Do you have adblock enabled?
 
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.

(Atlanta Journal Constitution)   Remember that lottery winner that couldn't understand why she should stop collecting welfare? She's about to learn   (ajc.com ) divider line
    More: Followup, welfare fraud, Lincoln Park, Bay County, Michigan Attorney General Mike Cox, Zach Braff, public good, state Department of Human Services, felony charges  
•       •       •

36904 clicks; posted to Main » on 17 Apr 2012 at 4:10 PM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



419 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2012-04-17 05:21:32 PM  
kiwimoogle84

Like my mom used to tell me, if you steal a million dollars or steal a nickel, it's still stealing.

yep, it's the principle.

Some chick stole a $2 dress from my garage sale a couple weeks ago. Couldn't believe it. My wife noticed as she was getting in her car. She almost yelled to get her attention but you know...she looked a tad methy so why fight it.
 
2012-04-17 05:22:01 PM  

srgrobe: Fallout Zone: umad: Mikey1969: Well, it wasn't even 700,000 after taxes, something like $375,000.

You really shouldn't pull claims out of your ass. They usually stink. She won a million and ended up with a little over 700k after taxes.

No, she took the lump sum, which is a lower amount. Taxes come out of the 700k. $400k is a solid guess at her "take-home".

you get yor MBA with skullkrusher @ upstairs financial skool?


my financial acumen is pretty sound. As is me Engrish
 
2012-04-17 05:22:38 PM  

JohnTuttle: zobear: Warlordtrooper: 700,000 may seem like a lot but it really really isn't and you can't expect it to last the rest of her life.

Sitting under a mattress, no. But with her pay-out, which was probably closer to 520K

Her pay-out *was* the 700k number after taxes, based on a winning jackpot of $1 million.


Then she should at least be able to make $2600/mo conservatively and wouldn't have to work. If she actually (gasps) got a job and saved it, then she'd be able to make that last the rest of her life, no problem.
 
2012-04-17 05:22:39 PM  

skullkrusher: srgrobe: GoodyearPimp: screwzloos: So if I'm responsible and have saved enough over the years for a small medical emergency, yet due to hard times I am temporarily unable to keep food on the table for myself and my family, it's clearly better that I forfeit any safety buffer and collect food stamps in a couple months than it is to collect food stamps now.

Most would call it a "rainy day fund" or similarly generic. Hard times means it's time to use savings. You can maintain the dignity of not going on the dole.

plz try an assplain it to skullkrusher by next february. it's yor civic doodie.

hehe


:) I HAVE A 10.5% EARNINGS INVESTMENT FOR YOU!
 
2012-04-17 05:23:09 PM  

srgrobe: skullkrusher: srgrobe: GoodyearPimp: screwzloos: So if I'm responsible and have saved enough over the years for a small medical emergency, yet due to hard times I am temporarily unable to keep food on the table for myself and my family, it's clearly better that I forfeit any safety buffer and collect food stamps in a couple months than it is to collect food stamps now.

Most would call it a "rainy day fund" or similarly generic. Hard times means it's time to use savings. You can maintain the dignity of not going on the dole.

plz try an assplain it to skullkrusher by next february. it's yor civic doodie.

hehe

:) I HAVE A 10.5% EARNINGS INVESTMENT FOR YOU!


I loled
 
2012-04-17 05:23:36 PM  

akula: Warlordtrooper: Wouldn't banning her for life be counter to the purpose of welfare. What happens if she falls on hard times again. 700,000 may seem like a lot but it really really isn't and you can't expect it to last the rest of her life.

Yes, she could fall on hard times again.

However, if having $700K hard cash isn't more than enough to turn your life around on a very permanent basis, you're a complete and utter moron. That's way more than enough to cover ALL your expenses while pursuing higher education or learning a trade, with more than enough left over to start a business or invest against future hard times if you care to do so.

She's 25 years old. Most 25 year olds are just getting their lives underway. Give a random 100 25 year olds that kind of cash, and you're going to see something very interesting- some of them will be millionaires before 30, some will be living comfortably with a large nest egg when they turn 30, and some will have not one thin dime to their names within that very time span. For some reason I expect she would fall in group #3... anybody in the first two groups would have gotten off public aid immediately and gone about getting their shiat together.



Yep, you win . . . I don't even need to post anything insightful now. I'mma just go smoke my bowl now (sitting in my house, which I own).
 
2012-04-17 05:23:41 PM  

busy chillin': kiwimoogle84

Like my mom used to tell me, if you steal a million dollars or steal a nickel, it's still stealing.

yep, it's the principle.

Some chick stole a $2 dress from my garage sale a couple weeks ago. Couldn't believe it. My wife noticed as she was getting in her car. She almost yelled to get her attention but you know...she looked a tad methy so why fight it.


You fight it because thieves are degenerate bastards and need the shiat kicked out of them. $2 or $20000, doesn't matter.
 
2012-04-17 05:24:11 PM  

kiwimoogle84: akula: hinten: I don't give a flying dark about the handful of people that cheat the system for $5000. It's the price we pay for a half orderly society.

I care. That $5000 is $5000 that could have gone to somebody who needed it. I imagine it also could have covered medications for a few poor people for an entire year.

Or it could have been kept by the people who actually worked for the money.

No amount of fraud is acceptable. Some will always be present, but it is always inexcusable.

Like my mom used to tell me, if you steal a million dollars or steal a nickel, it's still stealing. Yeah, people like her are the reason this government is so damn broke. I used to see ladies with their jewelry and nice handbags come into my doctor's office and check in with me and slap down their state benefits card, when they're wearing more value than I take home in a week.



I don't necessarily disagree with your ethical and moral issues but to claim that it is 'these kind of people' that make our government go broke is exactly why I despise the outrage at this. It makes people think that a small number people unjustfiable on welfare are the reason our country is going broke. These are the same people that believe a bunch of (hundreds of thousand) Mexicans running across the border see the reason why unemployment is at 10%.

It is innumeracy of the highest order. Like I said, news that give the press, politicians, and jealous people a little twitch in their pants.
 
2012-04-17 05:24:15 PM  

akula: Mikey1969: The stupid twit should have paid cash for a house, a decent car, and put the rest in an investment that would gain her money.

No, it would be better to pay rent for a modest apartment, get a modest but reliable vehicle, and cover childcare expenses while going to school or learning some kind of trade. Get a job or not in the meantime; doesn't really matter much.

At $375K, taxes paid, she would likely not burn through more than half of that before she's qualified for a job that can pay her enough to take care of herself and her kids. That leaves a nest egg of over $150K cash money. That will jump start her retirement planning and/or give her kids a college fund to draw from on down the road.

Buying a house right off might well be a decent investment in some ways, but she'd end up blowing a major portion of that on a place that requires upkeep, insurance, and taxes. Better to not leash herself to something like that in the near term until she can afford to cover the upkeep and taxes out of ongoing regular income, not that fixed sum that isn't ever coming again.


Yeah, I was thinking along the lines of spending it on an actual investment and killing anything like a rent payment at the same time, but I see your point as well. IMHO, you spend the money before you blow through it on the inevitable 'Oh my God, I'm rich' bullshiat that we all know we'd buy, no matter how responsible we act for our fellow farkers. Yours is the better approach if the winner is able to keep the wild fling under control and play it smart. Mine works better for the person that's going to spend it either way, so that they can get some real investments out of the way first.

I would like to think that I could follow your type of plan, it's better for the long run, but it sure would be tough, I'd definitely want to lock up the extra money in some kind of investment where I couldn't pick away at it all of the time...
 
2012-04-17 05:24:20 PM  

jst3p: Ashtrey: Well, it's an account I've had since I was a kid. I hardly have any savings, but the monthly statement says 10.5%. Hell maybe I'm reading it wrong. Let's say it's 5%. That's still a damn good bit of money.

I'm pretty sure that account accrues at the rate I said, but it wasn't the point of my post.

It isn't 5% either.

You shouldn't be giving financial advice. You should be seeking it.


Wisconsin Credit Union APY's are from 0.01% - 0.50%. 5%, YOWZA... maybe he misplaced the decimal 1.05% is possible, I guess.
 
2012-04-17 05:24:23 PM  

srgrobe: skullkrusher: srgrobe: GoodyearPimp: screwzloos: So if I'm responsible and have saved enough over the years for a small medical emergency, yet due to hard times I am temporarily unable to keep food on the table for myself and my family, it's clearly better that I forfeit any safety buffer and collect food stamps in a couple months than it is to collect food stamps now.

Most would call it a "rainy day fund" or similarly generic. Hard times means it's time to use savings. You can maintain the dignity of not going on the dole.

plz try an assplain it to skullkrusher by next february. it's yor civic doodie.

hehe

:) I HAVE A 10.5% EARNINGS INVESTMENT FOR YOU!


I will take that shiat 8 days a week, primo.
 
2012-04-17 05:25:36 PM  

Mikey1969: I would like to think that I could follow your type of plan, it's better for the long run, but it sure would be tough, I'd definitely want to lock up the extra money in some kind of investment where I couldn't pick away at it all of the time...


what she should do is invest in going to college. Gonna guess that she hasn't done that.
 
2012-04-17 05:25:41 PM  
Maybe she still has more liabilities than assets.
 
2012-04-17 05:27:04 PM  
OK, so she's paid around $200K in taxes....so what? The game show basically paid that, she didn't. She still won an insane amount of money and continued to live on public assistance after winning it.

This whole argument of "well she paid back over $200Gs in taxes, so getting $5,000 back isn't bad!" is just wrong (especially if you're left with 400-500K after). She didn't pay that back, it would've been paid no matter who won it. The game show had to give someone a million dollars, she just happened to be that person that day.
 
2012-04-17 05:27:21 PM  

DBAWolflord: jst3p: Ashtrey: Well, it's an account I've had since I was a kid. I hardly have any savings, but the monthly statement says 10.5%. Hell maybe I'm reading it wrong. Let's say it's 5%. That's still a damn good bit of money.

I'm pretty sure that account accrues at the rate I said, but it wasn't the point of my post.

It isn't 5% either.

You shouldn't be giving financial advice. You should be seeking it.

Wisconsin Credit Union APY's are from 0.01% - 0.50%. 5%, YOWZA... maybe he misplaced the decimal 1.05% is possible, I guess.


Mine pays 7.5%. On the 1st $500.

/ Has $500 in savings.
 
2012-04-17 05:28:12 PM  

Ashtrey: srgrobe: Ashtrey: akula: Warlordtrooper: Well, it's an account I've had since I was a kid. I hardly have any savings, but the monthly statement says 10.5%. Hell maybe I'm reading it wrong. Let's say it's 5%. That's still a damn good bit of money.

I'm pretty sure that account accrues at the rate I said, but it wasn't the point of my post.


Perhaps you're reading .105% as 10.5%. A monthly rate of .105% (~1.25 APR) on a savings would be reasonable in this age.
 
2012-04-17 05:28:48 PM  

Jake Havechek: Is her vulva pink or red?


I bet now it's green.
 
2012-04-17 05:28:55 PM  
Silly coot. If she wants free money without working just do what thousands of other women do. Get married, make him miserable to drive him away & then file for divorce sighting emotional abandonment if you need to give any reason at all. Instant money and you don't need to give up your leech on society table you seem so desperate to keep.

/this example not from personal experience.
 
2012-04-17 05:28:58 PM  

Rent Party: DBAWolflord: jst3p: Ashtrey: Well, it's an account I've had since I was a kid. I hardly have any savings, but the monthly statement says 10.5%. Hell maybe I'm reading it wrong. Let's say it's 5%. That's still a damn good bit of money.

I'm pretty sure that account accrues at the rate I said, but it wasn't the point of my post.

It isn't 5% either.

You shouldn't be giving financial advice. You should be seeking it.

Wisconsin Credit Union APY's are from 0.01% - 0.50%. 5%, YOWZA... maybe he misplaced the decimal 1.05% is possible, I guess.

Mine pays 7.5%. On the 1st $500.

/ Has $500 in savings.


That has no bearing on the discussion we are having and I know you are smart enough to know it.
 
2012-04-17 05:29:11 PM  
Rent Party


You fight it because thieves are degenerate bastards and need the shiat kicked out of them. $2 or $20000, doesn't matter.

I agree, it still pisses me off.

FFUU Methshelle
 
2012-04-17 05:29:19 PM  

Mikey1969: 32oz High Life: She didn't have a job because she won the lottery. People who don't have jobs are eligible for food stamps. Therefore, she was eligible for food stamps.
What's so hard to understand about that?

No, people with no assets more than $5,000, excluding a car, are eligible for food stamps, job or no job.


Why is the car excluded from the calculation? Or not part of a separate calculation? Like "assets of $5000, excluding a car; or total assets of $15000"? Otherwise, you just incentivize people to pour more and more money into cars. And I'd assume rims, stereos, etc.
 
2012-04-17 05:30:02 PM  
Not defending welfare abuse here, but if billion-dollar corporations can get tax payer handouts, why can't she?
 
2012-04-17 05:30:18 PM  
YOU THINK HE CAN READ???
 
2012-04-17 05:31:15 PM  

Splish: Mikey1969: 32oz High Life: She didn't have a job because she won the lottery. People who don't have jobs are eligible for food stamps. Therefore, she was eligible for food stamps.
What's so hard to understand about that?

No, people with no assets more than $5,000, excluding a car, are eligible for food stamps, job or no job.

Why is the car excluded from the calculation? Or not part of a separate calculation? Like "assets of $5000, excluding a car; or total assets of $15000"? Otherwise, you just incentivize people to pour more and more money into cars. And I'd assume rims, stereos, etc.


Because forcing someone to sell their car to receive public assistance means they have no transportation and will have a harder time getting off public assistance.
 
2012-04-17 05:31:17 PM  
On top of the outrage we, of course, also needed a new law and regulation to capture the millions and millions of lottery winners that also continue to be on welfare. I mean, there have to be thousands or millions of those that totally justify a bunch of lawmakers doing what they do best, new laws and regulations.

I think I just saw a lawmaker with a boner.
 
2012-04-17 05:31:47 PM  

umad: Mikey1969: Well, it wasn't even 700,000 after taxes, something like $375,000.

You really shouldn't pull claims out of your ass. They usually stink. She won a million and ended up with a little over 700k after taxes.


FTFA:
"She won a $1 million jackpot on a game show, "Make Me Rich!" and chose a $735,000 lump sum, before taxes, last September."

Now, you usually get about 1/2 of that lump sum, half of close to 750 is 375, see how that works? I thought I'd seen the 375, 000 and that makes sense for those of us in the real world, but I'm seeing about half a mil on other websites, which still isn't the "over 700k after taxes" you are claiming. I'd love to see your source on this one.
 
2012-04-17 05:31:57 PM  

Mikey1969: Mine works better for the person that's going to spend it either way, so that they can get some real investments out of the way first.


No argument.

There's a big difference between the absolute smartest way to play it and a way that spend a little more frivolously, but lets one get some of that "let's blow it" out of their system.

Maybe a little nicer car than a three year old Honda, and maybe a week's trip down to Disney or something. But it's very easy to go from the occasional luxury to regular luxuries, and now that nest egg is gone.

Still, it's up to the person to realize that while they may not have been given a sum that will serve as permanent Fark You money, they still have been given enough money to change your life completely. It's tempting to think that if we don't have enough money to never work another day in our lives it isn't enough, but for most people, even a quarter million cash is enough to change things to the extent that the rest of your life will be markedly better.
 
2012-04-17 05:32:30 PM  

kiwimoogle84: akula: hinten: I don't give a flying dark about the handful of people that cheat the system for $5000. It's the price we pay for a half orderly society.

I care. That $5000 is $5000 that could have gone to somebody who needed it. I imagine it also could have covered medications for a few poor people for an entire year.

Or it could have been kept by the people who actually worked for the money.

No amount of fraud is acceptable. Some will always be present, but it is always inexcusable.

Like my mom used to tell me, if you steal a million dollars or steal a nickel, it's still stealing. Yeah, people like her are the reason this government is so damn broke. I used to see ladies with their jewelry and nice handbags come into my doctor's office and check in with me and slap down their state benefits card, when they're wearing more value than I take home in a week.


yor mom sounds...ok, i'll stop...as I said I'm a CPA and today is pretty sacred for me. hi5 skullkrusher!
 
2012-04-17 05:33:04 PM  

jst3p:
Mine pays 7.5%. On the 1st $500.

/ Has $500 in savings.

That has no bearing on the discussion we are having and I know you are smart enough to know it.


My point is: Perhaps he was confused when he made his post, and I am providing reasonable explanations for his confusion. I am being polite and helpful today. You should thank me.

Alternatively, if the silly bugger wants to earn 7.5% on the 1st $500 of his $700K, he should put it in my credit union. What the other $699,500 does is still up for discussion.
 
2012-04-17 05:34:34 PM  

Gyrfalcon: Muisak: "The state has since banned anyone with assets of more than $5,000, excluding a car, from the food stamp program."

I'm all about not helping people who don't deserve it... but wow, if they have a car, no assistance? How about if they have three kids and a fourth one on the way, they can either get "fixed" or they stop receiving benefits. Not that I want to copy china, but I'm acquainted with several families here in East Tennessee that have had more kids then they wanted in order to receive more benefits. Someone needs to put a stop to that loophole! Also, people without cars are very unlikely to find a job that would enable them to support themselves. Seems like that would just give most people the impression its easier to take the benefits and do nothing... which just seems like the wrong impression to give these people....

You need to get some education on how welfare benefits work. Also what $5000 in assets really means. Usually it's $5000 more than basic necessities--your household goods and clothes, for instance, are not included. It's assets that, if liquidated, would provide an additional $5000 in living money, so it has to be land, jewelry, etc.

Also, you don't get enough extra benefits per child to make having "extra kids" worth it, as I'm sure your so-called acquaintances discovered. Benefits aren't fixed per person in the household, with each person getting a fixed amount; they're scaled so more people actually get less per person than the baseline. They get a larger total sum; but each additional child doesn't get the same amount as the first one. So the loophole isn't as big as you seem to think.


I am a mechanic, not a social worker or an economist, you have called me on that. Knowledge is only as good as the people telling it to you, and in this case, I'd have to say they probably had some incorrect knowledge. These are the same people who claimed they didn't know you couldn't reuse a condom....

true story
 
2012-04-17 05:35:02 PM  

hinten: kiwimoogle84: akula: hinten: I don't give a flying dark about the handful of people that cheat the system for $5000. It's the price we pay for a half orderly society.

I care. That $5000 is $5000 that could have gone to somebody who needed it. I imagine it also could have covered medications for a few poor people for an entire year.

Or it could have been kept by the people who actually worked for the money.

No amount of fraud is acceptable. Some will always be present, but it is always inexcusable.

Like my mom used to tell me, if you steal a million dollars or steal a nickel, it's still stealing. Yeah, people like her are the reason this government is so damn broke. I used to see ladies with their jewelry and nice handbags come into my doctor's office and check in with me and slap down their state benefits card, when they're wearing more value than I take home in a week.


I don't necessarily disagree with your ethical and moral issues but to claim that it is 'these kind of people' that make our government go broke is exactly why I despise the outrage at this. It makes people think that a small number people unjustfiable on welfare are the reason our country is going broke. These are the same people that believe a bunch of (hundreds of thousand) Mexicans running across the border see the reason why unemployment is at 10%.

It is innumeracy of the highest order. Like I said, news that give the press, politicians, and jealous people a little twitch in their pants.


CSB:

I used to work in my insurance conpany's fraud department. Doctors who make a half million a year already upcoding all their claims to steal an extra hundred thousand dollars or so every year. The principle is this- if you see your doc for a simple rx refill, that's billed as a 99211, or let's just say, a 1. If you have 8 different diagnoses, four tests run and it takes an hour, that's a 5. These doctors would consistently bill 4 or 5's for EVERY PATIENT. It was my job to look for trends in doctors then when I found one who NEVER billed below a 2, we audited them.

Thieves, all of them. And it doesn't have to be many, but it does add up.

I also agree with drug testing for welfare recipients. If you can't afford to feed your kids, you sure as hell can't afford drugs. Get clean and then we'll help you. We'll even help you get clean. A small dent in the gov't hole is still a dent.

Basically, don't take advantage, mmmmkay?

/endrant
 
2012-04-17 05:35:14 PM  

Rent Party: My point is: Perhaps he was confused when he made his post, and I am providing reasonable explanations for his confusion. I am being polite and helpful today. You should thank me.


Fair enough, but this being fark I am not allowed to be civil, so get bent!
 
2012-04-17 05:36:23 PM  

Mikey1969: umad: Mikey1969: Well, it wasn't even 700,000 after taxes, something like $375,000.

You really shouldn't pull claims out of your ass. They usually stink. She won a million and ended up with a little over 700k after taxes.

FTFA:
"She won a $1 million jackpot on a game show, "Make Me Rich!" and chose a $735,000 lump sum, before taxes, last September."

Now, you usually get about 1/2 of that lump sum, half of close to 750 is 375, see how that works? I thought I'd seen the 375, 000 and that makes sense for those of us in the real world, but I'm seeing about half a mil on other websites, which still isn't the "over 700k after taxes" you are claiming. I'd love to see your source on this one.


It's almost $520K (new window)
 
2012-04-17 05:36:25 PM  

kiwimoogle84: I also agree with drug testing for welfare recipients. If you can't afford to feed your kids, you sure as hell can't afford drugs. Get clean and then we'll help you. We'll even help you get clean. A small dent in the gov't hole is still a dent.


Yeah, let the kids starve, right?
 
2012-04-17 05:37:01 PM  

hinten: On top of the outrage we, of course, also needed a new law and regulation to capture the millions and millions of lottery winners that also continue to be on welfare. I mean, there have to be thousands or millions of those that totally justify a bunch of lawmakers doing what they do best, new laws and regulations.

I think I just saw a lawmaker with a boner.


I bet they literally spent more public funds writing and passing that legislation than they'll ever recoup from it.
 
2012-04-17 05:37:03 PM  

srgrobe: kiwimoogle84: akula: hinten: I don't give a flying dark about the handful of people that cheat the system for $5000. It's the price we pay for a half orderly society.

I care. That $5000 is $5000 that could have gone to somebody who needed it. I imagine it also could have covered medications for a few poor people for an entire year.

Or it could have been kept by the people who actually worked for the money.

No amount of fraud is acceptable. Some will always be present, but it is always inexcusable.

Like my mom used to tell me, if you steal a million dollars or steal a nickel, it's still stealing. Yeah, people like her are the reason this government is so damn broke. I used to see ladies with their jewelry and nice handbags come into my doctor's office and check in with me and slap down their state benefits card, when they're wearing more value than I take home in a week.

yor mom sounds...ok, i'll stop...as I said I'm a CPA and today is pretty sacred for me. hi5 skullkrusher!


DOROTHY MANTOOTH IS A SAINT
 
2012-04-17 05:37:20 PM  
I just remember this biatch saying something along the lines of, "I bought a house and a car, I have bills to pay, I don't see what's wrong with it." She got caught gaming the system.
 
2012-04-17 05:37:45 PM  

Trance750: Not defending welfare abuse here, but if billion-dollar corporations can get tax payer handouts, why can't she?


Handouts for everyone! Giving tax dollars to one undeserving group obviously means we should give them to all undeserving groups!

I'm an idiot!
 
2012-04-17 05:37:53 PM  

jst3p: kiwimoogle84: I also agree with drug testing for welfare recipients. If you can't afford to feed your kids, you sure as hell can't afford drugs. Get clean and then we'll help you. We'll even help you get clean. A small dent in the gov't hole is still a dent.

Yeah, let the kids starve, right?


They're starving anyway when their dads are snorting all the assistance money.
 
2012-04-17 05:38:22 PM  

SharkTrager: screwzloos: "The state has since banned anyone with assets of more than $5,000, excluding a car, from the food stamp program."

So if I'm responsible and have saved enough over the years for a small medical emergency, yet due to hard times I am temporarily unable to keep food on the table for myself and my family, it's clearly better that I forfeit any safety buffer and collect food stamps in a couple months than it is to collect food stamps now.

Not to defend the lottery winner, as she should've been making money on investments, but if you're not actively earning income, you're getting poorer. $5000 seems to be the cutoff for just how poor Michigan wants you to be.

Did you just try to say that you shouldn't have to use your emergency savings in the event of an emergency, because then you wouldn't have any emergency savings?


If there's no work available, should emergency savings that help me avoid declaring bankruptcy if I break a leg be the same lump of money I use to feed my family, when there are already widely used social services in place to support exactly that? Do I really have to pick just one?

Don't get me wrong, I'm all for libertarian ideals, but the services are there and paid for, and they aren't going away any time soon. I just don't think it's fair to limit food stamps to those only at the very bottom of the barrel. It's already too late once you get to that point, and there's no turning back if anything else comes up. Unemployment benefits should come with food stamps, no matter what you own.
 
2012-04-17 05:38:32 PM  

jst3p: Rent Party: My point is: Perhaps he was confused when he made his post, and I am providing reasonable explanations for his confusion. I am being polite and helpful today. You should thank me.

Fair enough, but this being fark I am not allowed to be civil, so get bent!


I will restrain my witty repartee for a searing riposte on the morn! Good day to you, Sir!
 
2012-04-17 05:38:48 PM  

srgrobe: Ashtrey: srgrobe: Ashtrey: akula: Warlordtrooper: Wouldn't banning her for life be counter to the purpose of welfare. What happens if she falls on hard times again. 700,000 may seem like a lot but it really really isn't and you can't expect it to last the rest of her life.

Yes, she could fall on hard times again.

However, if having $700K hard cash isn't more than enough to turn your life around on a very permanent basis, you're a complete and utter moron. That's way more than enough to cover ALL your expenses while pursuing higher education or learning a trade, with more than enough left over to start a business or invest against future hard times if you care to do so.

She's 25 years old. Most 25 year olds are just getting their lives underway. Give a random 100 25 year olds that kind of cash, and you're going to see something very interesting- some of them will be millionaires before 30, some will be living comfortably with a large nest egg when they turn 30, and some will have not one thin dime to their names within that very time span. For some reason I expect she would fall in group #3... anybody in the first two groups would have gotten off public aid immediately and gone about getting their shiat together.

I figure if I hit the lottery on the odd time I play, just consider interest on principle income and don't touch that golden goose.

Hell if I put $750,000 in savings at 10% (my credit union has 10.5%) that's an extra $75k a year. I could live well in a lot of the world on that.

yor credit union, nor nobody has 10.5% ace

Well, it's an account I've had since I was a kid. I hardly have any savings, but the monthly statement says 10.5%. Hell maybe I'm reading it wrong. Let's say it's 5%. That's still a damn good bit of money.

I'm pretty sure that account accrues at the rate I said, but it wasn't the point of my post.

i tell clients like you just to debit the debit the credit and pocket the cash. and again, assplain to skullkrusher by february or i ...


wtfamireading.jpg
 
2012-04-17 05:39:16 PM  

jst3p: chookbillion: $5K in assets isn't much for a cut-off for foodstamps. What if you are upside-down on a house, lose your job, and can't feed the kids? You have to sell the house at a loss and then be homeless and hungry? Talk about kicking someone when they're down.

If you are "upside down" you owe more than it is worth. That isn't an asset.


Actually, that did dawn on me after I thought about it. I'm not very bright.
 
2012-04-17 05:39:49 PM  

Evil Kirk vs Bad Ash: She collected $5,475 in benefits from the state.
She paid $265,000 in taxes to the state.

I'm not saying she's not a complete and total idiot, but for farks sake, why the outrage? Make her pay it back and be done with it.


That's like saying that shoplifting groceries should be okay if you also bought stuff at the same store later on.
 
2012-04-17 05:40:05 PM  

kiwimoogle84: jst3p: kiwimoogle84: I also agree with drug testing for welfare recipients. If you can't afford to feed your kids, you sure as hell can't afford drugs. Get clean and then we'll help you. We'll even help you get clean. A small dent in the gov't hole is still a dent.

Yeah, let the kids starve, right?

They're starving anyway when their dads are snorting all the assistance money.


Citation needed.


/you sound kinda dumb.
//false dichotomy is false
///they are feeding their kids and buying drugs
////as evidenced by the fact that kids don't routinely starve to death in the US
 
2012-04-17 05:40:40 PM  

jst3p: kiwimoogle84: I also agree with drug testing for welfare recipients. If you can't afford to feed your kids, you sure as hell can't afford drugs. Get clean and then we'll help you. We'll even help you get clean. A small dent in the gov't hole is still a dent.

Yeah, let the kids starve, right?


If the parents are drug abusers on welfare... it's the humane thing to do.
 
2012-04-17 05:41:39 PM  

Dow Jones and the Temple of Doom: Leroy Fick!! The dude wasted a million dollars on pawn shop junk and fireworks.


Winning a million dollars may make someone rich, but it doesn't make them smart.
They lost it all within a year. They're both in prison now

I think the MegaMillions threads had a comment that 90% of jackpot winners lose it all within 5 years. I'd feel comfortable saying that anyone who takes the jackpot over the annuity has more dollars than sense.
 
2012-04-17 05:42:07 PM  

Trance750: Not defending welfare abuse here, but if billion-dollar corporations can get tax payer handouts, why can't she?


Because she doesn't employ thousands of people.
 
2012-04-17 05:42:32 PM  
Dear Lord, please give me the opportunity to show that I can be seriously wealthy and socially responsible at the same time.

Thanks muchly.

In the name of Jesus, Amen

farkin_Gary
 
2012-04-17 05:42:38 PM  

skullkrusher: Gyrfalcon: slc11082: One Bad Apple: slc11082: Wow a white person on welfare.

Never thought I'd see one of those.

Why ? Won't Wal-Mart let you buy mirrors with food stamps ?

I'm just saying it's mostly the black and mexicans on welfare.

You can say it as much as you want, but you're still wrong.

yeah. I don't think she's white.


Everyone in Lincoln Park is white.
 
Displayed 50 of 419 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter








In Other Media
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report