Category Archives: public assistance

Understanding the Occupiers

English: Protest signs outside of Occupy Boston.

Image via Wikipedia

Though it started months ago, and no longer makes daily headlines on the major news networks, the Occupy Movement is still plugging away. Tenaciously spreading its anti-capitalist mantra to anyone who cares to listen. This movement has been applauded in the media as a great social movement, but how great has it really been? Just what has truly been accomplished that will benefit the whole of society? To get a better handle on the kind of people who are, or  have participated in an Occupy protest, I have a few questions I would like to ask. I would appreciate a direct response to these questions from anyone who is or has participated in an Occupy protest for more than a week.

  1. Are you currently employed? If so, how did you get the time off from work to participate in this protest? If no, are you actively seeking employment? If so, how are you conducting a job search while  attending the protest?
  2. If not employed, are you a student? If so, how are you managing to attend class and keep up with your homework while attending the protest?  What is your grade point average?
  3. Do you own a home or rent?  If so, how are you paying your mortgage, or rent and utilities while you are attending the protest?  If not, where were you living before you encamped at the protest?  Did you have to contribute financially in any way,  in order to live there?  Will you be able to return there when you are through protesting?
  4. Other than student loans or education grants, are you receiving any form of government assistance?  If so what kind?
  5. Do you depend on your parents for any kind of financial support?  (To include trust funds)
  6. Are you married?  If so, are both of you attending the protest?
  7. Do you have any children?
  8. What visible positive effects can be seen in this community due to the presence of this protest?
  9. Are you old enough to vote? If so, are you planning on voting in the presidential election?
  10. Do you now, or have you ever owned any kind of business?

It will be interesting and probably surprising to see the answers to these questions.  I’ll put the results in a future post.

Advertisements

Somebody Has to Pay? Guess Who That Would Be

I first heard this on the Neal Boortz show.

The video is astonishing in its audacity. It is an embarrassing illustration of everything that is wrong with our system of social services. I’m not a social worker, or a psychologist. I’m just a housewife and mother who’s had to work hard, pay taxes and live with the consequences of my choices. I could never imagine myself proclaiming that someone other than myself or the father of my children should “pay for them.” Yes, children are a gift from God. But when he blesses us with children He tasks the parents with the responsibility for their care. Not the government. It’s obvious that our welfare system is broken. Fortunately most of the problems are simple to fix. Unfortunately our culture of political correctness and preservation of self-esteem will prevent these changes from taking place.

We need to remember what the purpose of the welfare system was in the first place. It was meant as a way for people who had hit hard times or who were economically disadvantaged, to be put back on the path to self-sufficiency. No one was expected to stay on welfare for life. It was certainly never intended to be a “family business” handed down from parent to child. As our society began to put a higher value on self-esteem than integrity, the stigma of being on welfare began to disappear. We were taught that feeling guilt and shame regardless of the reason was a bad thing. This caused a fundamental shift in our attitudes, and so we began to feel that not only was it okay to live off of the charity of others, it was our right. Politicians eager to buy votes from the poor and poorly educated were all too willing to promote this attitude.

To cover all the minute details involved to fix the system would be too unwieldy to put into one blog post. We can begin however, by making some basic common sense rules for people who are receiving welfare to live by.

1. In order to continue to receive benefits, a person must demonstrate that they are actively trying to get out of the system.

2. When a woman comes into the system, the children she has at the time are covered. If she chooses to have any more children then she and her children are kicked out of the system.

3. Any one guilty of drug possession or of being under the influence of illegal drugs is kicked out of the system.

4. Any one convicted of a crime other than minor traffic violations is kicked out of the system.

5. Any one who uses welfare funds to buy alcohol, tobacco, illegal drugs, or luxury items or services, or uses the funds for gambling (to include lottery tickets) will be kicked out of the system.

6. If an individual or family is living in any form of public housing they will be expected to take care of he property. They will not damage, deface, destroy, or willfully neglect the property or they will be evicted. Those living there who are physically able will be expected to participate in the upkeep and maintenance of the buildings and grounds.

Six simple, straightforward, common sense rules. Are they unreasonable? No. Discriminatory? No. Are they a bit harsh? Well maybe, but they need to be in order to change the attitude from a one of entitlement to one of self-sufficiency. Knowing what the rules are and the consequences for breaking them from the outset could be a good incentive to do the right thing. The taxpayers who are funding the service programs have a right to expect responsible behavior from those who are benefitting from the system. By demanding that people in the social services system make an effort to reduce the financial burden placed on the taxpayers for their care, we make them a partner in their care and help to create an attitude of stewardship rather than entitlement.

Who’s Got Who’s Back?

Picture of Samsung Moment cell phone with scre...

Image via Wikipedia

I am really irritated at those television commercials advertising free cell phones for low-income people. Yes, basic landline service should be provided for emergency purposes. No one should be left without a way to call 911. What gets me about these commercials however, is that they are misleading as to the source of the funding. One commercial practically insinuates that the Government owes you a cell phone if you are on public assistance. A women in another commercial proudly proclaims that she “has her mother’s back.”  Who do these people think the Government is? A more truthful commercial would have the woman thanking her friends, family, and neighbors for “having her mother’s back” by providing the tax money that subsidises her mother’s phone. I really feel that this is a program that seriously needs to be reconsidered. Why should my tax money go to provide a luxury that I can barely afford myself.

%d bloggers like this: