Belly35;1584832 wrote:Time... Time limit is the motivator
When my mom and I lived on welfare, public housing project she set a time (goal) that we would move from this situation to a better life.
Many on welfare, public housing have no aspiration to improve their situation because they have a crutch with no obligations to keep the benefits … with not “time restrictions”

Let give the needy the support but with the goal to achieve dependency .. “Time Limit”

Time to get a job, time to get a education or training, to move to a better job location, time to straighten their lives, time to evaluate their decision, time to understand that more babies does not increase the time for achieving the goal of bettering yourself. …. The poor got 5 or 6 years to get off welfare and move out of public housing and 1 year after that of the government paying their utilities. …. Have a good life

If the habitual poor choose to squander this opportunity … sorry they are on their own now…

Solution you’ll lose the kids … the kids will be place in a government reform school (cheaper than a life time of entitlement programs) where they will be given care, medical attention, a education, structure, discipline and potential future more that what their dead beat habitual loser parent could offer.
My estimate is that 25 years down the road … poverty will drop, higher standard of society will develop, less crime, drop out rate will fall, teen pregnant drop, unwed poor pregnant decline and government welfare programs cost will begin dropping.

Hope this helps…

Al Bundy;1584996 wrote:isadore, why do you think you are poor?

Con_Alma;1584935 wrote:Business chose to offer it as part of compensation. That doesn't put the onus on them to provide it. ...at least until the affordable care act. In addition, it's not the only means of paying for medical services. It's just one.

isadore;1584998 wrote:I am not.

isadore;1584804 wrote:and what do you want to do with their kids

oh that's right
back to the factories and the mines

WebFire;1585027 wrote:You mean like find a babysitter? Where do mines and factories come in?

Al Bundy;1585020 wrote:Then, why are you not poor? Did you inherit money or did you work for your money?

isadore;1585099 wrote:gosh I grew up into a time when unions had won factory workers like my dad, a livable wage Before union busting Reaganomics took full effect. So I was able to get a job at 13 to save for college.

isadore;1585099 wrote:gosh I grew up into a time when unions had won factory workers like my dad, a livable wage Before union busting Reaganomics took full effect. So I was able to get a job at 13 to save for college.

isadore;1585092 wrote:right, minimum wage workers have a lot of bucks to pay babysitters. Of course we could use the belly method and ship them all to reform school. Or using your push for a work ethic send them into sweat shops

Al Bundy;1585107 wrote:Black Monday hit Ohio in 1977. It was 3.5 years before Reagan became president.

WebFire;1585144 wrote:I see. So they should continue on welfare because they cannot find babysitters. Funny that I rarely pay for a babysitter, and my wife and I both work.

WebFire;1585143 wrote:Which is why our manufacturing declined. Overpaid factory workers drove up the price of American goods.

isadore;1585152 wrote:gosh hardly a surprise that you would consider fair pay for workers overpayment. A government that truly serves its people not corporate interests would have saved those jobs and by doing that offered a real path for many out of poverty.

isadore;1585151 wrote:personal anecdotal evidence always of such great value, especially when your situation is compared to the poor single mothers and their families who make up the largest portion of the welfare recipients.

WebFire;1585143 wrote:Which is why our manufacturing declined. Overpaid factory workers drove up the price of American goods.

WebFire;1585158 wrote:Artificial inflation of wages is not fair pay.

WebFire;1585159 wrote:I was raised by a single mom for a long time. She worked full time. She found a way to get it done, instead of sitting around collecting welfare. Now she has a nice career and will retire happily. You make your own bed.

isadore;1585151 wrote:personal anecdotal evidence always of such great value, especially when your situation is compared to the poor single mothers and their families who make up the largest portion of the welfare recipients.

WebFire;1585158 wrote:Artificial inflation of wages is not fair pay.

BoatShoes;1585193 wrote:Do you apply this argument to lawyers and doctors who are protected by government created licensure requirements? Do you apply this argument to people who's wages and incomes are protected by government granted patent monopolies? Etc. Etc.

isadore;1584999 wrote:they chose to put the onus on themselves by providing the benefit for generations.

Con_Alma;1585197 wrote:I don't but the correlation isn't exact in some of the examples you've provided. Monopolies should not be enabled to resulting in artificially inflated wages. I am opposed to that. Patents, however, along with all intellectual property do not belong to the economy or the country but rather the individual or company. I would entertain arguments with regard to time length a patent should be protected but that's an objective position.

isadore;1585152 wrote:gosh hardly a surprise that you would consider fair pay for workers overpayment. A government that truly serves its people not corporate interests would have saved those jobs and by doing that offered a real path for many out of poverty.

rrfan;1585223 wrote:gosh sounds like you think the government should take care of everything...gosh wait they are already paying for all these people's expenses...gosh maybe they should have to work hard and earn things like the rest of us...gosh that would require them to not sit on there fat butt all day at home...gosh that would be to hard and they would not like it...gosh give them an Obama phone because everyone needs a cell phone...Shut up with that crap. You are allowing this to continue!