Granny Eating Cat Food vs. Welfare Queens

[spamking]

You seem to care a big deal about poor people getting one up on the government.

I do? How is spending your welfare check on steaks getting one up on the government?

Why not care about the rich people doing the same and incredibly more often?

If someone pays into social security, etc. they deserve those benefits when they are eligible for them . . .

 

[GOATER]

Welfare Queens create resentment and stand out even in hardowrking poor communities.

My family was one of those poor families that didn't get welfare or foodstamps....yet we saw fuckers exactly in the same positioon as us, who got a shitload of help.....shit load.


These people(family friends)....knew how to game the system..they had a shitload of kids, on purpose, because they knew, they would qualify to get government assitance....they did a lot of shady things too.

So even poor people like my family knew that was fucking bullshit.

Now, do some people need welfare etc, yes....but there is always cunts who will take advantage.


Is it a huge problem? Hell no...Corporate welfare/corruption is way fucking worse....but I can see how peoppe don't get rustled at corporations and much as welfare queens/kings....you actually see welfare queens/kings playing the system...rarely does the average person, see corporations do that infront of them.

As for what is more likely, somebody who needs welfare to survive or someone getting it who doesn't deserve it...I think is neither and your simplifying it.

I think most people with welfare would survive without it, but it would be tough as fuck but they would need it, to live a semi comfortable life.

However welfare queens who game the system make up a decent chunk imo.

 

[Rational Poster]

I do? How is spending your welfare check on steaks getting one up on the government?



If someone pays into social security, etc. they deserve those benefits when they are eligible for them . . .

Even if they have a 401K worth millions?

 

[spamking]

Even if they have a 401K worth millions?

Yep . . . if they paid into the system it's their benefit is it not?

 

[Rational Poster]

Yep . . . if they paid into the system it's their benefit is it not?

Seems like they could share it with the granny eating cat food and not lose any sleep.

 

[spamking]

Seems like they could share it with the granny eating cat food and not lose any sleep.

How do you know some of them don't?

 

[Rational Poster]

How do you know some of them don't?

I'm not talking about some of them, I'm talking about all of them.

If you have gained personal retirement benefits worth exponentially more than the government provided benefits your share should be kept for others.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

One could argue that this is subjective as well . . . and greatly depends on where someone lives IMO. Do you really believe that it's only "right wingers" who hold the poor in such contempt?

Of course it's not only right wingers, but it's far more right wingers than the rest.

And I don't see how where they live would matter. Whether it's an urban, suburban, or rural setting, right wingers get especially ticked off when they see a person

Seriously? Folks do actually save up to be able to afford some of the "finer things". I'd rather they do that than go into credit card debt. Are you not able to understand the frustration that some workers see from day-to-day when it comes to these situations? I'm not saying it's right or wrong, but if you're claiming it's all about keeping someone in their place or whatever I think that's a huge generalization.

We ALL attempt to live better than we earn . . .

I certainly do understand where the frustration comes from, I just think it's misguided.

Instead of feeling contempt towards those that spend welfare funds for items that they deem too good for them, they should feel empathy for them. It's people in dire conditions trying to feel a little less bad about their condition.

And yes, I do think a large part of it is a desire to keep them in their place. How dare they drive a BMW when I only drive a Toyota! They should be riding a bike or taking the bus- because those are below my Toyota.

 

[panamaican]

In my years as an attorney, I've never met the welfare queen.

I've met poor people who have big screen tv's - but they're not that expensive and no one's buying a new tv every week. I've met drug dealers who have nice cars living in houses where their family is on welfare. Few people talk about how when those dealers get arrested, the family gets tossed from welfare. They're often more scared of losing their welfare status than of whatever temporary gain the dealer is bringing to the house. I've never met a poor person on welfare living a good life, a grand life. Abusing the system and profiting.

I have met the elderly eating cat food. I've met entirely too many of them while doing pro bono work. People in their 60's and up struggling to pay for utilities, not having money for food regularly, living in houses that are falling part because they can't afford basic repairs and are too old to do it themselves. Scared and desperate with no family nearby and no one to turn to except the government.

