If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Government: "Single parents on welfare benefit need to STFU and GBTW"   (news.bbc.co.uk) divider line 338
    More: Hero  
•       •       •

18130 clicks; posted to Main » on 05 Mar 2007 at 7:49 AM (7 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



338 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all
 
2007-03-05 08:49:07 AM
jumac

Beautiful troll. I don't know the last time I read such amazing work.

/kudos
 
2007-03-05 08:51:05 AM
I've never been unemployed in my life, therefore the only reason people could possibly be unemployed and on welfare is because they're inferior to me and lack PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Because everybody else's situation is the same as mine. In fact, the unemployed should be strung up and killed and raped for stealing all my hard earned money.

shiat, I love Fark threads like this, I like feeling so good about myself.
 
2007-03-05 08:52:00 AM
The Third Man
Don't want a vasectomy, norplant, depo-provera? Then don't
use public, taxpayer funded money.
Did you drive on a public, taxpayer-funded road today? Ever called the police for anything? How 'bout the fire department?
The answer is yes? OK then: snip, snip for you.


Ah but I earn those services by paying for them with the taxes taken out of my paycheck when I work.
 
2007-03-05 08:53:05 AM
A new generation of latchkey kids.

Makes me proud.
 
2007-03-05 08:55:05 AM
The Third Man - Did you drive on a public, taxpayer-funded road today? Ever called the police for anything? How 'bout the fire department? The answer is yes? OK then: snip, snip for you.

That is a weak argument... and you know it.

The answer is "Yes", but I also pay taxes (in fact, a little over 1/3 of my income is taxed) and do not receive funds from the government in the form of a welfare check.

My wife and I pay for my our food, water, housing, clothing, heat/air-conditioning, and insurance. We don't rely on the government/taxpayer to provide it for us. I work my arse off to provide for my family and don't rely on someone else to do it for me.
 
2007-03-05 08:56:41 AM
My wife and I pay for my our food, water...

Should read... "My wife and I pay for OUR OWN food, water..."

/typo
 
2007-03-05 08:57:33 AM
Mugato: I know this is about Britain but the 'necks in the States who biatch about welfare mothers really don't have a grasp of what the government really wastes its money on or they would prioritize their biatching a little better.

What might that be? Almost all the federal budget goes to handout programs.
 
2007-03-05 08:58:07 AM
I personally am disgusted that our Prime Minister is so dedicated to manifesting his own libertarian economic wet-dream in this country. We're spending hundreds of billions of pounds on crap like an offensive military, nuclear weapons, and various waste organisations (like the Department of Trade and Industry) that simply don't justify their cost, and rather than deal with redistributing funding from these to essential public services like the police, education ("Education, education, education" was Blair's mantra when he came in, and he's completely failed to deliver on that), and healthcare.

I understand that there's a huge cultural difference between America and Europe/Britain when it comes to benefits and welfare, but I'm getting increasingly frustrated with the right-wing in this country foisting Randite economics on us whilst buddying up to a one-sided relationship with America (and turning our back on Europe/the rest of the world). Maybe blowing billions on a military works in the US and creates a happy, harmonious society, but I'd rather we spent that money on improving quality of life at home.

\Would love to change things
\\No idea how to make a difference
 
2007-03-05 08:58:57 AM
Cache: But corporate welfare is still okay... right?

Brainless cliches are certainly still stupid.
 
2007-03-05 09:00:14 AM
The Third Man: Did you drive on a public, taxpayer-funded road today? Ever called the police for anything? How 'bout the fire department?

The answer is yes? OK then: snip, snip for you.


That makes about as much sense as using a wet noodle to hunt moose.

If you drive on a road, then you are the taxpayer funding the road. Police, fire protection: taxpayer funded. Taxpayer? Person calling the police or fire dep't.
 
2007-03-05 09:00:26 AM
1. Some previously successful people fall on hard times through no fault of their own.

2. Some people are born into really lousy situations and lack the cognitive tools to make their life work by themselves.

3. In neither case should the rest of us give a damn, or use the government's considerable ability to apply resources to try and improve their chances of becoming productive citizens (again).

4.
gallery.ksilebo.com
 
2007-03-05 09:00:53 AM
espertron

I went about that the wrong way, sorry about that, contraceptives are just a sensitive subject for me. I don't ever want to become pregnant and the choices seem limited. I don't want to make any drastic actions, i'm only twenty and may change my mind eventually. So the fact that you can't be on the pill (safely) for more than a few years, Depo-Provera has some of the worst side effects of the contraceptives and so on is not

I use to educate teens about contraceptives and safe sex. I think that should be the first step, get em' while they're young. Prevention is key. I wish we could put birth control in the water lol.

Those men and women who decide not to take this choice you propose and become infected with one of those parasites will then be with child and no money...which is just a bigger problem. I'm not really a fan of children but I definitely don't want to see them homeless and suffering.
 
2007-03-05 09:01:14 AM
Welfare mothers make better lovers..
 
2007-03-05 09:01:39 AM
drop your anchors...
 
2007-03-05 09:03:06 AM
"Look how many women, single or otherwise, go back to work in 6 weeks to 3 months"

If you're going to do that, you should just get a farking dog instead.
 
2007-03-05 09:03:21 AM
absentee fathers need to be hunted down.

Then they should be given the beating of their life for shirking the most important responsibility that any of them will ever have.
 
2007-03-05 09:03:34 AM
No Such Agency
That's entirely incorrect reasoning. People only fall on hard times because they're immoral and corrupt. Probably drug abusing sluts as well.
We shouldn't help anybody else out, ever, what do you think we're in a "society"?
 
2007-03-05 09:03:50 AM
sorry mdeesnuts didn't mean to sound like a troll, only second post i ever made on fark. as time gose on I'll do better not to sound like one.

but my point was that not everyone that gets help form the gov. is out for a free ride and some are just hard working people who just can't get buy on the job(s) they have. around here in Maine the avg start out pay is $7.00/hr. and the avg cost for a 3 bedroom place is bout $900-$1000 a month. for someone making mim wag even at 40 hours a week that not even enough for rent.

As for the deadbeat/adsent parent part some of us try to be in our kids life but the other parent dosen't want us to be.
 
2007-03-05 09:04:03 AM
Just one of many reasons to keep abortion legal.
 
2007-03-05 09:05:10 AM
OriginalReaper
Solution: develop a sterilizing STD.

You mean like Chlamydia, HPV, Gonorrhea, Syphilis...
 
2007-03-05 09:05:18 AM
Espertron

That is a weak argument... and you know it.

The answer is "Yes", but I also pay taxes (in fact, a little over 1/3 of my income is taxed) and do not receive funds from the government in the form of a welfare check.


That's cool. And hey, if you tell me your tax burden I could probably figure out how much public roadway that you're allowed to use per year. Might even get you to work and back once a month. =P
 
2007-03-05 09:05:43 AM
Yup. We get Foodstamps, WIC and we are on MaineCare. Yes, I am a stay at home mom to my 10-month-old son. You know what? It would cost MORE for me to work than it does for me to stay home. My bf works full time at only make $10/hr and that's with a college education. We're in the middle of nowhere where stuff costs a lot and people don't pay shiat in terms of wages. We only have one car, and that's falling apart. Yes, I'd LOVE for us to get off this government help. But we can't. In order for me to go to work, my wages would need to cover child care (nigh impossible given the minimum wage), plus my wages would also need to cover the expenses of a second car since it's HIGHLY unlikely that anyone who pays minimum wage is willing to work around a fixed schedule. God forbid I *actually* have a work schedule that is somewhat fixed so that I can make sure my child is taken care of and transportation is available. That's the inherently bad thing about minimum wage jobs, which are the ONLY ones available in this area - we want you available all the time but you'll only work 4 hours a day at most and we never know when that will be.

Oh, we should move you say? To where, and with what money?
 
2007-03-05 09:06:36 AM
i imagine that the expected target is the real problem mothers (otherwise one would imagine that the government would attempt to 'help' them into work, rather than 'force'). these good women will just develop depression, or get pregnant by any man stupid enough to fark them - and instead of doing it when the youngest child nears 16, they'll do it as the kid nears 11 or 12. there are plenty of single moms who have three or four children in quick succession, before seemingly stopping. then, just as the youngest child approaches 16 and mom is going to need to work ... surprise!

attempting to force these good women into work will just lead to them popping out more dysfunctional children
 
2007-03-05 09:06:39 AM
mister aj
That's entirely incorrect reasoning. People only fall on hard times because they're immoral and corrupt. Probably drug abusing sluts as well.
We shouldn't help anybody else out, ever, what do you think we're in a "society"?


No, no. Only innocent, hard-working folk fall on hard times. No one ever abuses the system and so no reform to the system is needed.
 
2007-03-05 09:06:54 AM
Diabound: "Education, education, education" was Blair's mantra when he came in, and he's completely failed to deliver on that

While it's debatable that educational outcomes have improved, the improvements in the standards of infrastructure are striking. If you're going to take aim at Blair's 'reforms', the NHS is a much better target.
 
2007-03-05 09:07:24 AM
If you drive on a road, then you are the taxpayer funding the road.

So foriegners can't drive on US roads?

How about if I cross state lines and drive on state-maintained lines? Or county-maintained roads, if I don't live in that county?
 
2007-03-05 09:09:31 AM
Atomic_Cockroach
Fascinating. That almost sounds like the whole situation isn't just black and white, and one needs to find a middle ground that realises the range of different individuals in the system rather than treating everyone on welfare as either all innocent or all scroungers.

This is far too reasonable a conclusion for a Fark thread though, so .... STFU, NEOCONTARD!

/got annoyed at all the smug superiority
 
2007-03-05 09:09:41 AM
HoodCrowd: The ONLY thing you forgot was, MANDATORY drug and alcohol for ANYONE getting government benefits. I don't give a rats arse about someone getting money from the goverment enjoying it by being stoned or drunk all day. Make the jobless bored, I say.

I'm down with that, so long as we implement mandatory drug and alcohol testing for all of the congress critters in D.C.

I sure as hell don't want them passing laws or making policy under the influence.
 
2007-03-05 09:09:51 AM
Well, welfare-slackers are bad and all, but the non-welfare expenses in the US prohibit people from making ends meet, period...at minimum wage, the best you can hope for is $816 a month before taxes; after about $75 for taxes, that's $750. Most full-time daycares cost at least $100 a week. Half your paycheck goes towards daycare (making the government write out a $400 check to daycare isn't any better than $400 to her, because she'll just use her paycheck on booze and premium cable channels, right?), another $250-$300 for family healthcare (gotta get them off Medicaid when they have insurance available, right?) Maybe $300/mo for a tiny, tiny apartment, and you still can't make ends meet, so they stay on foodstamps ($300) and utility assistance ($100). Make her pick up a night job, too? Off-hour daycare doubles in price, now there's two transportation costs, and there's no parent around for the kids.

So, if you're making them go back to work to pay their way, you're leaving them on welfare -- at similar cost to the state as before -- just moving them to different programs while taking in the meager taxes she pays now, most of which she'll get back next spring. Get off the high horse of saving the state money -- those 'welfare moms' will still be costing the state a heck of a lot of money whether they work or not. Your distaste is a moral one, one that objects to their lifestyle. Address the lifestyle and culture's acceptance of it, not the welfare system, and you'll fix the problem. The problem is also one of the cost of living -- minimum wage can hardly cover a single parent's expenses, so we send the message that either the government can pay for everything AND work an 8 to 10 hour day, or the government can just pay for everything. Which would you choose? The problem everybody complains about actually happens quite a while before welfare is even applied for.
 
2007-03-05 09:11:10 AM
I love how so many of the 'welfare queen' people are biatching about the women making more babies, but if you even whispered the word 'abortion' within earshot of most of them, you'd get a speech about the preciousness of human life.

Don't like women making babies for pay? Start supporting the right to an abortion.
If Daddy picks up and walks out three weeks into a pregnancy, for God's sake let the woman make a choice about what she has to do. If you're going to scream at her outside the clinic and demonize her for making an informed decision, then be prepared to pay her way when she has the kid.
 
2007-03-05 09:11:54 AM
nomatophobia

I understand your argument and there is merit to what you say. I certainly don't want to see homeless, destitute children. I think it is disgusting and sad that children should have to suffer as a result of the irresponsibility of their parents.

It is a touchy situation that has no easy answers: On one hand, we simply cannot have parents having children, sometimes repeatedly, and lack the ability to provide for them. On the other, we cannot allow children to suffer because they have thoughtless parents. I believe a line has to be drawn somewhere.

My belief is that if you want to take public money, you have to pay the price: mandatory birth control, public financial disclosure, commitment to employment/training (and I think we should provide job training and placement... trust me, there are plenty of jobs out there to be had and while some of them don't pay that well, they provide needed benefits and little is better than nothing). Partial state support is superior to full state support.

I respectfully submit to you that there are no easy answers. Life is hard, my friend ... that is a fact we can all agree upon.
 
2007-03-05 09:12:19 AM
clouddancer: Yup. We get Foodstamps, WIC and we are on MaineCare. Yes, I am a stay at home mom to my 10-month-old son. You know what? It would cost MORE for me to work than it does for me to stay home. My bf works full time at only make $10/hr and that's with a college education. We're in the middle of nowhere where stuff costs a lot and people don't pay shiat in terms of wages. We only have one car, and that's falling apart. Yes, I'd LOVE for us to get off this government help. But we can't. In order for me to go to work, my wages would need to cover child care (nigh impossible given the minimum wage), plus my wages would also need to cover the expenses of a second car since it's HIGHLY unlikely that anyone who pays minimum wage is willing to work around a fixed schedule. God forbid I *actually* have a work schedule that is somewhat fixed so that I can make sure my child is taken care of and transportation is available. That's the inherently bad thing about minimum wage jobs, which are the ONLY ones available in this area - we want you available all the time but you'll only work 4 hours a day at most and we never know when that will be.

Oh, we should move you say? To where, and with what money?


Why on earth would you choose to have a kid that you knew you couldn't afford?
 
2007-03-05 09:12:33 AM
The Third Man

Did you drive on a public, taxpayer-funded road today? Ever called the police for anything? How 'bout the fire department?

Well, first off, nice straw man.

now to the straws:

Did you drive on a public, taxpayer-funded road today?
Well, assume I did and I was on welfare. I had to buy gas. And gas has road taxes added into it. Also, I had to buy my drivers licesne, and pay for registration. All income to the gub'ment. Hell, I even had to pay taxes when I bought the damn car. So I think Ive payed for the road.

Ever called the police for anything? How 'bout the fire department?
There is a drasitic difference between basic police and fire protection, which you may use once or twice in your lifetime, and getting a check for sitting on your ass once a month. It is in the best interests of the community to extend these protections to everyone.
 
2007-03-05 09:12:37 AM
mister aj

Of course the situation is not black and white. But there are certain black and white aspects thereof. For example: if you are unable to support yourself without help from the government, then there is no conceivable reason why you should have a child.

Now obviously if you already have a child when you go on welfare that's another story. But I think any of the responsible hard luck cases you described would be willing to accept a birth control condition of some kind because they'd probably realize that now is not a good time to pop one out.
 
2007-03-05 09:13:43 AM
I have a friend who's dealing with her husband's ex right now. He and the ex had a baby, and now the ex is on welfare because she doesn't feel like holding a job...she was a week away from getting a raise when she quit for no reason. She's held about eight jobs in less as many months. She's a waste of space and we're all paying for her lazy @$$...biatch.
 
2007-03-05 09:14:16 AM
clouddancer

It would cost MORE for me to work than it does for me to stay home.

Which is exactly why this country needs some sort of free day care for small children.
 
2007-03-05 09:15:41 AM
nomatophobia
I wish it were that easy. You must be a man. If you were a woman you'd probably think twice about implementing something like forcing women to inject the unsafe Depo-Provera and plant the uncomfortable Norplant. And who's going to pay for the vasectomies, medicine, the time off work, the lawsuits? Oh yea, the government.


Umm they are on welfare they are NOT WORKING!

/emphasis added on key words
 
2007-03-05 09:15:57 AM
Unintended consequences: woman, seeing imposing age of 12 coming on, cranks out more kids. At least with 18 the odds are she'll be done with cranking 'em out when the alarm bells start ringing. Either way though, no reason a person should need benefits for teen children.
 
2007-03-05 09:16:16 AM
Christian Socialist - That's cool. And hey, if you tell me your tax burden I could probably figure out how much public roadway that you're allowed to use per year. Might even get you to work and back once a month. =P

That argument is so ludicrous and without merit. I know it. You know it. We all know it.

By your own "argument" (and I use that term loosely): Since our nation is in debt and our government in a state of financial deficit, NO government services should be available. NO roads, healthcare, military... nothing. ALL funds and monies should go towards repaying the debt.

See... we can all make a pointless and unrealistic argument if we try hard enough.
 
2007-03-05 09:17:22 AM
Single Moms, aka that bastard baby maker. Hell I'm pretty sure if the government offered them $10,000 to permanently get their tubes tied half of them would take up on the offer.


If you want to be respected as a parent, keep your little bastards under control.
 
2007-03-05 09:17:35 AM
clouddancer

Yup. We get Foodstamps, WIC and we are on MaineCare. Yes, I am a stay at home mom to my 10-month-old son. You know what? It would cost MORE for me to work than it does for me to stay home.


If that is the case, have you considered a career in child-care?
 
2007-03-05 09:18:27 AM
All you asshats talking about sterilization for people on public assistance should check out
this
for a little perspective.
 
