NationStates Jolt Archive

Those on welfare are like ticks; they exploit their host organism by sucking its blood for nourishment without giving anything in return. Similarly, those on welfare tenaciously cling on to the emotional and easily manipulated members of society and bleed them try. They suck their money and use it to fund a care-free life of drugs, alcohol, and hedonism without even giving one iota of support for society in return. This must immediately stop. We must implement more stringent programmes in an effort to dissuade the indolent and stupid from leeching off society. Welfare reform is in order.

The most critical failure of our current welfare programme is that it's too easy to obtain money for doing nothing at all. We must "tighten the leash," so to speak. The welfare system should be more like a prison. If you cannot acquire a job and wish, instead, to appeal to society for succor, you must submit yourself to rigorous circumstances to prove your devotion. All those who are on welfare should be confined to cells and forced to do a form of "community service." At night, they would have to sleep in small, cold, cells. During the day, they would help the hard-working members of society, by performing such menial tasks as cleaning toilets and sweeping floors in office buildings. In return for these services rendered, they would receive three square meals a day, a roof over their heads, and $20 dollars each day. If they continuously apply themselves for over a year, they will be able to succeed in the real world. They will develop the skills necessary to find employment and shall no longer be burdens to society.

If, however, they fail to leave the programme for a long period of time, more drastic action is necessary. Try to rehabilitate some people is just a waste of time; their sole purpose in life is to prey off society, and we would be throwing our money down a black hole if we attempt to aid such people. We must ship them out of the country, to whichever country is willing to accept them. Of course, the government will pay for the air fare and a bit of pocket money, and we'll say "good riddance!" Hopefully, countries such as France with failed economic models will steer their way clear to accepting them because they don't realize that their crumbling systems cannot withstand any more pressure. If not, we'll have to transport them to countries with more lax immigration measures, such as Madagascar. Once there, they cannot plague society any more. These measures are harsh; I realize this. However, they are also necessary if we wish to have a functioning society and a prosperous economy -- people must be willing to work if they want to live in this great country. We must not tolerate the scum of the earth whose dearest ambition is to destroy society from within and be as useless as a lump of clay.

hey look over there! it's reality - i wonder how she's been recently?

Before anyone posts:

This has been reported to the mods. Please let it die.

I wonder if he's on welfare himself :p Now that would be ironic.

You have not the right to exile an American citizen who has not commited a crime. You would be suprised how much of our culture and status we would lose within ten years of this program.

I do not like welfare either, it creates dependency. I think the solution to this is workfare, not exile for failing to succeed. In the case of the handicapped, welfare is perfectly acceptable.

* makes a very large batch of popcorn & gets comfy *

Before anyone posts:

This has been reported to the mods. Please let it die.

Beat me to it.

This one's not as good as the one yesterday, where you were arguing that Mark Foley was trying to expand the rights of youth. You really need to try harder, MTAE.

I give this one a 4.8 out of 10.

* makes a very large batch of popcorn & gets comfy *

Don't get too comfy. This thread may not survive long. But until it gets locked...

*grabs a handful of popcorn, hands Saint Farnhamia a drink*

Don't get too comfy. This thread may not survive long. But until it gets locked...

*grabs a handful of popcorn, hands Saint Farnhamia a drink*

*sips drink* Did the Mods lock MTAE's other threads? Or ban him, even temporarily?

*sips drink* Did the Mods lock MTAE's other threads? Or ban him, even temporarily?

I think the Foley thread got locked. But no, he's not been banned yet...at least, not that I know of. :confused:

TBH, part of me hopes they don't ban him. He's a good source of entertainment. :)

You're either a sixteen year old armchair politician with no significant grasp of the reality of economic systems and politics, or you're a troll.

This has been reported to the mods. Please let it die.

What the hell are you on about? Do you honestly believe that this forum is so ultra-liberal that no one can even challenge the disgusting welfare state that currently exists in the US which allows the lazy to get a free feast with society footing the bill?


This one's not as good as the one yesterday, where you were arguing that Mark Foley was trying to expand the rights of youth. You really need to try harder, MTAE.

