Jump to content

Menu

just a rant, people who refuse to work


Recommended Posts

Sigh. You read an article? I've held factory jobs and worked my rear off with a good attitude (and actually enjoyed this more than some of my desk jobs). It is a means to an end, a step on the ladder, unless one is such a poor employee that nobody will give him a chance to try something more interesting.

 

How anyone can find more "dignity" in choosing to be supported by the taxes (or other funds) paid by working folks is beyond me. It's attitudes like this that make me wonder if it really wouldn't be better to just give people bread and water if they won't work. Dignity schmignity.

 

It's not up to employers to provide people with self-worth. Two people doing the exact same job can be at opposite ends of the satisfaction / self-worth spectrum.

 

Yes, because I've never had a hard job.:glare: I spent 10 years in the army. I know what it means to work hard and I know what it means to take care of the people working hard for you.

 

You have missed the point. I am not talking about jobs that require hard work. I am talking about jobs that are exploitative - that treat people as less than human. It is not about "giving people self-worth". It is about seeing them as human beings and not objects for use. The kind of stuff democracy and humanism and religion all promote as a basic underpinning of a moral and good life. It is not just about what we give to another but the attitude we have within ourselves - the person who looks at others as less than human is arguably even more damaged in the final analysis. Seeing other people as commodities makes us into monsters if we take it to its logical conclusion.

 

When we have messages all round that it is ok to treat people as if they were resources to be used up, that attitude spreads throughout society. We allow these kinds of employers to exist in our society, and in fact they are increasing in number after we had managed to make things better for some time. If that is what an employee is - something that requires no consideration, in fact a financial liability in many ways - that is also what an employer is, and a tax-payer is. It simply becomes a matter of each person looking to what he can get from the other.

 

People don't find more dignity in being supported by taxes. They find there is no dignity in their work, and at least on social security they don't have to deal with a terrible job.

 

There is no question some people are just bums, or immoral. They will take advantage of any institution they can, be it the state, the community, or family. But as the post I was responding to pointed out, they is really not more frustrating or immoral than those who look to exploit the people who work for them, and that seems to be considered fair play by many. And when that is being encouraged, even in a backward way, you can be sure more and more people will see exploiting others, including the state, as the way to get by.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 207
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

It's just sad. How do you stop the abuses without penalizing those who really need it?

 

Let's face it, we can't even monitor CHILD abuse situations successfully, where a LIFE is at stake. How is the govt supposed to monitor every single welfare case?

 

It is really frustrating. There is so much guilt in applying and using assistance because you get lumped in with people who abuse it. But there is no good way to sort the abusers from those who really are doing their best.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Where I live the minimum amount to work is 30 hours a week or earning an amount at least equal to the federal minimum wage multiplied by 30 hours. I guess if you made more than minimum the work requirement would go down. I was curious, so I looked it up. I was figuring the single mom must be working 30 hours to maintain eligibility. Honestly I think a single mom without help from family is doing good to work 30 hours a week, but that is just my opinion. I imagine its a lot to handle raising kids on your own, shuffling them around between school and/or childcare and home, needing to have a job that allows flexibility of schedule so you can be there for your kids when they are ill and needing to be picked up from school or childcare. If she's only getting support for one of the two kids she's probably getting less than $200 a month, maybe quite a bit less.

 

You are right about the support amount. And she gets minimum wage on the books, but pockets tips at a private supper club that has a liquor license and because it is a private club the patrons can smoke. These people tip well. She makes more in tips alone than dh does in wages most weeks. But she doesn't count the tips as income like she is supposed to.

 

She isn't the greatest, most involved mom either, and she does have family support. She has a lot of family support, but always needs more and more, and no one will give her cash anymore since we know her and know better.

 

I've had her kids for up to five days at a time with no change of clothes, no diapers, no baby bottle, no formula, nothing and haven't been able to get a hold of her to find out when if ever she planned to pick them up. She plays us, rotating through family members with a sob story about how so-and-so won't babysit for her anymore, blah blah blah, and we all fall for it because we feel bad for the kids, but every darn time we agree to babysit for her for one work shift those kids don't get picked up for at least two days or more. Yes, Children's Services is familiar with her, the kids have been placed with us through them twice now, and we've talked about going for custody with a lawyer. Her oldest won't be kindergarten age until next fall, and I think she is either going to have to radically change her lifestyle or else finally lose custody over truancy. The problem is that she works where there is a bar and she likes to drink there before and after her shift, and likes to get drunk and pass out and the management lets her sleep it off there. Then she wakes up and drinks the next day until her shift starts again. I guess she is able to do her job well enough while she is drunk, because they think she is 'cute'.

