mudcat.org: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
Lyrics & Knowledge Personal Pages Record Shop Auction Links Radio & Media Kids Membership Help
The Mudcat Cafeawe

Post to this Thread - Printer Friendly - Home
Page: [1] [2] [3]


BS: Benefits/Welfare.

akenaton 09 Oct 03 - 09:12 PM
hesperis 09 Oct 03 - 09:15 PM
akenaton 09 Oct 03 - 09:24 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 09 Oct 03 - 09:25 PM
akenaton 09 Oct 03 - 09:33 PM
Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull 09 Oct 03 - 09:40 PM
Bobert 09 Oct 03 - 11:05 PM
LadyJean 09 Oct 03 - 11:09 PM
Stilly River Sage 09 Oct 03 - 11:15 PM
The Fooles Troupe 09 Oct 03 - 11:25 PM
Kaleea 09 Oct 03 - 11:31 PM
The Fooles Troupe 09 Oct 03 - 11:39 PM
Amos 10 Oct 03 - 12:28 AM
katlaughing 10 Oct 03 - 12:44 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 07:28 AM
GUEST,John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 08:43 AM
The Fooles Troupe 10 Oct 03 - 09:04 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 09:43 AM
katlaughing 10 Oct 03 - 10:12 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 10:23 AM
GUEST,John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 10:30 AM
katlaughing 10 Oct 03 - 11:21 AM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 11:54 AM
Amos 10 Oct 03 - 12:15 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 12:36 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 12:37 PM
John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 01:02 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 01:31 PM
John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 01:39 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 01:45 PM
John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 01:53 PM
John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 02:01 PM
katlaughing 10 Oct 03 - 02:26 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 02:36 PM
John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 02:51 PM
katlaughing 10 Oct 03 - 03:09 PM
John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 03:39 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 04:24 PM
GUEST,Marta 10 Oct 03 - 04:58 PM
jacqui c 10 Oct 03 - 05:30 PM
katlaughing 10 Oct 03 - 05:45 PM
John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 06:02 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 06:17 PM
akenaton 10 Oct 03 - 06:20 PM
katlaughing 10 Oct 03 - 06:49 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 07:02 PM
akenaton 10 Oct 03 - 07:11 PM
GUEST,petr 10 Oct 03 - 07:53 PM
McGrath of Harlow 10 Oct 03 - 08:08 PM
John Hardly 10 Oct 03 - 08:15 PM
Lyrics & Knowledge Search [Advanced]
DT  Forum
Sort (Forum) by:relevance date
DT Lyrics:






Subject: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 09:12 PM

Having listened to friends complaining bitterly about Benefit/Welfare fraud,it occured to me that the benefit system is not a cunning ploy thought up by socialists to bring down "the economic system",but actually ,a tool to allow that system to keep spluttering along.
Without Benefits/welfare,anarchy would surely prevail.
Not a bad thing in my opinion...Ake


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: hesperis
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 09:15 PM

without the benefits, there would be a lot of realy desperate people. They're desperate enough ON benefits... and desperate people are dangerous to the status quo.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 09:24 PM

It seems to be the case, that for years the socialists ,myself included, have been supporting a policy that helps to to keep in existence a system we all want to see the back of.
Isn't politics a devious business....


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 09:25 PM

I do short term contract work, in various trades, ie semi-skilled labour, wharehouse-man [sorry it's wharehouseperson nowadays!}, slaughterline, proces operator or whatever


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 09:33 PM

Hi john Sorry i couldn't reply to you on chat....I couldn't get the hang of it ,so I gave up. Hope your doing OK...


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 09:40 PM

I seemed to have got cut off.
I will try again tomorow.

akemnaton-wereabouts in the UK are yoi?
Hull is the best place in the UYK, [best place in tge werrld anyway]
and every were else is rubbish.john


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: Bobert
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 11:05 PM

Well, here in the US, we have "Welfare Reform" translated into meanin' that any woman whoes husband has deserted the family has to get up at 5:00 in the mornin', get on a bus 5 or 6 days aweek and go to a job that pays minimum wage ($5.25 an hour) and pay child care before rent, 'er food, 'er____________..... Anyone want to change places with this woman?

Ya' see, back during the day of Clinton, the right wing got this legislation passed that limits welfare benefits to 2 years and then you're done. Get a job. Pick Boss Hog's cotten if ya have to but get a dangted job and shut the heck up! We don't want to hear no crap out of you... Just get yer sorry ass out in the cotten fields...

Bobert


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: LadyJean
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 11:09 PM

A friend of mine lives in a resort town. From October to May work is scarce, and locals get by on unemployment. Take away the benefits, and hotel maids, cooks, store clerks, laundromat staff, etc. are going to leave the town. No more town, no more resort. Thus does our government subsidize the tourist industry.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 11:15 PM

Bobert, there was a discussion on Diane Rehm on NPR this morning about where many of those women have gone. Seems there has been a huge increase in the sex trade since welfare was cut off so unceremoniously. Pimps are outnumbering drug dealers in some communities now, apparently.

SRS


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 11:25 PM

akenaton -
if you look into history you will see that - even in recent history where we even have surviving documentary film - if enough starving men get together, things turn nasty.

So what famous US General disobeyed Presidental orders and shot up and burnt the camp of the ex-WW1 soldiers just trying to get the small amount of money that they had been promised?


Also the 1930's really frightened teh rich - with the large number of men on the streets in soup-lines, things looked bad in the daily film-news clips.

The Political juggling trick is to guess just how little you have to pay while accusing them of being "spongers" - the Autralian Govt has added the neat trick of legally (well, according to the law of the land - set up by the Government!) fudging the unemployment figures by doing neat tricks as

I've had my payment delayed or cuttoff wrongfully without any reason given about seven or 8 times since 1996. And the cute trick is that Centrelink then tells any politician that you complain to, that they can't tell the politicians the reason because of "The Privacy Act".

I wrote some Stuff "What a Friend we have in Johnny", that mentions some of this.

An aussie took a can of petrol and matches into a Centrelink office here a while ago, and made much excitement.

Standing in line in the office can be quite stressful, even for us in line: regularly, some one freaks out and starts swearing and cursing...

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: Kaleea
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 11:31 PM

I was a caseworker in Phoenix when the so-called "welfare reform" took effect. I saw elderly couples who could not pay for their prescriptions or their living expenses lose their food stamps. If you were maxing out your credit cards paying your bills while you had no income, then you were automatically considered suspect because nobody can pay their bills if they have no income--& you would have to prove who gave you the $$ you paid the bills with & for what purposes (even when no one gave you $$--duh!) or else you were tossed aside, & got no benefits because obviously you had money you were'nt reporting--at least according to Congress, anyway. People who were attempting to get a foster child of 3 yrs registered to receive medical care for the child who had a serious disease were tossed a big curve & told they were on their own when our new 'puter programs pointed out that the child's social security number was evidently being used by 6 different adults at 6 different jobs--& that they were on their own to go to the Soc Sec office to clean up the problem. Etc., Etc., Etc. When does it all end?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 09 Oct 03 - 11:39 PM

http://www.mudcat.org/thread.cfm?threadid=63557

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: Amos
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 12:28 AM

Robin:: That link won't work -- the destination URL is listed by the title of the thread instead of its number.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 12:44 AM

In some states if one is evicted for not paying their rent, they are automatically disqualified for emergency shelter funds, no matter the reason why they couldn't pay their rent.

We need a revolt in this country. With a billions dollars per week being spent on military conquests, it is sickening that even one person in this country is without a decent wage, decent place to live, healthcare and elder age security.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 07:28 AM

It always puzzles me, why are so many people who are comfortably off so mean when it comes to this kind of thing? Face to face I'm sure many of them they are decent enough and generous enough. (Though the old saying "It's the poor that helps the poor" is still true enough, as I've found any time I've been it collecting for charity.)Is it that people need to have someone say "Thank you" to them personally, as a kind of instant reward?

Or is it that once you accept that hard times can hit anyone without it being their fault, it gets a bit frightening looking into an uncertain future, and it feels more comfortable to assume that people only get hard times because they are lazy and good for nothing?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: GUEST,John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 08:43 AM

It isn't a perfect world.

You get more of the behavior that you subsidize. It isn't as simple as WANTING to help. At some point you actually have to decide if you are, indeed, helping.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 09:04 AM

Sorry, I got it back-asswards...

What a Friend we have in Johnny

:-)

Robin


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 09:43 AM

So if actually helping would mean spending more money, but maybe in a slightly different way, these people would vote for that, John Hardly? Somehow that's never the impression I get. (I'm talking UK here, but from what I've read and seen, US as well.)


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 10:12 AM

No, McGrath, that's the standard line from the conservatives in this country, i.e. if we "subsidise" mothers who stay home with their pre-school children etc., then we will get more no-good for nothing freeloading women getting knocked up so they can collect those oh-so-generous (not!) welfare checks. Nevermind that she can only make minimum wage and can't pay for decent child care. Nevermind the double messages she hears from society, i.e. "if you were a decent mom you'd be home with your children/why aren't you out working, supporting your family?" It wouldn't matter to the Cons. how the money was spent, not on education or anything else, they don't care. An "idle" mom or other person on welfare MUST be lazy and dependent and not care a bit about bettering themselves. Much better to spend ONE BILLION per week on miltary conquests.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 10:23 AM

Always strikes me that the bottom line for anyone who is pro-life includes being opposed to anything that makes it harder for a woman who is on her own to look after her children , starting with a guarantee of an adequate income if she stays home, and good child-care, if she thinks going to work is a better idea.

Anyone who says they are pro-life and doesn't support things like that is, in my view, a liar.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: GUEST,John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 10:30 AM

If people are paid when not productive, where does the productivity come from that supports them?

If people are paid when not productive, what is their incentive to be productive?

Can a person's feelings of self-worth really survive a non-productive life?

To what degree is poverty a result of lifestyle choices?

If you took all the money in the USA, liquidated all assets, and distributed all the proceeds equally, and unemployed everyone equally, would we all be equally rich or equally poor?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 11:21 AM

What is your definition of productive, John? If it is by a monetary standard only, then I fail and yet, I have only been on welfare once in my life. You guessed it, it was for one year when I was a newly divorced mother of two young children, going to school for that one year. When I got a job after completing my courses, welfare offered to help out with childcare for three months only, then reneged on their promise. That really made me want to go out and get knocked up and keep on getting those welfare checks, oh yeah, for sure! It was awfully discouraging getting slapped down a the system that supposedly was there to help one get on one's feet.

What kind of "productivity" test would you measure this person by: developmentally challenged, has MS, and young child. Receives social security and lives in subsidised housing. Landlord violates state regs about keeping the place up, housing authorities withhold rent, renter gets evicted, now homeless, for failure to pay rent. Housing authorities admit their mistake, refusal of emergency shelter funding is in appeal. Meanwhile, the person trhough no fault of their own is homeless, struggling to be "productive." What kind of country are we to treat each other in such a fashion, again, while we spend One Billion per week on military conquests?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 11:54 AM

"Anyone who says they are pro-life and doesn't support things like that is, in my view, a liar. And of course I'd say just the same of anyone who said they were pro-choice but wanted to limit real choice by restricting benefits.

Most of the time, if people are paid when they aren't able to be productive, the money to pay for that comes from when they are able to be productive.

"Can a person's feelings of self-worth really survive a non-productive life?" A lot of wealthy people have always seemed to manage to cope with that.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: Amos
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 12:15 PM

Productivity of some sort is the basis of all morale, IMHO -- but there is nothing about raising a child well that excludesa it as productive activity. I can't think of a more valuable product than a living, sane human being!

As for the wealthy when you look in to iot you usually find the money came from production somewhere down the line; and for those who inherited it, they often are equipped with some kind of mission -- chariotable, artistic or some such -- and if not they end up flaming neurotic.

A


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 12:36 PM

There probably is a human need to produce something that is in some way.

However people who are able to meet this need through their paid work are fortunate, and probably not that common. For many people, the paid, but useless or even harmful, work they do to get by, gets in the way of their producing anything worth producing.

That's one of the good things about getting into our kinds of music.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 12:37 PM

There probably is a human need to produce something that is in some way worth producing - beautiful or useful, for example.

However people who are able to meet this need through their paid work are fortunate, and probably not that common. For many people, the paid, but useless or even harmful, work they do to get by, gets in the way of their producing anything worth producing.

That's one of the good things about getting into our kinds of music.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 01:02 PM

Neither conservative nor liberal disagree much about welfare for the truly disabled -- maybe about the details of how to manage it, but not the philosophical underpinnings.

So, unless we WANT to argue red herrings, what we are arguing over is welfare given to the capable.

What you described here:
"...welfare offered to help out with childcare for three months only, then reneged on their promise. That really made me want to go out and get knocked up and keep on getting those welfare checks, oh yeah, for sure! It was awfully discouraging getting slapped down a the system that supposedly was there to help one get on one's feet."

...doesn't seem to argue against my point as much as reinforce it -- the implication being, you are describing a system that did not provide. Had it provided, your choices may have been different. If it had provided childcare and a check for an indefinite period, what would have been the necessity to get off of it?

Should welfare provide a comfortable lifestyle?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 01:31 PM

"...what would have been the necessity to get off of it?" Necessity isn't the only thing that decides what people do. A society where it did would be essentially, I suggest, a slave society.

The bottom line is ensuring that there is a decent life for the children as well as the mother. In some cases that is going to be best provided by her staying home, and in some by her going out to fulltime work or education, ánd in others some combination. And the person who is in a best position to make that decision is likely going to be the mother herself.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 01:39 PM

"And the person who is in a best position to make that decision is likely going to be the mother herself."

Why?

Hasn't she already, to some extent, showed herself less than capable of the kind of desision making that would have kept her our of this circumstance in the first place?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 01:45 PM

You mean she decided not to have an abortion, John?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 01:53 PM

touche'

Deft turn of discussion but that wasn't part of your previously stated options.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 02:01 PM

If millions of woman have suffered because our governments' and society's mis-handling of their predicament, should we NOT correct the problem (because it might be hard to do so) so that subsequent millions of women don't have to suffer the same fate?

It's great when we make the right desisions and judgements in a timely manner. It just doesn't always happen that way. Ever had a relationship that you utterly mishandled because you didn't do the right thing at the right time -- and then the other person in the relationship escalated what should have been dealt with properly in the first place......

....but then you don't deal with now escalated, worse problem because now, not only is it still hard to deal with, but now you are complicitous in having mishandled it in the first place and allowing the thing to escalate.

Do you ever ultimately DEAL with it?


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 02:26 PM

No, John, the point was it made me feel as though there was no use in trying to be self-sufficient because of the lack of promised support. I don't know why people continue to think there is some kind of fun or joy in trying to raise a family on what welfare pays. Ask anyone who is on welfare how happy they are or how much fun they are having. Ask them if they choose/chose to live that way on purpose.

As to whether a woman is in that situation through her own fault, maybe sometimes but usually NOT. Usually it has a LOT to do with partners who have abandoned, couldn't cope, were abusive, etc. most times an unforseen circumstance. Also, it is still a sad fact that woman cannot earn as much as their male counterparts. When I completed my course at college employers were still legally able to choose to hire a man over a woman just because SHE might get pregnant and not last long as an employee! Talk about discrimination!

If society does not help its poorest and does nothing to show them a way out of poverty, then that society as a whole is poorer, for the treament of the lowest reflects right back to those who would begrudge a morsel of bread. America is not mighty, beautiful, grand, nor the leading nation in the world as long as we are without healthcare for all, childcare for all, and equality in wages, etc. for women.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 02:36 PM

"that wasn't part of your previously stated options"

Wasn't it? Look at my post at 10.23 . It's pretty clearly indicated in that.

I believe that a major, probably the major, factor in causing women to opt for abortion in both our countries, are these kinds of pressures.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 02:51 PM

"I believe that a major, probably the major, factor in causing women to opt for abortion in both our countries, are these kinds of pressures."

That may be the number two reason but I think pregnancy is the number one.

I'm not sure women are worse off health-care wise, or any other wise here in America.

I'm not sure welfare is "Show(ing) them a way out of poverty". That's the whole crux of this discussion.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 03:09 PM

I said, If society does not help its poorest and does nothing to show them a way out of poverty. I did NOT say that welfare was "Show(ing) them a way out of poverty."

If the Cons. really cared about mothers and children, really were "Focused on the Family" we would have a country which pays mothers and/or fathers a living wage to stay home with their children until they start school; we would have more employers who offer on-site childcare and/or shared work hours, making sure one parent can be home when the kids get off from school; we'd have free preventative medical care for all and more education aabout and availability of birth control methods. BUT, unless the family is white, with both parents present, and upper middle-class and above, the Cons. don't give a damn.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 03:39 PM

but we aren't a society that put our heads together and collectively decided to pay anyone a wage, living or otherwise. The market did that and, though we may be able to jockey around a bit with it, we may be able to take from earners from the open market and pay for non-participants, it won't be until markets decide that this is economic good sense (and to some extent they are deciding that) that one should expect business to do so. To force them to do so takes away the base of productivity upon which all depend.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 04:24 PM

Markets should be our servants, not our masters.

If the pattern of distribution that "the markets" decide doesn't help us live together better, then "the markets" have to change. Markets operate within a set of parameters,and these parameters are not laid down in Holy Writ. They are a human invention, and human inventions generally need to be adjusted before they work right.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: GUEST,Marta
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 04:58 PM

hey akenaton, I note you started this and have left us to it !

I agree with you. The welfare state has provided a safety net without which we might have had a serious uprising in the Uk. Clever ploy !


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: jacqui c
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 05:30 PM

I was on benefits for a number of years back in the 70s, after my husband left me for another woman and my children were one and four years old. It was very much a hand to mouth existence with no luxuries. On the estate I lived on there were a number of women in the same sort of position and I looked at the fact that, with teenage children, some of them were still reliant on the state and showed no sign of thinking about what they would do once the children were grown up and they were no longer eligible for benefits. As a result, once my youngest was in school I started studying, did A and O levels and trained as a teacher. For various reasons I didn't go into teaching but the qualification got me into the firm that I still work for today. I could no more stay on benefits any longer than was absolutely necessary than jump off a cliff.

The problem is that it is the feckless and ill prepared ones who make the headlines and are held up as examples of the ills of 'welfare'. There are a lot of people out there who have no option at some point or other in their lives than to rely on the state, but who fight tooth and nail to get back to supporting themselves as fast as possible. self respect demands it of most. I do get angry at the ones who see welfare as a 'right' and state that they 'can't afford' to work. But we will always have these people and that is no reason to penalise those in need who will, at some point, make the effort. If I had not been supported by the state when I was doing my A and O levels I would not have had the opportunity to progress to higher education and to become a fully productive member of the working population for the past 24 years. I know that there are many others out there who are doing or have done the same thing - they just ain't interesting enough for the media to spotlight them, unlike the 'lazy and feckless' types who do get their fifteen minutes of fame.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 05:45 PM

Thank you, jacqui, well said!

John, one last note, we, as a society, did get together, in a way, and decide on a minimum wage; have done for many years. Also, I really don't know how anyone could be classified as a "non-participant" unless they are totally self-sufficient with absolutely no need to interact for anything from the rest of society and its markets.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 06:02 PM

non-participant=non-working


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 06:17 PM

The trouble is people, often sensible and well-intentioned people, are seduced by the anecdotes presented by hacks, working for proprietors who have an agenda of trying to present people on benefits as scroungers, for some peculiar political reason of their own.

If you grab a few selected cases together you can cobble them together into a narrative that tells you anything you want it to. There are free loaders, there are saints, there are hard cases, there are soft options...It's wrong to rely on gossip when reaching conclusions about these kind of issues. And that's what is done all the time.

Basically, the consensus we've reached, that democracies have worked out, and which I believe makes sense, is that, on balance it is best for decisions to be made by people directly affected, rather than having them made by supposedly wiser and better informed people on their behalf.

It' squite true that, all too often it doesn't work out right - but experience seems to have shown that doing it the clever way works out even worse. And that applies when it comes to people on benefit, every bit as much as for the rest of us.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 06:20 PM

Hi Marta ...good to hear from you again...As you rightly say I started this discussion....In an effort to get at the truth ,and once again ,facts seem to be getting in the way..In my opinion, our governmentsdont give a shit abouthow people feel about themselves ...or getting them out of poverty . It seems nowadays ,there is always going to be a large section of society which is going to be "unproductive", for a variety of reasons.
To keep this mass fed, watered and quiet,the government are prepared to spend billions of our money on benefits.
This ploy is sure to fail, as the lump grows bigger and thepool of money smaller.Add to this the demands being put on the Health service, the retirement pension problem related to people living longer,ect,ect, ect,and its obvious we are on a down ward spiral,to which our capitalist system has no answer.
Whats coming next?    Tune in 2013 to find out.....Ake


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: katlaughing
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 06:49 PM

if someone is buying goods and services they are a participant, no matter where their income is from, imo


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 07:02 PM

Once again, why do comfortable people get so mean about this kind of stuff? And I'm using "mean" in the English snese - tight-fisted, ungenerous.

Not in that American sense where "mean" is used for being tough and rugged and all that stuff. Scrooge-mean, not Clint Eastwood-mean.

"...I can't afford to make idle people merry. I help to support the establishments I have mentioned -- they cost enough; and those who are badly off must go there... If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: akenaton
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 07:11 PM

Mcgrath ...What do you mean.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 07:53 PM

the fact is that someone has to pay for it, I dont mind paying taxes for a safety net system that will help people get back on their feet,
but those who are capable of work and choose not to should be made to work for it or cutoff.
I knew people even in high school whose main goal was to work long enough to collect unemployment benefits.

I knew a couple of welfare mothers (one decided to get pregnant while traveling in Japan - and came back to canada to live on welfare - she just wanted a child) It wasnt until the child was 10 that she decided that to get out of the welfare trap and work. Shes quite proud of it.
but basically they chose to have children because they wanted kids - not welfare.

lately one vancouver councillor said that people who panhandle are actually working in their own way - which prompted another councillor to say that those who break into cars and houses are also working.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 08:08 PM

I think it's fairly clear what I meant - and that last post reinforces it.

Things don't really change much over the years. The details change, and the rationalisations change, and the disguises change.

But thank God, in some parts of the world, though thoings are far from perfect, and we even still have those kind of attitudes expressed from time to time, and there are people who hold them, they are not within reach of the levers of power. And I hope they never will be.


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate

Subject: RE: BS: Benefits/Welfare.
From: John Hardly
Date: 10 Oct 03 - 08:15 PM

you're showing a rather "either/or" point of view there MofH, aren't you? Because one might content that generosity does not equate with "help" , you sign them off as "mean". And their anecdotal evidence is discounted by your omniscience? *grin*


Post - Top - Home - Printer Friendly - Translate
Next Page

 


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.


You must be a member to post in non-music threads. Join here.



Mudcat time: 22 January 9:20 AM EST

[ Home ]

All original material is copyright © 1998 by the Mudcat Café Music Foundation, Inc. All photos, music, images, etc. are copyright © by their rightful owners. Every effort is taken to attribute appropriate copyright to images, content, music, etc. We are not a copyright resource.