What if we cut off all welfare? - Page 2

General » General Discussion

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What if we cut off all welfare? (Page 2 of 6)

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:04:28 AM EDT

[#1]

Quoted:
Read my sig line, did ya?

Unfortunately we are dealing with savages with no morals or intent on bettering themselves.Left alone nature would have fixed this.Drives me nuts when Im not working or fixing something.Others would rather watch and sponge off the producer.IF Welfare was cut off from the abusers the abusers would riot as usual and burn as usual.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:06:39 AM EDT

[#2]

Quoted:
Inner cities would burn. The food stampless would also be homeless.

Respectfully I disagree.

Sure there may be a transition time but that's no surprise. I think it would be great for inner cities. Probably the only thing that can save them in the long run.

Cut off food stamps and welfare ans the idiots may riot, and some will certainly turn to crime for a while. Let's be honest. Many of the welfare set are doing crime now so not much changes. Cutting off their support may increase the crime rate for a short time but ultimately they will find out that crime does not work. They will eventually have to stand up businesses to make a living. I would argue that welfare prevents prosperity and is therefore wrong.

If you cut off welfare could lead to an economic recover.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:06:46 AM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Well we can HOPE for that CHANGE.

It's way too easy to get welfare/food stamps/medicare/section eight housing and there are so many ways to scam these programs it's nearly impossible to keep up with all of them. If you're happy enough to live a $15-$18 an hour or so life style while staying at home playing games and doing/selling drugs welfare is a good life. These programs reward failure and laziness ... so we get more of it.

It's gotta get worse before it gets better.

The poor will burn their cities down.

With more than 50% of this country being supported by government money, imagine the 'real' economy that we would see if half of the nation lost its ability to make everyday purchases.

Welfare is nothing but kickbacks to companies like Wal-Mart.

TRG

The most educated person in this thread. Why do people think foodstamps can buy Pepsi, Potato Chips. Because the companies that make them lobbied to have them approved.

If foodstamps were eliminated tomorrow I bet half of Pepsi/Coke/Grocery Store employees would get laid off.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:07:50 AM EDT

[#4]

The cleansing properties of fire are often grossly overlooked.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:08:54 AM EDT

[#5]

Quoted:
Benjamin Franklin said ver batim " make people uncomfortable in their poverty" I like this line of thinking.

Today they would say he was a racist and ask for his wealth he aquired from HIS hard works be given to the Skittles foundation!

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:09:43 AM EDT

[#6]

I'm for giving it a shot for the next decade, or millennium or so.

You'd have to get rid of minimum wage as well though.

It's what we producers like to call a win/win.

TXL

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:11:44 AM EDT

[#7]

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:14:13 AM EDT

[#8]

What if we cut off all welfare?

In the long term it would be good for the U.S. In the short term lots of people would die.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:15:01 AM EDT

[#9]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Well we can HOPE for that CHANGE.

It's way too easy to get welfare/food stamps/medicare/section eight housing and there are so many ways to scam these programs it's nearly impossible to keep up with all of them. If you're happy enough to live a $15-$18 an hour or so life style while staying at home playing games and doing/selling drugs welfare is a good life. These programs reward failure and laziness ... so we get more of it.

It's gotta get worse before it gets better.

The poor will burn their cities down.

With more than 50% of this country being supported by government money, imagine the 'real' economy that we would see if half of the nation lost its ability to make everyday purchases.

Welfare is nothing but kickbacks to companies like Wal-Mart.

TRG

It would still be worth it. This boil needs to be lanced, even with several years of pus.

The free economy will adjust, in fact it would flourish.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:16:05 AM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:

Cities will burn with in 24 hours.

It is optomistic to think it would take that long.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:16:17 AM EDT

[#11]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Inner cities would burn. The food stampless would also be homeless.

Respectfully I disagree.

Sure there may be a transition time but that's no surprise. I think it would be great for inner cities. Probably the only thing that can save them in the long run.