How many times must I tell you? I am not a troll. If you wish to debate me, go ahead. If you wish to attempt to poke holes in my logic, proceed. However, if you only wish to post inane comments which underline your ignorance, please stop. It's called spam if you contribute nothing to a thread. You probably live in a rich, cloistered, liberal community where there are no people who prey on society. Well, wake up, Buddha, and look around you! This is a problem which needs to be resolved. I would appreciate honest discourse instead of mindless blabbering.

http://www.photogg.de/skan/8-4-troll.jpg

Don't Feed the Troll!
Thankyou.

I think the Foley thread got locked. But no, he's not been banned yet...at least, not that I know of. :confused:

TBH, part of me hopes they don't ban him. He's a good source of entertainment. :)

I know, he is entertaining. The Foley OP was, in its perverse way, brilliant.

http://www.photogg.de/skan/8-4-troll.jpg

Don't Feed the Troll!
Thankyou.

But he's amusing!

What the hell are you on about? Do you honestly believe that this forum is so ultra-liberal that no one can even challenge the disgusting welfare state that currently exists in the US which allows the lazy to get a free feast with society footing the bill?

Challenging it = fine
Insulting people on welfare = not fine

Not all welfare repicients are as you describe.

How many times must I tell you? I am not a troll.

And how many times did Mr. Nixon tell people "I am not a crook? Saying something doesn't make it a fact, MTAE.

How many times must I tell you? I am not a troll.

Repetition doesn't make it any more true.

But he's amusing!

It's no longer funny, really.

It's no longer funny, really.

Did you read the Foley thread?

It's no longer funny, really.

No, the only thing that's not amusing is that my tax dollars have to go to support some drug addict (not all welfare recipients use their money for drugs, but some do) who doesn't want to do anything with his life. It's a gross misallocation of resources, and something needs to be done about it. It's not a joke.

Did you read the Foley thread?

Yeah, but this one isn't as good.

No, the only thing that's not amusing is that my tax dollars have to go to support some drug addict (not all welfare recipients use their money for drugs, but some do) who doesn't want to do anything with his life. It's a gross misallocation of resources, and something needs to be done about it. It's not a joke.

And neither is trolling. And that, sir, is what you are doing.

Aaaw... And this could have been such an interesting debate. Too bad you had to muck it up by your posting style :(


How many times must I tell you? I am not a troll. If you wish to debate me, go ahead. If you wish to attempt to poke holes in my logic, proceed.

It iz too late... Your reputation, zhe iz ruined... Ruined, André, RUINED!!

You don't debate when given the chance, so why bother? Moderate your posting style and maybe, somewhere down the road, you will be taken seriously again.

Yeah, but this one isn't as good.

Like I said, the Foley thread was a work of art. This one, not so much.

That's a cracker :D

And fuck, I wish I'd got $20 per day when I was on the dole. I'd've been able to have drugs and whores every day instead of alternating!

The concept has all the appeal of a still-furry clubbed-baby-seal soufle.

Given the reform that Clinton signed into office, things are many times better than they were in the 70s and 80s. :rolleyes:

* makes a very large batch of popcorn & gets comfy *

*inlfates a chair and sits next to Her Saintliness*

The concept has all the appeal of a still-furry clubbed-baby-seal soufle.

Given the reform that Clinton signed into office, things are many times better than they were in the 70s and 80s. :rolleyes:

See? I keep telling you, everything is Clinton's fault.

Repetition doesn't make it any more true.

Unless you're a republican.

LOOK A TERRORIST! GIVE ME YOUR RIGHTS!

If welfare is evil, shouldn't Wal Mart be nailed repeatedly for pushing its employees to go on state health insurance assistance instead of offering a real and affordable plan?

Before anyone posts:

This has been reported to the mods. Please let it die.

WHY has this been reported to the mods? What the hell is WRONG with you whiney little bastards and this deep seated need to run to "Moddie" with every little bitty thing?





<edit: Count down to some whiner repoting this post to a mod: t minus 10, 9, 8 . . .

All things considered, this was tamer than I expected. I thought MTAE was going to advocate mowing down anyone on welfare with machine guns.

Just a friendly reminder

DON'T FEED THE TROLL!!!

Those on welfare are like ticks; they exploit their host organism by sucking its blood for nourishment without giving anything in return. Similarly, those on welfare tenaciously cling on to the emotional and easily manipulated members of society and bleed them try. They suck their money and use it to fund a care-free life of drugs, alcohol, and hedonism without even giving one iota of support for society in return. This must immediately stop. We must implement more stringent programmes in an effort to dissuade the indolent and stupid from leeching off society. Welfare reform is in order.

Anyone else notice anything -

The current birthrate favors the stupid and indolent. The poor and stupid have much higher birthrates than the intelligent and capable. While genetics are not a 100% indication of success in life, everyone must admit that a child of successful educated people has a much better chance of being an intelligent productive member of society than a child born to impoverished idiots.

Hmmm... sounds familiar.

WHY has this been reported to the mods? What the hell is WRONG with you whiney little bastards and this deep seated need to run to "Moddie" with every little bitty thing?





<edit: Count down to some whiner repoting this post to a mod: t minus 10, 9, 8 . . .

Your wish is granted. You flamed people and baited people on purpose and admit you're doing so expecting to be reported. Who am I to resist your wishes?

Those on welfare are like ticks; they exploit their host organism by sucking its blood for nourishment without giving anything in return. Similarly, those on welfare tenaciously cling on to the emotional and easily manipulated members of society and bleed them try. They suck their money and use it to fund a care-free life of drugs, alcohol, and hedonism without even giving one iota of support for society in return. This must immediately stop. We must implement more stringent programmes in an effort to dissuade the indolent and stupid from leeching off society. Welfare reform is in order.

The most critical failure of our current welfare programme is that it's too easy to obtain money for doing nothing at all. We must "tighten the leash," so to speak. The welfare system should be more like a prison. If you cannot acquire a job and wish, instead, to appeal to society for succor, you must submit yourself to rigorous circumstances to prove your devotion. All those who are on welfare should be confined to cells and forced to do a form of "community service." At night, they would have to sleep in small, cold, cells. During the day, they would help the hard-working members of society, by performing such menial tasks as cleaning toilets and sweeping floors in office buildings. In return for these services rendered, they would receive three square meals a day, a roof over their heads, and $20 dollars each day. If they continuously apply themselves for over a year, they will be able to succeed in the real world. They will develop the skills necessary to find employment and shall no longer be burdens to society.

If, however, they fail to leave the programme for a long period of time, more drastic action is necessary. Try to rehabilitate some people is just a waste of time; their sole purpose in life is to prey off society, and we would be throwing our money down a black hole if we attempt to aid such people. We must ship them out of the country, to whichever country is willing to accept them. Of course, the government will pay for the air fare and a bit of pocket money, and we'll say "good riddance!" Hopefully, countries such as France with failed economic models will steer their way clear to accepting them because they don't realize that their crumbling systems cannot withstand any more pressure. If not, we'll have to transport them to countries with more lax immigration measures, such as Madagascar. Once there, they cannot plague society any more. These measures are harsh; I realize this. However, they are also necessary if we wish to have a functioning society and a prosperous economy -- people must be willing to work if they want to live in this great country. We must not tolerate the scum of the earth whose dearest ambition is to destroy society from within and be as useless as a lump of clay.

I completely agree. And while we're at it, we should start deporting anyone who we don't like. And by we, I mean ME. So all the racists, you're shipped off to China. All those that call the poor 'stupid, 'scum of the earth' or suggest that poor people as a group are generally drug addicted, alcohol abusing hedonists, all heading out to... hmmm... North Korea. Hopefully, no one will listen to the advice of some posters against that area.

Or perhaps, we could start a real discussion that doesn't include all the unsupported generalizations and accusations and talks about real solutions designed at actually solving the problems instead of just trying to upset people by being extreme. Or did you intend to refer to Madagascar as a non-society? Did you really intend to suggest that because you've become poor you should lose your civil rights? Did you really intend to suggest that poor people are generally stupid?

Your wish is granted. You flamed people and baited people on purpose and admit you're doing so expecting to be reported. Who am I to resist your wishes?

No, I flamed people and "baited people" as you claim because I'm pissed off. People here seem to have trouble with simple actions like not reading threads they dislike or putting posters they dislike on their individual ban list so instead they run whining to their "nanny" the mods to delete threads and ban people.

<edit: and that wan't a wish, just an acknowledgement that someone was going to whine about my post too instead of ignoring it or just replying and arguing the point with me. Had someone done the later rather than repoting me I probabaly would have calmed down and discussed my problems with the nanny culture on these boads rationaly in another thread.>

I say we deport all the poor people! Our type ain't wanted round here.

All things considered, this was tamer than I expected. I thought MTAE was going to advocate mowing down anyone on welfare with machine guns.

Well, it certainly has its merits. After all, it would be beneficial to society as a whole if those on welfare ceased to exist -- they are most likely stupid and definitely detrimental to society (by definition). But killing them is a bit extreme -- it's not their fault that they were born at a genetic disadvantage. However, we would be amiss if we allowed them to further taint society. We should propose some breeding restrictions for those who are on welfare and are unintelligent. That might be a good idea. On the other hand, that would be a restriction of individual freedoms, of which I am a vehement supporter. It's a very complex issue, granted. On second thought, I'll just stick to my original plan -- just discourage people from being on welfare. Let them work for a living.

Oh for Pete's sake alive! If none of our resident social engineering advocates will engage in this debate in General nor do more than call on Nanny mod to make the bad man quit using hurtful words I'll have to do this myself. I'm far from the best man for this particular job though.


Those on welfare are like ticks; they exploit their host organism by sucking its blood for nourishment without giving anything in return. Similarly, those on welfare tenaciously cling on to the emotional and easily manipulated members of society and bleed them try. They suck their money and use it to fund a care-free life of drugs, alcohol, and hedonism without even giving one iota of support for society in return. This must immediately stop. We must implement more stringent programmes in an effort to dissuade the indolent and stupid from leeching off society. Welfare reform is in order.

While welfare reform is long overdue, I have never seen any instance where demonising a group of people led to a better understanding of either a problem or indeed to a viable solution. It has however often led to more and worse difficulties to overcome.

The most critical failure of our current welfare programme is that it's too easy to obtain money for doing nothing at all. We must "tighten the leash," so to speak. The welfare system should be more like a prison. If you cannot acquire a job and wish, instead, to appeal to society for succor, you must submit yourself to rigorous circumstances to prove your devotion. All those who are on welfare should be confined to cells and forced to do a form of "community service." At night, they would have to sleep in small, cold, cells. During the day, they would help the hard-working members of society, by performing such menial tasks as cleaning toilets and sweeping floors in office buildings. In return for these services rendered, they would receive three square meals a day, a roof over their heads, and $20 dollars each day. If they continuously apply themselves for over a year, they will be able to succeed in the real world. They will develop the skills necessary to find employment and shall no longer be burdens to society.

If, however, they fail to leave the programme for a long period of time, more drastic action is necessary. Try to rehabilitate some people is just a waste of time; their sole purpose in life is to prey off society, and we would be throwing our money down a black hole if we attempt to aid such people. We must ship them out of the country, to whichever country is willing to accept them. Of course, the government will pay for the air fare and a bit of pocket money, and we'll say "good riddance!" Hopefully, countries such as France with failed economic models will steer their way clear to accepting them because they don't realize that their crumbling systems cannot withstand any more pressure. If not, we'll have to transport them to countries with more lax immigration measures, such as Madagascar. Once there, they cannot plague society any more. These measures are harsh; I realize this. However, they are also necessary if we wish to have a functioning society and a prosperous economy -- people must be willing to work if they want to live in this great country. We must not tolerate the scum of the earth whose dearest ambition is to destroy society from within and be as useless as a lump of clay.


Prisons, even debtor and indigent prisons with work camps, force the prisoners to become 100% parasitic with no opportunity to become otherwise until release.These are exactly your gripes with the current system. When considered as groups, prisoners more closely match each and every negative trait you pointed out in your first paragraph than welfare recipients do. Making welfare recipients into prisoners would make them have the traits of prisoners. Since prisons will worsen the problem for those donating money and would be nearly universally considered to be a worse circumstance by those spending welfare funds we can see that this is not a viable solution and moreso is probably actually opposite of the direction we should head if results are to be our guide.

I completely agree. And while we're at it, we should start deporting anyone who we don't like. And by we, I mean ME. So all the racists, you're shipped off to China. All those that call the poor 'stupid, 'scum of the earth' or suggest that poor people as a group are generally drug addicted, alcohol abusing hedonists, all heading out to... hmmm... North Korea. Hopefully, no one will listen to the advice of some posters against that area.

Or perhaps, we could start a real discussion that doesn't include all the unsupported generalizations and accusations and talks about real solutions designed at actually solving the problems instead of just trying to upset people by being extreme. Or did you intend to refer to Madagascar as a non-society? Did you really intend to suggest that because you've become poor you should lose your civil rights? Did you really intend to suggest that poor people are generally stupid?

Of course poor people are stupid, otherwise they wouldn't be poor. Come on, that's just common sense. ;)

I started a thread on the social welfare state but I guess it was worded too politely because it got about 10 resposnses and sank off the 1st page. :(

Oh for Pete's sake alive! If none of our resident social engineering advocates will engage in this debate in General nor do more than call on Nanny mod to make the bad man quit using hurtful words I'll have to do this myself. I'm far from the best man for this particular job though.

Everyone knows better than to respond to him at this point.

I completely agree. And while we're at it, we should start deporting anyone who we don't like.

No, no, no -- you misunderstand me. I do not seek to forcibly deport anyone -- I just want to cut off their welfare benefits if they are deemed to be too much of a drain to society. If they wish, they can go somewhere else. Otherwise, they can starve or get a job.

Oh for Pete's sake alive! If none of our resident social engineering advocates will engage in this debate in General nor do more than call on Nanny mod to make the bad man quit using hurtful words I'll have to do this myself. I'm far from the best man for this particular job though.
This is why, NB:

Well, it certainly has its merits. After all, it would be beneficial to society as a whole if those on welfare ceased to exist -- they are most likely stupid and definitely detrimental to society (by definition). But killing them is a bit extreme -- it's not their fault that they were born at a genetic disadvantage. However, we would be amiss if we allowed them to further taint society. We should propose some breeding restrictions for those who are on welfare and are unintelligent. That might be a good idea. On the other hand, that would be a restriction of individual freedoms, of which I am a vehement supporter. It's a very complex issue, granted. On second thought, I'll just stick to my original plan -- just discourage people from being on welfare. Let them work for a living.

Im not everybody. If he wants to put up unsuppportable and untenable arguments I think I should knock them over rather than just calling him names. If that's okay by you.

Im not everybody. If he wants to put up unsuppportable and untenable arguments I think I should knock them over rather than just calling him names. If that's okay by you.

Have at it, but you're only encouraging him. None of his arguments ever have anything resembling sense, he always picks the most extreme and untenable positions possible in any given post, and he never actually defends his ideas, just whines when people call him out for trolling and reinterates stupid ideas from his original post in even stupider ways with each subsequent retelling.

Of course poor people are stupid, otherwise they wouldn't be poor. Come on, that's just common sense. ;)

I started a thread on the social welfare state but I guess it was worded too politely because it got about 10 resposnses and sank off the 1st page. :(

Sorry I missed it:(

No, I flamed people and "baited people" as you claim because I'm pissed off. People here seem to have trouble with simple actions like not reading threads they dislike or putting posters they dislike on their individual ban list so instead they run whining to their "nanny" the mods to delete threads and ban people.

<edit: and that wan't a wish, just an acknowledgement that someone was going to whine about my post too instead of ignoring it or just replying and arguing the point with me. Had someone done the later rather than repoting me I probabaly would have calmed down and discussed my problems with the nanny culture on these boads rationaly in another thread.>

It's amusing to me the irony of your posts. People are doing something that does not effect you and that is fully within the role of the mods to deal with yet you insist on complaining that people aren't behaving exactly how you'd like them to. Isn't that exactly what you're complaining others are doing?

<edit: and that wan't a wish, just an acknowledgement that someone was going to whine about my post too instead of ignoring it or just replying and arguing the point with me. Had someone done the later rather than repoting me I probabaly would have calmed down and discussed my problems with the nanny culture on these boads rationaly in another thread.>

I would however like to apologise for my earlyer phrasing. I will leave it standing unless deleted by a mod because I don't feel I should try to make my mistakes just go away.

Im not everybody. If he wants to put up unsuppportable and untenable arguments I think I should knock them over rather than just calling him names. If that's okay by you.

I liked your reply. People have treated everything he says with the same types of reply. However, it should be noted that a person who starts out by calling everyone who is poor 'stupid' and 'the scum of the earth' and anyone who defends them is 'easily manipulated' isn't trying to foster a debate.

It's amusing to me the irony of your posts. People are doing something that does not effect you and that is fully within the role of the mods to deal with yet you insist on complaining that people aren't behaving exactly how you'd like them to. Isn't that exactly what you're complaining others are doing?

Actualy if I hadn't been distracted by this situation (and by the way let us ajourn this conversation to other places after this post) I would have been responding to Meanstoanend's post and the topic of the thread. I often enjoy arguing with him and his ilk as they often say the funnyest things. People who report threads that I wish to participate in DO effect me by causing such threads to be deleted and/or locked so that I can not participate in them. Ignoring a thread you dislike on the other hand has no effect other than causing you to go to the next one.

Have at it, but you're only encouraging him. None of his arguments ever have anything resembling sense, he always picks the most extreme and untenable positions possible in any given post, and he never actually defends his ideas, just whines when people call him out for trolling and reinterates stupid ideas from his original post in even stupider ways with each subsequent retelling.

Ocassionally we need to suffer weak and wrong ideas and engage them in debate in order to allow freedom of speech, but moreso that we might make sure that our own ideas are not the weak and wrong ones:p

No, no, no -- you misunderstand me. I do not seek to forcibly deport anyone -- I just want to cut off their welfare benefits if they are deemed to be too much of a drain to society. If they wish, they can go somewhere else. Otherwise, they can starve or get a job.

I misunderstand this -
"We must ship them out of the country, to whichever country is willing to accept them."

Hmmm... I guess I didn't realize "We must ship them" means not forcibly. Meanwhile, you wish to give people the choice of starvation or prison. How kind of you? Like I said, if we accept your premise that we should deport all the undesirables, then I put people who suggest that we'd be better off if we killed all the people on welfare pretty high on the list of undesirables.

What about those that can't work? What about those where jobs they are qualified for aren't available? What about those who can't afford to care for their families on any of the available jobs for their skill set? What about those who are on welfare because they followed your system that doesn't include health insurance and then got sick?

If we looking for robust genetics or hard workers, I'd put you up against any of a number of people from my old neighborhood. I doubt you'd fair well on either front. Most of them are naturally healthier than many of the rich people I've encountered and most of them have never not worked, except for short periods of welfare due to an illness or injury. Most of them have multiple jobs and still are starving. However, all of the rich people I know now spend much more time at doctor's than my friends did when I was younger, spend much more on medication, and have had long periods of unemployment where they wouldn't take any job that was 'beneath them'.

Lazy and poor are not related and if they are the connection is inverse. Stupid and poor are not related. I challenge you to support ANY of your claims.

What about those that can't work?

If there is a medical problem which prevents someone from finding employment, then he/she should not be penalized. However, if only the inadequacies of that person prevent him/her from getting a job, then we should spare them very little pity and give them money only if they choose to work for the state.

If there is a medical problem which prevents someone from finding employment, then he/she should not be penalized. However, if only the inadequacies of that person prevent him/her from getting a job, then we should spare them very little pity and give them money only if they choose to work for the state.

Serious question: Do you live w/ your parents?

If there is a medical problem which prevents someone from finding employment, then he/she should not be penalized. However, if only the inadequacies of that person prevent him/her from getting a job, then we should spare them very little pity and give them money only if they choose to work for the state.

I see, debtor's prison. Yay, we can go back a few hundred years. Can we get rid of other unnecessary freedoms as well, please?

Meanwhile, you were talking about their bad genetics, certainly being injured doesn't excuse you from having bad genetics, right?

Meanwhile, you're doing an excellent job of dropping arguments. Did you come here to debate or to preach? Weren't just complaining that no one would debate you? Then why are you avoiding replying to reasoned responses and instead picking and choosing? Can anyone say 'agenda'?

I see, debtor's prison. Yay, we can go back a few hundred years. Can we get rid of other unnecessary freedoms as well, please?

Meanwhile, you were talking about their bad genetics, certainly being injured doesn't excuse you from having bad genetics, right?

There shouldn't be any people on welfare because MTAE believes anyone can be millionaires.

I see, debtor's prison. Yay, we can go back a few hundred years. Can we get rid of other unnecessary freedoms as well, please?

Meanwhile, you were talking about their bad genetics, certainly being injured doesn't excuse you from having bad genetics, right?

Meanwhile, you're doing an excellent job of dropping arguments. Did you come here to debate or to preach? Weren't just complaining that no one would debate you? Then why are you avoiding replying to reasoned responses and instead picking and choosing? Can anyone say 'agenda'?

There shouldn't be any people on welfare because MTAE believes anyone can be millionaires.

Yes, we covered this partly yesterday. You remember Bob, I'm sure. Debtor's prison was the first thing I thought of, too, though MTAE doesn't mean the nice old Dickensian kind where you languish until something comes along, supported by your family and friends. And let's once again recall that there's hardly a welfare state in the US. Reform was passed by a Republican Congress and signed by ... you know who, back in the 90's. Are there cheats? Of course. But there are cheats in corporate boardrooms as well as on the welfare rolls.

Yes, we covered this partly yesterday. You remember Bob, I'm sure. Debtor's prison was the first thing I thought of, too, though MTAE doesn't mean the nice old Dickensian kind where you languish until something comes along, supported by your family and friends. And let's once again recall that there's hardly a welfare state in the US. Reform was passed by a Republican Congress and signed by ... you know who, back in the 90's. Are there cheats? Of course. But there are cheats in corporate boardrooms as well as on the welfare rolls.

Yes, in fact, some on the ebil welfare were put there by the 'desirable' people who are successful corporate thieves.

*SNIP*

Another chapter from MeansToAnEnd... *sighs*

I disagree, MTAE...

Having been on welfare I think I have a much better idea of the reality of the situation than you will ever have MTAE.
I was on welfare for a little more than a year after my baby was born.
I am a single parent who was trying to deal with mental disease and a newborn.
Did I want to be on welfare?
No of course I did not.
But I am glad that there is a system in place to help people like myself in their time of need.
I am now working at a very good job and am back to being a productive member of society.

I realize that there are people that abuse the welfare system and they should be forced to work or be cut off.
But your totalitarian ideas of locking people up "in cold dark cells" and deporting them show once again your inhumanity and how far you are removed from reality.
And anyone who thinks that living on welfare is some grand existence is out of their minds.
You barely get enough money to survive.
This is why I was living in a homeless shelter.
There were no apartments that I could afford on the pittance the state gave me.
Being on welfare can never be described as a feast!

*pulls beanbag chair up next to Farnhamia* Oooh, trolling! My favorite! *eats popcorn*

Meh. I think MTAE lives with his (ultraconservative) parents. *nod*

Ahh this crap again. Must be close to elections.

The short of it.

I am a welfare kid. Mom was divorsed with 2 kids and no skills. She bought into the (now) conservative crap of being a stay at home mom.

She did welfare for a year or two(she won't say how long). She used that money to feed us and only work one job so she could go to night school.

End result. A Registered Nurse who assisted over 40000 births in her career.

A boy who is a WAN engineer for a multinational and a girl how does costume design on Broadway.

My sister and I have never used welfare and probably never will.

A real waste of money it was. :rolleyes: