Another reason

Varmintmist

that I will vote for the current pres again.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nearly-700-000-will-lose-food-stamps-usda-work-requirement-n1095726?cid=sm_npd_nn_fb_ma&fbclid=IwAR3At0emN7LIb9WM69OPO5ZASLQTDvo17ZL7_ELJP4KOX5drqXVZSG_bMto

knitepoet

Yep

GunNut

About effing time...

CaliFFL

Lying, pandering politicians...Exhibit A:

Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., the ranking member of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, said this rule would do little to help anyone find work. All the rule change does is strip people from accessing the benefit, she said.

"This Administration is out of touch with families who are struggling to make ends meet by working seasonal jobs or part time jobs with unreliable hours," Stabenow said. "Seasonal holiday workers, workers in Northern Michigan’s tourism industry, and workers with unreliable hours like waiters and waitresses are the kinds of workers hurt by this proposal."

The rule change: 

The USDA rule change affects people between the ages of 18 and 49 who are childless and not disabled. 

In other words, able-bodied childless people who should effin' working. 

Diver43

If you can not work 3 months out of 3 years to stay eligible, you deserve to starve

earlyagain

For me, its a strange phenomenon that constituents of the Republican right are so obsessively fixated on people on welfare. In 54 years of life, Ive known exactly two people that don't work. All of the people I see in the course of daily routine are working.

zorba

I guess you don't get out much there, Early. I've seen "zillions" of people "on the dole" - heck, most of my neighbors when I was a kid were such. People who actually PRODUCE something are tired of the parasites, to be blunt. Its all in Ayn Rand.

I don't agree with the Republican Right on a lot of things, but this is most definitely one that I do!

Accipiter

I do a lot of work for section 8.  I used to have Much more sympathy for these individuals before I started working around them.  85% are either trash that will never rise above their situation regardless of how much support they are given, or they are gaming the system, and taking benefits while making cash on the side, in order to keep their freebies. Around 15% seem to be trying to somehow better themselves with the support they are receiving.  Don’t get me started on the near ubiquitous use of marijuana.  As a libertarian I don’t much care what someone does with their own time, except when I am forced to subsidize it.  A great start would be to boot the 85% from the dole.

I don’t much care for Trump, but no able bodied adult should be getting paid to sit on their ass.  We should not be helping people who do not seek to help themselves.  On this I am inclined to side with the President.

CaliFFL

Not too long ago, I asked an employee to work four hours overtime. He declined because "if my pay goes over X, I lose my benefit." My jaw dropped. 

Some time later I saw this person in the local Walmart in the checkout line. He had separate baskets on the conveyor. One basket (food items) was paid with some government debit card and the other basket (beer, junk food, toys) was paid with his personal debit card. 

I guess managing this lifestyle is easier than working 44 hours per week. 

earlyagain

The refusing overtime in lue of assistance is an interesting perspective.

I'd be more likely to wonder why a 40 hr weeks pay leaves an employee qualified for food stamps? Seems like a reliable hand out is better than 4 hrs over time maybe not available next week.

I don't think there's that many people on assistance that don't work. I think its a BS narrative. Albeit an effective one, that distracts and diverts attention from where the money really goes, and focuses it on the ever present those people on which the Republican right is so dependent for their slight of hand agenda. Of course I never read Ayn Rand. Maybe there's more dead beats in there.

Im not opposed to the rule. Sounds great. Im not holding my breath waiting for my life to improve as a result either.

bullsi1911

alphasigmookie said:

I will pass along my experience with such things. I have a close friend who is a disabled vet. He struggled for most of his life to make ends meet until he just couldn't anymore and ended up homeless. The caseworkers are the shelter were able to help him jump through all the hoops to get food stamps and eventually after like 6 months a small 1 bedroom appartment. It took over a year get through everything to get approved for military disability and start collecting just enough to scrape by. If not for government services my friend would be dead today. He nearly took his own life many times along the way. Today he lives in a small government subsidized appartment and lives a quiet but comfortable life. Had he not been a veteran he would not have been eligible for many of the services he now recieves and again would probably be dead. Yes there are people who take advantage of the system, but plenty more who really need it. 

Those are the people and cases we need to support- especially our veterans.  We need to kick out the moochers to make sure there is more available to people like your friend, and to make it EASIER for the people who need the services to get the services.

GunNut

bullsi1911 said:

alphasigmookie said:

I will pass along my experience with such things. I have a close friend who is a disabled vet. He struggled for most of his life to make ends meet until he just couldn't anymore and ended up homeless. The caseworkers are the shelter were able to help him jump through all the hoops to get food stamps and eventually after like 6 months a small 1 bedroom appartment. It took over a year get through everything to get approved for military disability and start collecting just enough to scrape by. If not for government services my friend would be dead today. He nearly took his own life many times along the way. Today he lives in a small government subsidized appartment and lives a quiet but comfortable life. Had he not been a veteran he would not have been eligible for many of the services he now recieves and again would probably be dead. Yes there are people who take advantage of the system, but plenty more who really need it. 

Those are the people and cases we need to support- especially our veterans.  We need to kick out the moochers to make sure there is more available to people like your friend, and to make it EASIER for the people who need the services to get the services.

EXACTLY!  But our friend Alpha is ok with the abuses in THIS system where millions are screwing ALL of us out of money but he is outraged by the Capitalism abuse that left a couple of thousand out of work in Nebraska.  Hey it’s ok, mostly Trump supporters getting screwed right?

zorba

alphasigmookie said:

I will pass along my experience with such things. I have a close friend who is a disabled vet. He struggled for most of his life to make ends meet until he just couldn't anymore and ended up homeless. The caseworkers are the shelter were able to help him jump through all the hoops to get food stamps and eventually after like 6 months a small 1 bedroom apartment. It took over a year get through everything to get approved for military disability and start collecting just enough to scrape by. If not for government services my friend would be dead today. He nearly took his own life many times along the way. Today he lives in a small government subsidized apartment and lives a quiet but comfortable life. Had he not been a veteran he would not have been eligible for many of the services he now receives and again would probably be dead. Yes there are people who take advantage of the system, but plenty more who really need it. 

I'm with you right up until the last sentence, which I would invert.

knitepoet

Alpha's story, while touching has no bearing to the current hoopla, the people possibly being cut AREN'T disabled and aren't families. If you read the actual order, it's the ABLE BODIED, with NO DEPENDENTS who are being require to work.

GunNut

It’s a classic example of him latching on to one salient example to advance a policy that continues to harm millions of the “elites” because it fits your personal agenda of building a Socialist Nirvana.

Varmintmist

earlyagain said:

For me, its a strange phenomenon that constituents of the Republican right are so obsessively fixated on people on welfare. In 54 years of life, Ive known exactly two people that don't work. All of the people I see in the course of daily routine are working.

At a guess, you are not now nor have ever been a landlord, or have been in any business who is "at home" customer service, or have any contact with persons on govt plans or programs.

Lilly Tomlin as Ernestine described my job perfectly "We are the phone company. We serve everyone from Presidents and kings to the scum of the earth." Most people work, those are not the ones we are talking about. It is my opinion, based on years of contact with welfare recipients, that the majority are trying to game the system.

The easy way to tell is if they are not trying to game the system, they get off of it. They will work the extra 4 hours, 10 hours, second job.

Varmintmist

alphasigmookie said:

I will pass along my experience with such things. I have a close friend who is a disabled vet.

Which means your story is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the work requirement

GunNut

Varmintmist said:

alphasigmookie said:

I will pass along my experience with such things. I have a close friend who is a disabled vet.

Which means your story is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the work requirement

Yes, irrelevant, as most of his handpicked examples.  He’s the equivalent of clickbait on this forum.  He should start his threads with, “You’re not going to believe what she looks like now.”

GunNut

I have, took about 2 days.

Varmintmist

alphasigmookie said:

Varmintmist said:

alphasigmookie said:

I will pass along my experience with such things. I have a close friend who is a disabled vet.

Which means your story is irrelevant. It has nothing to do with the work requirement

It's irrelevant only if you've never tried to help someone jump through the hoops of getting a disability designation.   

No, its irrelevant because the new rule will NOT affect a disabled vet, or a disabled civilian, or a person with children. The article has nothing to do with your story.

Varmintmist

alphasigmookie said:

In my experience people who are homeless or on public assistance fall into a number of categories. Very few of them would truly fall into the "just lazy" category, but yes sure there are people who will try to abuse any system. 

Disabled -  Doesnt apply to the new rule.

Mentally Ill - if they are abled bodied they can still work 20 hours and receive bennies

Addicts - If they are abled bodied, they can still work 20 hours and receive bennies. In real life they are self caused problems.

Struggling working single parents and families - Doesnt apply to the new rule

The bottom line is there is always going to be a small segment of the population who aren't well equipped to succeed in our modern world. Sure in previous generations we may have just let them die or even killed them proactively. However as a society we have decided that's not how we want to be. We have the resources to at least provide a small amount to these people so they can survive and maintain at least a tiny shred of dignity. The only question is how much and to whom.

Exactly. How much and to whom. IS the question. The answer currently is, to those who have kids or cant work, AND to able bodied people who work a whopping 20 hours at a job.

Also this seems relevant to this thread

 Only if you are smoking while you are typing. Again, zero relevance to a work requirement for ABLE BODIED people who want free stuff.

Accipiter

alphasigmookie said:

In my experience people who are homeless or on public assistance fall into a number of categories. Very few of them would truly fall into the "just lazy" category, but yes sure there are people who will try to abuse any system. 

Disabled - It can be challenging to get classified as disabled, but once you are it's the best way to get the most benefits. I'd argue that most of the abuse actually comes in the disability system.

Mentally Ill - We have criminally underfunded our mental health systems for generations now and it's coming back to bite us. We have a full blown mental health crisis in this country and aren't doing anything to fix it. Good luck telling many of these people to "just get a job". Who would hire them. They might be able to fake it through an interview, but they aren't going to stay employed for long. Since we're never going to invest enough money to actually try to solve the crisis we're stuck with either going back to institutionalizing them and robbing them of whatever small shreds of dignity they still have left, paying them some public assistance so they can at least survive, or just becoming Nazis and killing them all. 

Addicts - Yes addicts are the people we all can hate on right? Except most true addicts are just people who are mentally ill who have gone to drugs and alcohol to self medicate because we don't actually ever treat people for mental health in this country unless they're rich, and even then we place large social stigma on seeking mental health. Also once a person slips into being an addict it's easier said than done to actually escape from that trap. Almost no one can do it on their own without help. Again we can pay for treatment and mental health services and maybe turn some of these people around. We can pay $3k/month to keep them in jail. Or we can give them a small amount of public assistance to help limit how much other damage they do to society.  Or again we can go the Nazi route and just kill them all. 

Struggling working single parents and families - This is actually the largest section of people receiving assistance. As I've discussed at before in many threads, the jobs at the bottom rungs of the economic ladder just don't pay enough for a lot of people to survive and raise kids. If you want these people off of public assistance we need more programs that provide childcare for poor working families and raise wages for the people who are trying their best to get by honestly. Hard to go to school or develop skills when you're struggling just to make enough money to get by and raise a kid. Especially if you were raised in poverty and drew the short end of the genetic lottery (50% of the population is below average). Here there are a huge number of approaches that all help a little bit. Sure sex education, free birth control, the A word, better education, more public child care, raising wages at the bottom of the economic ladder, universal basic income, or some small amount of public assistance to help give people a boost or at least help keep them from completely falling off the economic ladder. 

The bottom line is there is always going to be a small segment of the population who aren't well equipped to succeed in our modern world. Sure in previous generations we may have just let them die or even killed them proactively. However as a society we have decided that's not how we want to be. We have the resources to at least provide a small amount to these people so they can survive and maintain at least a tiny shred of dignity. The only question is how much and to whom. 

Also this seems relevant to this thread

What precisely is your experience?  I have been doing business with 4 section eight communities over the last 15 years.  I have worked around hundreds if not thousand of recipients of subsidized housing, food stamps, and welfare to come to my not so scientific opinion.  I have worked in their occupied homes, and their recently vacated homes.  Just curious the sample size your experience encompasses.  

GunNut

alphasigmookie said:

There's a difference between people who are physically or mentally unable to work and those who have an official government disability designation. Getting the latter is no simple matter. Also are you volunteering to hire the mentally ill and addicts so they don't starve to death? Are we going to put in place a government mandate saying someone else has to hire them? Or are we going to put in place a government job placement program that will provide jobs for them? What is your solution?

The solution is to have a safety net in place that is NOT an enticement to avoid work.  Then RUTHLESSLY weed out the deserving from the abusers and PUNISH the abusers severely so we have enough money in the kitty to take care of the really in need.

This is not what is in place today.  And will never be as long as folks like Bernie, Kamala and the Native American, Lizzie Unicon Farts are pandering to the slugs of society buying their votes with more freebies.

Accipiter

alphasigmookie said:

I will pass along my experience with such things. I have a close friend who is a disabled vet. He struggled for most of his life to make ends meet until he just couldn't anymore and ended up homeless. The caseworkers are the shelter were able to help him jump through all the hoops to get food stamps and eventually after like 6 months a small 1 bedroom appartment. It took over a year get through everything to get approved for military disability and start collecting just enough to scrape by. If not for government services my friend would be dead today. He nearly took his own life many times along the way. Today he lives in a small government subsidized appartment and lives a quiet but comfortable life. Had he not been a veteran he would not have been eligible for many of the services he now recieves and again would probably be dead. Yes there are people who take advantage of the system, but plenty more who really need it. 

Sounds like one of the 15% I mentioned.  I support an effort to keep helping him, if you will support getting rid of the other 85%.

Accipiter

CaliFFL said:

Not too long ago, I asked an employee to work four hours overtime. He declined because "if my pay goes over X, I lose my benefit." My jaw dropped. 

Some time later I saw this person in the local Walmart in the checkout line. He had separate baskets on the conveyor. One basket (food items) was paid with some government debit card and the other basket (beer, junk food, toys) was paid with his personal debit card. 

I guess managing this lifestyle is easier than working 44 hours per week. 

My wife once had an employee quit! Because they would lose their benefits if the didn’t.

Varmintmist

alphasigmookie said:

There's a difference between people who are physically or mentally unable to work and those who have an official government disability designation. Getting the latter is no simple matter. Also are you volunteering to hire the mentally ill and addicts so they don't starve to death? Are we going to put in place a government mandate saying someone else has to hire them? Or are we going to put in place a government job placement program that will provide jobs for them? What is your solution?

If they are actually unable to work 20 hours a week, then it is motivation for them to get the designation. It isnt on me to prove that they are able, it is on them to prove they are unable. Just so you know there is a large unit in this town that provides jobs, real paying jobs that self sustain, for mentally and physically handicapped people. Seems to work, but they actually want to work.

We have 3% unemployment. 12-15/hr jobs in convience stores are available. No govt program needed.

I have made my stance on drug use pretty clear. Legalize them all. You wan to use them, go for it. I can step over your corpse.

CaliFFL

Accipiter said:

CaliFFL said:

Not too long ago, I asked an employee to work four hours overtime. He declined because "if my pay goes over X, I lose my benefit." My jaw dropped. 

Some time later I saw this person in the local Walmart in the checkout line. He had separate baskets on the conveyor. One basket (food items) was paid with some government debit card and the other basket (beer, junk food, toys) was paid with his personal debit card. 

I guess managing this lifestyle is easier than working 44 hours per week. 

My wife once had an employee quit! Because they would lose their benefits if the didn’t.

My favorite is the interviews. Start asking relevant questions and the "candidate" says, "I'm just here to keep my unemployment going." 

GunNut

Was recently speaking to the Sr VP of a local supermarket chain.  Biggest problem? Personnel.  He said he can tell me when just about any of his employees will quit to go back on unemployment insurance and food stamps.

knitepoet

GunNut said:

Was recently speaking to the Sr VP of a local supermarket chain.  Biggest problem? Personnel.  He said he can tell me when just about any of his employees will quit to go back on unemployment insurance and food stamps.

Of course. Why work when you can get paid to sit on your assets, and do nothing? 

Varmintmist

CaliFFL said:

My favorite is the interviews. Start asking relevant questions and the "candidate" says, "I'm just here to keep my unemployment going."

Ok, quote stickage.....

There is something to that. My spouse is going through it now. There are about 3 jobs in the works that would be a good fit for her. The interview process with some of these companies takes weeks/months. They will post the job for a few weeks, then interview for 6 weeks, then do call backs/background checks, then take 4 weeks for a decision. In the meantime she has to interview with any company that is somewhat in the same line of work per unemployment. She is a network engineer and just took an interview with a company that needs someone to place ankle monitors on offenders.

JerryBobCo

In 1983, I was working Sugarland, Tx.  I liked the job, but hated living there as it's basically a Houston suburb.  We decided to move to Salt Lake City for personal reasons.

I contacted a head hunter who got me an interview with a company there.  I flew in, interviewed, and came home the same day with a job.  Four years later I changed jobs, and had the same experience.  I had a job offer in less than a few days after interviewing.

I realize that this is not the way it always (usually?) works, and I've long maintained that a human resources department is the largest impediment to a person getting a job with a company, or a company hiring the right personnel.

It's too bad that companies have such requirements when trying to fill vacancies.  I don't know if it's strictly company policy, or government mandated.