Cut off food stamps and welfare ans the idiots may riot, and some will certainly turn to crime for a while. Let's be honest. Many of the welfare set are doing crime now so not much changes. Cutting off their support may increase the crime rate for a short time but ultimately they will find out that crime does not work. They will eventually have to stand up businesses to make a living. I would argue that welfare prevents prosperity and is therefore wrong.

If you cut off welfare could lead to an economic recover.

I'm guessing you're typing on a phone?

Anyway, you think welfare queens are going to just leave their 4 kids at home and go work?

Where exactly would this new influx of workers find these jobs? How much are they going to make to be able to support themselves, let alone their children?

I'll tell you what will happen when the riots calm down, people will be living in the ghetto like they do in 3rd world countries, stacked on top of each other, as, they are not heartless. People will genuinely want to work again, out of pure necessity, but will be unable to find jobs, or jobs that pay enough to cover essentials. they will protest and property and drug crimes will increase as we build new prisons faster than ever before, thus spending a lot of the "savings" we thought we had.

Any politician who comes in at that moment and promises government relief will get elected so easily, it will seem criminal. The entitlements will start again, and we'll be back in the same position we are now.

There is no ultimate solution to the problem of poverty. The only thing we can do, hell the only thing we're good at, is allowing our citizens to produce as much as possible, thus creating a wealthier nation where the poverty rate can drop naturally, and/or the poor are better off by default than in other nations.

Speed

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:17:24 AM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Inner cities would burn. The food stampless would also be homeless.

Respectfully I disagree.

Sure there may be a transition time but that's no surprise. I think it would be great for inner cities. Probably the only thing that can save them in the long run.

Cut off food stamps and welfare ans the idiots may riot, and some will certainly turn to crime for a while. Let's be honest. Many of the welfare set are doing crime now so not much changes. Cutting off their support may increase the crime rate for a short time but ultimately they will find out that crime does not work. They will eventually have to stand up businesses to make a living. I would argue that welfare prevents prosperity and is therefore wrong.

If you cut off welfare could lead to an economic recover.

I was actually focusing on the short term. Rioting tends to not be a commuter affair. The houses that burn have a good chance of being close to home.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:21:44 AM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
<snip> I hold no, there would not be. I hold that there would be a renaissance in the job market, that there would be a lowering of the welfare rates, a balancing of the budget and a lowering of the deficit. There would be an incentive to get out and actually work for a living, to better themselves, not just to get by.

I think after the initial bloodshed, which would be substantial, you are correct.

After decades of training a segment of our population to live on the dole, the short term would be exceedingly difficult.

Your suggestions are, in the long term, good solutions to many of our problems.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:22:27 AM EDT

[#14]

What if we cut off all welfare THEN becomes "the truly needy".

OK OP. No matter what programs and rules you may support, someone will always make an effort to game them. The people that you have elected to office (yep, when you don't contribute time, money or a vote, you are essentially voting for the other guys to create the programs and rules) want things the way they are. This will not change by ranting.

When a person wants to "correct" one problem, another problem is created.

Here is an example. Don't want people coming into the country illegally, anchor babies, single mothers, welfare babies? Fine. Then provide abortions and birth control on demand domestically and as foreign aid. Ignoring the religious people, this is a cheap way of reducing welfare rolls. Also, bring back public service for 2 years for every able-bodied man and woman. It will reduce the welfare rolls. It will also instill a feeling that nothing is free in this life.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:22:33 AM EDT

[#15]

Quoted:
OK, so after reading all these responses, what would the downside be?

We get called racist.I dont even care anymore.I know a guy that openly says he is a bigot.I gave him the

look and he said look up the word.I guess Im a bigot.I treat ALL equally but as soon as you show me the agenda your out of my life.Lifes lessons for over 50 yrs has given me SOME insight on what to expect from people.They used to call it wisdom but now its racism,biggotry,homophobic,predjudice,and whatever cute terms the non producers can come up with!Who do these assholes think build the houses,grow the crops,fix the trucks and tractors,provide hospitals and fire and police services are?TIRED TAXPAYERS!

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:32:08 AM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:

Quoted:

The riots would start before the ink dried.
GD

This.

We've created a dependent class, a healthy portion of which idolizes a culture of lawlessness.

We're basically bribing them not to commit too many crimes

Speed

Yep, I've said exactly the same thing here before.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:37:41 AM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
The riots would start before the ink dried.

GD

This.

Also, even though I live in country in a decent area, I doubt I'd be able to leave my house to go to work without coming back to a looted home.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:38:23 AM EDT

[#18]

Until those on assistance found ways to replace income or reduce spending, the goverment would use the tax dollars for other reasons. I doubt they would put it towards the deficit. A lot of economic sectors would be affected. I saw this that was interesting. The large majority of Medicaid is used by elderly people receiving long term care.

Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:40:12 AM EDT

[#19]

CIVIL WAR II

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:47:21 AM EDT

[#20]

I think that those who are truly needy should get it. Those that are just sucking it dry, they are entitled to a box of Cheerios and a shelter half.
Not the General Mills Cheerios either, the store brand like Oat Toastios.

Bilster

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:52:30 AM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
CIVIL WAR II

Bring it.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:53:36 AM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:

I think that those who are truly needy should get it. Those that are just sucking it dry, they are entitled to a box of Cheerios and a shelter half.

Not the General Mills Cheerios either, the store brand like Oat Toastios.

Bilster

So in your mind, the question isn't whether or not forced redistribution of wealth is a good thing or not. You've decided that it is a good thing; the only matter left to decide is how much.

Its too bad the the .gov is the only way anything can possibly get done. If only there were these things we could call 'private charities', then all of you who feel the 'truly needy' deserve your money could give YOUR money, while the rest of us get left alone. But that's crazy; only through .gov forced redistributions can anything be done!

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:57:25 AM EDT

[#23]

I'm always curious about what most people think is included in welfare. Under the budget it includes unemployment insurance, workman's comp, and disability among other things. Its not just food stamps, public housing, and welfare checks to children. Its a lot of shit.

The Federal Government needs to stop providing Welfare. But Social Security and Medicare, as well as all the unfunded military and government retirement benefits are the REALLY HUGE ones.

Social Security and Medicare are breaking us, their cost are measured in the 100's of billions of dollars, soon to be trillions of dollars. Food stamps and welfare checks are measured in the 10's of billions of dollars. A problem to be sure, but lets set our priorities based on costs. Traditional welfare costs is on the scale of the War on Drugs.

Posted: 6/22/2012 11:59:11 AM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Inner cities would burn. The food stampless would also be homeless.

You make it sound like a bad thing...

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:01:55 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
I'm always curious about what most people think is included in welfare. Under the budget it includes unemployment insurance, workman's comp, and disability among other things. Its not just food stamps, public housing, and welfare checks to children. Its a lot of shit.

The Federal Government needs to stop providing Welfare. But Social Security and Medicare, as well as all the unfunded military and government retirement benefits are the REALLY HUGE ones.

Social Security and Medicare are breaking us.

I consider those part of the package that is wealth redistribution.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:06:07 PM EDT

[#26]

Quoted:

Quoted:

I'm always curious about what most people think is included in welfare. Under the budget it includes unemployment insurance, workman's comp, and disability among other things. Its not just food stamps, public housing, and welfare checks to children. Its a lot of shit.

The Federal Government needs to stop providing Welfare. But Social Security and Medicare, as well as all the unfunded military and government retirement benefits are the REALLY HUGE ones.

Social Security and Medicare are breaking us.

I consider those part of the package that is wealth redistribution.

I agree then. What the real question should be then is "What would happen if the Federal Government was pulled back to its constitutional limits?"

The answer is: Greece x 1000.

Government retirees, social security recipients, government employees union, welfare mothers, school teachers union, government contractors, farmers, the disabled,etc...all would hit the streets.

Remember 20% of the population produces 80% of all the federal revenue. So roughly 80% of the population would be kinda pissed.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:12:57 PM EDT

[#27]

Rodney King style riots in every major city...

Not so much noise in the midwest and southern rural states.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:16:55 PM EDT

[#28]

Written in 1512, and still the most accurate book on how shit works ever written.

http://www.amazon.com/Prince-Penguin-Classics-Niccolo-Machiavelli/dp/0140449159

Here is cliffs notes pertaining to this topic: when a prince must choose between the nobels and the masses, choose the masses. It is very Machiavellian to impoverished the masses, and then provide them with high profile handouts, to gain their loyalty and dependance.

Seriously, if you want to know how the world really works, read this.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:17:08 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:

Quoted:
I'm always curious about what most people think is included in welfare. Under the budget it includes unemployment insurance, workman's comp, and disability among other things. Its not just food stamps, public housing, and welfare checks to children. Its a lot of shit.

The Federal Government needs to stop providing Welfare. But Social Security and Medicare, as well as all the unfunded military and government retirement benefits are the REALLY HUGE ones.

Social Security and Medicare are breaking us.

I consider those part of the package that is wealth redistribution.

I agree then. What the real question should be then is "What would happen if the Federal Government was pulled back to its constitutional limits?"

The answer is: Greece x 1000.

Government retirees, social security recipients, government employees union, welfare mothers, school teachers union, government contractors, farmers, the disabled,etc...all would hit the streets.

Remember 20% of the population produces 80% of all the federal revenue. So roughly 80% of the population would be kinda pissed.

I'm unfourtinately running out of scenarios where basic math doesn't make that happen anyways.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:17:47 PM EDT

[#30]

afaik, it wouldn't even put a noticable dent in the budget. not that that is a reason not to cut welfare, but lets keep the fantasy accurate

eta: i see someone else already made this point

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:20:06 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
What if we cut off all welfare?

In the long term it would be good for the U.S. In the short term lots of people would die.

only ones that weren't smart enough to go camping for about 2 weeks.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:25:01 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
The riots would start before the ink dried.

GD

Good!

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:25:12 PM EDT

[#33]

Quoted:

Quoted:

I'm always curious about what most people think is included in welfare. Under the budget it includes unemployment insurance, workman's comp, and disability among other things. Its not just food stamps, public housing, and welfare checks to children. Its a lot of shit.

The Federal Government needs to stop providing Welfare. But Social Security and Medicare, as well as all the unfunded military and government retirement benefits are the REALLY HUGE ones.

Social Security and Medicare are breaking us.

I consider those part of the package that is wealth redistribution.

I agree then. What the real question should be then is "What would happen if the Federal Government was pulled back to its constitutional limits?"

The answer is: Greece x 1000.

Government retirees, social security recipients, government employees union, welfare mothers, school teachers union, government contractors, farmers, the disabled,etc...all would hit the streets.

Remember 20% of the population produces 80% of all the federal revenue. So roughly 80% of the population would be kinda pissed.

I'm unfourtinately running out of scenarios where basic math doesn't make that happen anyways.

I know. Maybe there is a reason basic math skills declined in government run schools. It's kinda disturbing if you can add, subtract, and multiply.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:27:01 PM EDT

[#34]

What the fuck do you think is going to happen? Every left wing organization in America is going to get so strong the word Republican, capitalism fuck anything but communism and socialism will be a dead words politically.

You better fucking believe all those welfare rats are going to get off the couch and vote real damn fast if you cut off the cheese.
How are you going to stop them from voting you out and replacing all Republicans with socialist democrats? They can vote and will have a good damn reason to keep voting to kill anything but socialism. Do you honestly believe they are going to lie down and take that shit even for a second if you do you need mental help.

The NAACP and a whole fuck ton of liberal organizations are going to be so far up Republicans asses that they will be shitting communist red. The moment the cheese stops there will be a real bad democrat candidate who will win reverse that shit quick fast and in heart beat and Republicans will lose most every office because how the fuck could they fight against that wave of fuck Republican votes they can’t.

You keep the hood rats happy lest they really get out and vote. Do you really think they are going to lie down and take that fuck no they are going to really get out and vote something fierce because you took their cheese? I shudder to think of the government that would be voted in next after that stupid fucking maneuver.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:27:10 PM EDT

[#35]

I think it was the sociologist Jürgen Habermas who argued that governments "buy" peace and social order from their citizenry with subsidies, entitlements and other income transfers.
Therefore, no more welfare = no more pacified population = disorder and shenanigans.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:31:05 PM EDT

[#36]

how much ammo do you have on hand and how friendly arre you with your neighbors?

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:32:15 PM EDT

[#37]

They'll tell you that everyone drawing is "truly needy". They said a couple fo years ago that about 30% of the people they deem as eligible aren't even drawing benefits.

What if we were to do away with school subsidies of lunch, breakfast, heating allowances, cell phone allowances, food stamps, et al. Would there be people dying in the street? Would there be children starving? I hold no, there would not be. I hold that there would be a renaissance in the job market, that there would be a lowering of the welfare rates, a balancing of the budget and a lowering of the deficit. There would be an incentive to get out and actually work for a living, to better themselves, not just to get by.

What magic jobs are these newly bereft people going to take, and with what skills?
Somek of these kids who are getting discounted school lunches, its the only meals they are getting. Now maybe we should go after the parents in question for fraud, but I see that you even want to do away with regular food stamps, not just school lunches...so where are these kids going to get their food? From the parents they have who rely on school lunches and food stamps?

Now, I don't see why we should be spending 1 billion a year on Obama phones. Kill off that program ASAP.....

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:32:57 PM EDT

[#38]

It's like gaining/losing fat.

It takes a while to gain fat, so you can't expect to lose it instantly.

It took decades to make millions of people dependent on the government, it will take a lot of time to ween them off. Try to do it instantly, and you're going to cause more harm than good.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:33:10 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:

What the fuck do you think is going to happen? Every left wing organization in America is going to get so strong the word Republican, capitalism fuck anything but communism and socialism will be a dead words politically.

You better fucking believe all those welfare rats are going to get off the couch and vote real damn fast if you cut off the cheese.

How are you going to stop them from voting you out and replacing all Republicans with socialist democrats? They can vote and will have a good damn reason to keep voting to kill anything but socialism. Do you honestly believe they are going to lie down and take that shit even for a second if you do you need mental help.

The NAACP and a whole fuck ton of liberal organizations are going to be so far up Republicans asses that they will be shitting communist red. The moment the cheese stops there will be a real bad democrat candidate who will win reverse that shit quick fast and in heart beat and Republicans will lose most every office because how the fuck could they fight against that wave of fuck Republican votes they can’t.

You keep the hood rats happy lest they really get out and vote. Do you really think they are going to lie down and take that fuck no they are going to really get out and vote something fierce because you took their cheese? I shudder to think of the government that would be voted in next after that stupid fucking maneuver.

Honestly, it won't be just what people that considered the left today. It will be a bizarre cross-section of the political spectrum. You'll see self-identified "conservatives" marching as well. There are a lot of people who get money from the federal government.

I know the "conservatives" that get money and contracts from the government don't think of their federal money in the same category, but it is. They would be marching as well. Welfare moms would be a relatively small percentage of the population, AARP members and government retirees and employees would by far be the largest segment of the protests.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:34:06 PM EDT

[#40]

I've heard them called the custodial class.

The trends are already set up. We're becoming a two tier society. There's a class of people who'll always need someone to support them. No amount of education will pull them up and out.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:36:18 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:

Cities will burn with in 24 hours.

Than what?

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:40:36 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Inner cities would burn. The food stampless would also be homeless.

Respectfully I disagree.

Sure there may be a transition time but that's no surprise. I think it would be great for inner cities. Probably the only thing that can save them in the long run.

Cut off food stamps and welfare ans the idiots may riot, and some will certainly turn to crime for a while. Let's be honest. Many of the welfare set are doing crime now so not much changes. Cutting off their support may increase the crime rate for a short time but ultimately they will find out that crime does not work. They will eventually have to stand up businesses to make a living. I would argue that welfare prevents prosperity and is therefore wrong.

If you cut off welfare could lead to an economic recover.

I was actually focusing on the short term. Rioting tends to not be a commuter affair. The houses that burn have a good chance of being close to home.

So the fact that they burn their own neighborhoods is bad? I'm sorry. I'm not sure I see how.

I do not think the people that eventually have to get jobs will suddenly become CEO's of fortune 500's and the like. They will stand up small business in inner cities since that is all they will have left. This could be our economic recovery.

As for suddenly leaving the 15 kids from 13 different fathers at home while they look for work. Yes. Actions have consequences. They will find a way to work around their problem. The next generation may be reluctant to repeat their parent's mistakes.

If unemployment benefits last 100 weeks people will be unemployed 102 weeks. The same is true with welfare. Take away welfare and people will get off their ass. Some will turn to crime and when that doesn't work they get jobs or start a business.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:41:57 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
and take a good honest look at who is in desperate need? the old and infirm, the mentally impaired, the truly needy, and assist only them? What if we were to do away with school subsidies of lunch, breakfast, heating allowances, cell phone allowances, food stamps, et al. Would there be people dying in the street? Would there be children starving? I hold no, there would not be. I hold that there would be a renaissance in the job market, that there would be a lowering of the welfare rates, a balancing of the budget and a lowering of the deficit. There would be an incentive to get out and actually work for a living, to better themselves, not just to get by.

Van Jones had got one thing right about this country, we are a wealthy country, we are a very generous country, but we would be much wealthier if we didn't have a goodly portion of the country draining the wealth of the rest of the country by governmental force.

considering the vast majority of the people we're talking about are mostly unskilled, you're absolutely and completely wrong... 2-3 minimum wage jobs per recipient just to get by is a lot of jobs, and there just aren't that many jobs out there. There would absolutely be starvation (after the massive looting/rioting and the associated violence). I'm as against welfare as anybody, but you're living in fantasyland.

Your post, and several others here, do show that the notion of "class warfare" goes both ways, however.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:42:01 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:

I do not think the people that eventually have to get jobs will suddenly become CEO's of fortune 500's and the like. They will stand up small business in inner cities since that is all they will have left. This could be our economic recovery.

Stand up a business with what money?

As for suddenly leaving the 15 kids from 13 different fathers at home while they look for work. Yes. Actions have consequences. They will find a way to work around their problem. The next generation may be reluctant to repeat their parent's mistakes.

I don't see them leaving their kids with someone for a minimum wage job. The cost of child care would exceed their paycheck.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:42:15 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
I've heard them called the custodial class.
The trends are already set up. We're becoming a two tier society. There's a class of people who'll always need someone to support them. No amount of education will pull them up and out.

Unless you paid at least $28,000 in federal taxes last year you are being supported by others. That's the average share per tax-payer of the federal budget.

I have a feeling that a lot of people have a very distorted view of their actual contribution to covering the cost of government. The federal government receives the lion share of its support from a relatively small segment of the population. Everyone else is subsidized to some degree.

Every man, woman, and child, working, retired, and disabled, would have to pay over $11,000 each for the cost of the FEDERAL government to be equally shared. This of course doesn't include the additional cost of state and local governments which varies.

How many on this forum actually paid their fair share? I imagine very few.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:42:52 PM EDT

[#46]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Cities will burn with in 24 hours.

Than what?

Then every hood rat around and their dead relatives are going to get out and vote so hard that Republicans will die from exposure to so many fuck you votes. Then the most socialist government ever seen on ground by the U.S is going to be voted in. Do you really think they won't get out and vote? If you think they will lie down and take that then I have forty bridges to sell to you and I know you will buy them because you believe that the hood rats will go away.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:43:39 PM EDT

[#47]

Quoted:
and take a good honest look at who is in desperate need? the old and infirm, the mentally impaired, the truly needy, and assist only them? What if we were to do away with school subsidies of lunch, breakfast, heating allowances, cell phone allowances, food stamps, et al. Would there be people dying in the street? Would there be children starving? I hold no, there would not be. I hold that there would be a renaissance in the job market, that there would be a lowering of the welfare rates, a balancing of the budget and a lowering of the deficit. There would be an incentive to get out and actually work for a living, to better themselves, not just to get by.

Van Jones had got one thing right about this country, we are a wealthy country, we are a very generous country, but we would be much wealthier if we didn't have a goodly portion of the country draining the wealth of the rest of the country by governmental force.