 

I've been a single mom busting my butt to try and make it, and put myself through college with no family support and no assistance of any kind, I've been there and this lady is NOT there, trust me. I have every respect for single moms who put their kids first and work hard to make it, she isn't one of them. She is one of the entitlement people and the kids are just her tickets.

 

Sorry. She really gets me angry. The other one does too. I know people who get help and who really need it, and I'm glad it's there for that purpose. I even know some people who really really need help but don't qualify because of some reason or other. But these entitlement people really make me angry when they take advantage. I'm not sure what the solution is.

Link to post
Share on other sites

:ohmy: My husband got laid off a couple years ago.When he couldn't find a job close to home he got one 4000 miles away. He still works with this company and we feel blessed that he has a job in today's market even if he is so far away. But when our children were babies there was a time when ends just weren't meeting and we applied for assistance we made $2 to much. The mentality of some people is shameful.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, the purpose of it is for medical emergencies, work, school, etc. However, they have to choose from one of three plans and can run out of minutes where, if the want more minutes, they have to pay for the extra.

 

 

Wait a minute. The government provides cell phones? Who cares what they're for. That's ridiculous. And to the PP who mentioned making people lazy and dependent on the government is a great way to destroy a country, BINGO. IMO that's the plan.

Edited by cdrumm4448
Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, since she's your sister, you know the details. But I have an iPhone. My parents gave it to me for my birthday.

 

It's this general attitude that makes me nervous when I shop with my WIC checks. If I am buying other groceries, I feel like people might judge me because I bought something they deem an extra. I had a cashier make a nasty comment because I bought real maple syrup. Because, clearly, if I'm going to have syrup, it has to be made from HFCS and artificial flavoring. :glare: But it could be anything. People seem to want to make a list of things poor people can't have if they want help from someone else.

 

:iagree:About three years ago, my DH lost his job quite unexpectedly. He applied everywhere that would accept an application and/or resume including fast food restaurants, etc. No one was hiring. It was awful. We don't have a lot of money, we had very little savings that was gone in a matter of weeks and if it hadn't been for the assistance we got and from the help from family and our church we would likely have been living on the street. We had just traded in for a new van about two weeks prior and I found out I was pregnant four days after he lost his job (and his insurance). Every time I went to the grocery store I hung my head because I could just feel the stares and thoughts that were saying, "Look at her on assistance and still popping out babies!" It was very hard for me, but I swallowed my pride because my children needed to eat. When I went to social services to apply for Medicaid so that I could actually go to the dr. during my pregnancy, I acutally got asked if all three of my children had the same father by TWO different people in the waiting room....as if me simply being there meant that it was impossible for me to be a married woman with children who all belonged to my HUSBAND.

 

I also didn't stop buying the food we regularly ate in exchange for boxed processed junk and so I'm sure there were judgements there as well.

 

That Christmas, my mother bought my children a new swingset as a gift. I had a few people insinuate that we shouldn't be spending our money that way if we were using government benefits. They didn't know where the swingset came from, but were very quick to make snap judgements.

 

Thankfully, he wasn't out of work for an extremely long period of time so we were able to get back on our feet after a few months. I do think it is ridiculous that so many people take advantage of the system, but I worked from the time I was 16 until I gave birth to my first child paying into that system and my DH has worked even longer than that, so I should be able to go for help if I need it without feeling like everyone around me is giving me the hairy eyeball for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, since she's your sister, you know the details. But I have an iPhone. My parents gave it to me for my birthday.

 

It's this general attitude that makes me nervous when I shop with my WIC checks. If I am buying other groceries, I feel like people might judge me because I bought something they deem an extra. I had a cashier make a nasty comment because I bought real maple syrup. Because, clearly, if I'm going to have syrup, it has to be made from HFCS and artificial flavoring. :glare: But it could be anything. People seem to want to make a list of things poor people can't have if they want help from someone else.

 

 

You are correct that she is my sister so I know her well:001_smile: She manipulates the system and has done that her whole life. Clearly, that is her choice and I love her regardless.

 

I do not feel at all that someone who is getting food assistance should have to purchase non-nutritional food because it is cheaper.

 

Everyone is free to purchase and use whatever they like. However, I do believe that there are certain times in life when we just have to go without some wants. It is part of being an adult and having your priorties in order.

 

I do understand that not everyone is abusing the system. I am thankful that the help is there, as these past few years have been extremely difficult for many.

 

I guess at the end of the day my issue is more with the mindset that some may have. The sense of entitlement. I know my sister is like that and it has only crippled her from excellence. She has two daughters and I fear for the example this is to their futures.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait a minute. The government provides cell phones? Who cares what they're for. That's ridiculous.

 

From Snopes

 

Origins: As noted on the Federal Communication Commission's (FCC) web page about Universal Service Support Mechanisms:

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and Congress recognize that telephone service provides a vital link to emergency services, government services, and surrounding communities. Telephone service is considered a necessity for daily modern life. Yet the cost of starting and maintaining such service may be too high for some consumers. Under Congressional mandate, the federal Universal Service Fund (USF) supports the Lifeline Assistance and Link-Up America programs. These programs provide discounts on basic monthly service and initial installation or activation fees for telephone service at the primary residence to income-eligible consumers. The Federal Communications Commission (FCC), with the help of the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC), administers the USF.

The USF subsidizes telephone/telecommunications services to low-income residents and other entities through a number or programs, one of which is the Lifeline/Link-Up program, which "provides discounts on monthly service and initial telephone installation or activation fees for primary residences to income-eligible consumers":

Lifeline Assistance provides discounts on basic monthly service at the primary residence for qualified telephone subscribers. These discounts can be up to $10.00 per month, depending on your state.

 

Link-Up America helps income-eligible consumers initiate telephone service. This program pays one-half (up to a maximum of $30) of the initial installation fee for a traditional, wireline telephone or activation fee for a wireless telephone for a primary residence. It also allows participants to pay the remaining amount they owe on a deferred schedule, interest-free. (In some cases cellular service is cheaper than landlines, and the latter is not a viable option for persons without fixed residential addresses.)

The intent of these programs is to help ensure that everyone, regardless of income, has access to basic telephone services in order to be able to keep in touch with family members, make medical appointments, contact emergency services, be reachable by telephone themselves, etc. Contrary to what is suggested by the example cited above, Lifeline/Link-Up discounts are not available only to "welfare recipients" — these programs are implemented at both the state and federal levels, so qualification criteria can vary from state to state, but in general participants must have an income that is at or below 135% of the federal Poverty Guidelines, or take part in at least one of the following federal assistance programs:

 

Medicaid

Food Stamps

Supplemental Security Income (SSI)

Federal Public Housing Assistance

Low-Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP)

Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF)

The National School Lunch Program's Free Lunch Program

 

TracFone (through its SafeLink Wireless outlet) is one company that provides subsidized telephone service to qualifying participants through the Lifeline program, in the form of free cellphones and (limited) free cellular service. (Although SafeLink provides free service, not all carriers certified to participate in Lifeline do — others provide discounted, rather than free, wireless service.) SafeLink Wireless service is currently available only in 19 states, primarily in the eastern United States.

 

Also contrary to what is suggested in the example quoted above, LifeLine/Link-Up is not an "Obama program" (i.e., one that was initiated by or during the Obama administration). The LifeLine and Link-Up programs were established by the FCC in 1984 and 1987, respectively, during the administration of Ronald Reagan. The SafeLink Wireless service was launched by TracFone in Tennessee in August 2008 and in Florida in September 2008, months before the election that put Barack Obama in the White House.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Yes, because I've never had a hard job.:glare: I spent 10 years in the army. I know what it means to work hard and I know what it means to take care of the people working hard for you.

 

You have missed the point. I am not talking about jobs that require hard work. I am talking about jobs that are exploitative - that treat people as less than human. It is not about "giving people self-worth". It is about seeing them as human beings and not objects for use. The kind of stuff democracy and humanism and religion all promote as a basic underpinning of a moral and good life. It is not just about what we give to another but the attitude we have within ourselves - the person who looks at others as less than human is arguably even more damaged in the final analysis. Seeing other people as commodities makes us into monsters if we take it to its logical conclusion.

