i'm not against helping people. i don't think they should ever have cash given to them. housing, food, transportation and some entertainment...but not money. many of these people are able to work, but choose to not work. others do not have the capacity to spend it wisely, so it is never enough.
2006-08-28 07:02:18 · 13 answers · asked by bill loomer 4 in Society & Culture ➔ Other - Society & Culture
I agree. I think we should also call it what it is, charity. Someone has sacrificed something they own to give it to them. It is because they are in need, and people want to help. It is not because they are entitled. If I can't claim them as a dependent, then they should not be getting my tax money because their lazy and still breathing.
Give a person a fish, and they get a meal, but teach them to fish and they can feed themselves. To many hand outs creates a new class of slaves.
2006-08-28 07:10:35 · answer #1 · answered by Mr Cellophane 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Funny you should ask that, since millions of American workers have lost their jobs through downsizing. I've been downsized twice in the last 15 years. It's not enough that our jobs are outsourced overseas, but then we get posters like you.
I've found another job, but my income is 50% less than I previously earned. I'm out on disability for surgery right now. The company I work for (a well known Fortune 300 company), doesn't pay disability benefits, so in the five weeks I've been out, I haven't received one dime from my employer.
People fall in hard times. We all need help at some time or another. With the changes in the welfare system, I'm not sure who these people who can work but choose not to are.
In the county where I live, $58,000 a year is considered low income, and $83,000 a year for a family of four. I currently earn MUCH less than that. Anyone I talk to always feels the same way, regardless of whether they earn $30,000 or four times that amount - you never have enough.
People all over the world are struggling. They need legitimate help, not someone making blanket judgments about them.
2006-08-28 14:20:05 · answer #2 · answered by loveblue 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You answered your own questions. I stand in line behind you with all you said except one area, if they chose not to work we chose not to give them money....Everyone who makes a decision not to work just because they don't want to then expects us to pay him for doing so is a plaque upon the society and needs to be put to work in some complicity before they receive any assistance what so ever. Or let them roam in the desert for 40 days and 40 nights, speak with/ god or the devil and then come back and get a book deal and make some damn money and pay taxes like the rest of us.
2006-08-28 14:09:32 · answer #3 · answered by kickinupfunf 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't think the rules to decide who does and doesn't qualify are strict enough. When you see some old lazy gal having their "welfare kids" every year and getting rent assistence, food stamps, christmas from the churches and fire departments, free medical, not working because she has little ones, that just burns me up. Some of them make a career out of getting pregnant.
2006-08-28 14:13:19 · answer #4 · answered by Grandma Susie 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There are institutions and facilities for them to go to, that help them out, if i was to give them money, it would though a donation to one of those. I dont trust them to good with any cash that i give them, i like to know that money is being used for good, and not wasted on some drug fix,or Alcohol (im ont trying to be stereotypical, there are some exceptions), i know at least through a donation to those places will be used properly.
2006-08-28 14:11:42 · answer #5 · answered by Metallicat 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think if you're mentally or physical challenged it's one thing. But these people who are too lazy or have so many damn kids that they can't afford to work and pay for day care need to help themselves. If you can't support a family, don't have one. However, I think all LEGAL Americans should get free health care.
2006-08-28 14:13:01 · answer #6 · answered by U.WANT.ME 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, theres nothing wrong with getting help if you need it. if you have an honest job and work and still need help it should be available to you. if the government would quit giving themselves all the money and help the real people out with raising min. wage and affordable health coverage, then maybe so many people wouldn't need it.
2006-08-28 14:07:28 · answer #7 · answered by amy b 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
some people aren't mentally or physically able to work.
also, i don't presume to know what someone is going to do with the money i give them, so why shouldn't i try and help?
2006-08-28 14:05:35 · answer #8 · answered by kittens 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
theres more money spent on government wasteful spending than money spent to help people.the government spends billions of dollars every year on foreign governments.
2006-08-28 14:17:03 · answer #9 · answered by mack j 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If they can't work, give. If they choose not to work, save it.
2006-08-28 14:09:33 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