They will have to get off their lazy asses get jobs like the rest of the planet. They probabley won't get good jobs but that is their problem for thinking they were going to be rappers or NBA stars and not going to school.

They won't be eligible for unemployment. You have to first pay in to collect.

The trailer trash and the hoodrats will end up doing the jobs that the illegals are now doing. If they got jobs it would actually be good for the economy. There would be more money coming in and less going out.

And what jobs are those being that everyone from top to bottom are losing them? Not to mention if a good portion of these folks are undereducated and unqualified, what job can they possibly hope to take that would ALSO equate to them having a good standard of living?

"Rappers and NBA stars..."

And whomever asked earlier why I wanted to know about stereotyping people on welfareand what this had to do with this thread, this is what I was talking about.

this is where the whole line of convo goes south...

ne'er mind...just say nothing. I forgot what I was talking to.

How? I've come to expect the "blacks=amoral lazy Democrat" line from that character.

They won't have a good standard of living. Who cares? They don't have a good standard of living on welfare either. That is life.


What jobs? Like I said before they won't get good jobs but that is their problem. They can get low paying jobs picking tomatos for all I care. I would rather they work for minimum than sit home for minimum.

There are probably some decent jobs too. There are plenty of jobs in healthcare, nursing, energy. I think there is a about a half a million openings for nurses. There are jobs in energy too and the good thing about those jobs is you can't offshore them.

The problem with jobs is you have to work. Most of the welfare recipients are allergic to work. In da hood they are considered sellouts to da man if they go to school and have a job. The welfare recipients are just slackards milking the system. They don't work even when the economy is booming. They should be cutoff cold turkey.

Half of the slackards don't even take care of their own kids. That right there says it all. They are a waste of good air.

madmax, as right-of-center as I tend to be, what I see above are a bunch of nonsense generalizations and stereotypes.

I don't think it's really helpful (or productive) to focus on the immorality of poverty or who is at fault or any of that. I also think that cutting people off of what in many places has become a way of life and subsistence in some sort of fell swoop is not only impracticable, but in many cases, inhumane. For better or worse, we've created an expectancy that certain folks in certain situations get cash.

To suddenly cut off the supply of cash for these folks is simply not doable -- not unless you want the working people in society to experience some major repercussions -- think urban instability, unrest, massive crime, etc.

Want to force folks to work? Great. I'm all for it. Society is going to be bearing the cost of poverty one way or the other -- whether it's in welfare checks or prisons. Hopefully the states and the feds can get together and figure out the most efficient way to manage this problem.

yeah...my bad for the slip up...punish me.

Except that addicts being cut-off cold turkey tend to be delusional to the point of violence, whether directed at themselves, or others. I'd rather have a 50+ well-fare line than 50+ addicts all crashing and tearing their skin off at the same time. I hear about "social responspility" from both the right and left, but letting that many people crash out that hard in such concentrated numbers is asking for trouble, if not a full scale riot.

Not only would this add to the cost of a program that is I feel is admistered at the wrong level of government (I think it ought to be left up to the member-states), but would add to the size/scope of that government at all.

And face it, people would come up with a way to cheat, this government program.

A cracked-out government program that is choked up with red tape and buecracy will probably not be cured by more levels of red-tape and buerocracy.

spell check.

Munchkin and Co... I will preface this by saying that this isn't in direct response to HIM per se, but why there are SO many holes in this passage because unfortunately he isn't the only person that tends to think this way:

The homeless rate would skyrocket and which is the lesser of two evils: having millions live in shanty towns and wandering from place to place unchecked or subsidized housing which at least keeps some of the populace under control? Sorry but you cannot put children out on the street.

And I say AGAIN, if they are unqualified or uneducated, how do you expect them to work in healthcare? Regardless of their poverty level let's ask a simple question: Do you you want someone 21 years of age at the 5th grade math level changing your IV? We have said it before and maybe this point is being missed but you can't hire people for jobs where some of these folks are inadequately tasked to fill the position. Now let's be fair about this, there are training programs that are pushing people off of the welfare roles so let's kill this bullshit about 'these people are too lazy to work' sterotype. Point is, you don't know each and every person in the system enough to quaintify that as fact. Not to mention, there is no telling at how many of these people have degrees and cant find work for God only knows what reason. Hell, NURSES get laid off TOO!



See the above statement....and answer this question... Define 'hood'




prove it.

and BTW since you throwing 'da hood' out there you may want to see this (and if anyone has any updated figures, please feel free to post) and with the growing numbers of Latinos in this country I can't wait to see the new figures after the 2010 census which is right around the corner.

Program Recipients Black White
Social Security (1)
Retirement insurance 26 Million 7.7% 90.4%
Disability insurance 3.7 Million 18.3% 79.3%
Survivor’s benefits 1 .8 Million 24% 72%
Widow’s benefits 4.9 Million 9% 90.1%
Supplemental
Security Income 5.8 Million 26% 48.2%
Aid to Families with Dependent Children (2)
3.8 Million 39.2% 55.2%
Medicare 37 Million 8.1% 88% (3)
Medicaid 33.4 Million 25.1% 46.1% (4)
Food Stamps 27.5 Million 34.9% 42.3% (5)
Women, Infants and Children (WIC) Food Program (6)
5.8 Million 27.8% 44.3%
National Student Lunch Program (7)
44.5 Million 17% 75%
Veterans’ Benefits 26 Million 8.0% 86.4% 8
Housing Subsidies 4.7 Million 40% 46% (9)


SOURCE: http://www.census.gov/

Shut the system down and it's instant Anarchy...just add water.

You think?

Its funny how someone who has never been to "da hood" is intent on speaking about what happens in "da hood". A few more questions to add to DS's....
Who are they?
Who is "da man?"
Who considers "them" sellouts?
What are sellouts?
Could you cite the source you've attained this information from?

@ bolded:
Correction, YOU are a waste of good air and good space.

B.E.T.

Feel me?

Post #98 is why I love DS. :)

May I add that there are also a large amount of people in rural, poor areas that utilize welfare benefits as well (ex. southern states such as Miss., Louisiana, etc.).

Last time I checked, those weren't "da' hood". I'd be interested to see the stats between rural versus urban recipients.

More excuses by DamonSeid.

It is funny that you want to do away with the stereotype of welfare recipients are too lazy to work and then use an example of a 21 year old with a 5th grade education. He must be a real hard worker. :rolleyes: