Skip to main content

Put me in charge of food stamps.  I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away.  If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

 

Put me in charge of Medicaid.  The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligation's. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.

 

Put me in charge of government housing.  Ever live in a military barracks?  You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair.  Your “home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried.  If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

 

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job.  It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you.  We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good.."

 

Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary.  If you want our money, accept our rules.  Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone elses money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

 

If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices.  The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

 

AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!   Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest.  You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check.  If you want to vote, then get a job.

 

Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

Put me in charge of food stamps.  I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away.  If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

 

Put me in charge of Medicaid.  The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligation's. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.

 

Put me in charge of government housing.  Ever live in a military barracks?  You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair.  Your “home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried.  If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

 

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job.  It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you.  We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good.."

 

Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary.  If you want our money, accept our rules.  Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone elses money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

 

If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices.  The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

 

AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!   Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest.  You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check.  If you want to vote, then get a job.

 

____________________

I approve of this message

 

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

Put me in charge of food stamps.  I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away.  If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

 What!?  No Ramen noodles?

 

Put me in charge of Medicaid.  The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligation's.

wao Kim Jong Un..... Playing god much?

Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.

 

Put me in charge of government housing.  Ever live in a military barracks?  You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair.  Your “home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. 

jawohl mein Fuhrer!

If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

 

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job.  It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you.  We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good.."

Da, Comrade! The SOVIET METHOD!

 

Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary.  If you want our money, accept our rules.  Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone elses money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

 

If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices.  The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

 

AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!   Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest.  You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check.  If you want to vote, then get a job.

 

Dobro pozhalovat' v Ameriku.  Zemlya "besplatno."

Arbeit macht frei. Oder anderes.

 

Do ya realize that you're endorsing wholeheartedly the government involvement and control you so vehemently rail against?

 

 

 

 

 

Last edited by Road Puppy

 

Put me in charge of Medicaid.  The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligation's. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.

 I agree with the drug, alcohol and nicotine testing, and I do agree with the no pregnancy while on assistance idea, but you have men on assistance too, how would you keep them from reproducing?

Put me in charge of government housing.  Ever live in a military barracks?  You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair.  Your “home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried.  If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

So many have suggested opening closed military bases for this, and I don't see why it wouldn't work where possible, and it would stop a lot of fraud. One scam, many get their rent paid and rent out rooms. This is big business with the scammers. There is just no accountability. It seems like no one cares that tax payers are being ripped off for millions. I agree too that people on assistance, and in good health, should be required to do some kind of work. I'd add, and this will get all the old hens and roosters cackling, they must be legal citizens of the US and able to speak English. 

Last edited by Bestworking
 
Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

Put me in charge of food stamps.  I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away.  If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.

 

Put me in charge of Medicaid.  The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligation's. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, or smoke, then get a job.

 

Put me in charge of government housing.  Ever live in a military barracks?  You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair.  Your “home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried.  If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.

 

In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job.  It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you.  We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the "common good.."

 

Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary.  If you want our money, accept our rules.  Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone elses money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.

 

If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices.  The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.

 

AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!   Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest.  You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check.  If you want to vote, then get a job.

 

+++

 

For some reason, there's no anonymous option on my computer to "like" your post, but if there was, it would be me.  So the best I could do was repost it.  Way to go, Gal. 

 

 

Last edited by budsfarm
Originally Posted by Road Puppy:
Seriously.  You said 'Put me in charge', you endorsed it.  I don't think it means what you think it means.

________

I didn't write it, I copied/pasted it. Put Me In Charge was the title. Yes, I agree with what it says but I don't get upset over Politics like some of you do. There's more important things that's worth getting upset over.  Though true, & I agree with it all, it was only a light hearted attempt at humor.  I shouldn't have posted it, & suppose I should delete it before it turns into something ugly as Politics usually do.    

I know you copy/pasted it. That's not the point. People blindly pass on stuff on Facebook alla time without realizing what they are saying when they do it.

Politics bores me to tears.

Yes there are plenty of other things to get upset over, like gay marriage and all-but where do you start?

When it's too late and the poor are being rounded up and exterminated? Just for being poor?

 

 

While I agree that there should be (Actually there are) conditions to warrant the discontinuation of assistance, the idea was to 'help' people, not 'rigidly control and punish every aspect of their lives in order to make them as miserable as possible for even considering it.....'   It's actually not funny.

 

 "He who will not work-neither shall he eat."  True and goodly thinking.

Food assistance is not free.  You *can't* get it if you don't have an income of some sort be it from a pension or from employment. (Helping those who help themselves? Y'know...).

It's not a prison sentence and as such no 'penitance' is necessary. Being eligible for or actually receiving food assistance is not a crime.  If that's the way you really feel about them and the people that need them-I'm glad you're not in charge.

  

 

 

Last edited by Road Puppy

I didn't write it, I copied/pasted it. Put Me In Charge was the title. Yes, I agree with what it says but I don't get upset over Politics like some of you do. There's more important things that's worth getting upset over.  Though true, & I agree with it all, it was only a light hearted attempt at humor.  I shouldn't have posted it, & suppose I should delete it before it turns into something ugly as Politics usually do. 

--------------------------

There's nothing wrong with posting it semi. It's over the top a bit, but it should make people stop and think. Some people can't, or just don't care to, distinguish between the truly needy and the people who live off the system. You can't speak out about it either without being labeled, by some, hard-hearted and told how you hate the poor. They don't want your opinion, they just want your money. Well, I grew up poor, and when you grow up like I did you find out real fast who really needs help and who is just there to get all they can get because, hey, they're giving it to me, and yes, that p***** me off big time. We were taught and shown that no matter how hard we think we had it, there were others who were worse off, and that when we could, we should help them.

 

Younger, I was green, I'll admit that, and I never thought there was anyone any different than us, I thought everyone had that "if you want it work for it" attitude, and anybody on assistance really needed it. But as I got older, really "got out in the world", I saw how that wasn't true. I don't remember one time being jealous of someone who had more, silly me, I felt happy for anyone that could make it, and I knew what I wanted and how to get it, and knew, and still know, how to live within my limits.

 

Anyone that goes along with the way things are today either refuse to see it, have given up and think it can't be changed, or they have that "hey, they're giving it to me so I'm going to take it" way of thinking. When you've never had to work for anything I guess it's easy to think it's raining money and it's your right to just go get it. I really don't think most of them think or care about the people working every day, trying to raise families and paying so they can have that money they get for doing nothing. There are really needy people, and there are the "gimmethats". I don't give a flying flip if that word upsets people. The ones it upsets are not worth worrying about and if the shoe fits they can wear it.

 

 

 

Last edited by Bestworking

Well said RP. It scares me sometimes when I read how full of anger and hate some people are against the poor. The majority of people on assistance are the elderly, disabled and children. Maybe the elderly have family heirlooms that mean a lot to them, would they be confiscated and sold? Can the disabled own a good tv? They may not be able to get out into the world easily and that might be their only link or entertainment as they lie in a bed or sit in a wheel chair. Maybe we should take nice toys away from children receiving welfare....why should they have nice things, right? 

 

What is this world coming to when we think its funny to threaten the poor and the weak. SMDH

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

Oh, well! The option to delete has been removed. Some people are going to be negative & get angry no matter what you post or how you intended it. This topic went to Hell in a handbasket.......fast!

But I still believe what I posted was right on!

===================

Looks like most agree with you semi, and you have the right to your opinion. Some tend to forget that others have that right.

Last edited by Bestworking

Who said Semi didn't have a right to her opinion? We all do too. It's funny how it works like that. You give your opinion and then others state theirs.

 

The issue here seems to be that if you don't agree with Semi then you are just angry and negative, and somehow in your, and her mind, that also means we are somehow trying to deny her an opinion. 

 

The logic is flawed ladies...

 

Say and think whatever you want, just know that others can and will do the same thing. 

Originally Posted by Jankinonya:

Well said RP. It scares me sometimes when I read how full of anger and hate some people are against the poor. The majority of people on assistance are the elderly, disabled and children. Maybe the elderly have family heirlooms that mean a lot to them, would they be confiscated and sold? Can the disabled own a good tv? They may not be able to get out into the world easily and that might be their only link or entertainment as they lie in a bed or sit in a wheel chair. Maybe we should take nice toys away from children receiving welfare....why should they have nice things, right? 

 

What is this world coming to when we think its funny to threaten the poor and the weak. SMDH

When it comes to food stamps, I think if you dig into it, you will actually find that the majority of people receiving them (up to 85%)  are employed by the likes of Walmart, Fast food industry, and the military and are actually young adults with families working hard at low paying jobs.
Hence, you and I are subsidizing Walmart and McDonalds . Maybe a better plan would be to raise the minimum wage above the threshold needed to receive these benefits.

Well I'm not sure if the "lady" means all of it. She admitted LATER to copy and paste. I know there's a word for that kind of theft but I cant spell it. Since I barely graduated high school I guess I missed some of these meanings, but why would you care what a military family had in their homes? Bad enough they qualified for foodstamps. Maybe they got that big TV when gramps died? You want them to sell it?

 

You remind me of these ppl who rail against abortions and then don't help out when the child is born. I've never even seen where you have a job or ever had one. Wanta tell us?

 

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

Oh, well! The option to delete has been removed. Some people are going to be negative & get angry no matter what you post or how you intended it. This topic went to Hell in a handbasket.......fast!

But I still believe what I posted was right on!

Well I believe ya just hate everybody. Sad woman or whatever it is. Sorta like that quaildog is really a man. Bet that semi "woman" is too.

Last edited by Brandi's Man
Originally Posted by Brandi's Man:
Well I believe ya just hate everybody. Sad woman or whatever it is. Sorta like that quaildog is really a man. Bet that semi "woman" is too.

______

Nope, I don't hate anyone, just a strong dislike for a couple of people. If you were honest I bet you could admit to a couple of dislikes. BTW, I'm a female, & if you were smart, you would be able to tell that just by my post. Females tend to be much more emotional than men, & it comes across in mine/their post. I happen to love men. I think those w/o a huge ego are sexy & intelligent. I bet ole Quaildog is even sexy!!

Originally Posted by unclegus:

You asked for it baby doll!

_____

Yes, I did & I have no problem with other people's opinion. I, in fact, find them interesting. I've even had my opinion changed a time or two. What's sad is the anger that comes along with those opinions.

I always enjoy your opinions, unclegus. Most men are much more level headed than women. Notice I said most. 

Semi, while the copy-n'-paste you posted might be a tad extreme, especially the gonad controls, I understand the sentiment. While it has been years since I entered the workforce full time after college, I still remember the resentment of counting change to see if I could afford groceries for my wife and me when a illiterate fat slacker pulled out their food stamps to buy cuts of meat and other goodies that I couldn't afford. To rub salt in the wounds, they always wore more expensive clothes and they always arrived in a newer fancier car.

 

That said, one day reality will return and the piper will be paid. When that day comes the pen, the phone, the magic wand, and the printing press won't be enough.

Originally Posted by direstraits:

A UN nutritionist determined that a ration of bulgur wheat, powdered milk, cooking oil and a small amount of honey would meet all basic needs. I'd throw in a vitamin pill and a recipe brochure.  Let adults draw the ration on a 15-day basis, if hard up.  After a while, I suspect working would look good.

You idiot ! they ARE ALREADY WORKING ! What part of that do you not understand ?

 

Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

Oh, well! The option to delete has been removed. Some people are going to be negative & get angry no matter what you post or how you intended it. This topic went to Hell in a handbasket.......fast!

But I still believe what I posted was right on!

----------------------

It didn't go to hell, semi.....It just didn't go the way ya thought it might.

Hmm... Right on, eh?

Did you read *all* of those words you copy/pasted?  Or didya just dig the buzzwords and pass it on?

*Which people* in particular were you envisioning when you agreed with it?  I'm curious.

Would *you* be willing to live under the same conditions if the tables were turned? (It can happen to anybody faster than you can say "mutha£Δ%&a.")  Would you eat only beans and powdered milk?

What if *I* was the guy inventorying *your* stuff and deciding what and what not to confiscate?

 

Stuff to think about.

 

I'm not tryna be a jerk atya here, semi....I'm tryna get ya to think past the buzzwords and campaign slogans and consider the actual *people.*

 

I am eligible for food stamps a couple months out of the year.  I work-in the same job I've had for the past 28 years.  I wasn't always poor, but I am now.  I have a couple things left from before that I earned when I was doing all right. (At least the ones I haven't yet had to sell to survive, but hey....)

  Would you take them from me-even though I earned them-just because now I need food assistance?  Why?

(I just got this mental image of ya in my sock drawer-making sure I don't have too many pairs...)

 Just curious.

And serious.

  

  

Last edited by Road Puppy

That said, one day reality will return and the piper will be paid. When that day comes the pen, the phone, the magic wand, and the printing press won't be enough.

=====================================

One time when this subject came up, I linked to a site where their own god, obama, was lamenting about the fraud and waste in the government "help" programs. (Which he was going to fix ) Guess what-not a peep out of them about that. Not one word about how obama hated the poor and wanted them all to die, and of course no real attempt from obama to actually fix it. I don't know what's so hard to understand about it. It's simple, there are people who are in real need. Either they are ill or disabled, elderly and on a bare existence income, or they lost their jobs in this wonderful economy. Some that had them, have gone through their savings, sold off what they could sell, and are in serious need.

 

Common sense, if they have any, should tell the "you're a hater" bunch that these are not the people others resent and want to see off the system. Some claim fraud and waste is the "price we pay" so we can help people, and don't think it can be fixed. Then there are the ones who are abusing the system themselves or have family members who are, and if they're tossed they might actually have to do something, such  as support that family member or themselves. Like I said, they think it's raining money and why not get it if they can. Now we have the invasion from other countries, and we're expected to support them. How in the world can we do this? No one seems to care that the boston bombers family was on government support. This is shameful. This should have caused an uproar that would have been one for the records. I'd bet too, that the bomber's widow and child are on public assistance.

 

IMO the "you're a hater" bunch are the real haters. 

 

 

Last edited by Bestworking
Originally Posted by seeweed:
Originally Posted by direstraits:

A UN nutritionist determined that a ration of bulgur wheat, powdered milk, cooking oil and a small amount of honey would meet all basic needs. I'd throw in a vitamin pill and a recipe brochure.  Let adults draw the ration on a 15-day basis, if hard up.  After a while, I suspect working would look good.

You idiot ! they ARE ALREADY WORKING ! What part of that do you not understand ?

 

_____________________________________________

NO!  Some are working and some are not.  Yet, you claim all are working, then, throw insults rather like monkey tossing his waste to camouflage the flaws in you claim.  Next, you would probably claim I wish to starve children and pregnant mothers. In fact, I support WIC and such to ensure that children grow up healthy for both humanitarian and practical reasons.  Under my original statement no adult starves or suffers from malnutrition -- just doesn't get the steaks.

Walmart, the nation’s largest retailer, recently decided to go into the newspaper editing business.

The Arkansas-based company responded to an article from New York Times columnist Timothy Egan, titled “The Corporate Daddy” by doing the work that it felt Egan’s Times editors should have done.

“Thanks for sharing your first draft,” reads a red-inked note from Walmart, which is known more for its low prices than its snark.

“Below are a few thoughts to ensure something inaccurate doesn’t get published,” continued the note, which was posted at Walmart’s blog and is attributed to David Tovar, Walmart’s director of corporate communications.

The retail giant apparently couldn’t resist sarcasm after it found what it considered numerous problems with Egan’s piece in which he criticized the company for paying its 2.2 million employees what he called “humiliating wages.”

“Walmart is a net drain on taxpayers,” wrote Egan in the missive, adding that the company forces “employees into public assistance with its poverty-wage structure.

“We are the largest tax payer in America,” Tovar wrote in his edit. “Can we see your math?”

“We see more associates move off of public assistance as a result of their job at Walmart,” Tovar wrote.

Egan argued that “most advanced nations” look for ways to boost the middle class but that the U.S. had ceased doing that. “Witness the G.I. Bill, which helped millions of returning soldiers get a lift to a better life,” wrote the Times columnist.

“Did you know?” Tovar quizzed. “Walmart has hired more than 42,000 veterans this year.”

On the topic of veterans, Walmart has won unlikely support. First Lady Michelle Obama, who made veteran hiring on of her top issues, praised the company last year when it announced it would be hiring 100,000 veterans.

“Wal-Mart is setting a groundbreaking example for the private sector to follow,” she said in a statement at the time.

But Egan had other issues with Walmart, and the company had more edits.

The columnist wrote that the company’s “humiliating wages force thousands of employees to look to food stamps, Medicaid and other forms of welfare.”

“A bit repetitive,” wrote Tovar, like a seasoned professor. “See above.”

Egan cited a story from an Ohio Walmart that went viral last year which showed a sign in the story’s break room. The picture was meant to show the company’s failures to provide enough for its employees.

“To clarify,” wrote Tovar, “associates were helping associated during unexpected hard times (fires, divorce, loss of life, etc.). And a noble cause, no doubt.”

The company also chastised Egan for using vague statistics.

“Walmart disputes these figures, claiming the average full-time store worker makes at least $12 an hour,” wrote Egan.

“Be specific,” reads Tovar’s edit. “Full time average associate wage is $12.91.”

“But these numbers are skewed by higher pay for management,” wrote Egan.

“False: Only includes associates paid hourly,” Tovar corrected.

“The average ‘associate’ at Walmart makes $8.81 an hour – poverty wage,” offered Egan.

“Argument incomplete — in this study, starting wage 3 years ago was $1.50 over minimum wage. That’s a good thing,” reads Tovar’s red ink.

Egan pointed out that Walmart reaped $17 billion in profits last year, that it’s highest paid executive earned over $20 million and that the six Walton heirs are worth $150 billion.

“Possible addition: Largest corporate foundation in America. Gives more than $1 billion in cash and in kind donations each year.”

Egan pointed to a claim by Fortune magazine editor Stephen Gandel who wrote an article claiming that Walmart could raise its wages by 50 percent without harming shareholder value.

“Confirm credibility of source?” wrote Walmart. “Consider Economist Jason Furman,” Tovar continued.

Furman is the chairman of President Obama’s Council of Economic Advisers. In an article at Slate, Furman wrote that Walmart’s low prices provide the “equivalent to a 6.5 percent boost in household income” for low-income households.

Egan then cited an opinion poll to suggest that the public dislikes Walmart.

“A new poll by Lake Research Partners found that 28 percent of consumers surveyed have an unfavorable view of Walmart – almost five times the negative sentiment felt for Costco,” Egan wrote.

“Pretty sure any corporation, politician even media outlet would like to have a 72% favorability rating,” Tovar responded.

Egan did not mention that Lake Research Partners’ clients are mostly Democratic politicians and labor organizations.

Egan then compared the retail giant’s education outreach initiatives to Starbucks’ recent announcement that it would be providing tuition assistance to store associates.

“Walmart in 2010 pledged to spend $50 million over three years to offset some of the cost for a small percentage of employees who enrolled in a for-profit, online university,” wrote Egan, who called the plan a bust, pointing out that only about 400 employees had earned degrees.

“Most college degrees take more than 4 years. Not 3.”

“Better idea for a piece,” Tovar concluded. “Could focus on bringing back US manufacturing…and expanding education, training, and workforce programs, i.e. things that will make a bigger difference, not just focusing on starting wages.”

Chic sez:
Put me in charge of food stamps.  I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's,

==============

I was not aware that a Ho would accept a plastic card of any kind. Thought Cash was the only "tender" they took. Are you saying that a threesome with two Ho's would accept whatever a Lone Star card is  instead of cash only ?

Once saw an add for a cash machine (ATM) from a bank in New York, with a picture of what would obviously look like a hooker leaning up to a cash machine with the only words on the advertisement were "Sometimes, legal is the only tender she knows"

I guess things have changed.

 

Originally Posted by Road Puppy:
Originally Posted by semiannualchick:

Oh, well! The option to delete has been removed. Some people are going to be negative & get angry no matter what you post or how you intended it. This topic went to Hell in a handbasket.......fast!

But I still believe what I posted was right on!

----------------------

It didn't go to hell, semi.....It just didn't go the way ya thought it might.

Hmm... Right on, eh?

Did you read *all* of those words you copy/pasted?  Or didya just dig the buzzwords and pass it on?

*Which people* in particular were you envisioning when you agreed with it?  I'm curious.

Would *you* be willing to live under the same conditions if the tables were turned? (It can happen to anybody faster than you can say "mutha£Δ%&a.")  Would you eat only beans and powdered milk?

What if *I* was the guy inventorying *your* stuff and deciding what and what not to confiscate?

 

Stuff to think about.

 

I'm not tryna be a jerk atya here, semi....I'm tryna get ya to think past the buzzwords and campaign slogans and consider the actual *people.*

 

I am eligible for food stamps a couple months out of the year.  I work-in the same job I've had for the past 28 years.  I wasn't always poor, but I am now.  I have a couple things left from before that I earned when I was doing all right. (At least the ones I haven't yet had to sell to survive, but hey....)

  Would you take them from me-even though I earned them-just because now I need food assistance?  Why?

(I just got this mental image of ya in my sock drawer-making sure I don't have too many pairs...)

 Just curious.

And serious.

  

  

 

Excellent! I once knew a family that had to adopt their nieces and nephews due to their parents' accidental death. They qualified for assistance then. Remember, most who receive assistance have paid into the program in some way in the past.

 

On a side note, I'm always amazed at those who think Medicare if a freebie. Then again, those types don't usually think at all.

Excellent! I once knew a family that had to adopt their nieces and nephews due to their parents' accidental death. They qualified for assistance then. Remember, most who receive assistance have paid into the program in some way in the past.

 

On a side note, I'm always amazed at those who think Medicare if a freebie. Then again, those types don't usually think at all.

 

And btw, how is Semi going to get rid of Lone Star cards? Does she live in Texas now?

 

----------------------------------------------

 

It looks like it's you that can't think. Semi said it was copy/paste, so I would imagine the author lives in texas. Now, which part of this do you and others not get?

 

I don't know what's so hard to understand about it. It's simple, there are people who are in real need. Either they are ill or disabled, elderly and on a bare existence income, or they lost their jobs in this wonderfuleconomy. Some that had them, have gone through their savings, sold off what they could sell, and are in serious need.

 

Common sense, if they have any, should tell the "you're a hater" bunch that these are not the people others resent and want to see off the system. 

 

Originally Posted by Bestworking:

Excellent! I once knew a family that had to adopt their nieces and nephews due to their parents' accidental death. They qualified for assistance then. Remember, most who receive assistance have paid into the program in some way in the past.

 

On a side note, I'm always amazed at those who think Medicare if a freebie. Then again, those types don't usually think at all.

 

And btw, how is Semi going to get rid of Lone Star cards? Does she live in Texas now?

 

----------------------------------------------

 

It looks like it's you that can't think. Semi said it was copy/paste, so I would imagine the author lives in texas.

 

Now, which part of this do you and others not get?  (The part that the OP DIDN'T POST in the beginning.  I got *that* loud and clear.)

 

I don't know what's so hard to understand about it. It's simple, there are people who are in real need. Either they are ill or disabled, elderly and on a bare existence income, or they lost their jobs in this wonderfuleconomy. Some that had them, have gone through their savings, sold off what they could sell, and are in serious need.

 

Common sense, if they have any, should tell the "you're a hater" bunch that these are not the people others resent and want to see off the system. 

 

______________________

Then the OP should've said so instead of just blindly copy/pasting stuff without thinking it through. (Facebooklemmingitis)

That is apparently not what she did. Then the other "screw you, I got mine's" just reinforced it.

The post clearly makes the point that *everyone* who needs food assistance, or any other kind of assistance is a lazy bum, which just isn't true.  Not everybody got the breaks.  Not everybody's life is like a mountain where each step gets easier as you near the top. Not everybody got a good start and not everybody gets the same opportunities to fall back and recover when things go bad.

Semi's copy/paste takes things to a dictatorial end, strips *everybody* of any shred of dignity and punishes them just for being unfortunate. 

I just wanted to make sure that's what she really meant when she agreed with it.  

Apparently it was.

 

 

 


Semi had posted it was copy/paste long before kate's post. About two days before as a matter of fact. I did post that it was over the top a bit, and I don't know who the "screw you, I got mine" people are that "jumped in". I see a lot of people tired of spending money on a broken system, getting no results for their money, and people like you thinking what they have was handed to them, they were lucky, or "got the breaks".  What I have seen right on this forum is one who calls himself a die hard democrat or whatever, admit he could have gotten along fine on less money, but wouldn't have taken less even if it meant someone else could have had a job too. He always frets about what others make and when I asked him how high he would have gone before he turned down money and said he was paid enough, he didn't answer. 

 

I don't know your situation. I've read your stories about how you grew up, and to be honest it's hard to separate fact from fiction in a lot of your stories, but I give you the benefit of the doubt. The "well ya know, tryna, atya jes saying" is more of a story telling style imo. People may speak like that, but they wouldn't really write that way. But that's not important. You're a man. I don't know how old you are, but I do know this, it was harder for a woman to make it than a man when I was "coming up". I could have just set back and made all sorts of excuses about why I couldn't do something. I could have turned down jobs because they were "beneath me", or didn't pay enough, but I didn't. I was laid off one time due to a place closing and was told I could get unemployment. I said I wasn't even going to sign up because I would have another job within two days, and I did. I've had some crappy low paying jobs, but at the time I was glad to have them. I tell my kids that I have kissed a lot of frogs job wise. I know things were different. It was easier to find a job. 

That's why I said there are people now who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own, and no matter the claims from the left, there are just not that many out there. Their solution? Make burger joints/places like walmart pay more. OK, so everyone will work at the burger joints or walmart. We'll do away with the small businesses because they can't pay wages and benefits like the "big boys". Got it. 

 

If you're OK with people who have no reason to be on assistance getting on every program going, so be it. There are generations of those people. The argument that it's not a good way to live is bull. The pros at working the system make a very good living doing so. Those are the ones I have a problem with, and I could be wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's who semi and anyone else meant. Now we have an invasion of illegals coming in without any protection against them from our government. Right the opposite, they're welcomed with open arms. This amazes, and yes, scares me.

Last edited by Bestworking

Better re-think this one, semi--or expand it:

 

"AND While you are on Gov't subsistence, you no longer can VOTE!   Yes, that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest.  You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Gov't welfare check.  If you want to vote, then get a job."

 

Are you also going to cancel voting rights for all the corporation executives who covet favorable action from the politicians they funnel loads of campaign money to? Corporate welfare creates just as much of a "conflict of interest" as does welfare of the conventional variety, a major difference being that payments to food stamp recipients are but a tiny fraction of the largess gained by shrewd lobbyists for Big Oil, Big Pharma, and other biggies in the so-called "free enterprise system" who exercise much of their "freedom" to torque that system to a parody of pure capitalism and who thereby assure out-of-scale personal income for the meretricious moguls at the top. Ban the Koch brothers from the polls?

Best: Semi didn't say it was copy and paste until someone called her on it. It's called admitting guilt after one's hand has been caught in the cookie jar.

 

Not only that, when she was caught, she didn't make any attempt to give the real author credit. It took me less than ten seconds to find that it was written by Alfred W. Evans, a then 56-year-old resident of Gatesville, Texas. I may not agree with Mr. Evans' sentiments, but I certainly am opposed to people stealing from him.

 

Add Reply

Post

Untitled Document
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×