On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 02:23:44 -0500, Omelet wrote:

> In article > ,
> Saerah Gray > wrote:
>
>> Eliminating all aid to the people who rely on it does not solve the
>> problem. Again, unemployment is at 6%, and you can't feed a family on
>> minimum wage.
>
> I never suggested that.
>
> I have more compassion than that.

yet it apparently doesn't extend to giving up one percent of your tax
expenditures without ****ing and moaning. very commendable.

blake

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 02:44:36 -0500, Omelet wrote:

> In article > ,
> T > wrote:
>
>>> What is your income tax rate?
>>
>> Oh, about 40% when you add up state and federal plus the various dips
>> for SSI, etc.
>>
>> I need to buy property so I get the interest and tax write offs.
>
> A 40% income tax rate would have me living in subsidized housing and
> eating top ramen.
>
> Mine is around 25% and that's bad enough. (That includes SSI tax).

omgomg!!! jackbooted i.r.s. men are snatching the food from your mouth!
better stock up on canned goods and ammo.

blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 02:23:44 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>
>> In article > ,
>> Saerah Gray > wrote:
>>
>>> Eliminating all aid to the people who rely on it does not solve the
>>> problem. Again, unemployment is at 6%, and you can't feed a family on
>>> minimum wage.
>>
>> I never suggested that.
>>
>> I have more compassion than that.
>
> yet it apparently doesn't extend to giving up one percent of your tax
> expenditures without ****ing and moaning. very commendable.
>

Do you tango? *smiling around the rose in my teeth*

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:45:18 GMT, Saerah Gray wrote:

> Omelet > fnord
> news >
>> In article > ,
>> T > wrote:
>>>
>>> So tell me since you're the expert, what reforms would you make to
>>> the welfare system?
>>
>> Government work programs. I already stated that.
>>
>> Give them the welfare they need, but make them work for it.
>> It really is that simple...
>>
>> I believe in helping people, just not in giving them a totally free
>> ride. I work hard for the money I make.
>
> So will the government pay for child care under your program, too?
>
> An overhaul of the system is needed, certainly. What kind of jobs are we
> going to give these people so that they can get off welfare and make a
> living that is enough to support their family?
>
>
> It's more complicated than "have them work for the money". Basically,
> you would have these people work for *less* than minimum wage. And
> that's not a solution.

well, then, they'll just have to starve! problem solved!

(dibs on their big-screen t.v.'s.)

your pal,
blake

"blake murphy" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:09:28 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>
>> In article >,
>> "cybercat" > wrote:
>>
>>> "kilikini" > wrote in message
>>> ...
>>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> One thing not mentioned, if you don't have dependents, it's not
>>>>> easy to get benefits. If you can, I don't know. You lose your
>>>>> job, you're SOL. I imagine that varies by state, too.
>>>>>
>>>>> nancy
>>>>
>>>> That's one of the reasons I had so many problems getting Medicaid. I'm
>>>> married, no children, and I'm white. Without dependents, it's a much
>>>> harder struggle to receive anything; you get scrutinized so much more.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So you are saying that they descriminate against WHITE people, kili??
>>
>> Where have YOU been?
>
> you're saying 'they' do? complete and utter bullshit. cite, please.
>

And why is this stupid bitch still addressing me when I have her killfiled?

blake murphy wrote:

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 02:45:58 -0500, Omelet wrote:
>
> > In article 7>,
> > Wayne Boatwright > wrote:
> >
> >> I'm not insinuating anything. I'm *stating* that welfare *abusers*
> >> (abusers for any reason) should have either severely limited or no
benefits
> >> at all.
> >
> > Welfare ABUSERS are the problem and the issue.
> >
> > I'll say again, I have no problem with helping people that need help!
> > It's those that go out of their way to earn a free living that are the
> > entire problem!
>
> and what percentage of the awful, awful one percent of your taxes do they
> absorb?
>
> christ, you begrudge these people the crumbs off your table. how
> compassionate.


Hey, while yer at it why don't you tar and feather the Republicans as liars
and cheats...that tactic *really* worked during the last two national
elections, ya know...

<chuckle>


--
Best
Greg

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 13:10:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright wrote:

> On Mon 15 Sep 2008 06:02:22a, kilikini told us...
>
>> Orlando Enrique Fiol wrote:
>>> wrote:
>>>> Food stamps buy food
>>>
>>> Not always. They're often illegally exchanged for cash to buy tobacco,
>>> alcohol, drugs and junk food. Also, given the high surpluses most
>>> farms endure, why is produce so expensive and why do few food banks
>>> offer plentiful produce to people whose diets so desperately need it?
>>>
>>> Orlando
>>
>> The actual paper food stamps have been long gone for years, as I recall,
>> and now there's a credit card called an EBT card (I don't know what EBT
>> means). AFAIK, you're asked for an I.D. when you use the card to ensure
>> that the person buying the food is the person the card has been issued
>> to.
>>
>> kili
>
> They have the cards here in AZ, but I've never seen them ask for an ID.

possibly not, but they most certainly won't allow you to by non-food stamp
items.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 19:57:15 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:

> Orlando Enrique Fiol wrote:
>>
>> Your ongoing assumption is that people on welfare consider their lives
>> care free and ideal. Most people on welfare turn to it as a last ditch
>> supplemental economic option, one of many including traditional jobs and
>> participation in informal or illegal economies. It has little to do with
>> self esteem and more to do with life costing more than low wage salaries
>> can purchase.
>
>
>
>
> *Some* people turn to welfare as a last resort. Meanwhile, there are
> lots of people out there who have no problem getting pregnant and unable
> to support the children and living on welfare. Then they demand day care
> and special education and training programs to get themselves back into
> the work force.

and poor people always, *always* get what they demand. they are the secret
powerful elite that really runs the country.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:43:39 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:
>
> So until this attitude of (ugly) capitalist entitlement ceases, it is
> unlikely that welfare recipients will be fully empowered to find their way,
> and, honestly, I believe not everyone should be made to work. But that's
> another debate. Me, I have 275 calendare days to go until I retire and yet
> I have no animosity towards those whose basic need exceeds their ability.
> Why is that, do you think?

you're a not a person of niggardly spirit?

just a guess.

your pal,
blake

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 19:13:37 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:

> Edwin Pawlowski wrote:
>> "Saerah Gray" > wrote in message
>>> When welfare gives you a higher net income, why work a minimum wage job?
>>>
>>
>> That is one problem. The Federal minimum wage is ridiculously low and some
>> states are not much better. There should be a time limit though, and
>> possibly some training - job skills help. The other problem is that you
>> have to WANT to do well, educate yourself, be trained and try to earn a
>> living.
>
>
>
> It is interesting to note that the US Senate blocked increases in
> federal minimum wages for years, but over the same period they voted
> themselves a number of raises totaling something like $28,000 per year,
> which is about double annual income of a person earning minimum wage.

they work hard for the money. it's a short work week, but still.
sometimes the republicans even read the bills the lobbyists write for them.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:31:17 GMT, blake murphy
> wrote:

>On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 13:10:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright wrote:
>
>> On Mon 15 Sep 2008 06:02:22a, kilikini told us...
>>
>>> Orlando Enrique Fiol wrote:
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> Food stamps buy food
>>>>
>>>> Not always. They're often illegally exchanged for cash to buy tobacco,
>>>> alcohol, drugs and junk food. Also, given the high surpluses most
>>>> farms endure, why is produce so expensive and why do few food banks
>>>> offer plentiful produce to people whose diets so desperately need it?
>>>>
>>>> Orlando
>>>
>>> The actual paper food stamps have been long gone for years, as I recall,
>>> and now there's a credit card called an EBT card (I don't know what EBT
>>> means). AFAIK, you're asked for an I.D. when you use the card to ensure
>>> that the person buying the food is the person the card has been issued
>>> to.
>>>
>>> kili
>>
>> They have the cards here in AZ, but I've never seen them ask for an ID.
>
>possibly not, but they most certainly won't allow you to by non-food stamp
>items.
>
>your pal,
>blake


There is a certain kind of fraud that can be perpetrated using the
EBTs (and likely could have been with the old paper versions as well).

Small markets, bodegas, some independent, non-chain stores are allowed
to participate in the program if they carry a minimum number of
acceptable/eligible foods stamp items. These stores are allowed in
(under certain conditions) as some of those on food stamps do not live
in areas well-served by larger markets and groceries and it provides a
means of getting groceries.

These markets, that do not have the computerized records that make
checking food stamp sales easy, take the EBT transfer and allow some
percentage of it to be used for tobacco, alcohol or other non-eligible
items.

Even with that, the benefits to those who must honestly depend on such
markets, can be provided.

No matter what the program, be it taxes, food stamps, medical or auto
insurance, or even vacuum sales or roofing, there will always be those
who try to scam the system. The idea is to try to keep it to a minimum
and hunt down through laws and punishment, those who cheat.

Boron

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 07:58:10a, Ms P told us...

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> 5.247...
>> On Sun 14 Sep 2008 10:46:26a, Nancy Young told us...
>>
>>>
>>> "hahabogus" > wrote
>>>
>>>> The idea is to break this cycle in welfare recipience. It is a well
>> known
>>>> cycle...the problem is the fix hasn't been found yet.
>>>
>>> Where I live they put a 5 year lifetime limit on welfare. Last
>>> I heard, you didn't get extra funds if you had additional children
>>> after you were on welfare. That's a simple overview, but you
>>> get the idea. Training programs were set up for people who
>>> needed it.
>>>
>>> It might not be perfect, but it's a step in the right direction.
>>> Nothing wrong with If you can work, work.
>>>
>>> nancy
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that is certainly a step in the right direction. I wish that were
>> true nationally.
>>
>> --
>> Wayne Boatwright
>>
>
> I think the Welfare Reform Act reformed the welfare system for all
states.
>
> Ms P
>
>

You may be right, but I have yet to see it in action in AZ.

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 9hrs 46mins
*******************************************
It's easier to obtain forgiveness than
permission.
*******************************************

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 08:01:24a, Ms P told us...

>
> "Wayne Boatwright" > wrote in message
> 5.247...
>>
>> Whatever... Maybe it's time we imposed penalties on adult welfare
>> recipients and limited the number of children a welfare recipient could
>> have to 1, also limiting the benefits they could receive. What you
>> can't afford to have, you shouldn't have. It's no wonder there are so
>> many children on the welfare rolls. One of the things that irritates
>> me most is
>> seeing an indigent family or single mother marching into the welfare
>> office
>> with 8 kids in tow, because most of these people are unemployed by
>> choice or lack of even the most rudimentary skills, and have no desire
>> to work. With our present system they know they don't have to, yet they
>> keep popping
>> out kids like it ws a hobby, and they know they'll receive additional
>> benefits for each child they have.
>>
>> There are some who are making every effort to pull themselves up by
>> their bootstraps and to work or actively seek employment.
>> Unfortunately, they seem to be in the vast minority.
>>
>> --
>> Wayne Boatwright
>
>
> You watch who goes in and out of the welfare office? Do you actually
> know the rules for recieving welfare? How do you know they're recieving
> welfare and not just food stamps?
>
> They reformed the welfare system back in 1996. The rules have changed a
> lot.
>
> Ms P
>
>

I am aware of quite a lot second hand, but documented. I work for a not-
for-profit mental health agency where most of our clients are on various
state programs.

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 9hrs 46mins
*******************************************
It's easier to obtain forgiveness than
permission.
*******************************************

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 12:34:07p, Ms P told us...

>
> "Michael "Dog3"" > wrote in message
> ...
>> "Ms P" > :
>> in rec.food.cooking
>>
>>>
>>> I was pretty sure the WRA was federal. So basically Wayne doesn't
>>> know he's ranting about something that was changed over 10 years ago.
>>>
>>> Everybody is limited to 2 years at time on welfare with a lifetime
>>> limit of 5 years. You can still get food stamps which come from USDA
>>> and housing assistance which comes from HUD and Medicaide and
>>> childcare assistance once you're gainfully employed in that minimum
>>> wage job. Oh, and then you'll get EITC.
>>>
>>> Yeah, being on "welfare" is soooooooooooo lucrative these days.
>>
>> This is a stupid question... but... Is Welfare federal, state or both?
>>
>> Michael
>
> Both. It's a federal program that's state administered.
>
> Ms P
>
>

In AZ there are also state programs that have nothing to do with the
federal government.

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 9hrs 43mins
*******************************************
KIDS!! Please DON'T try this at home.!
*******************************************

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:01:51 -0700 (PDT), aem >
wrote:

>On Sep 14, 5:47*pm, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 17:20:09 -0700 (PDT), aem >
>> wrote:
>>
>> >On Sep 14, 3:47*pm, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>>
>> >> There are a lot of media popularized myths about welfare and those who
>> >> receive it. You might want to read up on them here. This is from the
>> >> American Psychological Society. * [snip the rest without reading]
>>
>> >I rarely participate in these threads, but I take occasional quick
>> >looks at them. *This strikes me as one of the funniest things I've
>> >seen. *You ask Wayne to set aside his ignorant, unthinking positions
>> >long enough to read something and (impliedly) learn something from a
>> >reputable source?! *Wayne?! *Too funny..... * * -aem
>>
>> Who implied that Wayne was ignorant or unthinking? *Are you insane as
>> well as stupid?
>>
>Wayne's posts, that you're replying to, demonstrate that he's ignorant
>and unthinking. I was chortling at the futility of your trying to get
>him to read and learn. -aem
>

I consider Wayne one of the smarter and more reasonable of those who
usually post around here. That is why I thought he might want to read
up on some of the numbers.

Boron

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 13:10:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>They have the cards here in AZ, but I've never seen them ask for an ID.


The cashiers may be familiar with those shoppers you saw, or the rules
in Arizona may differ from the rules in other states. Each state makes
up a lot of its own rules and regs. They get the block grants
earmarked for certain programs, the states have to stay within
certain boundaries to be program/grant eligible and then they tailor
the programs to suit themselves.

Boron

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:16:01 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:


>
>I am aware of quite a lot second hand, but documented. I work for a not-
>for-profit mental health agency where most of our clients are on various
>state programs.

I have a friend who is helped by just such an agency in a state near
you. She can work at some jobs if she is on her meds, but once she
goes to work (always at very low wage and at places that offer no
insurance) she winds up losing her Medicaid and cannot afford her
meds. Once she is off meds, her symptoms reappear, she winds up
losing her job, as she is unable to function, and the whole cycle
begins again. Catch 22.

She has no family nearby or able to help, lives in something like an
SRO hotel, and has a pretty miserable time of it. It is these mental
health care agencies (or agency, I really do not know how many places
she goes to or has to report to) that help her get back to sanity and
job-capable, only to see it all crumble when she can't get meds.

Boron

On Sep 15, 3:40*pm, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>
> I consider Wayne one of the smarter and more reasonable of those who
> usually post around here. That is why I thought he might want to read
> up on some of the numbers.
>
You are a tolerant and generous soul. Pardon me for butting in. -
aem

John Kane wrote:

>> I'm not against helping people in need! How many times do I have to say
>> that? I have a problem with deliberate freeloaders! There are those
>> that even feel that welfare recipients should be drug screened...
>
> What freeloaders? The press may talk about 'freeloaders' but I bet
> they're awfully hard to find on the ground.


I don't know that many people on welfare, but I can think of a few who
were definite abusers. I spoke before of a family I knew on welfare who
spent most of their time online. Every in the family had a their own
computer, all state of the art.The father sabotaged every job he
eventually got. One daughter got student welfare because he could not
live with her family, but spent most of her time at home with the family
she could not live with, and the older daughter set out to get pregnant
during her first year of college.

Then there is one of the kids who got caught breaking into my house. He
came from a welfare family, but at the age of 17 had his own car. Not to
mention one of his his burglary buddies, living on student welfare.

When I was working in commercial vehicle I came across a guy driving
under suspension. He was on his way to the local welfare office to pick
up his welfare cheque. He had a truck with NY plates and a NY driver
licence, and he is in Ontario to pick up his welfare cheque? I called
the welfare office to tell him that a NY resident was on his way in to
pick up a welfare cheque. They didn't want to know about it until I
asked if they preferred that I call the local newspaper.




> Perhaps you should call your local welfare office and ask?

See above.

blake murphy wrote:
>
> and what percentage of the awful, awful one percent of your taxes do they
> absorb?
>
> christ, you begrudge these people the crumbs off your table. how
> compassionate.

One percent for that, one percent for another thing and one percent for
something else. If they won't give 1%, why should the rest of us? If we
all tried to live off the system there would not be any tax revenue to
use to help those who need it.

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 03:40:42p, Boron Elgar told us...

> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 18:01:51 -0700 (PDT), aem >
> wrote:
>
>>On Sep 14, 5:47*pm, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>>> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 17:20:09 -0700 (PDT), aem >
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> >On Sep 14, 3:47*pm, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>>>
>>> >> There are a lot of media popularized myths about welfare and those
who
>>> >> receive it. You might want to read up on them here. This is from the
>>> >> American Psychological Society. * [snip the rest without reading]
>>>
>>> >I rarely participate in these threads, but I take occasional quick
>>> >looks at them. *This strikes me as one of the funniest things I've
>>> >seen. *You ask Wayne to set aside his ignorant, unthinking positions
>>> >long enough to read something and (impliedly) learn something from a
>>> >reputable source?! *Wayne?! *Too funny..... * * -aem
>>>
>>> Who implied that Wayne was ignorant or unthinking? *Are you insane as
>>> well as stupid?
>>>
>>Wayne's posts, that you're replying to, demonstrate that he's ignorant
>>and unthinking. I was chortling at the futility of your trying to get
>>him to read and learn. -aem
>>
>
> I consider Wayne one of the smarter and more reasonable of those who
> usually post around here. That is why I thought he might want to read
> up on some of the numbers.
>
> Boron

Thank you, Boron. Unfortunately, I have to fix my score file so that I can
see you when you first post instead of depending on someone to quote you,
as I have the hotmail domain blocked. Since I value your posts and what
you express, I need to get about doing this soon.

Yes, I should look at more of the *facts* instead of relying on hearsay.
One thing I do know, because I work in a closely related health service
area, is that it can vary widely georgraphically, regardless of what the
Federal government may mandate. There are both Federal and State
guidelines and they are not always alligned, regardless of what the Feds
may think is true.

Naturally, I have my own biased personal opinions, as do many others. Some
may be groundless, but perhaps others not.


--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 6hrs 46mins
*******************************************
DOS Tip #63: add BUGS=OFF to CONFIG.SYS
*******************************************

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 03:45:02p, Boron Elgar told us...

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 13:10:57 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>They have the cards here in AZ, but I've never seen them ask for an ID.
>
>
> The cashiers may be familiar with those shoppers you saw, or the rules
> in Arizona may differ from the rules in other states. Each state makes
> up a lot of its own rules and regs. They get the block grants
> earmarked for certain programs, the states have to stay within
> certain boundaries to be program/grant eligible and then they tailor
> the programs to suit themselves.
>
> Boron
>

I think that's exactly what happens here in AZ. I'm sure we must follow
certain boundaries, but there are wide variances practiced here still
within those boundaries.

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 6hrs 40mins
*******************************************
All probabilities are 50%. Either a
thing will happen or it won't. This is
especially true when dealing with

"aem" > wrote in message
...
On Sep 15, 3:40 pm, Boron Elgar > wrote:
>
> I consider Wayne one of the smarter and more reasonable of those who
> usually post around here. That is why I thought he might want to read
> up on some of the numbers.
>
>You are a tolerant and generous soul.

Who needs to reassess Wayne based upon is comments in this thread.

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 03:53:56p, Boron Elgar told us...

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:16:01 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>
>>
>>I am aware of quite a lot second hand, but documented. I work for a not-
>>for-profit mental health agency where most of our clients are on various
>>state programs.
>
> I have a friend who is helped by just such an agency in a state near
> you. She can work at some jobs if she is on her meds, but once she
> goes to work (always at very low wage and at places that offer no
> insurance) she winds up losing her Medicaid and cannot afford her
> meds. Once she is off meds, her symptoms reappear, she winds up
> losing her job, as she is unable to function, and the whole cycle
> begins again. Catch 22.

This is a very sad situation, and I know it does happen. However, as long
as one of our clients is functional and working, it doesn't necessarily
mean they will lose all state medical benefits. In many instances here,
the state still subsidizes the medications.

> She has no family nearby or able to help, lives in something like an
> SRO hotel, and has a pretty miserable time of it. It is these mental
> health care agencies (or agency, I really do not know how many places
> she goes to or has to report to) that help her get back to sanity and
> job-capable, only to see it all crumble when she can't get meds.

I know this happens, particularly in other areas, and even in other areas
of Arizona. It really depends a lot on the strength of the local agencies.
For example, our agency has numerous group homes as well as private
apartments where many of our clients reside. When they are well enough to
work, they do, but they are still receiving benefits through our agency,
including medications. They receive the medications directly rather than
through prescription programs.

We have facilities for the SMI (severely mentally ill), transition
facilities, and a methadone program which is excellent. The majority of
those in the methadone program are individuals who are employed, but report
to the methadone clinic daily for their dosing. Depending on their wages,
they may have to pay a small sum per dose, but it is a very small sum.

The goal of our organization, as well as many others here in the Valley, is
to get people back on their feet and back into the workplace if at all
possible.

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 6hrs 39mins
*******************************************
Experience varies directly with
equipment ruined.
*******************************************

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 04:24:33p, Dave Smith told us...

> John Kane wrote:
>
>>> I'm not against helping people in need! How many times do I have to say
>>> that? I have a problem with deliberate freeloaders! There are those
>>> that even feel that welfare recipients should be drug screened...
>>
>> What freeloaders? The press may talk about 'freeloaders' but I bet
>> they're awfully hard to find on the ground.
>
>
> I don't know that many people on welfare, but I can think of a few who
> were definite abusers. I spoke before of a family I knew on welfare who
> spent most of their time online. Every in the family had a their own
> computer, all state of the art.The father sabotaged every job he
> eventually got. One daughter got student welfare because he could not
> live with her family, but spent most of her time at home with the family
> she could not live with, and the older daughter set out to get pregnant
> during her first year of college.
>
> Then there is one of the kids who got caught breaking into my house. He
> came from a welfare family, but at the age of 17 had his own car. Not to
> mention one of his his burglary buddies, living on student welfare.
>
> When I was working in commercial vehicle I came across a guy driving
> under suspension. He was on his way to the local welfare office to pick
> up his welfare cheque. He had a truck with NY plates and a NY driver
> licence, and he is in Ontario to pick up his welfare cheque? I called
> the welfare office to tell him that a NY resident was on his way in to
> pick up a welfare cheque. They didn't want to know about it until I
> asked if they preferred that I call the local newspaper.

>> Perhaps you should call your local welfare office and ask?
>
> See above.
>

I can remember a time, many years ago in Cleveland, where it was common to
see many welfare recipients pulling up to the welfare offices in their new
Cadillacs to pick up their checks.

I know things aren't quite like that now, but it's an image one doesn't
forget.

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 6hrs 26mins
*******************************************
Use your wit to amuse, not abuse nor
confuse the stupid.
*******************************************

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:30:34 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>On Mon 15 Sep 2008 03:53:56p, Boron Elgar told us...
>
>> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 21:16:01 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>
>>>I am aware of quite a lot second hand, but documented. I work for a not-
>>>for-profit mental health agency where most of our clients are on various
>>>state programs.
>>
>> I have a friend who is helped by just such an agency in a state near
>> you. She can work at some jobs if she is on her meds, but once she
>> goes to work (always at very low wage and at places that offer no
>> insurance) she winds up losing her Medicaid and cannot afford her
>> meds. Once she is off meds, her symptoms reappear, she winds up
>> losing her job, as she is unable to function, and the whole cycle
>> begins again. Catch 22.
>
>This is a very sad situation, and I know it does happen. However, as long
>as one of our clients is functional and working, it doesn't necessarily
>mean they will lose all state medical benefits. In many instances here,
>the state still subsidizes the medications.
>
>> She has no family nearby or able to help, lives in something like an
>> SRO hotel, and has a pretty miserable time of it. It is these mental
>> health care agencies (or agency, I really do not know how many places
>> she goes to or has to report to) that help her get back to sanity and
>> job-capable, only to see it all crumble when she can't get meds.
>
>I know this happens, particularly in other areas, and even in other areas
>of Arizona. It really depends a lot on the strength of the local agencies.
>For example, our agency has numerous group homes as well as private
>apartments where many of our clients reside. When they are well enough to
>work, they do, but they are still receiving benefits through our agency,
>including medications. They receive the medications directly rather than
>through prescription programs.
>
>We have facilities for the SMI (severely mentally ill), transition
>facilities, and a methadone program which is excellent. The majority of
>those in the methadone program are individuals who are employed, but report
>to the methadone clinic daily for their dosing. Depending on their wages,
>they may have to pay a small sum per dose, but it is a very small sum.
>
>The goal of our organization, as well as many others here in the Valley, is
>to get people back on their feet and back into the workplace if at all
>possible.

I am sure it must be draining and emotionally wrenching as a job,
sometimes, but is sounds as if you do try to help people and make a
positive difference in their lives. That's a Good Thing and you are to
be thanked beyond wages.

Boron

On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 19:24:33 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>John Kane wrote:
>
>>> I'm not against helping people in need! How many times do I have to say
>>> that? I have a problem with deliberate freeloaders! There are those
>>> that even feel that welfare recipients should be drug screened...
>>
>> What freeloaders? The press may talk about 'freeloaders' but I bet
>> they're awfully hard to find on the ground.
>
>
>I don't know that many people on welfare, but I can think of a few who
>were definite abusers. I spoke before of a family I knew on welfare who
>spent most of their time online. Every in the family had a their own
>computer, all state of the art.The father sabotaged every job he
>eventually got. One daughter got student welfare because he could not
>live with her family, but spent most of her time at home with the family
>she could not live with, and the older daughter set out to get pregnant
>during her first year of college.
>
>Then there is one of the kids who got caught breaking into my house. He
>came from a welfare family, but at the age of 17 had his own car. Not to
>mention one of his his burglary buddies, living on student welfare.
>
>When I was working in commercial vehicle I came across a guy driving
>under suspension. He was on his way to the local welfare office to pick
>up his welfare cheque. He had a truck with NY plates and a NY driver
>licence, and he is in Ontario to pick up his welfare cheque? I called
>the welfare office to tell him that a NY resident was on his way in to
>pick up a welfare cheque. They didn't want to know about it until I
>asked if they preferred that I call the local newspaper.
>
>
>
>
Wow...you have as many run-ins with welfare cheats as Janet does with
dancing Arabs.

You guys need to write a book.

>
>See above.

Yeah...it's good advice. Take it.

Boron

John Kane > fnord
:
>Om wrote:
>>
>> Did I ever mention an amount? Is welfare less than minimum wage?
>
> Perhaps you should call your local welfare office and ask?
>
> You might find it suprising. Texas minimum wage is $6.55 apparently.
> http://www.dol.gov/esa/minwage/america.htm#Texas
>
> I don't know enough about Texas and US laws and terminology to easily
> track down the welfare equivelent.
>
> Welfare is well below the minumum wage in Ontario $520 pear month
> according to this site
> http://www.uclg.ca/en/services/ontar...assistance.asp
>
> Ontario minimum wage is $8 / hr. or roughly $1200 per month (assuming
> a 40 hour week)
> http://lpaula.wordpress.com/2007/02/...e-hike-canada/
>
> Ergo 520/1200 is roughly 43% of the minumum wage.


