What's the draw to having the government take care of you?

1795 Views 22 Replies 10 Participants Last post by godlessdustin, Apr 6, 2009

Wildman

Discussion Starter · Apr 4, 2009

The large number of "help me" topics lately has me wondering something. Why? Why is there so many people lately that are so willing to sit back and do nothing while waiting for the government to take care of them? "Socialized" everything seems to be the cry. I'm curious why is that? Where did the men and women of the old world disappear to and why?

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

Silicon Wolverine

· #2 · Apr 4, 2009

because you dont have to do anything but what the gov tells you. there is no responsibility or requirements.

the old world men and women have died off or had thier holier than thou kids and grandkids ship them off to hnursing homes and "managed care facilities" where they can be drugged into compliance.

SW

Wildman

Discussion Starter · #3 · Apr 4, 2009

So people like, say us, are a minority then? It sure seems so doesn't it. Am I wrong for being so forward, if abrasive at times, in trying to get people to go back to being responsible? It doesn't feel like it.

saiyandide

· #4 · Apr 4, 2009

No pride in knowing that you work hard for what you have. Example my neighbor laughs at the fact I work 45 + hours a week while he sits at home on disability riding his quads, hunting every day of the season. He brags on his days that he "goes shopping" about all the toys and crap he buys. HE and his girlfriend have been together and have a 4 year old daughter yet they refuse to get married because "I will lose my food stamps and medical".
Old world men and women would feel bad about living off the system and try and fight tooth and nail to get off it as soon as possible. Back then most man can't live with himself knowing he is not supporting his family or trying to provide the best possible life for them. Least that IMHO.

saiyandide

· #5 · Apr 4, 2009

So people like, say us, are a minority then? It sure seems so doesn't it. Am I wrong for being so forward, if abrasive at times, in trying to get people to go back to being responsible? It doesn't feel like it.

Absolutely, feels like anyway. I don't see anything wrong with being so forward time to time I go off on a rant about people like that my wife hears me start and knows just to be quiet until I get off my soap box. lol Seriously though its like are we the stupid ones for actually wanting to work and EARN what we have or what?!?!

adam

· #6 · Apr 4, 2009

No pride in knowing that you work hard for what you have. Example my neighbor laughs at the fact I work 45 + hours a week while he sits at home on disability riding his quads, hunting every day of the season. He brags on his days that he "goes shopping" about all the toys and crap he buys. HE and his girlfriend have been together and have a 4 year old daughter yet they refuse to get married because "I will lose my food stamps and medical".
Old world men and women would feel bad about living off the system and try and fight tooth and nail to get off it as soon as possible. Back then most man can't live with himself knowing he is not supporting his family or trying to provide the best possible life for them. Least that IMHO.

I see this all the time myself here in Michigan! I was hanging out at a friends house the other day when a few of his friends I don't know to well showed up. The one guys wife was mad and complaining about him taking anymore then 20 hours at work because they'd loose their food stamp (called a bridge card in Michigan). If your capable of working then you need to work thats the bottom line. There was nothing wrong with either one of those people they just didn't want to work! She wants to sit around all day playing on a computer, and he's not much better.

Mr. Boom

· #7 · Apr 4, 2009

Where did the men and women of the old world disappear to and why?

There's two right here in my house!

I feel the same way. Sick of seeing people(and now kids too)that want handouts.

wade

· #8 · Apr 4, 2009

while he sits at home on disability riding his quads, hunting every day of the season.

There's no way you should be able to live off of disability and be able to be physically active like that. We had to fight to get my father in law on disability after his stroke and during his cancer treatments and to hear about abuses like that burns me...

On the other hand... Would things like V.A. disability compensation and Chapter 30 voc. rehab be considered having the government take care of you?

Mr. Boom

· #9 · Apr 4, 2009

On the other hand... Would things like V.A. disability compensation and Chapter 30 voc. rehab be considered having the government take care of you?

NO! If they are a disabled Vet, they should be taken care of! Period! Big difference between someone who served and is now disabled, and someone who is a lazy ass!

THe problem with the Vet, is a lot of them don't want the help. You almost have to trick them to get them to the VA hospital, because they don't want to be a drain or burden.

wade

· #10 · Apr 4, 2009

On the other hand... Would things like V.A. disability compensation and Chapter 30 voc. rehab be considered having the government take care of you?

Click to expand...

NO! If they are a disabled Vet, they should be taken care of! Period! Big difference between someone who served and is now disabled, and someone who is a lazy ass!

THe problem with the Vet, is a lot of them don't want the help. You almost have to trick them to get them to the VA hospital, because they don't want to be a drain or burden.

Ok. Glad to know I'm not a leecher.

Mr. Boom

· #11 · Apr 4, 2009

Absolutely not! My opinion is that they should take all the "assistance" from these lazy asses, and start giving more to our Vets!

The money they give the octomom could probably provide for 20 adults who truly need it!

saiyandide

· #12 · Apr 4, 2009

On the other hand... Would things like V.A. disability compensation and Chapter 30 voc. rehab be considered having the government take care of you?

NO NO NO not at all, hell even if you are not a Vet and are truly disabled and can not work I don't care if you have to get help then. Shat happens, if someone was to get hurt in a car accident and be paralyzed from the waist down their family would be living like that because the wife would have to take care of the kids and him full time. I do believe that the programs help some of those who truly need it. But more and more its being abused and too many genuine people have trouble getting the help needed usually they were people who worked all their lives and paid into the system too. Its like they feel he worked for 30 years hey lets press him on going back to work because these other people haven't worked a full year in their lives and sure as hell won't try.

Wildman

Discussion Starter · #13 · Apr 5, 2009

Good discussion folks. I am curious though. Where are all of our liberal friends? Surely they are here? Why not put there two cents in?

Blintersifrid

· #14 · Apr 5, 2009

Could be that the liberals are afraid that if they *do* raise their heads, they'll get them shot off.
Then again, could be something else entirely. I dunno.

wade

· #15 · Apr 5, 2009

I guess it's a question of how to keep a safety net from becoming a way of life.

Wildman

Discussion Starter · #16 · Apr 5, 2009

Simple wade, time limits. Or maybe even dollar limits. Hell at this point anything different would be better wouldn't it? All it seems a guy has to do now is mail in an application to be set. All it takes is someone with a head on their shoulders to know the difference between a mailbox farmer and someone truly in need. Crap. Wade is right, how do we keep these programs from being a way of life?

leadslinger

· #17 · Apr 5, 2009

Good discussion folks. I am curious though. Where are all of our liberal friends? Surely they are here? Why not put there two cents in?

Ok I'll bite! I view my social aspects as liberal, but fiscally conservative; yeah go figure.

I despise the welfare system as it stands currently. I used to live in an area (not by choice, feds said go or lose my job) which was very much plagued by welfare abuse. The apartment complex I lived was adjacent to Section 8 housing, you would hardly ever see cars leaving in the AM, but come 10PM cars would constantly be coming and going and lord don't get me started on the music at 1 AM...

The welfare system was created to be temporary, but like most things people dig their claws in and never let go. 1996 President Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families was to switch some of the welfare programs out of federal power to the states, in which the states were to support the welfare recipients by helping them move into the workforce.

On the other hand, I'm all for unemployment insurance benefits. After all you do pay for it.

Wildman, don't paint all us liberals with such a broad brush all the time, most of us are not as bad as Rush says, likewise I know all conservatives are not as bad as Chris Matthews says.

See less See more

godlessdustin

· #18 · Apr 5, 2009

Good discussion folks. I am curious though. Where are all of our liberal friends? Surely they are here? Why not put there two cents in?

Click to expand...

Ok I'll bite! I view my social aspects as liberal, but fiscally conservative; yeah go figure.

I despise the welfare system as it stands currently. I used to live in an area (not by choice, feds said go or lose my job) which was very much plagued by welfare abuse. The apartment complex I lived was adjacent to Section 8 housing, you would hardly ever see cars leaving in the AM, but come 10PM cars would constantly be coming and going and lord don't get me started on the music at 1 AM...

The welfare system was created to be temporary, but like most things people dig their claws in and never let go. 1996 President Clinton signed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act. Temporary Assistance for Needy Families was to switch some of the welfare programs out of federal power to the states, in which the states were to support the welfare recipients by helping them move into the workforce.

On the other hand, I'm all for unemployment insurance benefits. After all you do pay for it.

Wildman, don't paint all us liberals with such a broad brush all the time, most of us are not as bad as Rush says, likewise I know all conservatives are not as bad as Chris Matthews says.

Ditto

neothespian

· #19 · Apr 5, 2009

I don't want the government to "take care of me".

I want a fair return on my tax investment.

If I pay taxes, I expect the government to give me my money's worth. I put in my loyal service as a citizen, and well, I should get the same respect back. If I serve in the military, the state I protect should somehow help protect ME when I need it. If I pay taxes to keep the lights on, then I should get a more efficent light to show my money's being spent right.

It's a matter of respect to me. I'm not looking for a babysitter like many insist Socialist "seem to want". I want to get what I give... a fair assessment for anyone putting effort into a system I say.

Wildman

Discussion Starter · #20 · Apr 6, 2009

Thanks a lot for the replies leadslinger and Neo. INteresting points to ponder for sure. Also raises some new questions. Neo doesn't the country provide you with constant protection already no matter if you serve or not? After all there is an active military ready 24/7. If only those who served were to be protected in return wouldn't that basically reduce or eliminate protection for all considering there would be no efficient way to check who is who?

I'm not sure I follow how paying taxes keeps the lights on. I'm sure you will explain what you mean but until then I'll have to reserve comment. Well except one thing. We do not pay the government to develop energy efficient utilities nor should we. As soon as we come to rely on government for things like this I feel the country will be screwed. History has proven the best inventions come from the private sector.

I feel the government is to serve two basic services. First and foremost is protection. Protection from all things internally and externally. A broad description I know. External protection includes, obviously, acts of war primarily but should also include safety nets on imported products. Think Chinese lead paint. The second service would be as "banker". Think Monopoly. The banker on Monopoly holds the money of the people and only spends it when needed. Now that is an over simplified version of course but it begins the point. Our government collects trillions of dollars in taxes and spends them, seemingly, without "our" input. That is wrong. Somehow we need to get things under control and more directly involve the people. I think liberalism and socialism began by accident to be honest. At least when referred to in the negative context most of us use. How by accident? People continued to give up their tax money and in more convenient ways such as allowing it to be taken from our paychecks. When is the last time you've actually seen a revenuer out collecting? While we allowed for easier and more convenient ways to give the government our tax money we've also been involved less and less in the decision making by not going to localized meetings or writing and calling our local elected. We've sent the message, likely by accident, that we will give you our money and trust you to do the rest. The problem is obvious. The federal government cannot be trusted in private with our money. Now with nearly no citizen input billions and billions of our tax dollars are spent every year. Who controls cost of services the government buys? Who decides what it gets spent on? Who decides how much tax is collected? Not us! That seems very wrong.

Fundamentally it is possible, I suppose, for liberalism and socialism to have a place in a well balanced society. Maybe it is even necessary. But under the current definition and execution I want nothing to do with it. If I had my druthers I'd prefer everyone be able to support themselves financially and eliminate the need for any government intervention. But at the very base the problem is people. Singularly a person is smart. But beyond that "people" are one of the dumbest beasts capable of logical thinking that exist.

See less See more

1 - 20 of 23 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.