Hypocrisy is overwhelming

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

So this is the argument I hate the most when it comes to food stamps and health care programs. You always hear about people starving and dying, but that makes absolutely no sense. These programs haven't existed forever. I didn't go to a private high school or ivy league college, but it's my understanding that before these programs existed people were not starving or dying in the streets. When someone was in need of help they could get it from their church or community. You can still get help from your church, but having a community come together to help your neighbor doesn't happen much anymore. I think that is due, at least in part, to these types of programs but that's a discussion worthy of it's own thread.

People don't give as much voluntarily anymore because they're forced to give more involuntarily now. If my taxes were lower because the government wasn't funding all these programs, and I had more disposable income - I'd be much more likely to donate it to the causes that I thought needed my help, and I feel like there are plenty of others like me.

 

[Blue2010]

I know you were being serious, but I'm not sure a thread on OOTB has every stayed serious and/or on track. I could start a thread on the questions to ask and by the third page we'll be talking about our favorite restaurants in North Dakota.

I'm all about some good italian joints - this one looks legit: http://bistro1100.com

 

[UNC71-00]

I agree that a test would be a great idea. Like Strum alluded to, I dunno if knowing much about the revolutionary war, or who the VP or Speaker of the House are, is all that relevant. You should have to be able to answer some question about policies or something. People who walk in there and say "I'm voting for Hillary" and when asked why say "because Trump will destroy the country" and when pressed further on why they feel that way have no answer other than that's what they heard people say on late night comedy talk shows - should be shown the fuggin door.

I think I've brought this idea up before - but what would be better than the current system, is if you didn't actually vote for a candidate. If you voted yes/no to questions that were related to their agendas. That way people would vote for who they actually wanted - not who they thought they wanted. For example, say Hillary wanted to raise taxes 5% in order to better fund programs such as unemployment and welfare. The question would be asked, and if you're in support of that initiative you vote yes, and if not you vote no. There would be maybe 20 or so questions, and whichever candidates agenda you voted more for would get your vote. Or each vote to each agenda would count, or you'd rank them by importance, or something that would actually make sense.

A test would be nice but at this point, I will settle for voter ID in all 50 states.

 

[strummingram]

I agree that a test would be a great idea. Like Strum alluded to, I dunno if knowing much about the revolutionary war, or who the VP or Speaker of the House are, is all that relevant. You should have to be able to answer some question about policies or something. People who walk in there and say "I'm voting for Hillary" and when asked why say "because Trump will destroy the country" and when pressed further on why they feel that way have no answer other than that's what they heard people say on late night comedy talk shows - should be shown the fuggin door.

I think I've brought this idea up before - but what would be better than the current system, is if you didn't actually vote for a candidate. If you voted yes/no to questions that were related to their agendas. That way people would vote for who they actually wanted - not who they thought they wanted. For example, say Hillary wanted to raise taxes 5% in order to better fund programs such as unemployment and welfare. The question would be asked, and if you're in support of that initiative you vote yes, and if not you vote no. There would be maybe 20 or so questions, and whichever candidates agenda you voted more for would get your vote. Or each vote to each agenda would count, or you'd rank them by importance, or something that would actually make sense.

Do it through something like the "isidewith.com".

This is what most career politicians would fear most.

 

[gunslingerdick]

The overwhelming majority of food stamp recipients are seniors, people with disabilities, and working families.
http://www.justharvest.org/advocacy/the-truth-about-snapfood-stamps/

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...amp-program-has-a-strong-record-of-efficienty

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/02/28/food-stamp-demographics_n_6771938.html

http://www.hungercoalition.org/food-stamp-myths

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/12/19/us/food-stamp-fraud-in-the-underground-economy.html?_r=0

Wow. That might be the first time you've actually attempted to back up some claims. I'm proud of you. But there are several problems I find with all those links:

1 - I read thoroughly 2 of the 5 and then skimmed 2 others (Huffington Post doesn't exist to me). No where did I see a 5% figure.
2 - Numbers are numbers. But why are people in need of govt assitance in the first place? For example, why did you have 4 children if you don't have a job that can support 4 children? That's taking advantage of the system. That's me having to pay for someone else's poor decision making.
3 - Lastly, when claiming disability, what is the criteria? It's shit. I know people on disability who are perfectly capable of working. That's taking advantage of the system. Your links don't speak to that. No links can really speak to that. It's kind of an untrackable and unfixable thing. But it's real. And if you had a stroke because of your years of drug use, then why should you get to claim disability now? If you have COPD because of years of smoking, why should I have to pay for your poor decision making? If you're grossly obese because you ate whatever you wanted and never exercised and now your fatass can't get to and from a place to work, why should I or anyone else have to support that? I personally know several cases (maybe dozens) of each of those examples. Your links don't speak to that.

show me yours now?

http://www.forbes.com/sites/carriel...s-do-abuse-federal-aid-programs/#50192b183d2d
http://www.forbes.com/sites/carriel...s-do-abuse-federal-aid-programs/#50192b183d2d
https://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/3-sneaky-way-people-advantage-government-assistance/

https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/fraud-and-abuse

http://federalsafetynet.com/welfare-fraud.html

 

[gunslingerdick]

A test would be nice but at this point, I will settle for voter ID in all 50 states.

Voter ID and proof of contributions into the system at a certain level. So basically, you would have to have been employed at some point and paid taxes to vote.

 

[tarheel0910]

I think you've brought this idea up before - but what would be better than the current system, is if you didn't actually vote for a candidate. If you voted yes/no to questions that were related to their agendas. That way people would vote for who they actually wanted - not who they thought they wanted.

Yes, I have brought that idea up.

 

[UNC71-00]

Voter ID and proof of contributions into the system at a certain level. So basically, you would have to have been employed at some point and paid taxes to vote.

Poll taxes are unconstitutional.

I disagree with having to provide any proof of contribution- you only have to be an American citizen and produce proof of such in order to vote.

Unless of course we could successfully repeal the 19th amendment. I would use this board as a starting point as proof of what happens when women think they have political opinions of merit.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I disagree with having to provide any proof of contribution- you only have to be an American citizen and produce proof of such in order to vote.
.

But why should people who have not contributed financially to the country's well-being get to have a say in how the country is run?

**edit - BTW, it was said somewhat tongue in cheek because it would never happen. But still, my rationale makes sense. If you don't put in, you don't get a say. Just like when me and my buddies order pizzas together. If one of us isn't paying, they don't get a vote on what is and isn't on the pizzas that the rest of us are buying.

 

[UNC71-00]

But why should people who have not contributed financially to the country's well-being get to have a say in how the country is run?

I'm going to assume you are referring to income taxes- correct me if wrong.

For starters, there are lots of 18 year olds who have never paid taxes.

Second, there are also plenty of people who never have nor will pay taxes. For instance, my mom never had a job until in her 50s. Should she not be allowed to vote? (since the 19th is still in effect). Heck, neither of my grandmothers ever had a job- should they not be allowed to vote?

There are other ways to contribute to the country's well-being besides paying taxes.

 

[UNC71-00]

But why should people who have not contributed financially to the country's well-being get to have a say in how the country is run?

**edit - BTW, it was said somewhat tongue in cheek because it would never happen. But still, my rationale makes sense. If you don't put in, you don't get a say. Just like when me and my buddies order pizzas together. If one of us isn't paying, they don't get a vote on what is and isn't on the pizzas that the rest of us are buying.

So if your buddy came by your house, picked you up, took you to another buddies house and y'all went to order pizza and he didn't have any cash, you wouldn't give him a vote as to what's on it?

 

[gunslingerdick]

I'm going to assume you are referring to income taxes- correct me if wrong.

For starters, there are lots of 18 year olds who have never paid taxes.

Second, there are also plenty of people who never have nor will pay taxes. For instance, my mom never had a job until in her 50s. Should she not be allowed to vote? (since the 19th is still in effect). Heck, neither of my grandmothers ever had a job- should they not be allowed to vote?

Does your mom get to call what's on the pizza when your dad orders and pays for it?

I don't know. I get that many women don't have to work or prefer to work "in home" as a caretaker to their children. So maybe, not proof of paying into the system - maybe instead - you can't have only taken from the system.

 

[gunslingerdick]

So if your buddy came by your house, picked you up, took you to another buddies house and y'all went to order pizza and he didn't have any cash, you wouldn't give him a vote as to what's on it?

But that's not what we're talking about. His payment is "in-kind". Because he provided the transportation. That's a payment into the system of sorts. But I'm talking about that friend that never has cash...never picks us up...and always wants a say on what's on the pizza.

 

[UNC71-00]

Does your mom get to call what's on the pizza when your dad orders and pays for it?

I don't know. I get that many women don't have to work or prefer to work "in home" as a caretaker to their children. So maybe, not proof of paying into the system - maybe instead - you can't have only taken from the system.

Absolutely mom decides what goes on the pizza if she wants to. Every single time.

And as far as taking from the system, that's a whole different topic on which we agree.

 

[UNC71-00]

But that's not what we're talking about. His payment is "in-kind". Because he provided the transportation. That's a payment into the system of sorts. But I'm talking about that friend that never has cash...never picks us up...and always wants a say on what's on the pizza.

I quit hanging out with guys like that when I moved away from all of my buddies from Lynchburg.

 

[gunslingerdick]

I quit hanging out with guys like that when I moved away from all of my buddies from Lynchburg.

Why? Because they weren't adding anything. They weren't serving a purpose other than to take. That's my point. People who aren't contributing in some fashion shouldn't get a say in how, when, or why they get to take.

 

[UNC71-00]

Why? Because they weren't adding anything. They weren't serving a purpose other than to take. That's my point. People who aren't contributing in some fashion shouldn't get a say in how, when, or why they get to take.

Then the conundrum is how to force people to make a contribution, not how to keep them from voting.

 

[gunslingerdick]

Then the conundrum is how to force people to make a contribution, not how to keep them from voting.

Maybe so.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Yes, I have brought that idea up.

I guess the idea was so genius I thought that only I could have conceivably come up with it.

 

[HeelFan58]

Sooo, everything that is wrong is because of actions, policies and philosophies that you don't ascribe to?

That's a follower!

While I'm not a fan of common core, you can't just blame it on that. It is relatively new and these issues started long before common core.

I was actually being facetious but you guys missed it. I know common core obviously hasn't been around long enough to have much effect.

 

[Hark_The_Sound_2010]

Voter ID and proof of contributions into the system at a certain level. So basically, you would have to have been employed at some point and paid taxes to vote.

The having had to pay taxes requirement sounds good in theory. As in - why should anyone who hasn't paid taxes be allowed to vote as to how those taxes are allocated.

However once it's introduced, the logic would extend further than that. Why should someone who has contributed $1K in taxes in their life have the same vote as someone who has contributed $100K, and so on. Then the more people have paid in taxes the more votes they'd get. The richest of the rich would have a million votes, and the average earners would only have a couple votes.

 

[HeelFan58]

This is why we need some sort of test that you have to pass before voting in each election. I see videos all of the time where people can't name the current VP or speaker of the house. Hell, I've seen interviews where people don't even know who we fought in the revolutionary war. If you don't know simple things like that, then you shouldn't be allowed to vote. I know that will never happen because it's racist to ask people to know a little bit about their country (at least that's how it will be spun). Voting should be more of a privilege and less of a right.

Ridiculous. How would all of the deceased voters take this test?

 

[tarheel0910]

Ridiculous. How would all of the deceased voters take this test?

I'm willing to bet some of them would do better than about 10% of the population.

 

[HeelFan58]

The actual percentage of people who take advantage of that program is only around 5%,

hey Barbie I know math is hard but

How many Americans on food stamps?
These charts show the number of Americans receiving food stamps as reported by the United States Department of Agriculture. As of the latest data released on May 6, 2016 the total is 44.4 million, which is more than the entire populations of many large nations.

About 45.4 million Americans, roughly one-seventh of the population, received nutrition aid last October, the most recent month of data. Unemployment was 5 percent that month. The last time joblessness fell to that level, in April 2008, 28 million Americans used food stamps, and the program cost less than half of what the government paid out last year.

Even though eligibility rules remained unchanged during the recession, annual spending for the program, administered by states with federal dollars, more than doubled in five years to a record $76.1 billion in 2013.


Sign-Up Easier
Several reasons explain the high numbers. Governments have made it easier to sign up for the program. More than 85 percent of eligible food-stamp recipients took assistance in 2013, the most recent year of available data, compared to 70 percent in 2008. The higher sign-up rate among those qualified accounts for 8.6 million more people on food stamps -- about half of the program’s total increase.

So tell me about that IQ again.

 

[HeelFan58]

Unless of course we could successfully repeal the 19th amendment.

that would be a good start.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Wow. That might be the first time you've actually attempted to back up some claims. I'm proud of you. But there are several problems I find with all those links:

1 - I read thoroughly 2 of the 5 and then skimmed 2 others (Huffington Post doesn't exist to me). No where did I see a 5% figure.
2 - Numbers are numbers. But why are people in need of govt assitance in the first place? For example, why did you have 4 children if you don't have a job that can support 4 children? That's taking advantage of the system. That's me having to pay for someone else's poor decision making.
3 - Lastly, when claiming disability, what is the criteria? It's shit. I know people on disability who are perfectly capable of working. That's taking advantage of the system. Your links don't speak to that. No links can really speak to that. It's kind of an untrackable and unfixable thing. But it's real. And if you had a stroke because of your years of drug use, then why should you get to claim disability now? If you have COPD because of years of smoking, why should I have to pay for your poor decision making? If you're grossly obese because you ate whatever you wanted and never exercised and now your fatass can't get to and from a place to work, why should I or anyone else have to support that? I personally know several cases (maybe dozens) of each of those examples. Your links don't speak to that.



http://www.forbes.com/sites/carriel...s-do-abuse-federal-aid-programs/#50192b183d2d
https://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/3-sneaky-way-people-advantage-government-assistance/
https://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/3-sneaky-way-people-advantage-government-assistance/
https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/fraud-and-abuse
https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/fraud-and-abuse
http://federalsafetynet.com/welfare-fraud.html

I am at a stop light in this hell called Clemson right now but will read these later this evening

 

[HeelFan58]

I'm going to assume you are referring to income taxes- correct me if wrong.

For starters, there are lots of 18 year olds who have never paid taxes.

Second, there are also plenty of people who never have nor will pay taxes. For instance, my mom never had a job until in her 50s. Should she not be allowed to vote? (since the 19th is still in effect). Heck, neither of my grandmothers ever had a job- should they not be allowed to vote?

There are other ways to contribute to the country's well-being besides paying taxes.

and there are people who get back money they never paid in period.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

Wow. That might be the first time you've actually attempted to back up some claims. I'm proud of you. But there are several problems I find with all those links:

1 - I read thoroughly 2 of the 5 and then skimmed 2 others (Huffington Post doesn't exist to me). No where did I see a 5% figure.
2 - Numbers are numbers. But why are people in need of govt assitance in the first place? For example, why did you have 4 children if you don't have a job that can support 4 children? That's taking advantage of the system. That's me having to pay for someone else's poor decision making.
3 - Lastly, when claiming disability, what is the criteria? It's shit. I know people on disability who are perfectly capable of working. That's taking advantage of the system. Your links don't speak to that. No links can really speak to that. It's kind of an untrackable and unfixable thing. But it's real. And if you had a stroke because of your years of drug use, then why should you get to claim disability now? If you have COPD because of years of smoking, why should I have to pay for your poor decision making? If you're grossly obese because you ate whatever you wanted and never exercised and now your fatass can't get to and from a place to work, why should I or anyone else have to support that? I personally know several cases (maybe dozens) of each of those examples. Your links don't speak to that.



http://www.forbes.com/sites/carriel...s-do-abuse-federal-aid-programs/#50192b183d2d
https://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/3-sneaky-way-people-advantage-government-assistance/
https://www.gobankingrates.com/personal-finance/3-sneaky-way-people-advantage-government-assistance/
https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/fraud-and-abuse
https://www.downsizinggovernment.org/fraud-and-abuse
http://federalsafetynet.com/welfare-fraud.html

I thought we were just talking about food stamps but you are correct on disability and I had completely forgotten about Medicaid. At my former job I worked up reports for disability determination and PLENTY of people would try getting it but surprisingly very few actually met the doctor's criteria to get any benefits.

I imagine the Medicaid fraud is a bigger issue because all you have to do for the most part to qualify is get pregnant and make less than 27K a year.

I honestly believe there are ways to keep the fraud down if not eliminate but it will take a bit of an overhaul and upgrade to do it.

Again, since such a low percentage of my tax money goes towards this I'd be willing to pay more in order to get better control of the problems and actually help people who need it.

Maybe we could have a nonprofit defense program. That would save us billions.

 

[UNC71-00]

and there are people who get back money they never paid in period.

True.

And in some situations that is acceptable. And in some it is not.

 

[BillyL]

 

[Nuk'EM Heels]

This is racist! You should be able to self-identify as whatever gender you desire to identify with so you can go into whatever bathroom/dressing room you want... So discriminatory!

 

[UNC71-00]

This is racist! You should be able to self-identify as whatever gender you desire to identify with so you can go into whatever bathroom/dressing room you want... So discriminatory!

I thought we were supposed to let anyone into any bathroom.

It is very confusing when you try to follow liberal logic.

 

[chick_bleeds_carolina_blue]

hey Barbie I know math is hard but

How many Americans on food stamps?
These charts show the number of Americans receiving food stamps as reported by the United States Department of Agriculture. As of the latest data released on May 6, 2016 the total is 44.4 million, which is more than the entire populations of many large nations.

About 45.4 million Americans, roughly one-seventh of the population, received nutrition aid last October, the most recent month of data. Unemployment was 5 percent that month. The last time joblessness fell to that level, in April 2008, 28 million Americans used food stamps, and the program cost less than half of what the government paid out last year.

Even though eligibility rules remained unchanged during the recession, annual spending for the program, administered by states with federal dollars, more than doubled in five years to a record $76.1 billion in 2013.


Sign-Up Easier
Several reasons explain the high numbers. Governments have made it easier to sign up for the program. More than 85 percent of eligible food-stamp recipients took assistance in 2013, the most recent year of available data, compared to 70 percent in 2008. The higher sign-up rate among those qualified accounts for 8.6 million more people on food stamps -- about half of the program’s total increase.

So tell me about that IQ again.

I'd say follow the SC protocol because they've found a way to eliminate a lot of the moochers. It's a pain in the ass to get them, stricter criteria to qualify and the length of time to use the program is three months unless you have a child.

I don't claim to have all the answers but I do know that we have enough resources in this country that we should NEVER have a hungry person living here. Sadly, we have more greedy AF assholes running around here than those willing to help others.

Perfect example the lighthearted discussion above over who gets to decide what pizza toppings are on the pizza. Pete and RePete both show us how friggin nutty the conservative side thinks. Well, that's okay. When we put them on the scales, it is even with the nutty liberal ideas too of giving TOO much. Both equally nutty.