I think you'd find that the largest portion of welfare recipients are middle class as far as total dollars, while it is low income as far as subsidy/earnings ratio. I think it would have an immediate negative consequence in the marketplace, and some of the responders arguing for riots is probably not unfounded. I think there is some 60 million people on foodstamps which is really hard to fathom, but throw in all the other forms of welfare such as social security, medicaid, medicare then it is astronomical.

I would argue that if those with means had the option to voluntarily support needed social services that, after a transitionary period, those in need would receive much greater help overall - not just economic support, but restoration of spirit, mind, body and developing to become productive and self sufficient; and it would all be accomplished at fractional cost as compared to statist welfarism.

However, the wailing and gnashing of teeth would come mostly from those in civil government or employed by it to provide these services. In many ways they are worse than the welfare recipients themselves - some of which are legitimate - because they don't have a problem with theft and demanding their own support at 2 to 3 times comparable market prices. The welfare cheats on the receiving end are really rather amateurish as compared to the civil government, corporations and parasites living off the system in the recipients name.

I would disagree that we are a wealthy country because we have a fiat economic system, we have an illusion of wealth; overall though a fiat economic system requires welfarism and vice versa. There is no way to accomplish even marginal adjustments to the welfare state with a fiat economic system.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:48:20 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:

Quoted:

Inner cities would burn. The food stampless would also be homeless.

Respectfully I disagree.

Sure there may be a transition time but that's no surprise. I think it would be great for inner cities. Probably the only thing that can save them in the long run.

Cut off food stamps and welfare ans the idiots may riot, and some will certainly turn to crime for a while. Let's be honest. Many of the welfare set are doing crime now so not much changes. Cutting off their support may increase the crime rate for a short time but ultimately they will find out that crime does not work. They will eventually have to stand up businesses to make a living. I would argue that welfare prevents prosperity and is therefore wrong.

If you cut off welfare could lead to an economic recover.

I was actually focusing on the short term. Rioting tends to not be a commuter affair. The houses that burn have a good chance of being close to home.

So the fact that they burn their own neighborhoods is bad? I'm sorry. I'm not sure I see how.

I do not think the people that eventually have to get jobs will suddenly become CEO's of fortune 500's and the like. They will stand up small business in inner cities since that is all they will have left. This could be our economic recovery.

As for suddenly leaving the 15 kids from 13 different fathers at home while they look for work. Yes. Actions have consequences. They will find a way to work around their problem. The next generation may be reluctant to repeat their parent's mistakes.

If unemployment benefits last 100 weeks people will be unemployed 102 weeks. The same is true with welfare. Take away welfare and people will get off their ass. Some will turn to crime and when that doesn't work they get jobs or start a business.

As far as burning down their own neighborhoods; Section 8 bud.

Your optimism about "finding a way to work around their problem" or "turn to crime and when that doesn't work, get jobs" is pretty unrealistic

When they turn to crime they will either be successful and/or caught. When they are caught we have to pay for housing, food, medical, etc...

Like I said, they will protest and any politician(s) who promises to lift them out of their squalor will be elected in a landslide, and, the entitlements will be back in place again.

Speed

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:48:48 PM EDT

[#49]

Quoted:

I would argue that if those with means had the option to voluntarily support needed social services that, after a transitionary period, those in need would receive much greater help overall - not just economic support, but restoration of spirit, mind, body and developing to become productive and self sufficient; and it would all be accomplished at fractional cost as compared to statist welfarism.
.

You're talking about the old 'sermon in exchange for soup" deal? Why?
you're right that the secular civil-funded programs would bitch, because a lot of people believe that you are legitimately in need, you shouldn't have to sit through a sermon from someone who is only helping you so they can hold you captive to hear their sermon about saving your soul.

Posted: 6/22/2012 12:51:12 PM EDT

[#50]

Quoted:

Quoted:
Cities will burn with in 24 hours.

Than what?

Than we can spend more money on public schools than.

TRG

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - What if we cut off all welfare? (Page 2 of 6)

General » General Discussion

Warning

Confirm Action

About AR15.COM

Stay Connected

Newsletter

Contact Us