grayfingers
Cave Dweller
Member since November 2007
Posts: 4,575
|
Post by grayfingers on Aug 24, 2013 18:43:27 GMT -5
*L* How about lobotomize instead, cause their brains definitely ain't right and so many libs are also gays that they ain't breeders anyway.....Mel I'd rather have a bottle in front of me. . . Than a frontal lobotomy. . . ![](http://i214.photobucket.com/albums/cc153/agates77/Web/ear-to-ear-smiling-smiley-emoticon_zps98577880.gif)
|
|
|
Post by helens on Aug 24, 2013 18:48:46 GMT -5
You need to keep Mel from seeing the question?
Why not answer it? Maybe the Democrats really are stupid, none seem to have figured out HOW to sort the 'really needy' from the 'lazy cheats' either. Between you guys, come up with an answer we can ALL live with.
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Aug 24, 2013 19:10:51 GMT -5
<Quote Helen>---How do you propose we determine 'need'? How do we separate the wheat from the chaff?
Simple enough Helen. State mandated physical exam for all recipients of welfare, food stamps, etc. 2 doctors hired by the state independently examine each and every recipient. Those deemed physically fit to work, and not mentally impaired would be immediately have all benefits revoked. In addition, they would be ordered to repay the state for each and every dime of state or federal aid they received. Within the first month the welfare list would be reduced by 2/3. The scumbags of the world would know they would be caught. Within a month there wouldn't be a fast food job to be found. The scumbags would quickly decide it was better to work at a low paying job than starve.
Repeat offenders get sent immediately to prison work camps, where they would have to earn their keep. That means paying for their bedding, food, personal needs and medical / dental needs. They would be paid a certain amount for each hour they worked, not to exceed minimum wage. No gyms or TV's for welfare fraud inmates. If they work long and hard enough, they could buy a TV for their cell.
Children and mentally handicapped would have their money / food stamps managed by state workers to ensure that the parents or caregivers weren't using the welfare or food stamps on themselves. If need be, children could be fed at special dining rooms. Physically handicapped, providing they are able to care for themselves would receive their welfare / disability payments to pay for their own keep.
At the age of 18, all able bodied children either join the military or find a job. They will stop receiving any sort of aid at 18 years old.
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Aug 24, 2013 19:22:38 GMT -5
<Qoute Helen again> --- Why not answer it? Maybe the Democrats really are stupid, none seem to have figured out HOW to sort the 'really needy' from the 'lazy cheats' either. Between you guys, come up with an answer we can ALL live with. Maybe ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) Ain't no maybe about it.
|
|
robsrockshop
has rocks in the head
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_pink.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_pink.png)
Member since August 2012
Posts: 715
|
Post by robsrockshop on Aug 24, 2013 19:23:11 GMT -5
I hate Obama but I couldn't really see electing a guy that made his fortune shipping jobs overseas so I sat out. And truthfully all this bouncing back and forth is getting quit ridiculous we need someone that ACTUALLY DOES have our best interests not all this say one thing and do another.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Aug 24, 2013 19:51:39 GMT -5
<Quote Helen>---How do you propose we determine 'need'? How do we separate the wheat from the chaff? Simple enough Helen. State mandated physical exam for all recipients of welfare, food stamps, etc. 2 doctors hired by the state independently examine each and every recipient. Those deemed physically fit to work, and not mentally impaired would be immediately have all benefits revoked. In addition, they would be ordered to repay the state for each and every dime of state or federal aid they received. Within the first month the welfare list would be reduced by 2/3. The scumbags of the world would know they would be caught. Within a month there wouldn't be a fast food job to be found. The scumbags would quickly decide it was better to work at a low paying job than starve. Repeat offenders get sent immediately to prison work camps, where they would have to earn their keep. That means paying for their bedding, food, personal needs and medical / dental needs. They would be paid a certain amount for each hour they worked, not to exceed minimum wage. No gyms or TV's for welfare fraud inmates. If they work long and hard enough, they could buy a TV for their cell. Children and mentally handicapped would have their money / food stamps managed by state workers to ensure that the parents or caregivers weren't using the welfare or food stamps on themselves. If need be, children could be fed at special dining rooms. Physically handicapped, providing they are able to care for themselves would receive their welfare / disability payments to pay for their own keep. At the age of 18, all able bodied children either join the military or find a job. They will stop receiving any sort of aid at 18 years old. Physical Exam cost $300 average per person per doctor = $600, because you want each welfare person examined by TWO doctors each time. How often did you want to have each welfare person on the rolls examined and how much do you want to add to the tax budget to pay for these people to get examined at your schedule? Prisons don't have work camps today, many are privately contracted, and cost as much as $150,000 per inmate. Now you want the state to hire people to manage children and mentally handicapped... how much in salary did you want to pay those newly hired federal employees? How many cases should they have per worker? (then multiply this cost by the number of children and disabled on the current rolls). So, how many billions are you talking? From hiring doctors we don't currently pay for, to hiring new state workers to oversee the money handling we don't currently pay for, to building new prisons to house these deadbeats when our prisons are already overcrowded. You sound like a tax and spend Democrat. Think this VAST increase to spending you propose will fly past the Republicans in Congress?
|
|
|
Post by helens on Aug 24, 2013 20:10:22 GMT -5
As for WELFARE, it has not existed since Clinton, in case you didn't know. Clinton passed the Work for Welfare law. Sitting on ass collecting free gov't money ceased to exist when it passed. Now if you are not a child, disabled, or elderly, you WORK or you don't get money: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personal_Responsibility_and_Work_Opportunity_ActSince Welfare has not existed in the US since 1997... are you actually proposing to bring Welfare BACK, in ADDITION to hiring all those extra Federal Employees? Who's going to pay for that Don?
|
|
|
Post by helens on Aug 24, 2013 20:20:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by helens on Aug 24, 2013 20:26:54 GMT -5
Scott says people will take them in. No one took in those 84,000 children. Scott says 'someone' will give them food, because he wants their food taken away too. I took in FOUR of those kids a few years ago. Friends of my older son. How many did you take in? How many CAN you take in NOW? Because there are still thousands of them. THIS is from ABC news... must be LIES from the Democrats: abcnews.go.com/US/hunger_at_home/hunger-home-american-children-malnourished/story?id=14367230You said YOU did not qualify for food stamps. THEY didn't either. It's mostly the handicapped that qualify for food stamps. Not families. THERE IS NO MORE WELFARE. ONLY Food Stamps. And Scott says we shouldn't have Food Stamps, even tho only THE MOST dire today can get Food Stamps. How many kids did you feed this month?
|
|
|
Post by helens on Aug 24, 2013 20:30:49 GMT -5
And then you wonder why kids would go on Urban Dictionary to say things like that about Republicans? There are no JOBS for those kids coming out of school either except the best and brightest. There ARE no 'opportunities' for them, they kill, and they don't care, they have nothing to look forward to. THIS is the nation you want to build? WHERE IS YOUR HEART?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2013 20:41:10 GMT -5
I dismiss the premiss of your question. Another liberal tactic. Asking questions of false premise to back opposition into a corner. I dismiss the premise of your question and replace it with a more likely and very real scenario. Take away all entitlements and I do not believe one child, disabled or sick person would (as you put it) starve. Not one. Given the government backs out of ALL of the entirety of the "entitlement business" then charity and church income would swell beyond the needs, easily stepping up to fill the gap. With no parasitic government drone workers taking salaries for doing nothing from middle management of the entitlement programs, there would be far too much money available to feed them all. I assume for the sake of this argument that I/you/we believe those government drones are able bodied capable people that can fend for themselves. It has been stated that the greatest talent in every career is being snatched up by the US government. Those folks can fend for themselves in any marketplace. I would just like to make one point. There are a lot of children in the USA right now that are hungry AND forced into prostitution. The really bad thing is that it is ignored by way too many people. Republicans, Democrats, police and churches do not fix it so the whole lot of them are totally f... up. Me me me me me me me me me. EVERYONE NEEDS TO WORK ON THIS TOGETHER INSTEAD OF INFIGHTING. We are pumping piles of money into other countries and not taking care of our own children. Then people want to force rape victims and people who have an accidental pregnancy TO HAVE IT AND ADD A BUNCH MORE CHILDREN TO THE LIST. This country is sliding down the slope to hell because too many people just do not give a damn about anyone but themselves and their own beliefs. If you are a non believer just type in "child prostitution usa" and you will get a bunch of hits. ecpatusa.org/wp/what-we-do/helping-children-in-america/safe-harbor/Safe Harbor THE CURRENT RESPONSE DOESN’T WORK According the federal Trafficking Victims Protection Act, a person under 18 who is induced to perform a commercial sex act is a victim of a severe form of trafficking (22 U.S.C. 7102). Yet, under state prostitution statutes, a person engaging in a commercial sex act is committing a crime, even if that person is under 18. These conflicting definitions send mixed messages about how our society and legal system should be treating child victims. Even if law enforcement correctly identifies the person as under 18, police are most likely to treat her as a juvenile offender, not a victim of human trafficking. There are many reasons for this — a lack of training, lack of alternative resources for victims, and police misperceptions about what child victims experience. By relying on the juvenile justice system, we allow an endless cycle of arrest/detention and abuse for these child victims. The cycle increases the child’s trauma as well as her distrust for the system and wastes precious time that could be used more effectively to intervene with appropriate services and support. Type in "child hunger usa" and you will get a bunch of hits here also. 16.7 million children lived in a food insecure household in 2011. Child Hunger Factsfeedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/hunger-facts/child-hunger-facts.aspxGood nutrition, particularly in the first three years of life, is important in establishing a good foundation that has implications for a child’s future physical and mental health, academic achievement, and economic productivity. Unfortunately, food insecurity is an obstacle that threatens that critical foundation. According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), 16.7 million children under 18 in the United States live in households where they are unable to consistently access enough nutritious food necessary for a healthy life. Although food insecurity is harmful to any individual, it can be particularly devastating among children due to their increased vulnerability and the potential for long-term consequences.
We address child hunger through two national programs: Kids Cafe Back Pack Program
Food Insecurity
16.7 million children lived in food insecure households in 2011.[ii] 20% or more of the child population in 37 states and D.C. lived in food insecure households in 2011, according to the most recent data available. New Mexico (30.6%) and the District of Columbia (30.0%) had the highest rates of children in households without consistent access to food.[iii] In 2011, the top five states with the highest rate of food insecure children under 18 are New Mexico, the District of Columbia, Arizona, Oregon, and Georgia.[iv] In 2011, the top five states with the lowest rate of food insecure children under 18 are North Dakota, New Hampshire, Massachusetts, Virginia, and Minnesota.[v]
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Aug 24, 2013 21:01:58 GMT -5
#1-- Physical Exam cost $300 average per person per doctor = $600, because you want each welfare person examined by TWO doctors each time.
The military has a surplus of good doctors already on the payrole. Say Max $100.00 per exam in a mobile exam room. (Government already has those too).
#2 -- How often did you want to have each welfare person on the rolls examined and how much do you want to add to the tax budget to pay for these people to get examined at your schedule?
Each person already on welfare would only need to be examined once to determine if they were able bodied and physically able to work. They would also have to take mandatory drug tests, just like our military do. New enrollments would get the same exams by 2 separate doctors. Military doctors could easily be changed out, so there would be little to no chance of a doctor on the take, like happens all too often with civilian doctors.
#3 -- Prisons don't have work camps today, many are privately contracted, and cost as much as $150,000 per inmate.
That's the trouble with prisons today. These are criminals. They don't need to be sent to Club Med. Put the military in charge of prisons, and make the prisoners work for their keep. No pampering like you liberal cry babies want for those scumbags.
#4 -- Now you want the state to hire people to manage children and mentally handicapped... how much in salary did you want to pay those newly hired federal employees? How many cases should they have per worker? (then multiply this cost by the number of children and disabled on the current rolls).
Those are your words Helen, Not mine. Nowhere did I say children and mentally handicapped should be made to work. But while we're on the subject, many of the mentally handicapped are able to, and do work. And my hat's off to the companies who will hire them. My wife has a handicapped son by a previous marriage who works for 3M here in Aberdeen, and brings in a nice pay check. Enough that his SSI has been lowered to practically nothing, thereby lowering the burden on the tax payers. As for hiring people to look after kids and handicapped unable to work, They already have them. My wifes son lives in a state run assisted living apartment. These same facilities are all over the U.S., and the states and federal government already have programs set up to look after kids. No need to hire anyone. They're already in place.
#5 --So, how many billions are you talking? From hiring doctors we don't currently pay for, to hiring new state workers to oversee the money handling we don't currently pay for, to building new prisons to house these deadbeats when our prisons are already overcrowded.
See all of the above. We're talking about a savings of billions. Most facilities are already in place. Most if not all personnel are already on state or federal pay roles. And the savings in halted fraudulent welfare,medical care, housing and food stamps would pay for any shortages many times over. And as for overcrowded prisons ? Too damned bad. These prisoners are the scum of the earth. They deserve to be crowded in like the sewer rats that they are.
#6 -- You sound like a tax and spend Democrat. Think this VAST increase to spending you propose will fly past the Republicans in Congress?
So you finally admit that Democrats are tax and spend. There's hope for you yet. I'm anything but one of your tax and spend Democrats, And yes, I think Republicans at least would listen to ideas that might reduce the Democrats need for more taxes to waste buying votes to keep them in office.
|
|
|
Post by helens on Aug 24, 2013 21:11:48 GMT -5
Don... you keep talking about Welfare... did you not read the note after this one? There IS no Welfare in the US anymore. It went out in 1997. You are proposing to bring it BACK?? As for military doctors in the military... they are all on military bases. There is not a military base in every single small town in the USA. You are proposing FLYING Military doctors around on US military planes (you KNOW what the price of jet fuel is vs gasoline I hope), or commercial flights, to every single city/town in the USA? Are you kidding? Weren't you complaining about the cost of JUST Air Force One? ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) ![???](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/huh.png) What the HECK?! HOW are you saving anything to revive a program that ceased to exist in 1997, and ADDING all those costs to it? As for the 'tax and spend' Democrat, I was sarcastically using a term YOU have used before. No Democrat wants to spend even 1/10 of what you just suggested. It was a Democrat President who ENDED welfare. I'm completely boggled at how much money you want the tax payers to shoulder... WHILE complaining about the cost of ONE plane. Holy smokes.
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Aug 24, 2013 21:19:04 GMT -5
<Quote Helen> -- Don... you keep talking about Welfare... did you not read the note after this one? There IS no Welfare in the US anymore. It went out in 1997. You are proposing to bring it BACK??
So they changed the name. It's still welfare, no matter what they call it. Good try Helen, but that bird don't fly. Damn Helen. Ya went and flapped that left wing so hard that ya went and broke it.
In the United States, welfare may also be used in a more specialized context, to refer specifically to what was historically known as Aid to Families with Dependent Children, and is now known as Temporary Assistance to Needy Families. Since 1997 this system has been handled by the states, who use money given to them by the Federal government as they see fit. This welfare system is limited to a maximum of 60 months during the recipient’s lifetime, and has a requirement that while receiving assistance the recipient must be actively seeking new employment.
Welfare by any other name is still welfare.
|
|
|
Post by Rockoonz on Aug 24, 2013 21:25:21 GMT -5
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Member since January 1970
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 24, 2013 22:01:56 GMT -5
But utopian socialist programs are in place. Free food for anyone just for the asking. How is it possible that there are children starving and/or forced into prostitution? Can't the machine save them?
Proof system = not working.
|
|
|
Post by parfive on Aug 24, 2013 23:44:41 GMT -5
12 hours ago
”Most of us conservatives have better things to do than spend all day reading reams of liberal B.S.” Most, maybe . . . but not all. ![](http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a390/parfive/Funnyguy.jpg)
|
|
|
Post by jakesrocks on Aug 25, 2013 0:12:01 GMT -5
Somebody must have crapped in the 9th hole.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,388
|
Post by jamesp on Aug 25, 2013 8:08:01 GMT -5
Florida was just fine until Obama came along. At least for the 50 years i spent there before he was elected. My how he has allowed devastation and pestilence. It is a shame. It is good that you see the outcome of Obama methods.
|
|
jamesp
Cave Dweller
Member since October 2012
Posts: 36,388
|
Post by jamesp on Aug 25, 2013 8:13:45 GMT -5
Scott says people will take them in. No one took in those 84,000 children. Scott says 'someone' will give them food, because he wants their food taken away too. I took in FOUR of those kids a few years ago. Friends of my older son. How many did you take in? How many CAN you take in NOW? Because there are still thousands of them. THIS is from ABC news... must be LIES from the Democrats: abcnews.go.com/US/hunger_at_home/hunger-home-american-children-malnourished/story?id=14367230You said YOU did not qualify for food stamps. THEY didn't either. It's mostly the handicapped that qualify for food stamps. Not families. THERE IS NO MORE WELFARE. ONLY Food Stamps. And Scott says we shouldn't have Food Stamps, even tho only THE MOST dire today can get Food Stamps. How many kids did you feed this month? More of the same, Obama has created a total widespread failure. Great quotes proving the pestilence. It is good that you are facing the reality Helen.
|
|