End Welfare, Free Housing, and quit promoting laziness in Cincinnati (how much, income)

[UKUKUK]

Originally Posted by Tubby513

Some members of our society really make me sick. We should crack down and stop catering to the ******* who just want to use the system and be leeches. If you have kids you can't support, well thats your problem. Shoulda thought about that before takin shots and bringin Tony out to your 94 Chevy Corsica.

How about the out of work computer programmer who can't afford to make his mortgage payment with the only available work these days, McDonalds?

For real, not everyone seeking assistance is a lazy, drug abusing alcoholic.

Welfare isn't there to carry the down, it's to help them get back up.

What we need to do is begin reinvesting into urban city centres and stop wasteful spending on infrastructure for suburbs. If we didn't spend thousands in city money to run a road to 3 exurban homes, we might be able to invest that back into education (in AND out of schools) and end this cycle of poverty.

Right now we're only continuing society's condition by letting people run away from urban problems rather than do something about them.

[Cleveland_Collector]

Yes, we need to end the cycle of poverty along with the cycle of bailing out the perpetually wealthy every time they drive the economy off of a cliff.

Also, in OH, everyone with a W-2 indirectly pays into Unemployment Insurance. After receiving it for 2 weeks (and it is quite possible to be denied), one is also required to show proof that a job is being sought. And, the most one will receive each week is $400 (some of which is taxable). In order to receive $400, you would have to gross in the neighborhood of $1000 per week. I don't know about you, but I don't know too many people who are willing to take a 60+% pay cut (with no benefits, mind you) for very long. The fact is, unemployment compensation is virtually unabusable and I haven't met a person yet that was happy to be on it. However, they were happy that the safety net was there for them. It is simply astounding how some people believe that unemployment INSURANCE is comparable to welfare. It isn't...not even one little bit.

[sickincali]

There would be assistance for those who have a true need if not for those cheating the system! We can't afford to help those who NEED it, because we spend toooo much for those who dont.

For all of you that think that we should not end welfare because of the abuse of a few, you obviously do not live in California. Welfare is practically handed to people as they leave the hospital with their anchor babies and those of us that work pay for it. There are guidelines and time limits that are never checked. Women have their baby daddies living with them bringing in money and they dont claim it because they would lose their welfare. We have several generations that have been raised that it is normal to have babies and raise them on welfare. Our state is tired of paying for the lazy, system sucking baby makers who sit back and bi*** about the fact that other people make money and have nice things, yet have no problem that I am paying to feed their babies and house their boyfriends.
Welfare should end in 90 days. Those sucking from the system should be relocated to counties where they can find employment. There are programs in place that will help educate the problem is that we have given and given for so long, they are use to it. Cut them off!!!! I wish we had the option on our taxes. I would opt to not contribute to welfare and I am sure many in California would do the same!!

[sickincali]

What do you have in mind???

[Wilson513]

If you want more of something, subsidize it.

We found out how well that worked with ADC when the rulemakers determined that no woman with a man living in the house would be eligible for ADC and the women without a man in the house could get on and stay on ADC as long as they and their progeny could continue popping out welfare babies.

Since the Clinton welfare reform, the number of illegitimate welfare babies has been steadily dropping. Gee, I wonder why that is?

[NDXUFan]

Most of these posts are interesting. My training is a B.A. in Government and Economics and along with working as a police officer at the Hamilton County Department of Job and Family Services, a.k.a "Public Assistance." I am a free-market Economist. However, I am also on dialysis. So, I have seen both sides of the fence. Since 1996, there are many requirements to receive public assistance in Ohio. Yes, you do have to be dirt poor to receive it.

Yet, the biggest problem is excessive government regulation and high taxes. For example, under President Carter, the top 1 percent paid 19.8 percent of our nation's tax bill in 1980(Wall Street Journal). Under the Bush tax cuts, the top 1 percent are paying 40 percent of our nation's tax bill(Wall Street Journal and I.R.S.) In fact, $.72 cents out of every $1.00 dollar is spent on bureaucrat salaries and benefits, not to the individuals in need.

My suggestion to this issue would be a very low flat tax rate of 1 percent, this would vastly decrease the taxes paid by the working and middle class and the top 1 percent would pay a much greater portion of the nation's income tax bill. With this vast creation of wealth, the creation of wealth would serve the poorest among us. How many of you will work harder if you are going to keep 99 or 50 percent of your earnings???

The vast majority of individuals on dialysis are on Medicare, in the area of 75 percent. The dialysis consumers who have private insurance are keeping the dialysis clinics afloat, financially. Now, if we eliminated all of the vast insurance mandates, numbering in the neighborhood of 2,000 or so, individuals who were diabetics and individuals on dialysis could purchase health insurance at reasonable rates. Always remember, regulation equals cost. What is more compassionate, a physician's office visit that costs $100.00 or $20.00??? What does the insurance company have to whine about with a 1 percent flat tax and no regulations??? Obamacare is going to be a disaster for individuals with chronic health conditions.

With very low taxes rates and private charity, more money will be available to those who truly need it, not to government bureaucrats. If anyone is interested, I would be willing to discuss this issue in much greater detail.

[wolden]

Originally Posted by NDXUFan

Now, if we eliminated all of the vast insurance mandates, numbering in the neighborhood of 2,000 or so, individuals who were diabetics and individuals on dialysis could purchase health insurance at reasonable rates.

Yes, no reason why society should pay for all these dialysis free loaders. Some time back intruding Big Brother congress mandated it should be free to everyone. That costs too much money and represent government pushing its way in where it doenst belong. After all it isn't society's fault that all these people have kidney failure.

Get gubment out of health care, kick them all off free dialysis. I'm sure you're right that insurance companies will be happy to take on all those preexisting dialysis patients costing millions and millions of dollars.

Then everyone would be happy.

[hello people]

Madness is continuing welfare. We are spiraling national debt and taxes. We need to bring an axe to all government "free money" programs. No need to argue over the fact we have no money to spend as a country, therefore dont! If you agree with these people who want to continue or god forbid expand these programs move to a communist country, now. My occupation puts me in contact daily with "welfare" communities...it has to stop!! We need mass government spending reductions!!!

[progmac]

why oh why has this thread been resurrected. this isn't the place

[CarpathianPeasant]

Originally Posted by progmac

why oh why has this thread been resurrected. this isn't the place

To end the thread on a different note in case someone pulls it out to read it for some reason (e.g., possible information). (Maybe.)