Should able-bodied, mentally capable adults who receive welfare be required to w
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 29, 2024, 07:32:09 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Individual Politics (Moderator: The Dowager Mod)
  Should able-bodied, mentally capable adults who receive welfare be required to w
« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]
Poll
Question: Which option
#1
Yes
 
#2
No
 
#3
Yes, adults who receive government benefits should be required to work
 
#4
Yes, and eliminate welfare all together as it is not authorized in the Constitution
 
#5
No, "workfare" is a form of slave labor
 
#6
No, but in order to receive benefits they should be looking for a job or enrolled in education and job training programs
 
#7
No, but their benefits would expire after two years of unemployment
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 59

Author Topic: Should able-bodied, mentally capable adults who receive welfare be required to w  (Read 4460 times)
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,610
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #25 on: October 12, 2013, 11:54:41 AM »

What, exactly, do you mean by 'welfare'? People are often curiously vague about that, which isn't a good thing in social policy.

That aside, this is the sort of thinking that led to the workhouse. Or, more accurately, to what we think of now when we say 'workhouse' (i.e. those that came into existence following the Poor Law Amendment Act). Essentially it is the moralisation of the issue: work is healthy both physically and spiritually and helps to build up good moral character, while idleness is corrosive of both actual and moral health. As is often the way with very dangerous ideas, its kernel is not actually such a bad thought at all, but a fundamental misinterpretation of something very important is made at a foundational level, resulting in trouble. In this case it is the assumption that work is inherently rewarding (and so is a good thing in terms of character and whatever), which is not so. Work that the worker considers to be productive (in any sense), rewarding (in any sense) or both is indeed 'good for you'. Work that the worker considers to be a waste of time, energy and effort is, on the contrary, not 'good for you'. It is typically worse than doing absolutely nothing, and gets worse as it gets more pointless. Making people on state support perform a contemporary version of 'picking oakum' benefits neither the person on support nor society in general.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #26 on: October 12, 2013, 12:03:23 PM »

They should be required to work, or look for work (and I mean really look, and maybe have to go somewhere for 8 hours a day to do it), or be training for work.

That's fine as long as we force you lazy rich to work as well - no retirement, no inheritance.  Just off to the work-camps with you.

I have neither retired (never plan to really), nor inherited much to speak of. What work camp do you think you should be sent to, since you in fact basically do meet the "requirements?"

Alas I don't!  I go to work every day (to my everlasting embarrassment and shame!) Cry
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,610
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #27 on: October 12, 2013, 12:06:28 PM »

Which reminds me of the bizarre hypocrisy: very rich people do not actually work at all. Even when technically employed. But apparently this is not corrosive to their moral wellbeing, because, reasons.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #28 on: October 12, 2013, 12:11:55 PM »

Popping out of their office two times a day to delegate more of their duties and make sure you're run off your feet is the very essence of bourgeois morality.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,096
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #29 on: October 12, 2013, 12:12:52 PM »

nope, but good job making up things!

Well exactly. You promote an economic system that doesn't guarantee work for willing people, and one that's prone to crisis and mass unemployment, and then sit there and blame them for their situation, and/or being feckless/stupid/scum.
No, that's how you assume I think of them.  I've actually been poor before.  I know poor people.  I suppose it makes you feel better if you think that's how I feel, but it's not the truth.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Having to constantly argue against it, sure. Most people aren't so deluded as you and have had to face bouts of unemployment (many including workfare).[/quote]I've never been unemployed, but my wife was for several years.  Thankfully she's recently acquired employment again.  Again, your assumptions about me are wrong.  A pattern.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Presumably, unless America's already replaced all state workers posts with free labour, and in doing so rendered them unemployed earlier. I somehow doubt its a shortage of labour stopping roadworks, as well. But surely, if they're going to be working, then they should be paid a worker's wage?[/quote]Of course, again wrong.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Of course everybody has a useful skill,[/quote]Perhaps your definition of "useful skill" is different than every other person on the planet.  Why would they need retraining if they have a useful skill.  Maybe you don't know what "useful" means?
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
and I have no problem with that, especially in a time of need.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.
Roll Eyes
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

So replacing actual paid jobs with an army of workfare recieves a consequent employment success rate that's lower than before it was brought in. [/quote]I have no idea what you're going on about here.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/03/average-length-of-unemployment-at-all-time-high/?_r=0[/quote]Goalpost moved.  Your cite doesn't say "most have been paying taxes for social insurances for this very occasion".  And there are more forms of help than just unemployment benefits (which I don't have a problem with anyway...hell, I don't have a problem with ANY form of benefit.  My issue is with the people that spend their entire lives getting assistance without ever trying to get off.  But I'll concede the point as I'm sure that makes up less than 50% of those receiving help.
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

They'd be recieving the exact same unemployment entitlements as ever but now expected to work for free.[/quote]Or you could word that "They'd be recieving the exact same unemployment entitlements as ever but now expected to work for a very small amount for them."
Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

Any mean spiritedness on my part is in retaliation and therefore with reason. Wink
[/quote]I don't think "retaliation" means what you think it means.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #30 on: October 12, 2013, 12:15:47 PM »

Which reminds me of the bizarre hypocrisy: very rich people do not actually work at all. Even when technically employed. But apparently this is not corrosive to their moral wellbeing, because, reasons.

Now wait a minute Al. The perception is that those who get inherited wealth and don't have to work, do tend to have unfortunate character traits. And that is been my personal experience - in spades (so many 'worthless" trust fund babies, so little time). If you have a lot of dough, raising your kids to have the "right" values is a huge challenge. It takes a mensch to do it really.

As to not working versus working a suck job, give me the suck job every day of the week. Heck, I quite enjoy bagging groceries. Granted the pay is thin. I guess your mileage varies from mine.

And assuming that I am "rich," why don't you think I am really working, or did really work? Care to elaborate on that?
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #31 on: October 12, 2013, 12:45:40 PM »

the problem is...people like torie cant grasp the idea that many poors have real barriers to finding employment.  bad credit, gaps in employment, no skills, criminal records, etc etc.

Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #32 on: October 12, 2013, 12:51:51 PM »

the problem is...people like torie cant grasp the idea that many poors have real barriers to finding employment.  bad credit, gaps in employment, no skills, criminal records, etc etc.

All of which are caused by the class system, not by anything attributable to them as 'individuals'.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #33 on: October 12, 2013, 12:57:52 PM »

the problem is...people like torie cant grasp the idea that many poors have real barriers to finding employment.  bad credit, gaps in employment, no skills, criminal records, etc etc.


Well Mitty, since you want to get personal about this for some reason (again), would you favor me with a text wherein I actually say or imply that I don't believe the poor have barriers to working (as opposed to the reverse)? Thanks. In point of fact, I fully grasp it, but I probably could not persuade you of that no matter how hard I tried, so why bother?  Let's just focus on my texts.
Logged
WalterMitty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 21,572


Political Matrix
E: 1.68, S: -2.26

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #34 on: October 12, 2013, 02:48:09 PM »

the problem is...people like torie cant grasp the idea that many poors have real barriers to finding employment.  bad credit, gaps in employment, no skills, criminal records, etc etc.


Well Mitty, since you want to get personal about this for some reason (again), would you favor me with a text wherein I actually say or imply that I don't believe the poor have barriers to working (as opposed to the reverse)? Thanks. In point of fact, I fully grasp it, but I probably could not persuade you of that no matter how hard I tried, so why bother?  Let's just focus on my texts.

it is your tone.  you said you would make them look...'really look' for work, even if they are required to go some place 8 hours a day to do it.

you are implying they arent 'really looking' now. 
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #35 on: October 12, 2013, 05:09:24 PM »

Many don't really until their unemployment checks run out. Or they have unrealistic expectations. But that does not mean that I don't understand how tough it is to get a job for some, for the reasons we actually both have stated. Heck, my roommate looked for 18 months during this horrific recession, without success (other than an Xmas gig at UPS). He got a job finally about 4 months ago, and moved out last week. And I know he was looking, and looking assiduously. If he had not been, I would have kicked him out.

Let's try to keep it less personal OK?
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,426
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #36 on: October 12, 2013, 05:19:11 PM »

Which reminds me of the bizarre hypocrisy: very rich people do not actually work at all. Even when technically employed. But apparently this is not corrosive to their moral wellbeing, because, reasons.

The Takers.
Logged
All Along The Watchtower
Progressive Realist
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 15,426
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #37 on: October 12, 2013, 05:29:20 PM »

And assuming that I am "rich," why don't you think I am really working, or did really work? Care to elaborate on that?

I disagree with Al in that I think a lot of rich people do technically work (although once you get to the "super-rich", you do see more of the "unearned income" or "money making money" thing-see Mitt Romney for a particularly appalling example...). But they don't depend on their work for survival. Rich people don't have to work. They have options-far more options than the vast majority of the population. When you consider that the top 1% own 45% of the financial wealth in all of America....

Rich people can live anywhere, compared to the rest of the population. Unless you live in one of those places where (essentially) only rich people live, like perhaps parts of the Upper East Side of Manhattan or Jupiter Island, FL....but, nobody is forcing them to live there. And it's not like they have to strain their vast financial resources to live a relatively extravagant life, let alone survive, like a growing and large number of Americans have to.


Logged
Redalgo
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,681
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #38 on: October 12, 2013, 05:45:44 PM »

No, in response to the poll, and...

Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #39 on: October 12, 2013, 07:06:57 PM »
« Edited: October 12, 2013, 07:08:45 PM by Torie »

And assuming that I am "rich," why don't you think I am really working, or did really work? Care to elaborate on that?

I disagree with Al in that I think a lot of rich people do technically work (although once you get to the "super-rich", you do see more of the "unearned income" or "money making money" thing-see Mitt Romney for a particularly appalling example...). But they don't depend on their work for survival. Rich people don't have to work. They have options-far more options than the vast majority of the population. When you consider that the top 1% own 45% of the financial wealth in all of America....

Rich people can live anywhere, compared to the rest of the population. Unless you live in one of those places where (essentially) only rich people live, like perhaps parts of the Upper East Side of Manhattan or Jupiter Island, FL....but, nobody is forcing them to live there. And it's not like they have to strain their vast financial resources to live a relatively extravagant life, let alone survive, like a growing and large number of Americans have to.


So "work" means having to work or see your lifestyle go down the tubes. OK. What you posted of course is stating the obvious. My bf wonders just why I work so hard. Life is not all about money you know. It's about meaning, meeting your responsibilities, and helping people who you think need your help and can benefit from it as well. At least for me, that is what gives me satisfaction, not my net worth balance sheet (which I long since stopped calculating really). Almost all of it is going to charity anyway. And that would be true even if I had kids.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,610
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #40 on: October 13, 2013, 06:56:36 PM »

I wasn't referring to you (I don't know your life and wouldn't be so crass as to bring it up in this sort of context) and that post was not posted in direct response or reference to any of your posts.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #41 on: October 14, 2013, 09:52:04 AM »
« Edited: October 14, 2013, 09:56:53 AM by Acting like I'm Morrissey w/o the wit »

No, that's how you assume I think of them.  I've actually been poor before.  I know poor people.  I suppose it makes you feel better if you think that's how I feel, but it's not the truth.

Well hang on, it wasn't me that peppered your original post with abusive terms that I think even the most unbiased of observers would describe as hostile and unsympathetic.

I've never been unemployed, but my wife was for several years.  Thankfully she's recently acquired employment again.  Again, your assumptions about me are wrong.  A pattern.

Much like you've been making assumptions about those receiving benefits? Sure your wife wasn't a lay-about?


How?

Perhaps your definition of "useful skill" is different than every other person on the planet.  Why would they need retraining if they have a useful skill.  Maybe you don't know what "useful" means?

Rather your belief in what's "useful" is predicated on its employability in an often irrational market. All those out of work builders for instance, amidst a housing crisis certainly have useful skills that aren't being utilised, and I'm sure many have took upon other work and/or training in the meantime. The idea that the market is the perfect arbitrator of what's useful is, again, a belief only found in delusional libertarians.    

and I have no problem with that, especially in a time of need.

A rare moment of agreement, then.


After, the comment I was replying to? Really?

I have no idea what you're going on about here.

Just informing you of the success rate and effects of workfare here in the UK.

My issue is with the people that spend their entire lives getting assistance without ever trying to get off.  But I'll concede the point as I'm sure that makes up less than 50% of those receiving help.

And I'm sure it's a minuscule amount that is regularly highlighted and used as a consistent tactic to further demonise benefit recipients, as undeserving poor.

Or you could word that "They'd be recieving the exact same unemployment entitlements as ever but now expected to work for a very small amount for them."

Will they be getting wages on top of their entitlements? No. So the net result is you're using the crash-induced mass-unemployment to force people, many who've paid social security, to now work for free.

I don't think "retaliation" means what you think it means.
Actually it does - I took personal offence to your horrific original post.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #42 on: October 14, 2013, 09:54:50 AM »

Many don't really until their unemployment checks run out. Or they have unrealistic expectations. But that does not mean that I don't understand how tough it is to get a job for some, for the reasons we actually both have stated. Heck, my roommate looked for 18 months during this horrific recession, without success (other than an Xmas gig at UPS). He got a job finally about 4 months ago, and moved out last week. And I know he was looking, and looking assiduously. If he had not been, I would have kicked him out.

Let's try to keep it less personal OK?

If you don't want it to be 'personal', how about stop propagating baseless smears against the unemployed? Carry on in your current tone and you'll deserve all you get.
Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #43 on: October 14, 2013, 10:33:04 AM »

And assuming that I am "rich," why don't you think I am really working, or did really work? Care to elaborate on that?

Just remember that what you were doing was accessing privilege granted to you by your class status. 

So, just don't take any credit for it, and realize that everyone making less than you almost certainly worked much 'harder'.  The rewards come from the class privilege, not the something innate about you as an 'individual'.
Logged
Oldiesfreak1854
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,674
United States


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #44 on: October 14, 2013, 03:35:31 PM »

Of course, welfare should be a hand up, not a handout.
Logged
Oakvale
oakvale
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,827
Ukraine
Political Matrix
E: -0.77, S: -4.00

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #45 on: October 15, 2013, 01:14:20 PM »

Of course, welfare should be a hand up, not a handout.

This. We'll need many Ladders of Opportunity to Build A Bridge to the 21st Century.
Logged
courts
Ghost_white
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 6,466
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #46 on: March 14, 2014, 01:47:42 AM »

al makes too much sense in this thread.
Logged
morgieb
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,625
Australia


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #47 on: March 14, 2014, 02:25:38 AM »

There should be programs to help them get jobs, so Option 6.

However, I don't think it's theoretically possible for everyone to get a job, and even then there are too many people who have too many barriers to employment.
Logged
dead0man
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,096
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #48 on: March 14, 2014, 06:22:37 AM »

However, I don't think it's theoretically possible for everyone to get a job, and even then there are too many people who have too many barriers to employment.
Which is why the title of the OP is "Should able-bodied, mentally capable adults who receive welfare be required to work?" and not "Should adults who receive welfare be required to work?"
Logged
SWE
SomebodyWhoExists
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 13,234
United States


P P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #49 on: March 14, 2014, 02:06:21 PM »

This is a blatant rip off of "I side with"
Logged
Pages: 1 [2]  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.076 seconds with 14 queries.