Why are the poor, poor?

[Luvlylittlewing]

they are certainly a back up plan to get more welfare and WIC benefits.

Those welfare and wic benefits don't pay for much, and they are only allowed a few years to collect those benefits and it is off to work or else.

[delalluvia]

they are certainly a back up plan to get more welfare and WIC benefits.

Good thing, eh?  The economic world certainly won't take care of them.

Nothing to say about the rest of the post?  OK.

You need to hang around more poor people.  They have families.  Why do you think you see these great big families living in one house or apartment?  Granny can't pay for her own place and neither can the kids when they work full-time at McDonald's.  What, did you think they were living like that because they liked each other's company?

Oh, and just try telling them that if they couldn't afford children then they shouldn't have had them and therefore deserve everything that happens to them and their children.  That'll go over well.

A friend of mine had an ex-boyfriend who was marrying a woman - strange wedding.  I met the man and his brother at the bachelor party - don't ask.  The brother had a fiancee.  A pregnant fiancee.  She was currently living with her folks because they had had a fight where he slapped her.  In the meantime, he hoped to win her back because he had a good job at the feed plant - making $8 an hour.

"That's good money, right?"  I just stared at him.

These weren't your inner city stereotypical folk that you're thinking of broketrash.  The man's brother had gone to college and gotten a degree in marketing.  I kinda doubt the brother will ever be able to show me his stock options and portfolio.  Not all the people who wind up on social programs are girls who couldn't keep their legs together.

[delalluvia]

see it IS complicated. Which is why people try to reduce it down to a simple "Poor people are lazy and stupid and slutty". Makes it easier to feel superior and to not do anything about it.

I dont' like the 'cradle to grave' thing. I think it hurts more than it helps. But I also believe there are people on welfare that we need to support. I am unwilling to deny food to the elderly or the children.

We need concrete solutions and 'privitazation' of all social programs is not the complete answer.

It is complicated.  But I do agree that 'cradle to grave' is excessive and yes, there is plenty of corruption in the system.  Name a system that doesn't have problems.

I met a very nice woman once.  She was divorced with two kids, working temp, hoping to get a full-time job.  Her ex-husband lived back east with his new wife.  You see, HE was the breadwinner in the family not HER.  So, when they got divorced, she got the kids and the small child support payments from her ex- who wasn't making much money at the time of the divorce.  By the time HE met his new wife, he'd gotten a better job and they could now buy a house together.  Where did that leave his ex-wife and the kids?  Living several states away, with no money to hire a lawyer to take him to court to increase her child support payments.  So while he was constantly trying to get her to take less child support money so he could pay more on his house, their children were going without medical care - she couldn't afford it - when her girl needed glasses and her boy had asthma.  She thought the national healthcare plan was a great idea.  She could take her kids to the doctor.  But I had to explain to her that many people thought her being unable to afford medical insurance was her own fault because she was poor and in this great country of ours, with all the opportunities for getting ahead, being poor was a personal failing and if her boy died from an asthma attack because she couldn't afford treatment, well, it was just too bad. 

[Clyde-B]

around here you are considered to have a 'good' job if you can draw in $8-10 an hour. Good luck finding more.

yet they are only building megamansions. Who are buying these homes? and where are the $8-10 crowd supposed to live?

This is a good point.  You can't get ahead, you can't save if you barely have enough money coming in to meet expenses.

We may, (and I'm doubtful here) have equal opportunity in this country, but people don't all have equal abilities.  I hear a lot of people that sound like they are saying that it's perfectly alright to deny a decent wage to someone who is unskilled, even though they do jobs that no one else is willing to do .

At the same time, those same people who are denying decent wages to workers are grabbing money with both hands and doing less work for it every year.

Meanwhile the people in the middle keep silent hoping to eventually earn membership in the grabbing with both hands crowd.

Big business is notorious for being fuelled by greed.  That's why labor unions came into being.  That's why the minimum wage was created.  That's why they have armys of lawyers to protect themselves from each other.  And they think nothing of taking advantage of the unfortunate, the uneducated, or the unsophisticated.  They speak as though equal opportunity somehow puts us on an equal playing field.  It doesn't matter that they have more knowledge.  It doesn't matter they have more experience.  It doesn't matter that they have more power.  It doesn't matter that their winning could destroy their opponent, while their losing would be a mild inconvenience to themselves.  They have to win.

The U. S. is one of the few countries where the rich have actually been able to convince many average people to trust them.

[brokeplex]

Those welfare and wic benefits don't pay for much, and they are only allowed a few years to collect those benefits and it is off to work or else.

one of the positive benefits that occured at both the state and federal levels in the 1990's is workfare. It is good that there is a time limit on claims cases. But, any change in "status" causes a welfare claim to be reevalutated. So, have yet another child without a father to support it, and bingo - Vanna White turned the wheel and you get a prize!

[brokeplex]

you are confused Del. All the poverty stricken are girls that can't say no!(and their offspring. )

No welfare payments go to ANYONE other than that....(and if there ARE other people on welfare we cant' discuss it here....)

 

I find it interesting that no one is noticing that I am putting the blame on the men and the women. didn't anyone notice that the comment about men doging the women and abandoning them when they get pregnant? to imply that my comments as  "antiwoman" shows the shallowness of your argumentation.

I made it clear that men, women, and the welfare pimps (excuse me, public servants who draw a much deserved salary while administering a worthwhile program that benefits the taxpayers) are part and parcel to the welfare pathology.

[brokeplex]

Good thing, eh?  The economic world certainly won't take care of them.

Nothing to say about the rest of the post?  OK.

You need to hang around more poor people.  They have families.  Why do you think you see these great big families living in one house or apartment?  Granny can't pay for her own place and neither can the kids when they work full-time at McDonald's.  What, did you think they were living like that because they liked each other's company?

Oh, and just try telling them that if they couldn't afford children then they shouldn't have had them and therefore deserve everything that happens to them and their children.  That'll go over well.

A friend of mine had an ex-boyfriend who was marrying a woman - strange wedding.  I met the man and his brother at the bachelor party - don't ask.  The brother had a fiancee.  A pregnant fiancee.  She was currently living with her folks because they had had a fight where he slapped her.  In the meantime, he hoped to win her back because he had a good job at the feed plant - making $8 an hour.

"That's good money, right?"  I just stared at him.

These weren't your inner city stereotypical folk that you're thinking of broketrash.  The man's brother had gone to college and gotten a degree in marketing.  I kinda doubt the brother will ever be able to show me his stock options and portfolio.  Not all the people who wind up on social programs are girls who couldn't keep their legs together.

del we can all fill up a 100 page forum with anecdotal stories of heart breaking cases on the one hand and criminal sloth and fraud on the other hand. so what? the system itself is pathological for the recipient victims and the tax paying victims. the system is a system of victimization and needs abolishment asap.

[brokeplex]

see it IS complicated. Which is why people try to reduce it down to a simple "Poor people are lazy and stupid and slutty". Makes it easier to feel superior and to not do anything about it.

I dont' like the 'cradle to grave' thing. I think it hurts more than it helps. But I also believe there are people on welfare that we need to support. I am unwilling to deny food to the elderly or the children.

We need concrete solutions and 'privitazation' of all social programs is not the complete answer.

Well, for months now I have been reading your PITY PARTY threads and your cries for new solutions to replace a failing system. Sadly, I still haven't heard any new ideas from you. You consistently reject church and private charities and do not acknowledge the inequity of making middle class families pay to feed, clothe, medicate, and educate the poor. While the rich pay little and the poor pay nothing into the system.

Do we all remember the "TEXAS # 1 IN TEENAGED BIRTHS" thread on this web site, these issues and many alternatives were all discussed at great length.

and, ladies and gentlemen of Bettermost for your convenience here is the link back to that lengthy and inconclusive thread.

http://bettermost.net/forum/index.php/topic,14666.msg284972.html#msg284972

Injest, you should meld all of your PITY PARTY threads into one giant clearinghouse, so much commentary is ignored and forgotten otherwise. 

[Jeff Wrangler]

You consistently reject church and private charities and do not acknowledge the inequity of making middle class families pay to feed, clothe, medicate, and educate the poor. While the rich pay little and the poor pay nothing into the system.

And who do you suppose supports the churches? The rich? I doubt it. Talking about shifting the responsibility from the government to private charities is just Conservative code for eliminating help for the poor, because the government can compel support--through taxation--and private charities cannot.

Eliminating the system is not the answer. We need to fix it, plug the loopholes, so that the rich pay their fair share.

[oilgun]

And who do you suppose supports the churches? The rich? I doubt it. Talking about shifting the responsibility from the government to private charities is just Conservative code for eliminating help for the poor, because the government can compel support--through taxation--and private charities cannot.

Eliminating the system is not the answer. We need to fix it, plug the loopholes, so that the rich pay their fair share.

And tax the damn churches! Talk about welfare, the churches are all welfare cases as are many corporations and even whole industries.  Here in 'socialist' Canada,  up to 50% of the biofuel industry is funded by government subsidies.  That's the same industry that's being held responsible for the worldwide food shortages.  (Like that was unexpected, lol!)