2007-03-05 09:18:48 AM
klisejo

Well, assume I did and I was on welfare. I had to buy gas. And gas has road taxes added into it. Also, I had to buy my drivers licesne, and pay for registration. All income to the gub'ment. Hell, I even had to pay taxes when I bought the damn car. So I think Ive payed for the road.

I dunno. What if I pay more taxes than you. Hardly seems fair that we both have an unlimited use of the resource. I'd hate to be subsidizing you in such a way.

You should also look up "straw man", I do not think it means what you think it means.

/done defending The Third Man, lol.
 
2007-03-05 09:19:56 AM
20/20 a few years ago did a show about state run workfare programs, I believe it was possibly Wisconsin. It was interesting. Now I'm not saying everybody on the welfare rolls is cheating, scamming, or lazy but a few of the cases they showed just had me shaking my head.

One was a white woman who was laid off from her white collar job. She had a degree. Her stance was that the program did not help her. Here's what happened. She had to work to receive her welfare. She didn't like the jobs she was getting through the program, she ended up with a better job that she found on her own. Didn't help her? She got some money while she was motivated by what she thought were crappy jobs to find one that was a good job.

The other one I remember was about an african american female who had a child. Her father was a minister and the family helped her as they could but it came to a point where they felt she needed to help herself. When they showed her child, he was always dressed to impress, as was she, again could be because of the help from her parents. But as they showed her story, she also felt the program didn't work. Why, because every job they gave her was beneath her. She'd only work it for a week or two then say it was below her. Now, one of those jobs involved something to do with an assembly plant, just plugging a part into another part. Didn't work? Hmmmm, you got paid for a job you did.

When will people wake up, these programs are not set up as employment services to find the job of your dreams. They are there to give you a helping hand, WHILE YOU TRY TO BETTER YOURSELF. We've all had our share of crappy jobs, those of us who have worked anyway. Did my share of fast food and cleaning service jobs. But those allowed me to have money, food, and be able to pursue a better job.

I don't see a problem with setting up more stringent requirements for those receiving public assisstance. Those of us that don't receive it have to deal with more bs every year with our hard earned money, revised tax laws, increased tax assessments, actually having to do the work to track down billing errors on medical claims, etc. So to say to someone receiving money from all our tax dollars, " okay, if you want this money, here's what you have to do.....you can't just do nothing" I say great idea.
 
2007-03-05 09:20:13 AM
jumacsorry mdeesnuts didn't mean to sound like a troll

Holy shiat. Try working 40hrs a week and get a 2 bedroom place. Maybe in a year or two you'll be making $12/hr and can get that nice 3 bedroom you've always dreamed of.

And I salute you for trying to keep in touch w/ your kid.

/am I feeding it? somebody help me out here
 
2007-03-05 09:20:35 AM
Bloginspanken: What might that be? Almost all the federal budget goes to handout programs

Wow.
 
2007-03-05 09:20:43 AM
stellathediver: she was a week away from getting a raise when she quit for no reason.

In most states, voluntarily leaving a job is grounds for denying unemployment benefits. I don't know from welfare because I don't have any spawn. Nor will I.
 
2007-03-05 09:22:01 AM
klisejo:
There is a drasitic difference between basic police and fire protection, which you may use once or twice in your lifetime, and getting a check for sitting on your ass once a month. It is in the best interests of the community to extend these protections to everyone.

As has been said before, it's also in the best interests of the community to help the poor and less fortunate bridge over hard times and make themselves into productive workers who have an incentive for working (ie. a living wage). Abuse of the system is unavoidable, it may just be a "cost of doing business" (just as corporate corruption seems unavoidable in the capitalist system, but must be tolerated at low levels to allow that system to work).

Sadly, welfare is not turned into real social change for the poor because to do so would cost more money *now*, god forbid. Also, I frankly think there are people who LIKE having multi-generational welfare recipients around, either because they make great political hay from them, or because they need someone to feel superior to.
 
2007-03-05 09:22:08 AM
Espertron

That argument is so ludicrous and without merit. I know it. You know it. We all know it.

By your own "argument" (and I use that term loosely): Since our nation is in debt and our government in a state of financial deficit, NO government services should be available. NO roads, healthcare, military... nothing. ALL funds and monies should go towards repaying the debt.


Um, yeah...that's exactly the point. lol
 
2007-03-05 09:22:45 AM
clouddancer:

Have you considered Early Head Start?
 
Displayed 50 of 338 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report