I will never again understand people who lack empathy for those people because they believe that some miniscule percentage of the welfare population is "getting over". As if living in welfare housing and surviving on SNAP is some kind of long term reward for cleverly tricking the government.

 

[spamking]

Of course it's not only right wingers, but it's far more right wingers than the rest.

Thanks for at least admitting to this . . . I don't know that we'll ever find out who complains more though . . .

And I don't see how where they live would matter. Whether it's an urban, suburban, or rural setting, right wingers get especially ticked off when they see a person

The local economical situation plays a huge role in how this supposed abuse is view IMO . . . so I think it does matter.

I certainly do understand where the frustration comes from, I just think it's misguided.

Misguided because of jealousy or lack of empathy? Maybe it's because the person who is frustrated by the system can't get the assistance they need due to making a thousand dollars a year too much? Maybe their frustration is with the system and it manifests itself with how they view those using the system?

Instead of feeling contempt towards those that spend welfare funds for items that they deem too good for them, they should feel empathy for them. It's people in dire conditions trying to feel a little less bad about their condition.

That's 100% subjective and can't be characterized as expecting everyone to feel empathy for someone they see getting a benefit that may or may not be seen as deserved.

And yes, I do think a large part of it is a desire to keep them in their place. How dare they drive a BMW when I only drive a Toyota! They should be riding a bike or taking the bus- because those are below my Toyota.

Based on what?

 

[spamking]

I will never again understand people who lack empathy for those people because they believe that some miniscule percentage of the welfare population is "getting over".

Seriously? You truly don't understand the perspective of someone who feels that way? This thread is full of anecdotal evidence of various experiences that are 100% responsible for how someone views this touchy subject.

As if living in welfare housing and surviving on SNAP is some kind of long term reward for cleverly tricking the government.

There's qualifying for and receiving these benefits because you truly need them and then there are those who barely qualify for them and may have an unreported means of income that supplements their ability to support their family. I think that's a distinction some folks fail to see as possible.

 

[Possum Jenkins]

Thanks for at least admitting to this . . . I don't know that we'll ever find out who complains more though . . .

If by "complains" you mean "criticizes the current system" then it's obviously the left.

And here lies a fundamental difference between the two sides. The right gets frustrated or downright angry at the "complainers." This is a pretty authoritarian position because it suggests that people should keep quiet, not voice their concerns, and not try to change anything.

Misguided because of jealousy or lack of empathy? Maybe it's because the person who is frustrated by the system can't get the assistance they need due to making a thousand dollars a year too much? Maybe their frustration is with the system and it manifests itself with how they view those using the system?

If their frustration is with the system, they should criticize and try to change the system, not the people in it.

That's 100% subjective and can't be characterized as expecting everyone to feel empathy for someone they see getting a benefit that may or may not be seen as deserved.

Of course it's subjective. Both positions are.

I just think the healthier position to take is the one of empathy towards the less fortunate instead of contempt towards them.

Based on what?

Based on the endless comments I've heard people make on this subject.

 

[spamking]

If by "complains" you mean "criticizes the current system" then it's obviously the left.

Not really sure that's close to what I meant . . . but whatever.

And here lies a fundamental difference between the two sides. The right gets frustrated or downright angry at the "complainers." This is a pretty authoritarian position because it suggests that people should keep quiet, not voice their concerns, and not try to change anything.

I thought "the right" was angry at those supposedly scamming the system?

If their frustration is with the system, they should criticize and try to change the system, not the people in it.

You know how life works right? We all lash out at those who are most convenient to us . . .

I just think the healthier position to take is the one of empathy towards the less fortunate instead of contempt towards them.

Of course it's healthier to "love thy neighbor" instead of causing hostility. That doesn't mean folks aren't often justified in being irritated with those they see (by their own anecdotal experience) as not truly needing the assistance.

Based on the endless comments I've heard people make on this subject.

So anecdotal experience is acceptable? I never know around here sometimes . . .

 

[Thesnake101]

I don't see how eating pet food is cheaper than some of the other foot out there.

Maybe it was her kink, and when she got found out, she just threw together whatever excuse she saw fit.

But I'm curious, what's the price of cat food in the states? Here, it's actually more expensive than regular food, but Venezuela has weird pricing across the board.

 

[method115]

Maybe it was her kink, and when she got found out, she just threw together whatever excuse she saw fit.

But I'm curious, what's the price of cat food in the states? Here, it's actually more expensive than regular food, but Venezuela has weird pricing across the board.

I'm not to sure what the prices are I just know that there is some really really cheap food out there because I've had to eat it in my early days while in college. Ramen being the #1 poor mans diet these things are like 20 cents a pack and it's two serving sizes.

Something tells me she's a fan of IASIP.

 

[HomerThompson]

I've seen right-wingers who think it's welfare abuse if people are making legal purchases of food that they (the right-wingers) think is too good for the purchasers.

LOL.

"They purchased the meat of the cow! Welfare abuse!!!"

 

[Possum Jenkins]

I thought "the right" was angry at those supposedly scamming the system?

In this particular case, they are. In general, they are derisive towards "complainers."

You know how life works right? We all lash out at those who are most convenient to us . . .

That's not how "life works."

That is what happens in a system where we're taught passiveness, obedience, and to not question authority. Then we lash out at the powerless instead of the ones that create the system.

So anecdotal experience is acceptable? I never know around here sometimes . . .

Depends what question you're trying to answer.

When it comes to something as hard to pinpoint as personal motivation, it's hard to get more objective data so personal anecdotes may be all you have.

When it comes to something like, say, the amount of people on welfare that abuse drugs, well, personal anecdotes don't matter because there's objective data to tell us it's a very small number:

Low rates of drug use have been shown in multiple states besides Florida, including only 1/800⁠ welfare recipients in Tennessee, vs. 8% in the general population. Similarly, Utah⁠ found 0.2 percent of the total welfare recipient population positive, vs. 6% of the population who admitted to using drugs. These 12 cases cost the state $30,000.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/judyst...testing-walker-scott-and-political-pandering/

 

[panamaican]

Seriously? You truly don't understand the perspective of someone who feels that way? This thread is full of anecdotal evidence of various experiences that are 100% responsible for how someone views this touchy subject.

No. I no longer understand that perspective. It can only come from a self-selecting mindset. If someone has seen the welfare abuser then they have to have seen the truly needy. And as a percentage of the relevant groups, the truly needy swamp the abusers in huge numbers. So if someone is hellbent on their anecdotal bad actor to the extent that they are ignoring the needy that they've also encountered, I can't understand that.

It's like someone going to a club. One guy pulls up in a Ferrari. Everyone else pulls up in regular cars. It makes no sense to then treat everyone in regular cars as if they are also in Ferraris. And anyone who says "They're all driving expensive sports cars," despite the obvious evidence that they are not is foolish, imho.

There's qualifying for and receiving these benefits because you truly need them and then there are those who barely qualify for them and may have an unreported means of income that supplements their ability to support their family. I think that's a distinction some folks fail to see as possible.

I think some people are wilfully stupid. They see one person abusing welfare and then ignore the 99 people they see who are not. If they're paying enough attention to spot the welfare mom buying steak and lobster then they had to see the welfare mom buying milk and eggs too. Ignoring the scores of needy to get a hard on for the one recreant is either selfish or stupid.

Either way, I can't support it.

 

[spamking]

In this particular case, they are. In general, they are derisive towards "complainers."

So it's both? Wow. Guess it's nice to have to have it both ways . . . or whatever way is convenient to try and make someone look bad.

That's not how "life works."

That's exactly a part of how life works . . .

That is what happens in a system where we're taught passiveness, obedience, and to not question authority. Then we lash out at the powerless instead of the ones that create the system.

So the "right" is supposedly taught all of these things and the "left" some how rises above them? Seriously?

Depends what question you're trying to answer.

When it comes to something as hard to pinpoint as personal motivation, it's hard to get more objective data so personal anecdotes may be all you have.

When it comes to something like, say, the amount of people on welfare that abuse drugs, well, personal anecdotes don't matter because there's objective data to tell us it's a very small number:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/judyst...testing-walker-scott-and-political-pandering/

Are the cat food eating grannies or welfare queens supposedly the ones who abuse drugs?

 

[MicroBrew]