Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Socialist United State ???
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 8 of 15 (597916)
12-25-2010 3:28 PM
Reply to: Message 7 by frako
12-25-2010 5:41 AM


frako responds to Taz:
quote:
quote:
I fail to see how 'welfare moms' legitimizes taking away safety nets for the real thing.
It is just a slight flaw in the system that could be corrected if the social workers and staff would actually do what they are supposed to do and check up on people like that.
What makes you think they don't?
This is nothing more than the recycled Reagan bullshit of "welfare queens." But the reality is that there aren't any. Now, let's not play dumb and say that if we can one example, then that means your original statement is true. I will handily admit that there is at least one person who games the system and at least one couple who has decided to avoid getting married due to the issue of losing benefits*. But let's not pretend that this is a widespread problem.
A common refrain from the "welfare queen" crowd is to point at Sweden to rail against the welfare state and how it leads to illegitimacy and the like. And while it's true that Sweden has a large percentage of its children born out of wedlock, it is also true that the majority of children have married parents. How can that be? Simple: The couple tends not to get married until they have a kid.
This is the problem with looking only at the surface. Social programs are developed not willy-nilly, not simply toss money from the side of a train a la scenes from Evita. The paperwork you have to slog through in order to get governmental benefits can be massive. It is not a simple procedure and there are checks to ensure efficiency. No system is perfect, but let's not pretend that because it isn't perfect, that means it is absolutely broken.
[*One of the problems with such is that among the benefits one gets is Medicaid, which is subsidized health insurance for the poor. When the income level changes such as by getting married, you can lose that benefit but still be too poor to afford health insurance, either because your employer doesn't offer it and/or it's too expensive.]

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 7 by frako, posted 12-25-2010 5:41 AM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by frako, posted 12-25-2010 5:23 PM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 10 of 15 (598184)
12-29-2010 2:34 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by frako
12-25-2010 5:23 PM


frako responds to me:
quote:
Well this was a very wide spread problem in Yugoslavia welfare was way to good there was only a small difference between welfare and minimal wage say 20% and loads of people who where lazy abused the system why work if you can sit at home and get the same cash.
This is a common whine from the right here in the US but the reality doesn't match. States that have more generous welfare payouts tend to have lower rates of poverty, usually because they have a more substantial safety net that helps people get out of poverty.
Don't you find it interesting that the constitution that the US provided for Iraq contains clauses about guaranteed living wages and welfare? Why is it so much better for everybody else but not for our own people?
quote:
loads of people who where lazy abused the system why work if you can sit at home and get the same cash.
I'm sure you think that's true. Do you have any evidence of such? And more specifically, do you have the evidence that shows it's an actual cause-and-effect scenario and not merely coincidence? For example, unemployment benefits have been extended out to 99 weeks from the previous standard of 26. Does that mean people in the US are lazy? Of course not. The reason unemployment has become so "generous" (and let's be honest, unemployment benefits won't get a family of four above the poverty line, so they're hardly "generous") is because unemployment is so rampant. People want to work, but there simply aren't any jobs for them to have.
quote:
Do not get me wrong i am all for "socialism" though i do think the system needs some work.
That may be, but you are making blanket statements rather than specifics and your examples are about things that are of little effect.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by frako, posted 12-25-2010 5:23 PM frako has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by frako, posted 12-29-2010 5:50 AM Rrhain has replied

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 6351
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003


Message 14 of 15 (599708)
01-10-2011 12:26 AM
Reply to: Message 11 by frako
12-29-2010 5:50 AM


frako responds to me:
quote:
quote:
Do you have any evidence of such?
You can interview my neighbor...
Hold it right there. You really think you can get away with passing off anecdote as evidence here?
But more importantly, I recall specifically telling you, in my original response:
Now, let's not play dumb and say that if we can one example, then that means your original statement is true.
It would seem that you have decided to ignore that request. As I stated immediately afterward:
I will handily admit that there is at least one person who games the system and at least one couple who has decided to avoid getting married due to the issue of losing benefits. But let's not pretend that this is a widespread problem.
If you aren't going to read my posts, then we are going to have a problem with having an intellectually honest discussion.
quote:
Tough when i was looking for 2 workers 30 applied 25 of them only wanted me to sign the paper that they where here for the interview, one of them did not even want to come out of his car he pointed the paper out of the window.
You seem to be overlooking something: You had more people looking for work than there were jobs available. That's the problem.
You're anecdotes are fine and dandy, but they do not reflect reality.
quote:
Now you have some examples
No, I don't. I have some just-so stories from you. Your personal experience is not an accurate gauge of real life. We don't accept it in any other area of rational inquiry, what on earth makes you think it would be blindly accepted here? The people who have actively studied the issue of social safety nets all disagree with your opinion.
Where is your study that shows them to be wrong? "I know a guy" is not a study.
quote:
as i said i am all for socialism tough it does need more control.
All things need control. There are no perfect systems, especially when people are involved. But your stated reactions have been based upon nothing more than personal bias.

Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by frako, posted 12-29-2010 5:50 AM frako has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024