posted on August 12, 2004 04:27:54 PM
No, my information is not false. But I'm fininshed batting this ball back and forth with you.
I've supported it with links to Kerry's updated site. I have also supported the rise in my state with a news article.
If you still believe it's false then it's your problem, not mine. Laugh like a hyenna and sprinkle your posts with grinning faces and believe whatever you want.
Helen
Why don't you tell us how you would handle welfare.
posted on August 12, 2004 04:59:27 PM
Oh Helen... this should be amusing. I'm waiting for a good laugh from the first neo-con who responds to your question. I would like to see these same people also answer how they would handle corporate welfare while they are at it.
I'll go first as the ultra liberal. For every dollar given towards corporate welfare, one dollar should be spent on social programs such as WIC. Education is not considered a social program unless you want to axe roads and highways.
When I became pregnant with my daughter, I was working, as was her father. Due to problems with my pregnancy, I lost my job. No disability, like they have now, just no job. And I was on the pill at the time.
When I became pregnant with my son, 1 year later, I was working, as was their father. Again due to several hospitalizations with pregnancy complications, I had to give up my job and go on complete bedrest....for 6 months. Again, no disability. And I was using a diaphragm at the time, since the pill did not work for me.
I only received WIC, no money or rent or anything else. Just WIC.
Sometimes crap happens, you have no control over it.
posted on August 12, 2004 05:36:27 PM
I'll restate the question.
Some people here appear to feel very opposed to welfare. How would you change the system if you were in control. Health care should be an important consideration since the health of the poor affects everyone. There are lots of other considerations but you can state whatever you think is important.
Kinda of jumped back in here late! LOL, when I left there were only two pages. I forgot about that speech by Dennis. I saw him yesterday at the opening of Kerry's new office down the street from me. He had a great speech then, too. Drew a lot of attention!! BTW, I now work for BOTH Dennis (in his bid for re-election to Congress) and Kerry.
Linda
It would appear that you are now subtly calling me a socialist? Well, at least you didn't say I was un-American. Just what is wrong with Dennis' words as posted by Helen? They were honest ones.
Not directed specifically at Linda (before Linda accuses me of it):
It seems honesty is kind of hard for some people to take judging by the blind support some of you have for a liar. The truth really does hurt, doesn't it?
Edited: grammar
Cheryl
. . .if you still try to defend the infamies and horrors perpetrated by that Antichrist- I really believe he is Antichrist- I will have nothing more to do with you and you are no longer my friend.. . - War and Peace, Tolstoy
[ edited by CBlev65252 on Aug 12, 2004 05:48 PM ]
posted on August 12, 2004 06:25:11 PM
Hello.. Chopped liver here! LOL
I am not a Republican nor do I wish for an end to the Social Welfare Program.
I do believe in helping those less fortunate but in a way that it will make a change in their social standing. By just handing them money to exist isn't getting to the root of the problem.
I wrote an idea on how I would like to see the Welfare Program changed in my last post. The one you all ignored. LOL. Hey, you asked, I answered.
I just happened to answer before you asked.
Dolittle
posted on August 12, 2004 06:47:54 PM
Cheryl, That's great...working for both. Kerry and Kucinich!
Drdolittle, Hey, I didn't ignore your answer! I agree that the root of the problem is so very important and that includes better schools including pre-kindergarden so that children get a better start in school. Since both parents need to work after school programs are needed also. Eveyone should have affordable health care too. With a good start, I think that the children now growing up in poverty can improve their future outlook and the welfare of their families.
As you pointed out, jobs are so important for those that are able to work. I don't think that most people choose to live on welfare in order to avoid work.
posted on August 17, 2004 04:56:31 AM
Something to ponder (or be reminded of!): poverty lies at the root of a lot of the world's problems. Where did all of these terrorists and suicide bombers come from? A background of poverty, one of hopelessness, where they had nothing to lose.
As the most powerful and rich country in the world, can we AFFORD to allow poverty to spread? Do we want more and more of these terrorists sprouting from within?
"Who's tending the bar? Sniping works up a thirst"
posted on August 17, 2004 05:56:31 AM
Why have welfare at all? I am curious helen, so eager to give away everyone else
s money... how much are you willing to give of yours?
Charity starts at home... plese tell us how many homeless you invite in for a shower and a warm meal?
Do you even stop and offer to get that person a meal or hand them more than $1? after all what can you buy with just a dollar?
Do you contribute clothes to the local missions? Volunteer to serve meals?
Not only Helen, but the rest of the liberal crowd screaming for welfare... how much do you actually contribute yourself?
posted on August 17, 2004 08:33:13 AM
Koto - Where did all of these terrorists and suicide bombers come from? A background of poverty, one of hopelessness, where they had nothing to lose.
Agreed the suicide bombers are most likely poor....but totally disagree on the terrorists being poor. Osama BinLaden and his 'top commanders' were/are ALL very rich men. They hate our lifestyle...they hate our power...but the are NOT poor oppressed people. They are rich people who decided to use their wealth in a very distructive way. As did saddam when he paid the hamas terrorists to do his dirty work.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"One thing is for sure: the extremists have faith in our weakness. And the weaker we are, the more they will come after us." --Tony Blair
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"The War on Terror will not be won until America is united. And as long as Democrats target the Bush administration -- not the terrorists -- as the enemy, we are in trouble." --Oliver North
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Those are only two reasons why we need to:
Just like the fundamentalist fanatics in this country, Al Qaida is well funded but they base their operation on a multitude of poverty. Poor people are hopeless and easily manipulated to follow Laden's direction...as koto so wisely observes, poverty is the root of the world's problems. Bin Laden depends on recruits from those who feel oppressed and hopeless.
No thinking individual really believes that suicide bombers or the guys who participated in 9/11 were wealthy.
posted on August 17, 2004 09:16:51 AMCharity starts at home... plese tell us how many homeless you invite in for a shower and a warm meal?
Then why as a nation are we rushing to help other countries - Iraq and those in Africa - feed their needy children when we have enough starving people right here at home?
If your view is correct then there should be so starving children in the US.
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
posted on August 17, 2004 10:50:27 AM
Just WHERE in the US are children starving. Or adults for that matter? Please fill me in
Come to Chicago and I will show. On my three block walk from the train station to my office, I see 3-5 homeless people asking for food or money every day. Sometimes there are kids with these people.
There have also been parents here in Chicago who have been arrested because they have neglected their children and have left them to live in sqawlor.
I was also in San Fran. on vacation one year and there were homeless people doing the same thing.
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
[ edited by logansdad on Aug 17, 2004 10:52 AM ]
posted on August 17, 2004 11:04:02 AM
Logansdad, you could take a neocon like Linda right up to a malnourished starving child and all she'd do was kick it aside and say, "Get a job, you lazy slob".
After all, Republicans believe children are poor and hungry because they CHOOSE to be and should be punished for that.
And if they can lift a gun, they deserve to be tortured.
It's an uphill fight, Logansdad. But we've overcome evil in this country before and with a lot of work we can do it again.
posted on August 17, 2004 11:49:19 AMLinda:Just WHERE in the US are children starving. Or adults for that matter? Please fill me in
U.S. Department of Agriculture — Household Food Security in the United States, 2002
In October 2003, the Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture released a national report that showed a growing prevalence of food insecurity and hunger in the United States in 2002:
* In 2002, 34.9 million people lived in households experiencing food insecurity, compared to 33.6 million in 2001 and 31 million in 1999.
* 11.1 percent of US households (12 million households) experienced either food insecurity or hunger in 2002.
* Since 1995, USDA, using data from surveys conducted annually by the Census Bureau, has released estimates of the number of people in households that are either food insecure or hungry. Black (22 percent) and Hispanic (21.7 percent) households experienced food insecurity at double the national average.
* In addition, the prevalence of food insecurity for households in central cities (14.4 percent) and rural areas (11.6 percent) substantially exceeded the rate for other households (8.8 percent).
* The food insecurity rates for households with elderly persons jumped in one year from 5.5 to 6.3 percent, and from 6.1 to 7.4 percent for elderly persons living alone.
* The states with the highest food insecurity rates in order were Utah, Texas, Mississippi, Arkansas, New Mexico and Oklahoma, all with rates above 14 percent of households, well above the national average.
____________________
"Bad temper is its own scourge. Few things are more bitter than to feel bitter. A man's venom poisons himself more than his victim." --Charles Buxton
posted on August 17, 2004 12:07:04 PM
bunni - I both appreciate your vote of confidence and your informative link.
-----
Everytime there is mention of *starving* children I see red. There is no reason for any child to be *starving* in the US. With all the available programs to feed the poor and with children getting breakfast, lunch and snack money at school....and with food stamps available to all who need them...[and some who don't] ....NO ONE is starving in this country. That was MY point.
I like the new, PC name they're calling it now..."food insecurity" but they're NOT starving. We'd be reading about all the dying children and adults if they were.
I can't begin to tell you how many articles I've read...news/commantary programs I've watched where the parents just aren't being responsible with how they spend the money they are given from the government. Many articles about drugs point out how the parents will use their money to buy the drugs....and there's nothing in the fridge or cubboards for the children to eat. That is not because it wasn't provided, but rather it was misused.
I don't want any child starving ....but the adults have to take responsibility for their own childrens needs.....and they are provided for those who can't do it themselves.
posted on August 17, 2004 12:16:17 PMpoverty is the root of the world's problems. Bin Laden depends on recruits from those who feel oppressed and hopeless.
BinLaden and ilk depend on the teaching of, belief in their faith/religion to be the biggest reward these idiot recruits will receive. That, much more than money, is what drives the bombers.
No thinking individual really believes that suicide bombers or the guys who participated in 9/11 were wealthy. The guys who planned 9-11 were wealthy. Those who gave funds to support the so called charity groups are certainly not from the poor class of their faith. Few who are poor could give to these causes to be used in such ways.
And helen....sometimes I think you don't live in the 'real' world - you live in some sort of Utopia. There will always be poor oppressed people somewhere in the world. And we, the US, can't make better every problem that every country or people in this world has better.
Thinking that's possible is so unrealistic as to be something from a fairytale.
posted on August 17, 2004 12:17:20 PM
I agree that we don't have actual starvation going on in the US, aside from isolated cases that do crop up in the news fromtime to time.
However, we do have hunger. Which should not exist in the greatest nation on Earth. And that is why programs like WIC exist.
It is those very programs that are under attack by neocons who think it is wrong for such programs to exist.
I am the first to say that people who abuse such programs should be gone after. But the programs do need to be in place.
edited to fix UBB
____________________
"Bad temper is its own scourge. Few things are more bitter than to feel bitter. A man's venom poisons himself more than his victim." --Charles Buxton
[ edited by bunnicula on Aug 17, 2004 12:19 PM ]
posted on August 17, 2004 12:27:58 PM
What I'm trying to convey is that this nation has turned from one of being self-suffient to government dependent...and I'm against that.
In my grandmother's day...in my mother's day....everyone could take care of themselves. There are too many, imo, who get themselves into situation, by their own choices, and then expect the government [read other taxpayers] to take care of the problems THEY have created.
It's my position that if these same people [millions of them] thought they had to take care of themselves....most of them would find a way to do so. But we have made it way too easy, for way too many, to just take because it's so easy to do so.
No neo-con wants to see children starve...or go hungry. And they support giving that 'helping hand'. What they don't support is lifetime dependency.
That's why I agreed with the welfare reform that was passed during the clinton administration. Help them for up to five years and if they don't have their act together by then....that's their problem. And that's why I agree there should be more who are made to work at some type of job....to earn what they're getting. If they are physically able to do so of course.
posted on August 17, 2004 12:34:54 PM
Actually, in your grandmother's time (or your mother's, depending on your age ), every one could not take care of themselves. Depression, remember? Soup kitchens. Works projects. Homes lost. Farms lost. Largest population of hoboes in our history due to lack of jobs.
Looking back over our history, there has never been a time when absolutely everyone was living well and needed no help at all.
And it's not always a matterof "being unwilling to work" as some wouldlike us to believe. There are folks out there that work 2 and 3 jobs and still can't make it, because they aren't making a living wage.
____________________
"Bad temper is its own scourge. Few things are more bitter than to feel bitter. A man's venom poisons himself more than his victim." --Charles Buxton
posted on August 17, 2004 12:56:17 PM Yea helen....just like I've seen you change your position on so many different issues when others post their non-agreement with what you've said.
---------------
bunni - My mother was a very young girl during the depression. My husband's grandparents were newly married during the depression. No one in my whole family ever took a hand out...ate at a soup kitchen...etc. But they all survived....a few still living today.
My aunt tells me of only have beans and bisquicks to eat....meal after meal after meal. But she says they felt fortunate to have that. That would never be considered acceptable now....people would be screaming these poor people were starving to death. They weren't. And it made them work harder for the nickels my aunt shares were so precious to hold in her hand. My mother told me of times when she would pass by the fresh orange crate at the store...and drool over how wonderful they looked. She wanted one so badly but they had no money to buy ONE. Would that be acceptable now-a-days? heck no. We have to make everyones life better. It's not the governments job to do that....people need to stand on their own two feet.
We've had friends who fell on hard times....they didn't go on welfare..etc...all of us helped them out until they were able to get new employment. Now people don't turn to family and friends to help one another...no, they think that's the governments job.
posted on August 17, 2004 01:10:37 PM
I meant to mention my husband's grandparents and their views during the depression. They lived in Nebraska...no jobs there. So...did they stay there and go on the dole? No...they moved to CA. Would people now be willing to pack up and go elsewhere, closer to where the jobs are? Not normally....especially if they can get government aid and stay where they are.
At that time his grandmother has shared, people in Santa Monica, CA were sharing houses...because they couldn't afford one on their own. Some who had houses....rented their garage out to other WHOLE families. Would that be acceptable now-a-days? Again - absolutely not.
And on your mention of having two and three jobs...I'd bet the number of those who are working FAR out number those who are working 2-3 jobs. Why are they working 2-3 jobs? Did THEY choose not to get an education....not to complete college...not to get trained in some manner...so now they're having trouble surviving because of that choice.
If we don't encourage people to grow up and take responsibility for their own choices and actions....we're going to have a Nation full of people who are forever crying poor. They need to be encouraged to get trained/educated ...to not have children until they can take care of them, themselves, etc. etc.
posted on August 17, 2004 02:25:59 PM
I certainly agree with this statement-I have been say this since JK announced his afterschool program. I own nobody a living except myself and my family. Sure there a bumps along the way, and I do help, but not forever.
"If we don't encourage people to grow up and take responsibility for their own choices and actions....we're going to have a Nation full of people who are forever crying poor. They need to be encouraged to get trained/educated ...to not have children until they can take care of them, themselves, etc. etc[/b]."
Don't worry Linda if JK is elected then they won't have to take care of themselves because the government will. And then the ones that can afford it will pay for it. Take from the rich and give to the poor.
Sniping works up a thirst"
administration. Help them for up to five years and if they don't have their act together by then....that's their problem. And that's why I agree there should be more who are made to work at some type of job....to earn what they're getting. If they are physically able to do so of course.