can't be given such large bribes by corporations & oligarchs so that they act in favor/benefit of the to 1 to 10% while screwing over the rest of their constituents.
It's hard to tell if a subsidy in that case is good or bad. Maybe without the subsidy the farm would fail, dozens of locals would be out of work and we'd end up buying wheat from China. Maybe they had a bad year because of man made climate change.
(and that she's a Republican
)Same can be said about the internet BS that the rich pay zero taxes. We are presented with no actual facts to make a reasonable conclusion, and simply a statement to inflame people.
Last edited:
she gets it every year and has for years.
Nick
In Remembrance
Sorry , I had to stop it at 145 seconds ..
I don't listen to either of the "liars clubs" CNN or FOX.
Nick
In Remembrance
Same here .. Would love to meet Hannity .. In a privet setting of course ..
Nick
In Remembrance
Wouldn't know .. To hot for hip Boots ..
Show me lies on CNN or MSNBC.
I believe Jon Stewart on the Daily Show mocked CNN for its lack of fact-checking. Led to a funny skit of John Oliver saying "CNN f***s goats". I think it was bc CNN fact-checked an SNL skit, but didn't fact check it's own stories. I don't watch CNN so I can't really comment on the accuracy.
Also, I find it interesting to see the comment about it being hard to judge if a farm needs a subsidy when the same courtesy is often not extended to individual people-- usually impoverished people. I'm not saying highup is guilty of that contradiction, but I've seen other people who express that on social media. It's like, when someone sees a family that gets public assistance and thinks they don't need it or that they are wasting their money because they have nice clothes, toys, games, phones etc. But their situation and the circumstances of how they came to possess those items are not known.
It is entirely possible that the woman legitimately needs subsidies to keep her farm running. It's also possible she could be scamming the government (regardless of political affiliation). Which brings me to ask, what is the evidence/proof of widespread fraud? Is it in government reports? Or is it assumption based on people saying they saw people on welfare that they don't think need/deserve it? I'm curious about that.
Also, I will take a moment to vent about companies that get people's info & then apply for Medicaid/Medicare $ for equipment/supplies that they never actually send to the people. IIRC, they were doing some sort of scam for scooters that way-- getting people to call to see if they qualified, taking down their info, & then filing for $ claiming they were providing those people with scooters when they weren't. I think there is more widespread corruption from larger organizations like that than from individuals people.
Also, I find it interesting to see the comment about it being hard to judge if a farm needs a subsidy when the same courtesy is often not extended to individual people-- usually impoverished people. I'm not saying highup is guilty of that contradiction, but I've seen other people who express that on social media. It's like, when someone sees a family that gets public assistance and thinks they don't need it or that they are wasting their money because they have nice clothes, toys, games, phones etc. But their situation and the circumstances of how they came to possess those items are not known.
It is entirely possible that the woman legitimately needs subsidies to keep her farm running. It's also possible she could be scamming the government (regardless of political affiliation). Which brings me to ask, what is the evidence/proof of widespread fraud? Is it in government reports? Or is it assumption based on people saying they saw people on welfare that they don't think need/deserve it? I'm curious about that.
Also, I will take a moment to vent about companies that get people's info & then apply for Medicaid/Medicare $ for equipment/supplies that they never actually send to the people. IIRC, they were doing some sort of scam for scooters that way-- getting people to call to see if they qualified, taking down their info, & then filing for $ claiming they were providing those people with scooters when they weren't. I think there is more widespread corruption from larger organizations like that than from individuals people.
Last edited:
