• You must be logged in to see or use the Shoutbox. Besides, if you haven't registered, you really should. It's quick and it will make your life a little better. Trust me. So just register and make yourself at home with like-minded individuals who share either your morbid curiousity or sense of gallows humor.

HagarTheHorrible

Big 'Ol Pussy
Welfare is an issue which arouses strong feelings - on both sides of the Atlantic - so here is a thread where people can sound off about it as much as they like. My own views inevitably have a UK perspective, but I think that many of the issues may well be applicable on both sides of the pond.

I believe that any decent and relatively wealthy society - which applies to both UK and US - ought to be able to take care of it's own. And it is a fact that there will always be periods of higher unemployment when there are simply not enough jobs to go around, there will always be those too sick or disabled to work, and there will always be those who have to settle temporarily for jobs that simply don't pay enough to support their families. The rest of society, via welfare funded by taxpayers, has a moral duty to support these through difficult times - AS LONG AS THEY ARE PREPARED TO GET OFF THEIR ASSES AND HELP THEMSELVES IF AND WHEN THEY CAN - an important proviso. The alternative would be to leave those who hit hard times homeless and begging on the streets, which would surely be a disgusting spectacle in wealthy nations such as ours. So welfare not only helps those in need, it also helps prevent our nations from looking totally shit.

And yes, as with just about any mechanism ever devised that involves payments of any kind, there will be scammers. And there will be those who seek to abuse the system. But no system is ever likely to be perfect enough to prevent that. The best we can do is crack down on it as much as possible, and prosecute and jail those caught. It is not an excuse for doing away with the system.

There is much disinformation and bullshit about this subject.

Here in the UK, we constantly hear stories about this guy down the pub who lives on the dole but has two new cars and three foreign holidays every year, etc,etc. Most of the time such stories are absolute bollocks or grossly exaggerated. People opposed to welfare do sometimes - shock horror - INVENT such stories to make a case. Meanwhile, the right wing press constantly whips up hatred against the welfare system itself, seeking to convince readers all too willing to believe, that the system is predominantly being used by charlatans to defraud taxpayers. They do this by investigating the worst examples of abuse committed by individuals, plastering them all over the front pages, and linking them to anti-welfare tirades, thereby convincing their readers that these fraudsters are the norm and that this is what every welfare claimant is doing, which is total bullshit.

We now have a large section of the electorate convinced that everyone on welfare is an undeserving scrounger, without themselves ever having had any personal knowledge of the system at all. And the degree of their malice combined with ignorance is quite breathtaking to behold for those of us who have known people in genuine hardship.

And as for who is defrauding taxpayers the most, here in the UK are some very revealing stats - not sure if the situation is mirrored in the US or not. But in the UK some £5 billion is thought to be being lost via the welfare system every year as a result of fraud and error. Two thirds of that is due to errors on the part of those administering a system which has grown ridiculously complex. So only about £1.7 billion is actually being lost to welfare fraud. Set against that is the fact that some £25 billion is being lost due to tax evasion by mostly quite wealthy people. Yet our government pays for ten times as many staff to investigate that £1.7 billion welfare fraud, than it pays to investigate the £25 billions lost through tax evasion.

It is all to do with politics, scapegoating of the poor, and governments being in the pockets of their rich mates, at least in the UK anyway.
 
My take on welfare is simple, it needs to be a hand-up not a hand-out. I have no problem helping people and families who have hit a rough patch, because who knows for sure how long each of us will be going along fine and then BAM, we need help. BUT, I would like it to only be a helping hand and not a lifestyle.

I believe that the majority of people who end up needing and receiving welfare do so with the right intentions and use it as the helping hand that it is intended to be but we need to crack down harder on those who have made it a lifestyle. I know of a family, they live a couple of miles from me, welfare is their job, for generations now, THAT shit needs to stop. I have met females get pregnant on a schedule to avoid the work search requirements associated with welfare, I lived in a state that if your child was under 2 you didn't have to work or look for work and females would have their children spaced about 2 and a half years apart. That is some bullshit.

But now, a family who falls on hard times and needs help, or even a family who has working adults but still can't make ends meet, they need to be helped both monetarily and through any type of training and/or job placement that could be offered. I like the idea of helping people who help themselves, I hate the idea of helping people who are simply "takers" and leeches.
 
As a hardworking taxpayer myself, I myself do not want to pay for people to sit around on their asses as a lifestyle choice at my expense either. If someone hits hard times, yeah I will willingly pay my dues to help support them as long as they do all they can to get themselves out of the shite they are in and make the effort. I don't want to pay my taxes to support lazy asses sitting around smoking dope all day.

I also accept that some people may be too sick or disabled to work, and I am happy to support them for as long as they are so afflicted.

I don't think that you and I really disagree all that much thus far, @Krystal.

But there is another side to welfare in the UK certainly that I resent paying my taxes for - to fund handouts for wealthy pensioners who clearly don't need it and are far better off than most of us working mugs who are slaving away to pay for it. Welfare should never go to those who don't need it. In the UK over half of all welfare payments go to pensioners. Yet two thirds of them are better off already than the majority of working taxpayers who are funding this, and doing so in the knowledge that such handouts are unlikely to be there when WE retire.

I pay taxes for welfare willingly on two conditions.

1. Recipients do all they can, if and when they can, and as soon as they can, to start supporting themselves.

2. Only those who need it get what I am paying for with my taxes.
 
As a hardworking taxpayer myself, I myself do not want to pay for people to sit around on their asses as a lifestyle choice at my expense either. If someone hits hard times, yeah I will willingly pay my dues to help support them as long as they do all they can to get themselves out of the shite they are in and make the effort. I don't want to pay my taxes to support lazy asses sitting around smoking dope all day.

I also accept that some people may be too sick or disabled to work, and I am happy to support them for as long as they are so afflicted.

I don't think that you and I really disagree all that much thus far, @Krystal.

But there is another side to welfare in the UK certainly that I resent paying my taxes for - to fund handouts for wealthy pensioners who clearly don't need it and are far better off than most of us working mugs who are slaving away to pay for it. Welfare should never go to those who don't need it. In the UK over half of all welfare payments go to pensioners. Yet two thirds of them are better off already than the majority of working taxpayers who are funding this, and doing so in the knowledge that such handouts are unlikely to be there when WE retire.

I pay taxes for welfare willingly on two conditions.

1. Recipients do all they can, if and when they can, and as soon as they can, to start supporting themselves.

2. Only those who need it get what I am paying for with my taxes.
The Daily Mail is the worst culprit for stirring up the hatred lol. What do you think of the Polish mothers being paid child benefit because their husbands live in Britain? It was cut from the high earning couples, and the way they've worked it out is stupid. I'm sure it's not just the Polish being paid, but that's who the DM were focusing on.

How about Katie Price claiming for Harvey? She said it costs around £1000 a day just for travel to his school. He has a driver and has to have a nurse accompanying him. He's entitled to the help obviously. Although, I think his dad should be contributing, he's a cunt though. If he was my son and I had her money he'd be getting the best care possible. I think she could raise the cash to open a special school closer to her main home, instead of having to send him so far every day.

Benefit fraud is a drop in the ocean compared to the money that's lost through tax evasion. All you have to do is take the head of hmrc out to dinner and he'll let you slide lol.
 
I can't judge. I'm not in the position to know who is bilking the system and who genuinely needs it.
Until I am given such powers, I say better to give to all that are eligible than to deny even one person that can't fend for themselves.


By the grace of god, there go I.
 
The Daily Mail is the worst culprit for stirring up the hatred lol. What do you think of the Polish mothers being paid child benefit because their husbands live in Britain? It was cut from the high earning couples, and the way they've worked it out is stupid. I'm sure it's not just the Polish being paid, but that's who the DM were focusing on.
I agree about the Daily Mail.

Insofar as child benefits to Polish mothers are concerned - if they and their children are living here, and especially if their husbands are working and contributing their taxes here, they should get the money. But not if mothers and children are not even living in the country.

But what the Mail doesn't tell people is that supposed "winter fuel payments" are leaving the country and going into the pockets of wealthy retirees living in the south of Spain or Portugal - not places renowned for their harsh winters. Curious how the Mail has nothing to say about this scandal. But then, in this case the recipients are neither poor nor foreign, but wealthy people who don't even need the fucking money. And as such, they are not on the Mail's hate list.

Benefit fraud is a drop in the ocean compared to the money that's lost through tax evasion. All you have to do is take the head of hmrc out to dinner and he'll let you slide lol.
Amen to that. In fact, many of the biggest tax dodgers here give large donations to the Conservative Party, and end up getting ministerial positions or seats in the House of Lords. Labour in recent years hasn't been a lot better. The UK is corrupt from top to bottom. But most of it is hidden behind a veneer of respectability and surrepticious nods and winks.
 
I'm disabled and on welfare, and I can tell you one thing for sure: My biggest ambition is to get a job, to support myself, to be really and truly independent. At 31 years old and with the ability to go to college, I have a good chance of doing it--I might be employed as soon as a year from now, if I can finish my degree. I don't know if I can work full-time, but I think I could manage at least part-time, and maybe since it'll be a skilled job, that'll be enough so that I can say goodbye to welfare forever.

And that's what a lot of us want. We want to work, even if we can't work full-time. Those of us who don't work, often volunteer. When I did volunteer work at the food pantry, many of the other volunteers were also either disabled or elderly. A person just can't sit around and do nothing; it drives them crazy. We have to have some kind of meaningful, useful activity. We want job training, and decent accommodations so that we can work. A person in a wheelchair can't work on the fourth floor unless there's an elevator... the elevator makes the big difference between working and not.

Some disabled people really haven't got a hope of working, no matter how much training they get or how well-adapted their workplace is. But even those people want to do useful things with their lives. Sometimes volunteer work, or social activity, or just going out and being part of their community. We don't want to sit at home on welfare for the simple reason that like anybody else, we want to live our lives and follow our dreams. Give us a way to get off welfare, or if that's not possible, let us be a part of your communities. You won't be sorry.
 
@Krystal commented:
I know of a family, they live a couple of miles from me, welfare is their job, for generations now, THAT shit needs to stop. I have met females get pregnant on a schedule to avoid the work search requirements associated with welfare, I lived in a state that if your child was under 2 you didn't have to work or look for work and females would have their children spaced about 2 and a half years apart. That is some bullshit.

Wow, I forgot this thread was even here. Thanks for bumping it, Wolfie!

Krystal, you don't happen to know if that family ever lived in CA, do you, lol? You nailed it down with brass tacks.

Li'l lengthy but requires backstory to get the *full* effect: I dated a really neat guy a lifetime ago I still talk to every couple of months (he's 20 yrs. my senior) who ended up retiring from GM (General Motors) on an awesome contract he was grandfathered in on. This man was your typical, hard-working, All-America cowboy type who (and I'm not kidding, he got a special award for this at his retirement banquet) never missed a day of work in 30 yrs. Fire, flood, Bubonic Plague, or famine, you could find him at the supervisor's station on the assembly line like clockwork.

Enter his son (my age), who ended up "in the family way" with his gf in h.s. (he was *not* pleased), and my friend with the amazing work ethic (a great dad but in NO way a financial enabler who handed out his duckets to reward irresponsibility), ends up with a son, d.i.l. and their first born on welfare. Son starts working cash jobs on the side and soon they're raking in more than if they were a working, reasonably moderate, two income household. His dad is furious, doing everything he possibly can to get both of them job-training through GM's family and EFAP (Employee Fam Asst. Program, heh E-FAP) through the union, etc. He is disappointed, disgusted and humiliated, but still loves his son. A LOT (not even his true bio son, married his mom when she was already pregnant).

Soon, baby #2 becomes a reality. Cha-ching! Now we have double WIC benefits taking care of preggers mom (incl. for 2 yrs. after #2 is born) on top of the food stamps, the free medical, dental and optical care for the fam., the cash for the bills, and all the $$ sonny boy is making on the side. In the meantime, my friend, who was ready to stroke out at any second, finds out his d.i.l. is 3rd generation welfare, the whole fam damily - both sides - lock, stock and barrel (he STILL hasn't stopped grumbling/grousing about it to this day).

Within the next year, sonny boy, who has now built his own $30K/yr. cash-only, tree trimming business on the CA taxpayer dollar, falls out of a tree and goes to the hospital. Wifey, who's so welfare (+$$) spoiled she can't even be bothered to get off her ass and learn how to drive to get her driver's license, frets and stews, 'Whatever shall I do without all the extra $$ from the tree business?' *dramatic back hand on forehead* Mom and grandma say, 'We know, honey, have another one! By that time he'll be back at work, and you'll have the extra money, keep your double WIC and bump up your food stamps!' Problem solved. LIFE. IS. GOOD.

During #3's toddlerhood, the State of California did a little "welfare reform" to try and put a stop to the generational, public welfare drain that was sucking the life blood out of the program for people who really needed it (already mega-stressed by a huge, additional influx of immigrants from Asian countries at that time), so they made a law that says once your youngest child is kindergarten age (5), no more free rides - your ass goes to work and you say bye bye to the gub'ment gravy train.

Guess how many years apart the next three grandkids are? And this is probably just a coincidence...but as of last month, 4 - count 'em 4 - of the 6 grands with "well-spaced" kids (his gg's) are ALSO still sucking off the CA gub'ment teat! Isn't that a hoot? (sings score from "Fiddler on the Roof" - "Tra-di-tion! Tradition!") :singing:

Ah, I just love a good, heart-warming family story. So far, FOUR generations of hard-mooching welfare recipients who no longer have to gather 'round the ol' mailbox to celebrate that monthly check, full healthcare benefits card and all the food stamps coming in every month thanks to the world of Tech. It's all done automatically now and all you have to do is have a bank account and show up in person with your ID *once* to get your EBT/Vision card which is reloaded monthly. I'm SO glad they don't have to stress themselves out by walking to that mailbox anymore. That takes effort, and gods forbid, we don't want this family to break a sweat (or a leg waddling down the sidewalk).

Needless to say, my friend, who is constantly being stopped and asked by strangers if he's the guy who plays "the World's Most Interesting Man" (looks like his twin and def. still as "thirsty", lol) is not a very interesting man when it comes to venting about his broken heart over his son's choices. He'll take that regret to his deathbed. So, IME, it's not just the hard-working taxpayer who takes it in the ass to support the parasites who give the whole program a bad name and make it a JOKE of a voter issue quandary, it's also the *real people* involved in and around the money-leeching game players in this country who milk the system and laugh in its face with every single bite of steak and lobster tail they poke in their fat f**king mouths (in this case) while the kids grow up on hot dogs and Kool Aid. Never had seen a 10-month-old baby drinking red Kool Aid out of a bottle before or since I saw #3 doing it while crawling around taking her nasty bottle away from the cat. Was kinda sickening actually. Parting tidbit - guess who STILL can't be bothered to learn how to drive and get her license? 'Murica! I love it! Smdhlol.
 
Last edited:
Yes, @gatekeeper, those are the kind of people who give welfare a bad name, the kind of people who are exploited by the right wing press to attack the very concept of welfare and make out that such cases are typical.

But in my experience, the majority of needy welfare claimants are genuine. Most have worked - legitimately in jobs where they pay their taxes - before, and will do so again.

Like I have said, doing all you can to help yourself out of your difficulties is and should be an important part of the deal. A helping hand through hard times and not a hand out. In the political buzzword of the day over here, welfare should never be allowed to be "a lifestyle choice".

One aspect of your tale, Gatekeeper, is this dude on welfare working cash in hand whilst still claiming welfare, and presumably not declaring his earnings? Is that not treated as welfare fraud over there? It is here, and there are even hotlines for people to report it. And we have paid investigators working for the welfare system whose job it is to investigate and gather evidence against such people for prosecution. Few people here end up doing that on a permanent basis or for very long before the snoops get on their tail. And they often end up in court facing jail or large fines, as well as having to repay thousands in welfare that they claimed.

Also, even where there are children involved, when it comes to couples, one of them is still obligated to actively seek work here, and under our system now must prove he is doing so by offering evidence of jobs applied for and interviews attended. And if they remain out of work for long, they can be ordered to sit training courses or voluntary work to gain experience, as a condition of continued welfare payments. And we have a system of financial sanctions against those who don't do all this to the letter, so stringently enforced that people are having their welfare stopped for weeks on end for the most minor infractions.

In one case here, a man with learning difficulties who struggles to tell the time had his welfare stopped for four weeks for being four minutes late to an appointment with an advisor. Others have been sanctioned for missing such appointments due to sickness, hospitalisation, or attending family funerals, and even for attending actual job interviews instead!

So the sanctions are being imposed here under almost any pretext with sadistic relish by state employees on a power trip. Obviously, this is not going to make it at all easy for genuine shirkers either, though. So welfare as a lifestyle choice is a much tougher option here these days than working for a living. Only an idiot would choose to put themselves at the mercy of our system if they can in any way avoid it.
 
Last edited:
@HagarTheHorrible , we have Welfare Fraud hotlines, here, too, and sometimes, people are actually prosecuted via the tips they received from it which I think is a great thing. I personally can't think of a state I've been in, or that *I* know of anyway (I've traveled the whole western half of the U.S. and a couple of states in the south, one on the east coast) who hasn't got a WF hotline in place. In my friend's case however, as I mentioned, he himself would not give them any cash support whatsoever (everything else but) and stayed furious and embarrassed over what his son and d.i.l. were doing, but he wasn't the type to send them to jail/prison. The thought of his grandkids having to go into foster care or some other "Children in Need of Care" situation wasn't something he would ever consider, and, he's the type who constantly says to himself, "Where did I go wrong?", and unduly blames himself. Both he and his ex lived for their son and daughter (incl. teaching them to work for what they wanted).

I like that you describe the U.K. seems to be staying more on top of things than we do, but it sounds as if there's still badly needed funds going out to people outside the U.K. where it doesn't seem those funds belong (those monies need to be put back in the home economy, IMO). I know GB is a hub where a lot of folks from different countries come to work, but it doesn't seem right to use U.K. taxpayer dollars to support families who don't live there. Seems like an unfair burden on the taxpayer, IMO. I guess there's really no perfect system anywhere, but ours could certainly use a major overhaul/kick in the butt. We've got subsidized work programs and fully subbed child care for working parents, fully paid college programs and other resources out the butt, but so many are underutilized by the types like the family I mentioned in favor of just sitting, eating, watching tv and existing.:grumpy:


ETA: I've mentioned this once before, but in order for me to leave my very abusive dtr.'s father at 19, I had to use our welfare/public assistance program myself and am still grateful it was there when I needed it. It was the worst, most embarrassing 3 mos. of my life. I was so humiliated by it, I used the food stamps to buy groceries in the next county where no one knew me, hung my head, and got in and out as quickly as I could. I swore I'd never have to do that again, and so far, aces.
 
Last edited:
I'm disabled and on welfare, and I can tell you one thing for sure: My biggest ambition is to get a job, to support myself, to be really and truly independent. At 31 years old and with the ability to go to college, I have a good chance of doing it--I might be employed as soon as a year from now, if I can finish my degree. I don't know if I can work full-time, but I think I could manage at least part-time, and maybe since it'll be a skilled job, that'll be enough so that I can say goodbye to welfare forever.

And that's what a lot of us want. We want to work, even if we can't work full-time. Those of us who don't work, often volunteer. When I did volunteer work at the food pantry, many of the other volunteers were also either disabled or elderly. A person just can't sit around and do nothing; it drives them crazy. We have to have some kind of meaningful, useful activity. We want job training, and decent accommodations so that we can work. A person in a wheelchair can't work on the fourth floor unless there's an elevator... the elevator makes the big difference between working and not.

