Those dirty, smelly welfare recipients

[Norman Bernstein]

Every time I think the whacko fringe couldn't get any worse.... one of them does:



Prison Dorms for Welfare Recipients (http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/08/23/prison_dorms_for_welfare_recipients.html)

Carl Paladino (R), a candidate for governor in New York, said he would transform some empty state prisons into housing for welfare recipients, where they would work in state-sponsored jobs like the military or "in some cases park service." People living in the facility would also get employment training and take lessons in "personal hygiene," the AP (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5gMerqzo-GmOgn5-ch4wz-J0DJ7nAD9HNVJIG2) reports.

Said Paladino: "Instead of handing out the welfare checks, we'll teach people how to earn their check. We'll teach them personal hygiene ... the personal things they don't get when they come from dysfunctional homes."

[McMike]

While it looks like there is little compassion in his approach what is wrong with his idea at its core? I've had similar ideas, although I'm much more progressive than he is in my approach.

[OconeePirate]

Weren't there programs like this under the evil, evil dictator FDR?

[Mike H]

Are there no prisons? Are there no work houses?

People would rather die.

Then they should do it and decrease the surplus population.

[Bob Adams]

He might be a little over the top and insensitive, but as a person who is having his home value destroyed by Section 8 tennants in the neighborhood, I can see some validity in his statement.

[Donn]

Another fringe whacko on smelly citizens:


"My staff tells me not to say this, but I'm going to say it anyway," said Reid in his remarks. "In the summer because of the heat and high humidity, you could literally smell the tourists coming into the Capitol. It may be descriptive but it's true."

Harry Reid

[Norman Bernstein]

Another fringe whacko on smelly citizens:


In the summer, in the high heat and humidity, both tourists and retired publishers may smell.

This is NOT the same thing as characterizing welfare recipients as not only smelly, but in need of personal hygiene instruction.

[OconeePirate]

Our town has lost lots of employment due to most of the local prisons closing. Five years ago we had 5 state prisons here , now we have one.

It would cost a lot of money to turn the former prisons (that were originally hospital buildings) into low income housing. Meeting code, removing the "prison" stuff, etc... Some of them were closed because they could no longer meet the code for a prison.

We are supposed to be getting a new prison in a few years though.

[Donn]

This is NOT the same thing as characterizing welfare recipients as not only smelly, but in need of personal hygiene instruction.

You said they were smelly, but I don't see where he did.

[Pugwash]

It's not difficult to find.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpb4nwfiaPY

[McMike]

Hygiene aside, I've seen a lot of section 8 housing, most of the apartments were clean and fairly well appointed. I, as someone who has been able to support myself, paid $1200 per month, not including utilities, for the privilege of living in the same conditions.

The line seemed to be that one out of three section 8 folks I knew actually work their rears off and simply need and deserved the leg up. The others needed to be kicked to the curb and had their children taken from them.

If the ratio were reversed I could see continuing the current practice of section 8 housing but sadly they are not.

This is an easer discussion to have when the economy is good because it's easier to separate out the lazy and entitled, none the less, this is an important discussion to have.

Simply put, I've know many lazy people willing to leach off the government and therefore the tax payers.

A good start would be, instead giving subsidies to farmers so they can turn around and hire illegal immigrants to do the work, give them free labor in the form of welfare recipients. Labor laws will apply except the cash will go directly to caring first for the children and bare necessitates, and then second into the recipients bank account.

I subscribe to the "if you're going to live under my roof then you WILL live under my rules" philosophy.

[Norman Bernstein]

You said they were smelly, but I don't see where he did.

Nahh, he merely mentioned personal hygiene instruction at random..... duh.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Are there no prisons? Are there no work houses?

People would rather die.

Then they should do it and decrease the surplus population.

Precisely. This is bringing back the workhouse.



http://users.ox.ac.uk/~peter/workhouse/misc/marylebonecasuals.jpg

[Pugwash]

A good start would be, instead giving subsidies to farmers so they can turn around and hire illegal immigrants to do the work, give them free labor in the form of welfare recipients. Labor laws will apply except the cash will go directly to caring first for the children and bare necessitates, and then second into the recipients bank account.


I think that's close to indentured servitude.

So, just to recap. "The problem with this country" is the Gays, the Muslims, the Blacks & the Poor.

Have I missed anyone out?

[Donn]

.... duh.

That's appropriate.

[McMike]

Are there no prisons? Are there no work houses?

People would rather die.

Then they should do it and decrease the surplus population.

Ya, ya Charles Dickens was right in so many ways but there is a big difference between the conditions that existed in his time and the ideas I and many others have. Something is out of balance and needs to be fixed, the fact remains that there a lot of children being raised to be vampires who feed on the tax payer.


It's not difficult to find.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpb4nwfiaPY

He's harsh, short sighted, bigoted, and even ignorant to the broader issues. He does not help the discussion because he's barley smarter than the folks receiving the free money. However there is a truth to his statements and it scares me that some here will deny those truths in the name of being politically correct.

Pug, what do you suggest be done, or do you think it's fine just the way it is?

[Norman Bernstein]

It is entirely possible that any one of us could, by virtue of some adverse set of life circumstances, end up destitute and in need of public assistance. In this day and age, the reasons for becoming destitute don't have to reflect on any of us personally, as if some character defect was the cause.

If it happened to me, I'd hope that I'd be treated with dignity.

Enough said.

[McMike]

I think that's close to indentured servitude.

So, just to recap. "The problem with this country" is the Gays, the Muslims, the Blacks & the Poor.

Have I missed anyone out?

First, don't lump me in with all the haters in this country, it's not true and not fair.

At this point I'm the indentured servant, paying someone else's debt.

I'm all for helping people when there is need. I don't like helping people who won't help themselves.

The current system does a horrible job of teaching people to fish especially when they don't want to learn.

[Norman Bernstein]

I'm all for helping people when there is need. I don't like helping people who won't help themselves.

I don't, either.... but regardless of what might be perceived as 'culpability', I'd still want everyone treated with dignity.

[McMike]

Enough said.




No, not enough.

How do you justify being used? How do you justify the large number of welfare recipients abusing the system?

FWIW, I'm all for making sure the children are 150% cared for, the "adults", I'm having trouble watching them use me. The excuse that mothers can't work because the kids need to be cared for is crap when the kids aren't being cared for.

[McMike]

. . . I'd still want everyone treated with dignity.

Assume, from now on, this being my primary intent and base your rebuttals of my thoughts on this fact.

[Hot Air]

The proprosed program is voluntary. There are plenty of people that need help with hygiene, fitness, and proper nutrition - many of them are on welfare. Would you prefer those who desire such a program to remain fat and stinky Norman?

[Norman Bernstein]

How do you justify the large number of welfare recipients abusing the system?

The excuse that mothers can't work because the kids need to be cared for is crap when the kids aren't being cared for.

You'd have to define, empirically, the degree to which this characterizes welfare recipients. It's a bit like presuming that all Muslims are intent on the destruction of America and the imposition of Sharia law... there's no proof of it, but it's a popular image.

Sure, there is abuse of the welfare system... but if you could quantify it, you could also identify it, well enough to eliminate it or reform it. This is a lot like Reagan's apocryphal Welfare Cadillac Queen... a talking point which serves as red meat for ideologues, but not based in empirical fact.

I'm all for reforming abuse of the welfare system... but crap like the whacko in the OP said is NOT a sober, sane, and sensible plan for reform... it's just something to get certain people's blood running.

As I said before, if YOU ended up on the dole, through no fault of your own, would you want people assuming you're lazy and/or smell?

[McMike]

The proprosed program is voluntary. There are plenty of people that need help with hygiene, fitness, and proper nutrition - many of them are on welfare. Would you prefer those who desire such a program to remain fat and stinky Norman?

The fact is that these problems are the effect and not the cause.

[Hot Air]

The fact is remaining fat and unwashed does not help one get a job and improve one's prospects.

[Pugwash]

First, don't lump me in with all the haters in this country, it's not true and not fair.

From where I sit it appears that the ignorant hatred & vitriol that I have become so used to, here in the South, is surfacing all over the US.

There is no doubt that the Middle Classes in this economy are hurting the most & looking for someone to blame. As usual sh!t flows downhill.

Rather than take an educated evaluation of how the US ended up where it is, the argument reverts to the old standards "Everything would be ok if it wasn't for.... (insert racial/economic group)".

Welfare Queens are so retro, don't you think? It must be like comfort food for the political right, something familiar to reheat and feast on. Combine that with Illegal immigrants and that's a tasty little snack you've got there.

[McMike]

You'd have to define, empirically, the degree to which this characterizes welfare recipients. It's a bit like presuming that all Muslims are intent on the destruction of America and the imposition of Sharia law... there's no proof of it, but it's a popular image.
I have a hard time trusting either side in this discussion. Statistics, as we all know can be twisted to validate anyone's cause. I do know what I see and on the other side, also acknowledge there is any number of flaws in my interpretation at any given time.

With that, I know this topic is not black and white and I also know I'm not arguing to be right.


Sure, there is abuse of the welfare system... but if you could quantify it, you could also identify it, well enough to eliminate it or reform it. This is a lot like Reagan's apocryphal Welfare Cadillac Queen... a talking point which serves as red meat for ideologues, but not based in empirical fact.
I don't have empirical data but this does not discount my personal observation to which I was very clear about it being the source of my opinion. In short, I trust my own eyes, this does not mean you should but I'm asking you to entertain me and my thoughts for the sake of our discussion.


I'm all for reforming abuse of the welfare system... but crap like the whacko in the OP said is NOT a sober, sane, and sensible plan for reform... it's just something to get certain people's blood running.
Agreed, but the topic is well worth a thread much longer than "Sudden Jihad Syndrome" no?


As I said before, if YOU ended up on the dole, through no fault of your own, would you want people assuming you're lazy and/or smell?
I'm about 60 weeks from ending up on the dole through no fault of my own. I also know that as long as I am able, I will work for my piece of it. There is no need to remind me how close we all are to needing help.

My thoughts are not assumptions; they are based on first hand observations. Are yours?

[McMike]

From where I sit it appears that the ignorant hatred & vitriol that I have become so used to, here in the South, is surfacing all over the US.

There is no doubt that the Middle Classes in this economy are hurting the most & looking for someone to blame. As usual sh!t flows downhill.

Rather than take an educated evaluation of how the US ended up where it is, the argument reverts to the old standards "Everything would be ok if it wasn't for.... (insert racial/economic group)".

Welfare Queens are so retro, don't you think? It must be like comfort food for the political right, something familiar to reheat and feast on. Combine that with Illegal immigrants and that's a tasty little snack you've got there.

Did you want to answer my question to you in post #17? It's easy to label and attack people when you don't have a dog in the race. Let's see what you've got.

[Norman Bernstein]

I don't have empirical data but this does not discount my personal observation to which I was very clear about it being the source of my opinion. In short, I trust my own eyes, this does not mean you should but I'm asking you to entertain me and my thoughts for the sake of our discussion.


I don't think that anecdotal observation should ever be discounted... but at the same time, neither is it a basis for generalization. We have the same sort of discussions here in the bilge all the time.... for example, does the religious affiliation of the 9/11 hijackers extend to 1.5 billion Muslims, including Americans who are Muslim?

I'm opposed to that sort of generalization.


I'm about 60 weeks from ending up on the dole through no fault of my own. I also know that as long as I am able, I will work for my piece of it. There is no need to remind me how close we all are to needing help.

Nonetheless, should you end up on welfare (through no fault of your own), there WILL be some asshat somewhere who will automatically assume that you're on the dole because you're shiftless and lazy. It is THAT attitude I'm trying to combat... and statements like the jerk in the OP made are precisely that sort of thing.


My thoughts are not assumptions; they are based on first hand observations. Are yours?

I've known several people who suffered really bad fates and ended up receiving public welfare.... but none of them were at fault, per se. I am not doubting that there are indeed some like that... I'm just objecting to the generalization. Even if you acknowledge that 'some' welfare recipients are gaming the system... how do you distinguish them?

[tomlarkin]

I spent a couple of years doing repairs on Section 8 housing, and got to know some of the people pretty well. As a whole, they were nice people. Most were single mothers with children. A lot of them had some kind of physical disability, or one of their children did. One woman I knew had left her husband because he was sexually abusing their children. A number had been living in their cars or on the street before they got the housing, and were extremely glad to be there. None were smellier or messier than the other tenants we had.

[Pugwash]

OK



Pug, what do you suggest be done, or do you think it's fine just the way it is?

First things first.


A good start would be, instead giving subsidies to farmers so they can turn around and hire illegal immigrants to do the work, give them free labor in the form of welfare recipients. Labor laws will apply except the cash will go directly to caring first for the children and bare necessitates, and then second into the recipients bank account. I don't know what it's like where you live, but good luck with your plan to force black people to work on farms for no money. Good luck with your plan to make white people work on farms as well. There is a reason why you never (and I mean never) see anyone other than Hispanics working in South Carolinas fields. And it's not because it's poorly paid, I've spoken to the people that do it and a regular peach picker averages @ $15 an hour, more if you can drive a tractor or are a supervisor. Basically, the whites won't do it because it's ni**er work & the blacks won't do it because it's slave work.


As for welfare recipients. I think you are starting at the wrong end of the chain. Like all good Libdrools I think the answer is education, education, education. And that means smaller class sizes and a more diverse curriculum to include practical skills not just academic ones.

[McMike]

I don't think that anecdotal observation should ever be discounted... but at the same time, neither is it a basis for generalization. We have the same sort of discussions here in the bilge all the time.... for example, does the religious affiliation of the 9/11 hijackers extend to 1.5 billion Muslims, including Americans who are Muslim


I'm opposed to that sort of generalization.
I think you've seen some of my opinions on how Muslims are viewed in this country but then that's not the discussion that's on the table in this thread.

FWIW, I am too opposed to that sort of generalization.



Nonetheless, should you end up on welfare (through no fault of your own), there WILL be some asshat somewhere who will automatically assume that you're on the dole because you're shiftless and lazy. It is THAT attitude I'm trying to combat... and statements like the jerk in the OP made are precisely that sort of thing.
Asshats will be asshats. I think we've established that our opinions of the OP's subject are congruant more or less.

I'd like to hear some of your solutions to the parts of the system that are broken and unfair to the tax payer.


I've known several people who suffered really bad fates and ended up receiving public welfare.... but none of them were at fault, per se. I am not doubting that there are indeed some like that... I'm just objecting to the generalization. Even if you acknowledge that 'some' welfare recipients are gaming the system... how do you distinguish them?
That's a good question. I think the answer is to not give them any room to take advantage of the system. I see welfare as an emergency safety net not as a way of life.

As for disabled people, we obviously have a moral obligation to care for them but there are very few people that are truly useless.

You know the saying that it takes a village? Well a good start would be to employ some of these unemployed mothers to care for other unemployed mother's children so they can go to school and work.

There are many simple solutions like this; what are some of yours?

You see, I'm all about restoring dignity but that takes work on all sides of the situation.

[Bruce Hooke]

The excuse that mothers can't work because the kids need to be cared for is crap when the kids aren't being cared for. [/FONT]

This statement strikes me as pretty absurd. You seem to be equating a mother who does not have very good mothering skills with a mother who is not in the house at all because she is at a job. Even if someone is not a very good mother, what are you proposing that she do, leave young children at home alone for hours every day? That would be a pretty certain way to get charged by the state with violating various child endangerment laws. Or are you suggesting that anyone who is not up to some particular standards of parenting should have their children taken from them? Leaving aside the issue of who would take care of all of these children, that strikes me as the kind of thing that various fanatical and horrific governments have tried, with generally horrific results.

[Bruce Hooke]

You know the saying that it takes a village? Well a good start would be to employ some of these unemployed mothers to care for other unemployed mother's children so they can go to school and work.

That sounds like a fine idea. Now go ahead and try to find the funding for it. While in the long term it seems like something like this should pay off in terms of fewer people on welfare, in the short term it will take money to implement the idea.

[Bruce Hooke]

As for disabled people, we obviously have a moral obligation to care for them but there are very few people that are truly useless.

If you include among the "disabled" those with mental health issues that make it hard for them to hold down a job, I'd bet that a pretty high percentage of those getting public assistance would at least count as partially disabled and in need of a bit of a helping hand towards leading a stable life. Sadly, real mental health counseling that would truly help people in that sort of situation is very rarely available because of the cost. What help there is tends to be of the "patch them up enough to get them out the door" variety.

[Y Bar Ranch]

That sounds like a fine idea. Now go ahead and try to find the funding for it.

???

Seems like a plan that would require less money. Moms would either work at an outside job or work as essentially daycare employees. Something that you ought not need to government for, but the government could serve as the catalyst.

[McMike]

OK




First things first.

I don't know what it's like where you live, but good luck with your plan to force black people to work on farms for no money. Good luck with your plan to make white people work on farms as well. There is a reason why you never (and I mean never) see anyone other than Hispanics working in South Carolinas fields. And it's not because it's poorly paid, I've spoken to the people that do it and a regular peach picker averages @ $15 an hour, more if you can drive a tractor or are a supervisor. Basically, the whites won't do it because it's ni**er work & the blacks won't do it because it's slave work.
Don't you think that's ridiculous? I say a resounding TS.
It's may sound harsh but those who are able to work but are unwilling to should receive nothing.



As for welfare recipients. I think you are starting at the wrong end of the chain. Like all good Libdrools I think the answer is education, education, education. And that means smaller class sizes and a more diverse curriculum to include practical skills not just academic ones.

Education starts at home, most children who live in poverty do not get the proper nutrition or the proper mental stimulation in order to be able to participate in a formal education. This is a biological cycle that only intervention can stop. Massive intervention. This, obviously, is not just a problem with welfare recipients, this problem goes all the way through the middle class to some degree, but it creates the same outcome; social retards that cannot function in society no matter how much education you throw at them.

While I agree that education is a huge aspect of the solution, it will not solve the problem on its own.

[McMike]

This statement strikes me as pretty absurd. You seem to be equating a mother who does not have very good mothering skills with a mother who is not in the house at all because she is at a job. Even if someone is not a very good mother, what are you proposing that she do, leave young children at home alone for hours every day? That would be a pretty certain way to get charged by the state with violating various child endangerment laws. Or are you suggesting that anyone who is not up to some particular standards of parenting should have their children taken from them? Leaving aside the issue of who would take care of all of these children, that strikes me as the kind of thing that various fanatical and horrific governments have tried, with generally horrific results.

Read post #33 where I have a solution to this problem.

[McMike]

If you include among the "disabled" those with mental health issues that make it hard for them to hold down a job, I'd bet that a pretty high percentage of those getting public assistance would at least count as partially disabled and in need of a bit of a helping hand towards leading a stable life. Sadly, real mental health counseling that would truly help people in that sort of situation is very rarely available because of the cost. What help there is tends to be of the "patch them up enough to get them out the door" variety.

There is no doubt that the mentally ill are under served and as I said, we have a moral obligation to serve them. I also believe there is a use for everyone, everyone has a place at the table no matter how small, to contribute to society.

[Bruce Hooke]

???

Seems like a plan that would require less money. Moms would either work at an outside job or work as essentially daycare employees. Something that you ought not need to government for, but the government could serve as the catalyst.

Yes, in the long run the program might well save money, but from my experience with these sorts of things, in the short run it will require money to get the program up and running, and whether it would save money in the long run is up for debate since there would inevitably be some administrative costs as well, that would not go away once the program was up and running. However, this is the sort of program that foundations and other grant-makers (both government and private) might well support, so what it would take is someone willing to leap in and start working on fund-raising and working on the details...or government decided to try the program itself. Either way, the start-up money would need to be found.

[Captain Blight]

I see a couple hundred Welfare recipients daily. Most of them are working the system. A few-- a very few-- are ashamed of it and want desperately to get out of the system. The rest... are about what you'd expect. Stereotypes get to be stereotypes by being at least in part true.

[Bruce Hooke]

There is no doubt that the mentally ill are under served and as I said, we have a moral obligation to serve them. I also believe there is a use for everyone, everyone has a place at the table no matter how small, to contribute to society.

I agree. Unfortunately, at least looked at in terms of usual government grant cycles, it is likely cheaper to "warehouse" people than to give them real mental health care.

[Bruce Hooke]

There is no doubt that the mentally ill are under served and as I said, we have a moral obligation to serve them. I also believe there is a use for everyone, everyone has a place at the table no matter how small, to contribute to society.

I don't see anything in post 33 that addresses this issue unless it is your plan to put people with mental/emotional health issues in charge of groups of children, which strikes me as a highly questionable idea and does not address the underlying issue of how to provide real mental health care.

[skipper68]

That sounds like a fine idea. Now go ahead and try to find the funding for it. While in the long term it seems like something like this should pay off in terms of fewer people on welfare, in the short term it will take money to implement the idea.In NY thats how it seems to work.No free lunch here. My daughter gets food stamps,and medical care for her and the kids..the dad ran off with a single chick(pregnant now!!)And barely receives support.She works 40hrs a week or more,and the child care people are paid 8$hr more than her! I've seen women too destitute to care for their kids,after some catastrophe,that gave their kids to foster care,short term,while they tried to get back on their feet. My beef is,the state will pay a foster care home 1400$ a month to foster a child,but wont spend that to keep a family together.THAT makes no sense to me.The times are hard out there,and the children are the ones that suffer when the finances go up in smoke.I see no clear answers,but at least a shelterer,quarters for family's to stay,besides under a bridge,in a car etc,would be a start.Dignity is of the most importance in these situations tho..

[McMike]

I don't see anything in post 33 that addresses this issue unless it is your plan to put people with mental/emotional health issues in charge of groups of children, which strikes me as a highly questionable idea and does not address the underlying issue of how to provide real mental health care.

I think you misunderstood what I was referring too. It definitely was not putting the mentally ill in charge of caring for children; however there is a place for physically handicapped folks to care for children.

[Pugwash]

Don't you think that's ridiculous? I say a resounding TS.
It's may sound harsh but those who are able to work but are unwilling to should receive nothing.

I don't think you quite understand the deep seated nature of 300 years of redneck dumbassery on one side & being subject to the most brutal racism on the other.



Education starts at home, most children who live in poverty do not get the proper nutrition or the proper mental stimulation in order to be able to participate in a formal education. This is a biological cycle that only intervention can stop. Massive intervention. This, obviously, is not just a problem with welfare recipients, this problem goes all the way through the middle class to some degree, but it creates the same outcome; social retards that cannot function in society no matter how much education you throw at them.

While I agree that education is a huge aspect of the solution, it will not solve the problem on its own.

This is one of those things that the righteous right appears to get wrong consistantly. I used to know a guy that ran a sailing programme, through a local college, for "at risk" kids. Kids that were just starting to get into trouble with schoolwork, getting involved with petty crime and stuff. It was hugely successful with something like a 3% recidivism rate.

It was closed down not because of it's failure, but because it was seen as a "reward" for bad behaviour by the moral minority.

[Captain Blight]

Let us not wallow in the valley of partisanship, I say to you today, my friends.
And so even though we face the difficulties of today and tomorrow, I still have a dream. It is a dream deeply rooted in the American dream.
I have a dream that one day this forum will rise up and live out the true meaning of its creed: "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal."
I have a dream that one day on this forum, the liberals and the conservatives will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.
I have a dream that one day even the state of Massachusetts, a state sweltering in indignation, sweltering with partisanship, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.
I have a dream that forumites will one day not spend all day looking for fuel to add to the partisan fires
I have a dream of a day when politicians will not be judged by the letter R or the letter D after their name but by the content of their character.
I have a dream today!
I have a dream that one day, down in the bilge, with its vicious partisans - one day right there in the bilge - little liberal boys and liberal girls will be able to join hands with little conservative boys and conservative girls as sisters and brothers.
I have a dream today!
I have a dream that one day every valley shall be exalted, and every hill and mountain shall be made low, the rough places will be made plain, and the crooked places will be made straight; "and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed and all flesh shall see it together."
This is our hope, and this is the faith that I go back to the bilge with.
With this faith, we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith, we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith, we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.
And this will be the day -- this will be the day when all of God's children will be able to sing with new meaning:


My country 'tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing.
Land where my fathers died, land of the Pilgrim's pride,
From every mountainside, let freedom ring!

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.
And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.


Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.
Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.
Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.
Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that:


Let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.
Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.
Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Massachusetts.
From every mountainside, let freedom ring.

And when this happens, when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, liberal men and conservative men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:
Free at last! Free at last!
Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!3


Okay. You start. Perhaps you'd like to open with an apology?

[Captain Blight]

Really? Me personally? In what way? Not that I'm going to ignore any charitable feelings you might have; I'm curious to know, that's all.

[Bruce Hooke]

I think you misunderstood what I was referring too. It definitely was not putting the mentally ill in charge of caring for children; however there is a place for physically handicapped folks to care for children.

Good point. I read something into what you wrote that was not there. However, I don't think post #33 answers the question I asked, which is how to get mental health services to the people at the low end of the income scale. Even getting them into a low-wage, full-time job is not going to solve the problem because real mental health care is expensive. So, all to often what happens is that they move from job to job, never being able to hold down a job for long or never being able to advance to a higher paying job because of underlying issues that are not being addressed. Realistically, as I think about it, the most effective thing all around is probably to try to start with stuff that is easier to address like helping those who need it with basic job skills. Ideally this should be done early, before people get set in their ways. So, in the long run, finding ways to provide jobs to teenagers and young adults in low-income neighborhoods, and making sure those jobs include a good element of job-skills training, may be one of the better ways to short-circuit longer-term problems.

[Paul Pless]

Okay. You start. Perhaps you'd like to open with an apology?


Fine, I feel sorry for you.

rofl

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

MMike you are suffering the Curse of Welfare Reform -

First you get misunderstood and your motives are questioned.

Next, someone cites a historical precedent for why it can't be done and/or how it went wrong when it was tried before.

Last, someone says its all too expensive.

Good luck!

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

This is one of those things that the righteous right appears to get wrong consistently. I used to know a guy that ran a sailing programme, through a local college, for "at risk" kids. Kids that were just starting to get into trouble with schoolwork, getting involved with petty crime and stuff. It was hugely successful with something like a 3% recidivism rate.

It was closed down not because of its failure, but because it was seen as a "reward" for bad behaviour by the moral minority.

Why are the moral minority such moral runts*? Their moral sense is disproportionately small and underdeveloped. They would no doubt make excellent guards for concentration camps, and would be scrupulously honest about murdering people.

*This word was selected after I had considered, and rejected "dwarfs", as unfair to small people, and "pygmies", as unfair to small black people who live in Zaire, both of whom are morally well developed.

[Bruce Hooke]

MMike you are suffering the Curse of Welfare Reform -

First you get misunderstood and your motives are questioned.

Next, someone cites a historical precedent for why it can't be done and/or how it went wrong when it was tried before.

Last, someone says its all too expensive.

Good luck!

What I'd add to this is that it often feels to me like if we could take each case alone it would likely be reasonably clear what to do in that particular case. What is damnably hard to figure out is how to codify that "intelligence" into law so that the benefits are distributed in a reasonably equitable manner and so that biases that might creep in, especially around issues like race, get (as much as possible) filtered out.

[Garret]

To a few posts:

Years back (70's?) New Hampshire had a requirement that if you were receiving unemployment compensation and had not found a job within x number of weeks (don't remember the #), you had to work on the state farm a certain # of days/week until you found a job or benefits ran out. If you were disabled you were exempted & transportation from the unemployment office was provided, health, job interview, etc. absences were allowed & it was for ~1/2 day at a time.

Seemed eminently fair to me, but it was struck down for some reason. I know that unemployment costs went way up after it was ended. Costs for food for prisons, etc. went up too.

[pefjr]

A few years ago some 20 or so young juveniles were sentenced to a clean up of the highways here in Nevada. A DUI hit and killed 9 of them. Terrible accident, many law suits followed, and since then, I don't think a single piece of trash has been picked up. The highways and 1/2 mile border on both sides are now the county dump. A mess beyond my vocabulary to describe. Meanwhile we have the highest unemployment in the country and the unemployed and the imprisoned are sitting on their cans getting bored and fat(that's not fair, some are playing basketball and tennis on brand new courts) off your tax dollar. I hope the lawyers and insurance Co's are happy and their bank accounts are full.

[perldog007]

In the summer, in the high heat and humidity, both tourists and retired publishers may smell.

This is NOT the same thing as characterizing welfare recipients as not only smelly, but in need of personal hygiene instruction.


Of course you seem to be working word for word from the entirely non-partisan Huffington Post... as per normal you are spinning ( Where did the candidate call welfare recipients smelly? WHEREAS Reid did exactly that) for maximum wrong from the right while blindly defending the left. Your intolerance and animus once again are showing. Nice troll though.

Was Reid saying that his sweat doesn't stink? What about the members, can't smell them? I have, they smell just as bad as anyone else at the end of a July day in D.C..

[Norman Bernstein]

Where did the candidate call welfare recipients smelly?

When he suggested they needed lessons in personal hygiene?


WHEREAS Reid did exactly that...

Reid suggested that tourists, in the midst of the summer heat and humidity in Washington DC, might be smelly. He wasn't calling welfare recipients smelly, was he?

[McMike]

Pugster!

I am ROTFLMYFAO!

You, Sir, take the cake!

If anyone can expose McMike to himself for the closeted Neocon he is, it's you!

Go, man! Go!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!

Are you serious Ozzy? Me!!!! A neocon???!!!! They don't like me either.

If you are at all serious about changing course in this country for the better, don't you think it's prudent to have a reasonable conversation about the problem and come up with some reasonable solutions? This name calling is ridiculous and I gotta say you're disappointing, I figured you for a thinking man not a closed minded cheerleader.

How about you put in some real brain time and hit us with some of your ideas for solutions to fix the problems that exist? Or do you think everything's perfect?

I think you need to actually read my posts to see that I'm all about providing a safety net but not to the point where it so east to play the system and not at the point where we're helping no one get back on their feet. I never said I have any answers; I'm simply trying to open a real dialog about real problems, using common sense to react to human nature.

[RonW]

Norm's threads are generally entertaining to say the least, But I find this one especially so.

I would like to give a shout out (presidential term) to milo and puggy who through their thoughtfull and sincere posts, have brung a smile to my face. That if not for so, would have been but another downtrodded laborous day in our so missguided capitaslistic way society, (soon to be changed).

[McMike]

MMike you are suffering the Curse of Welfare Reform -

First you get misunderstood and your motives are questioned.

Next, someone cites a historical precedent for why it can't be done and/or how it went wrong when it was tried before.

Last, someone says its all too expensive.

Good luck!

Is it that I'm not explaining myself properly or that they don't understand me?

[RonW]

Is it that I'm not explaining myself properly or that they don't understand me?

No not at all...it is more like, how can you have a socialistic society without wastefull social programs, eating up the tapayers..

[Peter Malcolm Jardine]

You said they were smelly, but I don't see where he did.


Speak of smelly.... Where do sweatshops fit in?

[Peter Malcolm Jardine]

Generally, this is an old old story... The wealthy ruling class finds the poor so lacking in basic skills and manners that helping them is a waste of time.....

I always liked this one:

There is no doubt that the overwhelming majority of white Americans desire that there be as few Negroes as possible in America. If the Negroes could be eliminated from America or greatly decreased in numbers, this would meet the whites' approval—provided that it could be accomplished by means which are also approved. Correspondingly, an increase of the proportion of Negroes in the American population is commonly looked upon as undesirable.

White prejudice and discrimination keep the Negro low in standards of living, health, education, manners and morals. This, in its turn, gives support to white prejudice. White prejudice and Negro standards thus mutually ‘cause’ each other.

-Gunnar Myrdal

[McMike]

Good point. I read something into what you wrote that was not there. However, I don't think post #33 answers the question I asked, which is how to get mental health services to the people at the low end of the income scale. Even getting them into a low-wage, full-time job is not going to solve the problem because real mental health care is expensive. So, all to often what happens is that they move from job to job, never being able to hold down a job for long or never being able to advance to a higher paying job because of underlying issues that are not being addressed. Realistically, as I think about it, the most effective thing all around is probably to try to start with stuff that is easier to address like helping those who need it with basic job skills. Ideally this should be done early, before people get set in their ways. So, in the long run, finding ways to provide jobs to teenagers and young adults in low-income neighborhoods, and making sure those jobs include a good element of job-skills training, may be one of the better ways to short-circuit longer-term problems.

I think taking care of the mentally ill is a social and moral responsibility. The problem is that in order to care for these people properly you have to spend a lot of money. This is a subject that unfortunately, is swept under the rug at every opportunity by politicians and the public alike.

I don't have a ready solution for this issue but I know I'd like to see these people brought as close to health as possible so they can contribute to society and live relatively happy lives.

[pefjr]

What you will deny over and over is that it isn't the lawyers and insurance companies that are getting rich so much as it is the (redacted) corporate prison owners.Well, I might, but I have never been given the chance to deny it the first time. Suggest you try to get off whatever you are smokin.

[WX]

http://t1.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQUVdGcNQvINgQkP7pMZB1jYTz3Zo_4e 6z2RjLIazYbJmqEXno&t=1&usg=__Qj4bezlDWErcALtOHFeEBbfSrL4=

I think he needs a small moustache.

[bobbys]

Generally, this is an old old story... The wealthy ruling class finds the poor so lacking in basic skills and manners that helping them is a waste of time.....

I always liked this one:

There is no doubt that the overwhelming majority of white Americans desire that there be as few Negroes as possible in America. If the Negroes could be eliminated from America or greatly decreased in numbers, this would meet the whites' approval—provided that it could be accomplished by means which are also approved. Correspondingly, an increase of the proportion of Negroes in the American population is commonly looked upon as undesirable.

White prejudice and discrimination keep the Negro low in standards of living, health, education, manners and morals. This, in its turn, gives support to white prejudice. White prejudice and Negro standards thus mutually ‘cause’ each other.

-Gunnar Myrdal.

Our Libs will say they love Black people for their votes but in reality they know full well Abortion is there tool and have pushed it for years.

http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/55956

[WX]

Attitudes like Bauer's are dangerous. It leads to things like the US Eugenics experiments on the poor back in the 1920s and in it's extreme form, gas chambers.

[Pugwash]

Attitudes like Bauer's are dangerous. It leads to things like the US Eugenics experiments on the poor back in the 1920s and in it's extreme form, gas chambers.

Andre Bauer brought you the Nicky Halley sex scandal(s), and not unlikely the Jake Knots "f*%king ragheads" comment.

Those good old boys tend to be in bed together (quite possibly literally).