I'll refer to G.A. Cohen for this. In his book, Why Not Socialism (great read, but short),
It is a paradoxical legacy of Mr. Chávez’s self-styled socialist revolution that his policies became a moneymaker for the capitalist systems he deplored. During his 14 years in power, he nationalized large farms, redistributed land and controlled food prices as part of a strategy to help the poor. But these policies turned Venezuela from a net exporter to a net importer of rice—from farmers like Mr. Orlicek. “The rice industry has been very good to us,” Mr. Orlicek said, sitting in his newly renovated home, appointed with a baby grand piano played by his wife, Phyllis.
It isn’t just rice. Production of steel, sugar and many other goods has fallen in Venezuela, leading to occasional shortages. Until recently, Venezuela was largely self-sufficient in beef and coffee. Now it imports both.
People like you try to foist the responsibility for your neighbors on the government. People like me think that "communal caring" is only natural and right when it's the community caring for the community instead of everyone giving everyone else the finger because it doesn't really matter anymore - we have safety nets and you don't NEED to be a good community citizen. You can be a lousy antisocial lazy drug abusing piece of crap that never did any thing for anyone because you don't need the community. Making welfare the state's responsibility isn't something you pinkos want out of the goodness of your heart. It's just more of the usual desire to avoid anything resembling personal responsibility; responsibility for yourself and responsibility for others. You want other people to take care of it for you.
The irony is that it's the people who promote the welfare state that are actually the "petty individualists" because they're the ones that want to be completely independent of community responsibility and want to delegate all their responsibilities for their neighbors' welfare to the government. More freedom for them at the expense of other people.
Another Epic Fail for Socialism | Power Line
ANOTHER EPIC FAIL FOR SOCIALISM
If every country was socialist, who would provide that rice?
It has nothing to do with socialism. It has to do with predatory capitalism that has shipped jobs overseas, fired workers, and slashed pay, all for higher profits. The problem isn't that welfare is too easy to get. It's that a job that pays enough to live on is too hard to get. It's not a symptom of laziness or anyone being unwilling to work or wanting to abuse welfare. It's a symptom of business decisions that have placed no priority on employing and paying Americans to work.
Who is receiving SNAP without seeking employment.... indefinitely?
You say you are not arguing from a position of ignorance, yet you don't seem to be aware of the fact that you do have to be actively seeking employment for SNAP benefits.
But we're not talking about Reagan's welfare cheats. This is a discussion about whiter to address the problem in the OP by a.) cutting welfare to force people into terrible jobs, or b.) beginning a programme of revitalizing the economy. These people we're talking about aren't choosing poverty over working, they're choosing poverty over poverty and despots.
mmmmmmm, no ... it has to do with being able to subsist on the dole so you don't have to work as long as you keep voting for the guys who keep the bucks flowing to ya.
But being a Socialist, you know that's the idea, right?
Did not want to? Are you claiming people were forced into applying for SNAP benefits?Who sent out his squads to talk people into enrolling even if they didn't want to and loosened the SNAP requirements thereby growing the program enormously?
Has anyone in this thread been on welfare? Do you know how it works?
The virtues of work extend far, far beyond receiving a pay check. As a society we have denigrated work to the point that work = pay check. Absent any attributable virtue, there's just no reason to work for money when it's possible to not work and receive the same perceived benefit. That's a damn shame.I was talking about people choosing between whether to work or whether to collect welfare. Work doesn't have to pay more in order for it to be the only legitimate choice. The only people that I have any sympathy toward are those that are busting their ass to find work and simply can't and there aren't many welfare recipients in that category. You have to cut your cloth to your measure and if you can't do something worth more than minimum wage, then you have to accept minimum wage. If you can do better, then you need to find someone that will pay you for it. The idea that working for a living is despotism.... well, that's a stupid idea. If you can make more by working for yourself than someone else, then work for yourself. If not, then there's no legitimate reason to complain about what you're earning. Some jobs (and some people) aren't worth much. That doesn't mean they don't have to work just like everyone else. I sure as hell don't want my tax dollars paying someone that doesn't want to work... I had to work for those tax dollars and giving them to someone that feels working doesn't pay well enough for them to get off the dole... well, people who feel like that are vermin and, basically, thieves.
Anecdotal BS. The level of fraud in the SNAP system is extremely low, and it is your duty to report instances of fraud.I had a high school friend who lived at a homeless shelter and went to visit him often. It was 4 stories high and served several hundred. They got a free bed and 3 meals a day. The problem being many of them had EBT cards and sold them for drug/alcohol money. Which is what he did too. He was offered free HUD housing with the caveat he would be subject visits to make sure wasn't abusing alcohol/drugs. He declined and stayed where he was. He said most of his buddies make the same choice. This was one shelter out of about a dozen in the area. Multiply by thousands thru out the country and what do we have?
A good contribution to our 16 trillion dollar debt.
Who is receiving SNAP without seeking employment.... indefinitely?
You say you are not arguing from a position of ignorance, yet you don't seem to be aware of the fact that you do have to be actively seeking employment for SNAP benefits.
The virtues of work extend far, far beyond receiving a pay check. As a society we have denigrated work to the point that work = pay check. Absent any attributable virtue, there's just no reason to work for money when it's possible to not work and receive the same perceived benefit. That's a damn shame.
Did not want to? Are you claiming people were forced into applying for SNAP benefits?
Links?
As far as "loosening" requirements (again not backed up), that if it existed, was nothing in comparison to the underlying cause of the increase in APPLICANTS......the Great Bush Recession......which caused huge numbers of extended unemployment and massive losses in income and household wealth.
Get some perspective for goodness sake.
Hey, Pol.Good morning, bubba! :2wave:
"Predatory capitalism" referenced above was given the go-ahead when Clinton signed NAFTA, which accelerated the shipping of jobs overseas. I didn't know that Clinton was a Republican predatory capitalist, instead of a believer in cradle-to-grave government dole! Whodathunk? :shock:
No one in the SNAP system "fills out paperwork once a year", a recipient files quarterly reports showing income for the past 3 months to determine benefits going forward for the next quarter.....and if able bodied and under 50yo, you have to be enrolled in training or in some kind of employment.Have you seen this? Yes, I know it's FOX News, but this guy is really something. Is he an isolated case? I do not know.
WATCH: Unabashed Surfer Receiving Food Stamps to Buy Sushi and Avoid Work - Fox Nation
Huh...no forcing, no lowered requirements, and a total ignoring of the causation of the massive increase in applicants.quote
This is telling. It's part of the reason we are willing to accept less and less quality these days as an acceptable substitute for the real things people used to make, the services that were once delivered, and the governance once considered "leading". Our culture is beginning to look as if it's chief enterprise is raising, breeding and herding cattle.It is ABSOLUTELY a damned shame. The monetary system we use is wonderful for making it very easy to trade, but it seems to obscure the fact that money is just a trade token. We work for these trade tokens because work actually is trade. You are doing something for others in trade and the fact that you trade for money just makes it easier for you to trade for whatever you need in a very versatile way. Working contributes to society. Welfare not only takes from those who work. It also keeps the recipient from providing utility to society through some sort of production (all jobs are some sort of "production" - they produce something of value, which is why you can get paid for them). Work builds self esteem and it builds character. It gives people exeprience and teaches them discipline and, as I already said, most of all, it is their part in the contribution to society. Someone has to sell tickets, sweep the floors, turn on the lights, organize the shows, drive the taxi's, sell the popcorn, replace downed electric wires, repair roads, pack meat, etc. etc. etc. etc. It's all "production" that benefits others.
Hey, Pol.
What's goin' on?
Anecdotal BS. The level of fraud in the SNAP system is extremely low, and it is your duty to report instances of fraud.
This is telling. It's part of the reason we are willing to accept less and less quality these days as an acceptable substitute for the real things people used to make, the services that were once delivered, and the governance once considered "leading". Our culture is beginning to look as if it's chief enterprise is raising, breeding and herding cattle.
Huh...no forcing, no lowered requirements, and a total ignoring of the causation of the massive increase in applicants.
It still is a dubious anecdotal argument and I am not making any kind of an absolutist argument, I am pointing out that it is not representative of SNAP recipients. If the poster was concerned about this supposed "HS buddy" or the fraud, he would report the fraud and take some positive action instead of enabling the addiction and fed/state fraud.IIRC from something I posted previously, it was about 4% having dropped to about 2% with the introduction of the EBT cards. It still happens though. I think what some consider fraud, nonetheless, is what they anecdotally see, experience, hear of in their day to day lives combined with the belief that some people getting it is fraud regardless of what they do with it.
It is scary, and based on what I see, the majority is quite willing to accept it because they don't know of anything else. We are told daily now that the standard we used to embrace is no longer attainable. Full employment is now around an 8% or more unemployment rate. Welfare is as good as work. A family is any group who happens to share a roof. The news from any source confirms that every day is a disaster. The differences among our species are much, much more important than the similarities. It's damn near evil, which does seem to exist in spite of all the objections.Your analogy about what appears to be the chief enterprise these days was frighteningly on the mark! And some are willing to accept this? Wow! :afraid:
Still ignoring the fact that the was not the causation for the increases? Still cannot wrap your argument around the cause of employment/income/wealth declines?Please stop.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?