Thanks for looking all that up so I didn't have to

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:19:51 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>On Mon 15 Sep 2008 03:40:42p, Boron Elgar told us...
>

>> I consider Wayne one of the smarter and more reasonable of those who
>> usually post around here. That is why I thought he might want to read
>> up on some of the numbers.
>>
>> Boron
>
>Thank you, Boron. Unfortunately, I have to fix my score file so that I can
>see you when you first post instead of depending on someone to quote you,
>as I have the hotmail domain blocked. Since I value your posts and what
>you express, I need to get about doing this soon.

I used to list my address at from "hootmail." I'll try it again and
see if this news server allows it. One of mine prevented it.
>
>Yes, I should look at more of the *facts* instead of relying on hearsay.
>One thing I do know, because I work in a closely related health service
>area, is that it can vary widely georgraphically, regardless of what the
>Federal government may mandate. There are both Federal and State
>guidelines and they are not always alligned, regardless of what the Feds
>may think is true.
>
>Naturally, I have my own biased personal opinions, as do many others. Some
>may be groundless, but perhaps others not.

We all have opinions. Sometimes they change, sometimes, not. I
sometimes get a kick out of trying to change others'. <BG>

Boron

Wayne Boatwright > fnord
5.247:

> On Mon 15 Sep 2008 04:24:33p, Dave Smith told us...
>
>> John Kane wrote:
>>
>>>> I'm not against helping people in need! How many times do I have to
>>>> say that? I have a problem with deliberate freeloaders! There are
>>>> those that even feel that welfare recipients should be drug
>>>> screened...
>>>
>>> What freeloaders? The press may talk about 'freeloaders' but I bet
>>> they're awfully hard to find on the ground.
>>
>>
>> I don't know that many people on welfare, but I can think of a few
>> who were definite abusers. I spoke before of a family I knew on
>> welfare who spent most of their time online. Every in the family had
>> a their own computer, all state of the art.The father sabotaged every
>> job he eventually got. One daughter got student welfare because he
>> could not live with her family, but spent most of her time at home
>> with the family she could not live with, and the older daughter set
>> out to get pregnant during her first year of college.
>>
>> Then there is one of the kids who got caught breaking into my house.
>> He came from a welfare family, but at the age of 17 had his own car.
>> Not to mention one of his his burglary buddies, living on student
>> welfare.
>>
>> When I was working in commercial vehicle I came across a guy driving
>> under suspension. He was on his way to the local welfare office to
>> pick up his welfare cheque. He had a truck with NY plates and a NY
>> driver licence, and he is in Ontario to pick up his welfare cheque? I
>> called the welfare office to tell him that a NY resident was on his
>> way in to pick up a welfare cheque. They didn't want to know about it
>> until I asked if they preferred that I call the local newspaper.
>
>>> Perhaps you should call your local welfare office and ask?
>>
>> See above.
>>
>
> I can remember a time, many years ago in Cleveland, where it was
> common to see many welfare recipients pulling up to the welfare
> offices in their new Cadillacs to pick up their checks.
>
> I know things aren't quite like that now, but it's an image one
> doesn't forget.
>

Wayne, I have a hard time believing that people picking up their welfare
checks in Cadillacs was a "common" sight. I mean, I've seen the video
with Ol' Dirty *******, but I imagine that that is the exception, rather
than the rule.

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

(Denise in NH) fnord news:15622-48CEABBC-2030
@storefull-3133.bay.webtv.net:

> I wasn't sure I wanted to weigh in on this conversation, but I think
I
> will. I have been the director of a food pantry for 18 years.
Because
> we are given government surplus food, we must follow the government
> guidelines for eligibility.
>
> These are the income eligibility limits ( in NH) :
>
> family of one = $19,240
> two = $25,900
> five = $45,880
> eight = $65,860
>
> If someone comes in with a gross household income under these amounts
> they are automatically qualified.

The cost of living in New Hampshire must be very high. I make just under
the guideline for a family of two, and while things are tight, I have no
need for food assitance.

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 06:19:52p, Boron Elgar told us...

> On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:19:51 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>On Mon 15 Sep 2008 03:40:42p, Boron Elgar told us...
>>
>
>>> I consider Wayne one of the smarter and more reasonable of those who
>>> usually post around here. That is why I thought he might want to read
>>> up on some of the numbers.
>>>
>>> Boron
>>
>>Thank you, Boron. Unfortunately, I have to fix my score file so that I
>>can see you when you first post instead of depending on someone to quote
>>you, as I have the hotmail domain blocked. Since I value your posts and
>>what you express, I need to get about doing this soon.
>
> I used to list my address at from "hootmail." I'll try it again and
> see if this news server allows it. One of mine prevented it.
>>
>>Yes, I should look at more of the *facts* instead of relying on hearsay.
>> One thing I do know, because I work in a closely related health service
>>area, is that it can vary widely georgraphically, regardless of what the
>>Federal government may mandate. There are both Federal and State
>>guidelines and they are not always alligned, regardless of what the Feds
>>may think is true.
>>
>>Naturally, I have my own biased personal opinions, as do many others.
>>Some may be groundless, but perhaps others not.
>
> We all have opinions. Sometimes they change, sometimes, not. I
> sometimes get a kick out of trying to change others'. <BG>
>
> Boron
>

You are definitely someone I would like to meet in *real* life. :-)

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 5hrs 20mins
*******************************************
Two dead ends and you still got to
choose... (Tom Waits)
*******************************************

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 06:21:32p, Saerah Gray told us...

> Wayne Boatwright > fnord
> 5.247:
>
>> On Mon 15 Sep 2008 04:24:33p, Dave Smith told us...
>>
>>> John Kane wrote:
>>>
>>>>> I'm not against helping people in need! How many times do I have to
>>>>> say that? I have a problem with deliberate freeloaders! There are
>>>>> those that even feel that welfare recipients should be drug
>>>>> screened...
>>>>
>>>> What freeloaders? The press may talk about 'freeloaders' but I bet
>>>> they're awfully hard to find on the ground.
>>>
>>>
>>> I don't know that many people on welfare, but I can think of a few
>>> who were definite abusers. I spoke before of a family I knew on
>>> welfare who spent most of their time online. Every in the family had
>>> a their own computer, all state of the art.The father sabotaged every
>>> job he eventually got. One daughter got student welfare because he
>>> could not live with her family, but spent most of her time at home
>>> with the family she could not live with, and the older daughter set
>>> out to get pregnant during her first year of college.
>>>
>>> Then there is one of the kids who got caught breaking into my house.
>>> He came from a welfare family, but at the age of 17 had his own car.
>>> Not to mention one of his his burglary buddies, living on student
>>> welfare.
>>>
>>> When I was working in commercial vehicle I came across a guy driving
>>> under suspension. He was on his way to the local welfare office to
>>> pick up his welfare cheque. He had a truck with NY plates and a NY
>>> driver licence, and he is in Ontario to pick up his welfare cheque? I
>>> called the welfare office to tell him that a NY resident was on his
>>> way in to pick up a welfare cheque. They didn't want to know about it
>>> until I asked if they preferred that I call the local newspaper.
>>
>>>> Perhaps you should call your local welfare office and ask?
>>>
>>> See above.
>>>
>>
>> I can remember a time, many years ago in Cleveland, where it was
>> common to see many welfare recipients pulling up to the welfare
>> offices in their new Cadillacs to pick up their checks.
>>
>> I know things aren't quite like that now, but it's an image one
>> doesn't forget.
>>
>
> Wayne, I have a hard time believing that people picking up their welfare
> checks in Cadillacs was a "common" sight. I mean, I've seen the video
> with Ol' Dirty *******, but I imagine that that is the exception, rather
> than the rule.
>

You didn't live in Cleveland in the 1960s.

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 5hrs 19mins
*******************************************
Friends come and go. Enemies are forever.
*******************************************

On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 01:41:21 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> wrote:

>On Mon 15 Sep 2008 06:19:52p, Boron Elgar told us...
>
>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:19:51 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On Mon 15 Sep 2008 03:40:42p, Boron Elgar told us...
>>>
>>
>>>> I consider Wayne one of the smarter and more reasonable of those who
>>>> usually post around here. That is why I thought he might want to read
>>>> up on some of the numbers.
>>>>
>>>> Boron
>>>
>>>Thank you, Boron. Unfortunately, I have to fix my score file so that I
>>>can see you when you first post instead of depending on someone to quote
>>>you, as I have the hotmail domain blocked. Since I value your posts and
>>>what you express, I need to get about doing this soon.
>>
>> I used to list my address at from "hootmail." I'll try it again and
>> see if this news server allows it. One of mine prevented it.
>>>
>>>Yes, I should look at more of the *facts* instead of relying on hearsay.
>>> One thing I do know, because I work in a closely related health service
>>>area, is that it can vary widely georgraphically, regardless of what the
>>>Federal government may mandate. There are both Federal and State
>>>guidelines and they are not always alligned, regardless of what the Feds
>>>may think is true.
>>>
>>>Naturally, I have my own biased personal opinions, as do many others.
>>>Some may be groundless, but perhaps others not.
>>
>> We all have opinions. Sometimes they change, sometimes, not. I
>> sometimes get a kick out of trying to change others'. <BG>
>>
>> Boron
>>
>
>You are definitely someone I would like to meet in *real* life. :-)


That would be a great pleasure of mine, sir.

Boron

blake murphy > fnord
:

> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:46:27 GMT, Saerah Gray wrote:
>
>> Wayne Boatwright > fnord
>> 5.247:
>>
>>> When I lost my job in 2002, I couldn't even get medical assistance
>>> through the state's program, which I sorely needed. The reason?
>>> Because I was single, had no children, and owned a 10 year old car!
>>>
>>> Don't even begin to try to tell me that I was less deserving or that
>>> this was fair, when some people who have never worked a day in their
>>> life go trailing into the welfare office with five or eight kids and
>>> get everything under the sun, including absolutely free medical
>>> care.
>>>
>>> I don't have a solution, but I will clearly state that the welfare
>>> system is seriously ****ed up.
>>>
>>
>> I want to add here that I think *everyone* is deserving of basic
>> healthcare, if they need it, employed or not. I think it is a
>> disgrace that every citizen does not have access to a doctor for
>> preventative care, causing people to get sicker, as well as costing
>> taxpayers more money in the long run.
>>
>> It's certainly no less reasonable then the government giving me a
>> break on my taxes because I decided to reproduce or finance a home.
>>
>> I feel very, very privileged to have low-cost health insurance
>> provided to me by my employer.
>
> still, it would be nice not to have to continue in a job you hate, as
> not a few people do, for fear of losing your insurance.
>

True, but I'm glad for the paycheck too. I am grateful that I am able to
support my family. I've had much shittier jobs than the one I have now.

--
Saerah (If I ever have to drive fast food delivery again, I think I'll
have to be put on serious tranquilizers.)

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

Dave Smith > fnord
:

> blake murphy wrote:
>>
>> and what percentage of the awful, awful one percent of your taxes do
>> they absorb?
>>
>> christ, you begrudge these people the crumbs off your table. how
>> compassionate.
>
> One percent for that, one percent for another thing and one percent
> for something else. If they won't give 1%, why should the rest of us?
> If we all tried to live off the system there would not be any tax
> revenue to use to help those who need it.
>

There is a time limit on welfare. No one is on it their entire life (at
least not anymore). 1% is a drop in the bucket compared to how much
money is wasted constantly on other things.

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

blake murphy > fnord
:

> On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 19:57:15 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:
>
>>
>> *Some* people turn to welfare as a last resort. Meanwhile, there are
>> lots of people out there who have no problem getting pregnant and
>> unable to support the children and living on welfare. Then they
>> demand day care and special education and training programs to get
>> themselves back into the work force.
>
> and poor people always, *always* get what they demand. they are the
> secret powerful elite that really runs the country.
>

Wait, was that how Bush got elected twice?

--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 06:55:05p, Saerah Gray told us...

> blake murphy > fnord
> :
>
>> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 03:46:27 GMT, Saerah Gray wrote:
>>
>>> Wayne Boatwright > fnord
>>> 5.247:
>>>
>>>> When I lost my job in 2002, I couldn't even get medical assistance
>>>> through the state's program, which I sorely needed. The reason?
>>>> Because I was single, had no children, and owned a 10 year old car!
>>>>
>>>> Don't even begin to try to tell me that I was less deserving or that
>>>> this was fair, when some people who have never worked a day in their
>>>> life go trailing into the welfare office with five or eight kids and
>>>> get everything under the sun, including absolutely free medical
>>>> care.
>>>>
>>>> I don't have a solution, but I will clearly state that the welfare
>>>> system is seriously ****ed up.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I want to add here that I think *everyone* is deserving of basic
>>> healthcare, if they need it, employed or not. I think it is a
>>> disgrace that every citizen does not have access to a doctor for
>>> preventative care, causing people to get sicker, as well as costing
>>> taxpayers more money in the long run.
>>>
>>> It's certainly no less reasonable then the government giving me a
>>> break on my taxes because I decided to reproduce or finance a home.
>>>
>>> I feel very, very privileged to have low-cost health insurance
>>> provided to me by my employer.
>>
>> still, it would be nice not to have to continue in a job you hate, as
>> not a few people do, for fear of losing your insurance.
>>
>
> True, but I'm glad for the paycheck too. I am grateful that I am able to
> support my family. I've had much shittier jobs than the one I have now.

There are some people who work where I work that are there only because of
the benfits. I know they'd rather be somewhere else doing something else.
I am fortunately that I really like my job. I am thankful for the
paycheck, and grateful for the medical insurance, and that I can pay my
bills. Anything beyond that is gravy, but I don't get much gravy. :-)

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 5hrs 1mins
*******************************************
A mainframe: The biggest PC peripheral
available.
*******************************************

"Michael \"Dog3\"" > fnord
:

> blake murphy >
> news >
>> On Mon, 15 Sep 2008 07:43:39 -0500, Michel Boucher wrote:
>>>
>>> So until this attitude of (ugly) capitalist entitlement ceases, it
is
>>> unlikely that welfare recipients will be fully empowered to find
>>> their way, and, honestly, I believe not everyone should be made to
>>> work. But that's another debate. Me, I have 275 calendare days to
>>> go until I retire and yet I have no animosity towards those whose
>>> basic need exceeds their ability. Why is that, do you think?
>>
>> you're a not a person of niggardly spirit?
>>
>> just a guess.
>
> ROFL... oh dear GAWD... such a discussion is cause last time it was
used
> around here.
>
> Michael
>

It's a perfectly valid word. I don't use the "n" word (other than when
I'm listening to music and making a really lame attempt at trying to
sing along to a rap song), but I love saying "niggardly" and freaking
people out.


--
Saerah

"Welcome to Usenet, Biatch! Adapt or haul ass!"
- some hillbilly from FL

On Mon 15 Sep 2008 06:51:23p, Boron Elgar told us...

> On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 01:41:21 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
> > wrote:
>
>>On Mon 15 Sep 2008 06:19:52p, Boron Elgar told us...
>>
>>> On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 00:19:51 GMT, Wayne Boatwright
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Mon 15 Sep 2008 03:40:42p, Boron Elgar told us...
>>>>
>>>
>>>>> I consider Wayne one of the smarter and more reasonable of those who
>>>>> usually post around here. That is why I thought he might want to read
>>>>> up on some of the numbers.
>>>>>
>>>>> Boron
>>>>
>>>>Thank you, Boron. Unfortunately, I have to fix my score file so that I
>>>>can see you when you first post instead of depending on someone to
quote
>>>>you, as I have the hotmail domain blocked. Since I value your posts
and
>>>>what you express, I need to get about doing this soon.
>>>
>>> I used to list my address at from "hootmail." I'll try it again and
>>> see if this news server allows it. One of mine prevented it.
>>>>
>>>>Yes, I should look at more of the *facts* instead of relying on
hearsay.
>>>> One thing I do know, because I work in a closely related health
service
>>>>area, is that it can vary widely georgraphically, regardless of what
the
>>>>Federal government may mandate. There are both Federal and State
>>>>guidelines and they are not always alligned, regardless of what the
Feds
>>>>may think is true.
>>>>
>>>>Naturally, I have my own biased personal opinions, as do many others.
>>>>Some may be groundless, but perhaps others not.
>>>
>>> We all have opinions. Sometimes they change, sometimes, not. I
>>> sometimes get a kick out of trying to change others'. <BG>
>>>
>>> Boron
>>>
>>
>>You are definitely someone I would like to meet in *real* life. :-)
>
>
> That would be a great pleasure of mine, sir.
>
> Boron
>

Thank you... If I ever make it back East someday...

--
Wayne Boatwright

*******************************************
Date: Monday, 09(IX)/15(XV)/08(MMVIII)
*******************************************
Countdown till Veteran's Day
8wks 5hrs 3mins
*******************************************
Why is it that when you transport
something by car, it's called a
'shipment,' but when you transport