Classes of Welfare Recipients - How to deal with each

[Ferretia Prime]

Some people, let's call them Paris Hilton, just inherit a lot of money that they have not earned. Would you suggest taking their money away in your zeal to make everybody work for every penny they have?

Or are you not really against parasites, you just want to stomp on everybody worse off than you just to make sure that they cannot catch you up?

My friend. That is called Communism.

[West Failure]

Some people, let's call them Paris Hilton, just inherit a lot of money that they have not earned. Would you suggest taking their money away in your zeal to make everybody work for every penny they have?

Or are you not really against parasites, you just want to stomp on everybody worse off than you just to make sure that they cannot catch you up?

Lemme give you a hint Sparky. Look around at the other threads on this channel, come back here, and talk to me some more.

What kind of answer is that? If you don't want to debate why bother coming to a debating forum?

[Redwulf]

Is it then justified for me, as a tax paying host, to eradicate the parasites?

No, seeing as they have thoughts, feelings, are self-aware human beings, they can feel pain etc.

Wait, isn't it logical to say that the host can do whatever they want with the parasite? And that the parasite's rights can't interfere with the hosts rights?

So what you're saying is that your trolling, flame bait OP is an attempt to win an argument in the abortion thread? Thanks. Good to know.

[West Failure]

So what you're saying is that your trolling, flame bait OP is an attempt to win an argument in the abortion thread? Thanks. Good to know.

I think you are right about this.

[Redwulf]

So what you're saying is that your trolling, flame bait OP is an attempt to win an argument in the abortion thread? Thanks. Good to know.

I think you are right about this.

Hell, he bloody admits it in the last post of page one.

[Saint Jade IV]

Wait, isn't it logical to say that the host can do whatever they want with the parasite? And that the parasite's rights can't interfere with the hosts rights?

So what you're saying is that your trolling, flame bait OP is an attempt to win an argument in the abortion thread? Thanks. Good to know.

This is why I didn't bother replying. Although, it makes me kind of sad that it got to 2 whole pages.

[PartyPeoples]

Can we then define Government welfare recipients as parasites on those who pay taxes to support them.
Can we also then justify thier extinction, based on the argument that the host has the right to rid itself of its parasites.

Or -

Are these merely human beings who need the help of the host to survive to a point in which they can be viable members of the community/society and no longer be parasitic.

The argument that you can justify extinction is a bit of a worrying one to be honest 'sparky' - but to the point: Sure some welfare recipients abuse the system and accept such abuse to be just a fine way of living but most welfare recipients that I've worked with/helped are just regular law-abiding people who have been demotivated by a lot of things; so much so that they just find it too difficult to do much with themselves.

Of those that aren't abusing the system, I found that most of the people simply needed a person to talk things through with them - to go through relatively simple stuff with them and enable them to build up their self-motivation to enable themselves to get back into a job.

But in any case - my personal feelings are that such safety nets are a very good thing and help many families survive when they fall on hard times. It isn't easy when you're world is turned upside down by something and people would be wise to remember that it can easily happen to anyone of us at anytime by a bewildering amount of things.

[Risottia]

I've seen some social Scrounger get pregnant and just get a house out of the Blue from the counsil when, me, the Tax paying member of Society, paying all bills due, gets denied because apparently there are none. Oh and this Social Scrounger comes from a family that's not worked a day in there lifes, father claims faulse medical benifits, brothers clame job seekers allowance when they never leave their home, and she, hereself, is 15 and up the duff.

There are several types of Social Benifiters in my mind.

1. Those who, forwhatever reason, have suffered Medical injuries, fair enough, BUT suffered them in such a way that they CANNOT work - Difference between CANNOT and WILL NOT.

2. People loosing their Jobs due to economic Climax, very common. These people will almost certainly look for further employment as most people who work cannot stand being without a job

3. Scroungers - people who have no plans on working or furthering themselves and want want want expecting that their needs go above the rest of Society

Solution:
1.better healthcare and better safety on workplace, in houses and on roads will reduce the amount of these people.
2.welfare, better (and better funded) education (also for unemployed people: helps in finding new jobs).
3.more controls by the police, the social serivices, and the tax agency.

No need to abolish welfare to fight against scroungers.

[Romanar]

Welfare should be a hand up, not a hand-out. Anyone can lose their job or get injured. But if someone gets cradle-to-grave welfare, something is very wrong. Maybe the person is a bum, or maybe the welfare system is encouraging him not to work. Either way, something is wrong with that.

[PartyPeoples]

Welfare should be a hand up, not a hand-out. Anyone can lose their job or get injured. But if someone gets cradle-to-grave welfare, something is very wrong. Maybe the person is a bum, or maybe the welfare system is encouraging him not to work. Either way, something is wrong with that.

It depends heavily on individual situations - for a lot of people who are in receipt of welfare but want to improve themselves so they become more employable, they find that it isn't possible because benefits will be cut. Like I said, there are many reasons for receiving welfare and I think that a very small percentage of the population DO need cradle-to-death welfare as they are medically unable to find employment or earn money themselves.

Abusers of the system though, should definately be clamped down upon but stereotyping people never helps improve the situation.

[Non Aligned States]

Wait, isn't it logical to say that the host can do whatever they want with the parasite? And that the parasite's rights can't interfere with the hosts rights?

Any unemployed non-adult (i.e. children) take resources without giving anything in return. They have not yet rendered any services. Ergo, you want to kill children. Ergo:

[Lunatic Goofballs]

Welfare is good for business. By maintaining a pool of potential employees about 5%-10% or so larger than needed, they can pay considerably lower wages to those employees. Should the number of unemployed fall below a certain level, wages will go up as demand for labor causes competition for the existing supply. This just won't do, which is why the level of unemployment is so carefully monitored and controlled by business.

[Tiesabre]

Considering my mother and little sister must subsist on welfare, I have to speak out.

Yes, there are many people out there who enjoy being able to kick back, lay down and get their welfare benefits and drain the governemtn dry until they simply can't get it anymore or die fat and happy.

However, then you have people like my mom and little sister. During my first 13 years of life, my mother was a hard worker, she worked two job in the medical industry to make sure I didn't need or want anything. She made her own money and snubbed the very idea of the government helping her with anything besides a tax return every year.

However, I had to move with my father, for various reasons, and my mom moved out to be closer to her dying parents. Around this time is when the economy started getting bad and she had my little sister. My little sister has always been a sickly child, so she's had to dedicate much of her time to her. Of course no business seemed to understand that and she found it hard to get the right job for her, then she got injured on the job and couldn't collect, came down with diabetes and a couple other chronic illness which made going to work from very hard to next to impossible. Soon she was forced to turn to the government in order to feed them, help them find a place to live in public housing and get state and federally funded health care. She does try to work from home, but the pay is nothing anybody could live off of. She's got a certificate in medical transcription, but now she's trying to go to college to get a two-year degree to help herself.

I think my mother's situation and others like it are prime reason why we need the welfare system.

[Psychotic Mongooses]

What kind of retarded thread is this?

[Lunatic Goofballs]

What kind of retarded thread is this?

We don't call it 'retarded'. We call it 'special needs'.

[No Names Left Damn It]

What kind of retarded thread is this?

It's supposedly meant to prove his point over on the abortion thread.

[Grays Harbor]

2.If welfare recipients are parasites, then companies who receive governmental aid are parasites too. With the slight difference that
a)welfare recipients are humans, companies are organisations
b)companies suck a lot more from the government's coffers (direct financial aid, tax discounts, tax elusion, etc) than welfare recipients do
c)companies who fired a lot of people (transforming them into welfare recipients) usually have CEOs who get huge bonuses, lose the investors' money, and receive governmental aid.

Even if welfare recipients were to be considered parasites, they wouldn't be the worst ones.

response to a) yes, welfare recipients are humans. companies are organizations. so what? failed analogy

response to b) yes, companies generally recieve more in the way of tax breaks, etc than welfare recipients do. the benefits provided by companies are greater as well. companies provide jobs. companies provide goods and services. welfare recipients provide ........... failed analogy

response to c) companies who "fire people and give CEO's big bonuses" are not the norm, which is why they show up as pariahs in the news. not all laid off employees automatically go on welfare. most don't in fact. they look for another job. failed analogy

result: welfare recipients, the chronic ones who have no intention of getting a job, provide no benefit to society as a whole other than as a drain of money and resources. even the worst companies still provide jobs, goods and services.

for those looking for work, unemployment insurance and welfare may be a good way to get by until re-employment, but for folk like that it is a temporary thing. it is the chronic welfare recipients, those who look at it as their entitlement, and who have no intention of ever trying to get off welfare who are the parasites.

[Grays Harbor]

Considering my mother and little sister must subsist on welfare, I have to speak out.

Yes, there are many people out there who enjoy being able to kick back, lay down and get their welfare benefits and drain the governemtn dry until they simply can't get it anymore or die fat and happy.

However, then you have people like my mom and little sister. During my first 13 years of life, my mother was a hard worker, she worked two job in the medical industry to make sure I didn't need or want anything. She made her own money and snubbed the very idea of the government helping her with anything besides a tax return every year.

However, I had to move with my father, for various reasons, and my mom moved out to be closer to her dying parents. Around this time is when the economy started getting bad and she had my little sister. My little sister has always been a sickly child, so she's had to dedicate much of her time to her. Of course no business seemed to understand that and she found it hard to get the right job for her, then she got injured on the job and couldn't collect, came down with diabetes and a couple other chronic illness which made going to work from very hard to next to impossible. Soon she was forced to turn to the government in order to feed them, help them find a place to live in public housing and get state and federally funded health care. She does try to work from home, but the pay is nothing anybody could live off of. She's got a certificate in medical transcription, but now she's trying to go to college to get a two-year degree to help herself.

I think my mother's situation and others like it are prime reason why we need the welfare system.

I don't think anybody is argueing to do away with the welfare system. from what you described, it looks as if the system is working as it was designed to in your moms situation. I believe the primaray complaint most have against welfare are the people who don't need it, but view it as an entitlement. who are capable of working, but won't.

[Grays Harbor]

What kind of retarded thread is this?

its called a "discussion", perhaps even a "debate", about the welfare system.

[Gopferdammi]

What kind of retarded thread is this?

It's supposedly meant to prove his point over on the abortion thread.

Really? Quite classy then.

[DrunkenDove]

What kind of retarded thread is this?

Hear hear!

[Tahar Joblis]

it is the chronic welfare recipients, those who look at it as their entitlement, and who have no intention of ever trying to get off welfare who are the parasites.

Who are these mysterious people?

I've known people who were receiving benefits, and not a one wanted it to be that way forever. The welfare queen was at least 95% mythological when Reagan invented her.

[No Names Left Damn It]

Who are these mysterious people?

I've known people who were receiving benefits, and not a one wanted it to be that way forever. The welfare queen was at least 95% mythological when Reagan invented her.

They exist in England.

[Grays Harbor]

it is the chronic welfare recipients, those who look at it as their entitlement, and who have no intention of ever trying to get off welfare who are the parasites.

Who are these mysterious people?

I've known people who were receiving benefits, and not a one wanted it to be that way forever. The welfare queen was at least 95% mythological when Reagan invented her.

come to Atlanta. there are quite a few of them. I am not saying that they are the majority of welfare recipients. most folk use it as intended. I am not saying end the system because of the minority of folk who abuse it. it does need reformed, however, and those who try and argue it doesn't are blind.

[Araraukar]

Are these merely human beings who need the help of the host to survive to a point in which they can be viable members of the community/society and no longer be parasitic.

Seeing as I'm one of those people, I certainly don't consider myself a parasite, especially since 1) I'm reschooling myself towards a different occupation, 2) it's summer time and thus no aforementioned school and 3) the employment rates being what they are and even worse in this city for 'summer jobs'.

I acknowledge that there are those who misuse the system - I've had the unfortune of actually knowing one or two - but most people I know who need welfare to survive, would rather be productive members of the society, if just the opportunity was given to them.