Some disabled people really haven't got a hope of working, no matter how much training they get or how well-adapted their workplace is. But even those people want to do useful things with their lives. Sometimes volunteer work, or social activity, or just going out and being part of their community. We don't want to sit at home on welfare for the simple reason that like anybody else, we want to live our lives and follow our dreams. Give us a way to get off welfare, or if that's not possible, let us be a part of your communities. You won't be sorry.
A person in a wheelchair shouldn't be working somewhere they need to use a lift in case there's a fire. 'elf n safety lol.
 
A person in a wheelchair shouldn't be working somewhere they need to use a lift in case there's a fire. 'elf n safety lol.

Interesting you mention that. I remember a few 9/11 news reports that at least one person that was trapped in an upper floor of one of the Towers was in a wheelchair. Not sure which company he worked for, though. I'm guessing he wasn't the only one.
 
Last edited:
I like that you describe the U.K. seems to be staying more on top of things than we do.....
Perhaps, but an awful lot of innocent people are being tarred with the same brush and unfairly sanctioned on the smallest pretexts. When people are being sentenced to no income at all for weeks on end because they were actually attending a job interview, or were sick, or were bereaved and attending the funeral of a loved one, instead of meeting an employment advisor, that amounts to state-sanctioned persecution by malicious turds on a power trip. And when someone is denied an income for four weeks because he was 4 minutes late for an appointment - incidentally he was found freezing and cold in an unlit and unheated home and not having eaten for five days - then we have state sanctioned persecution of the poor, with little attempt to discern between those who are taking the piss and deserve sanctions, and the rest.


ETA: I've mentioned this once before, but in order for me to leave my very abusive dtr.'s father at 19, I had to use our welfare/public assistance program myself and am still grateful it was there when I needed it. It was the worst, most embarrassing 3 mos. of my life. I was so humiliated by it, I used the food stamps to buy groceries in the next county where no one knew me, hung my head, and got in out as quickly as I could. I swore I'd never have to do that again, and so far, aces.

That sense of shame you speak of was once the norm here. But the rot set in in the 1980s when we had mass unemployment. Whole neighbourheads contained more people out of work than in it. Welfare support became normalised for many. Since then, the British economy has been perverted into one where the only road to riches is to own things. Working for a living results in most of your money being handed to those who own things - landlords, mortgage companies, utilities, etc. The cost of living here - rent, house prices, gas, electricity, water, fuel, food - have gone through the roof whilst wages have not kept pace at all. And many more jobs are part time or low wage only. 60% of working age welfare claimants here now actually work. They are not lazy bastards sat on their asses. When society creates the kind of economy where even hard work does not enable millions to live without some welfare support, that too normalises welfare support for many, and erodes the sense of shame. It replaces that sense of shame with a sense of anger at a fucked up economy that fails to reward hard work.
 
A person in a wheelchair shouldn't be working somewhere they need to use a lift in case there's a fire. 'elf n safety lol.
Not really... I get what you mean, sure, that you wouldn't want to be in a wheelchair on the fourth floor with a fire in the building. But there's more to accessibility than elevators--there has to be. You can try to discourage people in wheelchairs from working on the fourth floor, but there'll still be people visiting the fourth floor in wheelchairs, etc., and you've got to plan for that. What you would usually do, if you were in a wheelchair and there was a fire and no ramps, would be to go to the stairway that's the fire escape for your floor, go to the landing, and wait there while your co-worker notifies the firemen that you are on the landing. Why do you think they learn how to safely carry people? It's not just for people who are passed out from smoke; it's for people who couldn't walk to begin with. I don't know if they'd carry your wheelchair too if it was a light-weight manual one; I guess it depends on the situation.

Provided there are not too many disabled people working in the same building (this is why buildings with high disabled populations, like nursing homes, are often built single-story), this is as safe a fire plan as you are going to get. And personally, as far as risks associated with a disability go, I think it's a comparatively minor one. Maybe enough to justify always carrying a cell phone, though, in case your co-worker panicked and forgot to tell the fire department you were up there.

I really don't think that "It's on the fourth floor and I use a wheelchair" is enough of a reason not to take a job, provided they have a reasonably reliable elevator. There are far more risks from sitting at home and frying your brain on daytime TV.
 
Last edited:
it needs to be a hand-up not a hand-out
Well said!
When I was in college, I was a single mom of my son who has cystic fibrosis. I had a job with benefits, but it just wasn't enough to take care of everything. I went on welfare: collected about $80 a month in food stamps, medical (supplement to my work insurance) for my son, and got a whopping $47 in cash benefits. Of course, this was in 1995/1996. It was enough to get me over the hump until I finished school. Once I finished school and (fortunately) got hired right away in my new career, I informed the welfare and have not used it since. I worked my ass off during school. I never had a day off, no cable TV, the crappiest of crap cars, no new clothes, hand me downs for my son, ramen noodles A LOT, and a happy meal from McDonalds was a TREAT, not a daily meal. Mostly it was so he could eat and play on the playground while I studied, but that's another story. LOL! I was really happy to have the assistance, but I am REALLY glad I no longer need or depend on it.
I know a couple that has been married for over 20 years, and they have been on some sort of assistance the whole time. I chalk it up to laziness, plain and simple. They have eight (yes, 8) kids. More money. Their oldest is the same age as my son and is going down the same path as his parents. Why not? It worked for them all these years. Go to school. Work weird hours. GO WITHOUT some things until you EARN them. That's my philosophy.
 
Long term welfare is the most efficient form of control that has been devised by man.
It removes self-worth and replaces self-respect with insecurities that become a subservient mentality.
It's like breaking in a wild horse, first you touch 'em while handing out a carrot, move up to apple and a halter...
BAM, break down their spirit and ride the hell out of 'em.

Say, entitlement sounds more like a Politically Correct form of slavery.
If folks agree to long term welfare, does that mean voluntary slavery is morally acceptable in a modern liberal society?
Problem is, all Socialist governments have the de facto monopoly with this new industry.

Guess we'd have to move to the Mid East or Africa if we want to compete.
Let's not piss off any more folks here and mention how woman are treated in the East since Islamic radicals have surpassed the old world culture of the Oriental male dominance.

My reasoning? Simple, welfare is an industry, because slavery is so profitable.
 
Last edited:
Welfare is and ought to be no more than helping people through hard times as well as those too sick to help themselves. This is an alternative to starvation and begging in the streets.

It is generally not socialists nor true left wingers of any stripe who wish to turn it into bona fide slavery - ie making them work for private companies without those companies paying them a penny, to "earn" their welfare. This just turns them into state slaves farmed out to the government's rich friends to exploit for free. These are the favoured panaceas of more right wing politicians mostly. And indeed, anything remotely resembling economic slavery, whereby the masses toil for modest rewards so that the wealthy few can grow rich off their backs, in no way looks like anything that a socialist would espouse.

Welfare is a result of a failed economy mostly, protecting the victims of that failure from terrible suffering and even death. It is not of itself a form of slavery unless people are deliberately trapped there in order to work for others for free. That is NOT happening for the most part. Certainly in Britain, and I would guess probably in the US too, a primary governmental objective is to get as many people out of welfare dependency as possible.
 
Welfare is and ought to be no more than helping people through hard times
Some call this short term help, even without restrictions. This is why I can be called a left wing nutter.
Shot term is the key to reign in the left-wing insanity.
It is generally not socialists nor true left wingers of any stripe who wish to turn it into bona fide slavery - ie making them work for private companies without those companies paying them a penny, to "earn" their welfare.
Yet enabling long term welfare recipients by a government is NOT Socialism? You really think that way? Not being condescending, I just find it foreign.
Your altruism is remarkable, but the long term affects are just coming to fruition.
Self respect and independence is now mocked, while begging and self-pity have become a religion.
The only thing worse than self pity is the blame game that removes personal responsibility.
Socialism breeds dependence at the cost of self-sufficiency.
Some see this as a strength for the collective, some feel this removes the ability to learn from our mistakes.
Problem is, the collective will become mob rule and the inherent flaws of emotional group rule.
It's that touchy-feely thing that looks good on paper, but the most ruthless will always gain power due to greed. It's the natural selection of dog eat dog with the biggest teeth that can hit the jugular the fastest.
Yet thanks to the modern entitlement mentality, we have raised spoiled rotten children who expect the easy way over evil self-serving (liberal ideology, not mine)hard fucking work.
Did you allow your children the lame ass excuse of "but Johnny did it"? Or how about video time instead of chores?
Does teaching then instant self gratification and justify sloth with the intelecually challanged blame game cop out sound familiar?
a primary governmental objective
...is to serve the citizenry, NOT control them.
Personal choice is the ONLY way to get...
people out of welfare dependency
Yet making excuses for the growing population who are now DEMANDING a leg up can ONLY happen if personal responsibility is mocked and attacked by the idiots who are stuck on the blame game meme.
 
Last edited:
@NoBS ,we are against freeloaders totally, but we also accept that serving the citizens includes responsibility for providing help through the hard times resulting from market failure. We don't want to see people who through no fault of their own are reduced to starvation, begging, or crime in the name of self-sufficiency.

And welfare support is not viewed simplistically as inherently socialist. Indeed, state aid for pensioners and the unemployed and sick was first introduced here long before any kind of remotely socialist government was ever elected. A prime mover in these developments was, in fact, Winston Churchill who later became a well known Conservative Prime Minister.

We do not mock personal responsibility. Indeed our entire welfare system is predicated on the notion that recipients must do all they can to help themselves. A major clue is in the name of our main unemployment benefit - Jobseeker's Allowance. Claimants must prove that they are looking for work and applying for jobs to be eligible. And if they turn down a job offer their benefit is withdrawn.

Making sure that hard work always pays - which is another major market failure here in the UK - is another equally essential way to help people out of welfare dependency.
 
Last edited:
It is generally not socialists nor true left wingers of any stripe who wish to turn it into bona fide slavery - ie making them work for private companies without those companies paying them a penny, to "earn" their welfare.

:wtf:
 
And welfare support is not viewed simplistically as inherently socialist. Indeed, state aid for pensioners and the unemployed and sick was first introduced here long before any kind of remotely socialist government was ever elected. A prime mover in these developments was, in fact, Winston Churchill who later became a well known Conservative Prime Minister.
While revisionist definitions are a humorous form of mental masturbation, socialism as an ideology was around long before the word. Even dictators and monarchy can implement socialism to help control and subdue the slaves. In fact, the most entrenched regimes use this form of enslavement.
While pretending that cradle to grave entitlement is not a form of socialism, the reality is that a centralized form of government is the ONLY way to redistribute wealth to feed the bureaucracy of a bloated and inefficient government. Big Bloated Bureaucratic Social Services are needed so the slaves can get their 5th generation of food stamps, or Obamaphones, subsidized electricity; to power their idiot box connected to games to help raise... dependents. Which in turn gets 'em bigger free housing. Yet, no one can point out that they are too irresponsible to support themselves, let alone raise a child who is taught to beg? This is the new generation(s) that demands a hand out and then has a temper tantrum if they don't get their way.
Yet you only choose to mention temporary welfare, I take it you folks don't have 4 and 5 generations of welfare recipients... YET.

We do not mock personal responsibility. Indeed our entire welfare system is predicated on the notion that recipients must do all they can to help themselves.
Liberals do not mock? Pa-leeze! It's all in good fun, but denial is an addictive drug.
Hang around any ghetto, were over half the residents are on welfare. Reality is a bitch.
Attacking conservative ideology with the race card because a left-winger is black? What the fuck!
Gaming the system is the fastest growing "work" under a welfare system. To include "principle" for bloated welfare system is like leaving cash on your car dash and wondering why they broke the window to steal it when you left the doors unlocked.

Once again, your altruism is almost cute, if not for that slavery thing of dependence.
I don't have a problem with slaves or slave owners, I just don't hang with them any more since I no longer need to support slavery through taxes.
Oh, let me guess, since I don't respect voluntary slaves or their slave owners, does that mean I'm a racist if I lump in white trash into the liberal slave mix? How about Homophobia if I include the Gaystapo? Might as well go for the trifecta and add in Islamophobia because I not only disrespect hard working Muslims, but have a healthy hatred for the wife beaters and forced child marriage under guise of Sharia law. Even though I'm not "in fear of" gays, at this point, what difference does it make?... to a PC liberal.
Racist, Homophobia, Islamophobia, Climate Deniers (and hundreds of other PC mockeries)... all negative PC terms to help liberals manipulate social causes that increase dependence on left wing governments. Yeah, I have contempt towards liberal control freaks, even the few who don't need to use mockery. Funny, other than Sharia Law fanatics, I really don't hate anyone... pity comes to mind.
Then again, I pity pedophiles who die on their first brutal rape in prison, especially if only a few got to tap that ass.
 
That's quite a rant there, @NoBS . And it makes quite a few utterly groundless assumptions apparently plucked out of thin air. At no point have I labelled you a racist, a homophobe, or anything like that. But meh.

But it comes down to this. I equate socialism with Marxism. Marxism is discredited. That is why I do not consider myself a socialist because I think a lot of Marxist ideology is bullshit, eg class war, the abolition of capitalism, etc. But I am a left wing liberal.

You are a right wing ideologue who equates ANY form of government intervention with socialism, which is of course nonsense.

Welfare does not enslave people. It frees theem from the inevitability of starvation or destitution during hard times. Yes, there are a minority who abuse the system, but this is neither condoned nor accepted and my country certainly is getting ever tougher on this. What enslaves people is actually a combination of low pay, insecure employment, and very high cost of living, which is a problem here. Doing something about this will do far more to free them than abolition of welfare.

I think that for historical reasons, we do often have very different perspectives on different sides of the Atlantic. Your nation was founded as a reaction against over-tyrannous government and a desire to free the people from it. It was increasingly populated by inward migration by peoples fleeing from government tyrrany of one kind or another. And these were mostly people with dreams and ambitions who wanted to work hard and do well for their families. And with westward expansion, new land was readily available for them to make something of themselves. It didn't all belong already to wealthy landholders. So there is a major strain in the American psyche that regards government intervention as automatically tyrranous as a default belief, and is wedded to economic liberalism. And many of you guys are mostly convinced that anyone can come good through their own efforts, and that government intervention ought not to even be necessary.

Here the historical experience has been very different. Historically a class riven society where the wealthy have grown super rich through exploiting the masses whilst denying them political power - we finally got full democracy much later than you guys - and where class snobbery was rife. All land was pretty much already in the hands of wealthy elites. And there was always much more difficulty here for people to come good through hard work. Here, working people had to fight to get a fair deal, and eventually spawned political movements and parties that would fight for them. In government, these parties very much had to intervene to create the conditions where the masses had an even break. So millions here do not automatically assume that all government action is intrinsically tyrranous. It depends who is in power, and what the action is. Most here - even on the right - believe in a welfare state of some kind, and we on the left here have never seen wealth redistribution - within reason - as anything other than a positive, designed to make the economy work for the betterment of everyone willing to make the effort. And also simply to create a decent society for all, where no one starves, no one needs to beg in the streets, women are not driven to prostitution, men not driven to crime, etc.
 
Last edited:
That's quite a rant there, @NoBS .
Funny, I've paid for quite a few slaves myself. Your reply word count increases into the hypocrite realm... Was that to be funny? Your cute.

Welfare does not enslave people. It frees theem from the inevitability of starvation or destitution during hard times. Yes, there are a minority who abuse the system, but this is neither condoned nor accepted and my country certainly is getting ever tougher on this. What enslaves people is actually a combination of low pay, insecure employment, and very high cost of living, which is a problem here. Doing something about this will do far more to free them than abolition of welfare.
You are allowed to take the easy way out, no problem here. I don't need to open your eyes regarding government dependence and voluntary slavery. That's like telling an alcoholic he has a drinking problem. Bottoms up!

we do often have very different perspectives on different sides of the Atlantic.
I went to school for over a year behind the Iron curtain in the early seventies. Got to dissect propaganda from both the Russians and American's while having diplomatic travel protection. Which is quite funny, it was under British protection through the Australian consultant in Germany. Yet it was the Americans who employed my father. I'm NOT a native Yank. Yet America is the ONLY country worth fighting for IMHO.

Here the historical experience has been very different. Historically a class riven society where the wealthy have grown super rich through exploiting the masses whilst denying them political power - we finally got full democracy much later than you guys - and where class snobbery was rife. All land was pretty much already in the hands of wealthy elites. And there was always much more difficulty here for people to come good through hard work. Here, working people had to fight to get a fair deal, and eventually spawned political movements and parties that would fight for them. In government, these parties very much had to intervene to create the conditions where the masses had an even break. So millions here do not automatically assume that all government action is intrinsically tyrranous. It depends who is in power, and what the action is. Most here - even on the right - believe in a welfare state of some kind, and we on the left here have never seen wealth redistribution - within reason - as anything other than a positive, designed to make the economy work for the betterment of everyone willing to make the effort. And also simply to create a decent society for all, where no one starves, no one needs to beg in the streets, women are not driven to prostitution, men not driven to crime, etc.
A lot of words that play the blame game. Yet you do not understand that wealth distribution is the ONLY requirement for left-wing politics. Yet your quote: "of we on the left here have never seen wealth redistribution - within reason - as anything other than a positive, designed to make the economy work for the betterment of everyone willing to make the effort." is why you are so dependent on the blame game to justify bloated governance. I respectfully disagree with your wiliness to be enslaved to a government that protects blind followers by silencing opposition through Politically Correct blame game and the tactics of a spoiled child stuck in a victim hood mentality to defend their position.
 
Last edited:
Funny, I've paid for quite a few slaves myself. Your reply word count increases into the hypocrite realm... Was that to be funny? Your cute.

You are allowed to take the easy way out, no problem here. I don't need to open your eyes regarding government dependence and voluntary slavery. That's like telling an alcoholic he has a drinking problem. Bottoms up!


I went to school for over a year behind the Iron curtain in the early seventies. Got to dissect propaganda from both the Russians and American's while having diplomatic travel protection. Which is quite funny, it was under British protection through the Australian consultant in Germany. Yet it was the Americans who employed my father. I'm NOT a native Yank. Yet America is the ONLY country worth fighting for IMHO.


A lot of words that play the blame game. Yet you do not understand that wealth distribution is the ONLY requirement for left-wing politics. Yet your quote: "of we on the left here have never seen wealth redistribution - within reason - as anything other than a positive, designed to make the economy work for the betterment of everyone willing to make the effort." is why you are so dependent on the blame game to justify bloated governance. I respectfully disagree with your wiliness to be enslaved to a government that protects blind followers by silencing opposition through Politically Correct blame game and the tactics of a spoiled child stuck in a victim hood mentality to defend their position.

I approve this message.
 

This is just an example of how right wingers demonise welfare claimants and the welfare system. They select the very worst examples they can find - like this waster with no intention of working and who wants to leech off the taxes of other Americans all her life - and then try and make out that they are typical when they are not.

We have had people like her in my country too but they are seriously being cracked down upon now. But it is statistically true here also that three quarters of those claiming Jobseekers' Allowance have been in work paying taxes within the last six months, and that three quarters of them tend to be back in work again within the next six months.

It is the lazy wasters that need to be cracked down on, not the abolition of the entire welfare system. It needs simply to be amended and toughened up here and there, so that the wasters cannot get away with doing what this woman is doing.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top