 

When we have messages all round that it is ok to treat people as if they were resources to be used up, that attitude spreads throughout society. We allow these kinds of employers to exist in our society, and in fact they are increasing in number after we had managed to make things better for some time. If that is what an employee is - something that requires no consideration, in fact a financial liability in many ways - that is also what an employer is, and a tax-payer is. It simply becomes a matter of each person looking to what he can get from the other.

 

People don't find more dignity in being supported by taxes. They find there is no dignity in their work, and at least on social security they don't have to deal with a terrible job.

 

There is no question some people are just bums, or immoral. They will take advantage of any institution they can, be it the state, the community, or family. But as the post I was responding to pointed out, they is really not more frustrating or immoral than those who look to exploit the people who work for them, and that seems to be considered fair play by many. And when that is being encouraged, even in a backward way, you can be sure more and more people will see exploiting others, including the state, as the way to get by.

 

You also missed my point. You read an article that informed you that certain individuals whom you do not know view some people as less than human. And you take this as a fact, just because someone with a big mouth says so (and gets paid for saying so)?

 

I don't know anyone who views employees in the way you describe - and I know a lot of employers. Do they view staff as resources? Yes, that's why they call it HR. I personally like being viewed as a resource. I choose to be satisfied with being used, but then, I'm not looking for an excuse to be unproductive or to bring a company down.

 

I'm sorry, I have been around too long to buy into the rhetoric about jobs dehumanizing people (with the exception of prostitution and the like). Positive people have done every sort of job with a smile. I had a friend whose job was to clean toilets in bars, and she was as happy and energetic as anyone. Her next job was taking care of research animals, which she was thrilled to do. However, I'm sure a person with an agenda could write a very convincing article to the contrary.

Link to post
Share on other sites

This question is a bit tangential but doesn't warrant its own spinoff thread: How do people know when someone in front of them at the register is using SNAP or WIC? Even if I did pay attention to what other shoppers are buying and with what (checks stand out these days and almost seem old-fashioned, so I notice those), I wouldn't know if someone were using assistance.

Link to post
Share on other sites

See the thing is that the system is so abused that judgement is easily passed. I don't intend to judge people by what they purchase or what kind of car they drive however I know so many people that do abuse it. I realize some have no control over their situation and are there because they have no choice but so many are there because of the poor choices they have made for themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites
OK, since she's your sister, you know the details. But I have an iPhone. My parents gave it to me for my birthday.

 

 

I have a question about this, because I know a family where the Dad hasn't worked in 2 years, and they get by doing odd jobs. But four of them have iphones.

 

Sure, they could have been -and probably were - given the iphones. But doesn't each iphone require a $30 data package per month? I don't think this is optional (I could be wrong).

 

That would be $120 dollars EXTRA on top of the cell phone bill every single month. I have wondered about this. We don't have iphones (except spouse, who has one that is paid through work).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Speaking of iphones etc. I hired a full-time nanny after I adopted my kids as a WAHM. She had been unemployed because her previous employer basically flew the coop without making payroll etc. She had some trouble finding a job because her English wasn't so hot. She was supporting or partly supporting four adult children, including one dd with special needs. She was receiving some government help (for herself and her dd) with medical and perhaps other stuff. (Obviously the dd was receiving lots of help for her special needs, but that is beside the point.)

 

So here I am, this woman who has a nanny (you know the stereotype), and Nanny is always telling me how poor she is. During the years she worked with me she bought a brand-new SUV and a house, along with of course an iphone and other things. She's still getting some medical assistance (at least). I don't really grudge her any of it, but what bugs me a little is how she acts like she's too good for stuff that happens to be good enough for me. She totally disses my car, for example. Whatever! (I also know that she's guilty of some lies / hiding the truth from the government, so who knows how far she takes that?) For the record, I don't have an iphone nor any plans to buy one.

 

Oh, and I was paying her a reasonable rate for her services, in case anyone is wondering. In addition to paying her asking rate, I had an accountant set her up with a tax-favored HSA and then I upped her salary to cover the entire cost of her HSA+insurance. I also encouraged her to continue her side businesses (part of which were conducted during my kids' nap time). Still I never heard the end of how poor she was. Blah. I was bringing home less cash than she was the whole time.

 

I guess poverty is relative.

Link to post
Share on other sites
To look down on people because they have something nice while on assistance is wrong. You don't know the situation in most cases.

 

:iagree:

 

My smart phone represents a savings every month. My husband cannot run his business without a good smart phone with an excellent data package. It is his only business phone. He uses it to take and make client calls, check and respond to his work email while away from home, etc. Sometimes he'll get a call from a client that makes it necessary for him to pull over and tether his phone to his laptop so he can remotely access his client's computer to fix it. There's no question that it is a necessity for his business. When he went into the store to buy a business line, he found out that another package that came with two phones and more minutes was cheaper. Of course, he took the cheaper option! Now what should he do with the second phone? Throw it in a box? Or let me use it, especially considering that he sometimes calls/texts me to do something for his work?

 

Now, would you know that my phone made it so we spent less money each month just by seeing me using it in the grocery store?

 

If you came into our house and saw our 32 inch TV, would you know that it was given to us for free when our 17 year old TV died? And that we only watch Netflix or Redbox on it for lack of cable TV?

 

Would you know that our Wii, its accessories, and some of the games were free as part of a sales incentive at DH's old job? That we kept it so the kids could have a nice Christmas when we didn't have money for much else? That we sold the other Wii we got for free to pay for something DH needed for work?

 

Would you know that all of the computers in our house, except DH's work systems, were pieced together from free broken systems and/or parts? And aren't worth anything if we tried to sell them?

 

It's time to stop judging others, especially when we know nothing about their circumstances.

Link to post
Share on other sites
See the thing is that the system is so abused that judgement is easily passed. I don't intend to judge people by what they purchase or what kind of car they drive however I know so many people that do abuse it. I realize some have no control over their situation and are there because they have no choice but so many are there because of the poor choices they have made for themselves.

 

Claims like this keep getting repeated. Where are the statistics, where is the evidence, that abuse is rampant. Anecdotes are not NOT data and be ready to support our assertions with links to real evidence.

Edited by WishboneDawn
Link to post
Share on other sites
:iagree:

 

My smart phone represents a savings every month. My husband cannot run his business without a good smart phone with an excellent data package. It is his only business phone. He uses it to take and make client calls, check and respond to his work email while away from home, etc. Sometimes he'll get a call from a client that makes it necessary for him to pull over and tether his phone to his laptop so he can remotely access his client's computer to fix it. There's no question that it is a necessity for his business. When he went into the store to buy a business line, he found out that another package that came with two phones and more minutes was cheaper. Of course, he took the cheaper option! Now what should he do with the second phone? Throw it in a box? Or let me use it, especially considering that he sometimes calls/texts me to do something for his work?

 

Now, would you know that my phone made it so we spent less money each month just by seeing me using it in the grocery store?

 

If you came into our house and saw our 32 inch TV, would you know that it was given to us for free when our 17 year old TV died? And that we only watch Netflix or Redbox on it for lack of cable TV?

 

Would you know that our Wii, its accessories, and some of the games were free as part of a sales incentive at DH's old job? That we kept it so the kids could have a nice Christmas when we didn't have money for much else? That we sold the other Wii we got for free to pay for something DH needed for work?

 

Would you know that all of the computers in our house, except DH's work systems, were pieced together from free broken systems and/or parts? And aren't worth anything if we tried to sell them?

 

It's time to stop judging others, especially when we know nothing about their circumstances.

 

:iagree: Well stated.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This question is a bit tangential but doesn't warrant its own spinoff thread: How do people know when someone in front of them at the register is using SNAP or WIC? Even if I did pay attention to what other shoppers are buying and with what (checks stand out these days and almost seem old-fashioned, so I notice those), I wouldn't know if someone were using assistance.

 

In some states, you would have no idea, depending on what else the person bought. If they use SNAP, they can't buy non-food items with it, so they would have to use two cards, one with their SNAP benefits and one for the other stuff. In some states, WIC is also on debit cards. But in some states, mine included, WIC still has checks. So you would see me with 2 or 3 orders, some for WIC and some for my other groceries. The cashier has to enter all kinds of information, make sure my items are approved, have me sign the check, etc. for each check. It takes a while, especially if the cashier doesn't have much experience with WIC. This is why I go to Walmart with my WIC checks. Most of their cashiers are pretty quick with it. The other grocery store in town (higher prices, but sometimes really good sales) doesn't get as many WIC orders, so they aren't great with doing them.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This question is a bit tangential but doesn't warrant its own spinoff thread: How do people know when someone in front of them at the register is using SNAP or WIC? Even if I did pay attention to what other shoppers are buying and with what (checks stand out these days and almost seem old-fashioned, so I notice those), I wouldn't know if someone were using assistance.

 

In my state, WIC still gives paper checks. Each check has the foods printed on it, so the cashier checks for each one and then has the user sign the check. Anything non-WIC has to be paid for separately, and the cashier has to punch in before starting that it's WIC, so if you saw the checks, you might know that someone was using WIC. For SNAP, my state uses a debit card, but the cashier has to punch something in to indicate SNAP benefits. And then anything that isn't SNAP-approved (like toilet paper) has to be paid for separately. It's not impossible for someone who is using a couple of WIC checks plus SNAP benefits to have five separate transactions, and it can take a while, even if the cashiers are good.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There will always be people who sponge off others. They will sponge off the state, or private charity, or their family. Don't imagine that this is a problem just of state welfare - it affects all kinds of private organizations involved in charity work as well.

 

I have a few relatives who do this kind of thing - an uncle who bilks the state, an aunt who really can't work but who isn't above board with what she does either and who tries to get money from other relatives (and is sometimes successful).

 

I think the thing is you can't take that personally. There is something wrong with their thought process, but it isn't about trying to screw over other individuals. In the case of my uncle, he was always like this, it may be the way he was born or something to do with his up-bringing - he is a man who creates myths about himself that he believes. My aunt I think had an upbringing where a better result was unlikely - I don't think she was ever considered as a person with something to offer, she was always a burden and that was how she came to see herself. And if that is what someone thought, why not take what you can get if God gave you such an existence?

 

None of which is to say it isn't a problem and shouldn't be addressed when possible. But I tend to think the most successful answers won't be about "tightening up the system" so much as treating other people in a dignified way.

 

:iagree::iagree: I agree with this soooo many times. We need to address the people involved not the regulations. We can add a ton of regulations that burden the system and ultimately drive the cost up but there will always be folks who work around it.

 

I also have a distant relative who was treated as a failure from day one and has lived down to expectations. A few years in childhood with a caring adult influence could have saved a lifetime of suffering.

Edited by Denise in Florida
left something out
Link to post
Share on other sites
we have single older people in large houses on 3 acre lots

 

I'm not saying that it's unfortunate that the seniors are doing so well because of their subsidies, when the young families are struggling, because that's lousy. However, at the same time, what are the older people supposed to do with their large houses and lots? If their homes are paid off (and I would suspect they are), that's money they're not having to spend on rent/mortgage. If they sold their homes, they'd have to pay for something else, unless they moved in with their adult children (which may or may not be an option). And that's assuming they can even sell their houses. That's an issue for a lot of people -- they can't just get out of their houses. Some of your seniors may be abusing the system, but there may be others who are just stuck.

Link to post
Share on other sites
My hospital roommate (18 and on baby #2) had a gov't provided cell phone-- much nicer than mine. It could take photos and text. She yakked it up with the baby daddy and BFFs throughout the night, and snapped pictures for grandma.

 

I can see how this could be considered a necessary tool for seeking employment, but that didn't seem to be her primary goal with it.

 

I can't believe she wasn't applying for jobs from her hospital bed, hours after giving birth! What a slacker. :glare:

Link to post
Share on other sites

OP, on the one hand I can certainly sympathize with your frustration with this couple, but on the other hand, it sounds like you are struggling with some envy which needs to be addressed.

 

I had a similar struggle with family members myself. We invested in a business with another couple we are related to. They ran it into the ground and then declared bankruptcy, wiped out their debt and got a fresh start. Because we thought bankruptcy to be immoral in this case (it wasn't impossible to pay off for either couple, just unpleasant), we did not declare bankruptcy, and have several more years of paying down debt from the failed business. It's a little galling if I think about it too hard, but for the most part I have accepted it.

 

Life isn't fair. Asking "Why do the wicked prosper?" is as old as the hills. But I wasn't willing to compromise my principles for money, and you aren't either, and if that's the path we chose, it's wrong to get dragged down into envy and resentment about people whose choices we don't respect.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait a minute. The government provides cell phones? Who cares what they're for. That's ridiculous. And to the PP who mentioned making people lazy and dependent on the government is a great way to destroy a country, BINGO. IMO that's the plan.

Okay, so those that are looking for a job and can't afford a phone, how are they supposed to get a call for an interview?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got back on today and saw how many posts this had.

 

I'm trying to get through all of them now.

 

Where I live living off the state seems to be the way of life here. It's what the kids aspire to. I've heard them talking about their future plans. Seriously, I've heard "Once I'm out of school I'm getting pregnant and getting on assistance."

 

What I have seen is the ones who really do need it can't get much at all, but the ones who want to live off it can get all they want.

 

The ones I was talking about in the first post rent a house. The rent and all utilities are paid for them. They get food stamps, cash assistance, diapers all year (which are supposed to be for the autistic child but she uses them on the youngest), and medical aid. That's all I know of.

 

I also know some who get all that plus cell phones and a car. I also know of some who get the cash assistance and let their kids spend it all on toys each month and then whine about not having money for gas and other stuff they need.

 

I try not to let it bother me, but some days when I see my DH tired to the bone from working so much it gets to me. I don't work. I did until we had kids. DH and I decided to make some changes so I could stay home with them. When money got really tight for us, I looked into going back to work. Daycare costs were so high that I'd just be working to pay daycare. We actually do qualify for daycare assistance now. If I go to work we wouldn't qualify we'd make too much. :lol: I just have to laugh at that. They'll pay for me to sit home and let someone else watch my kids all day, but I can't work.

 

Off the read all the posts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I've met quite a few, and I'm unfortunately related to several of them and intimately acquainted with their thought processes. It disgusts me. We have a low income because of dh's desire to work in the trenches of social services but we don't apply for or receive any assistance. I would feel too guilty.

However, there are those who deliberately plan any work hours they DO work (like one is a nurse who will only work part time and her husband is a cook who also will only work part time) so that their income remains low enough to get the benefits they want, and also some folks who don't report part of their income (tips) for the same reason. Don't get me started on the people who have coached their kids on the symptoms of mental illness so they can apply for disability income (third generation for some of them). They are out there too.

 

There are so many kids starting at 14 yrs old (the legal age for them to do so with out a parents consent) checking themselves in for evaluations that our town is building a big mental health service building. And I live in a small town! Every other person here is diagnosed Bipolar. All you have to do apparently is answer the questions correctly and you have a diagnosis and an excuse not to work. There have been parents taking their 5 yr olds in for evals. The child stays for a week on the adolescent mental unit and the parents get a break. They say something is wrong with the child because they throw fits and won't listen.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I also think the system knows that when it comes down to it in the very end, the children will be the ones too suffer most. You cut off the mom who is going to bars and doing other things then how will the kids eat? Some people would gladly let their kids go hungry to give their boyfriend steaks or go to the bar. I have seen alot of single moms like this.

 

 

This is what actually really upsets me. I just don't understand letting your kids go without while you have all you want. I just could not do that. I would and have gone without to make sure my kids had what they needed.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There are so many kids starting at 14 yrs old (the legal age for them to do so with out a parents consent) checking themselves in for evaluations that our town is building a big mental health service building. And I live in a small town! Every other person here is diagnosed Bipolar. All you have to do apparently is answer the questions correctly and you have a diagnosis and an excuse not to work. There have been parents taking their 5 yr olds in for evals. The child stays for a week on the adolescent mental unit and the parents get a break. They say something is wrong with the child because they throw fits and won't listen.

 

I dunno, I agreed with your OP but this post got under my skin. Maybe because I do have my kids getting disability benefits. My ds13 spent his 6th birthday in a children's mental health unit, not for 1 week for for 2.5. He did a stint again at 12. I have struggled for years just to getting a working Dx on my kids that will help them. I have never heard of parents saddling their children with a mental illness disorder just for benefits. Having a label like that can destroy many opportunities for kids, heck dd12 had her application to a summer camp this year refused because she has ODD/CD, she is a good kid with a bad attitude and that was enough to keep her out of camp. I don't want my kids having mental illness labels, I want them to be normal, so I don't get why parents would lie to gets that. Or how it even works. I can't get my ds13 who has significant issues properly diagnosed and treated but parents can get fake labels of serious mental illness?

 

Anyway, this particular post got under my skin because it makes it sound like parents who have their kid in the mental ward, or have them Dx to get disability benefits are just lazy lieing sods, and as a parent who has done those things to help my kids it irks me.

 

Oh and I won't lie. The 2.5 weeks my son spent on the ward were a huge break for me and I loved it. I did not love having him gone, I loved having 2.5 weeks of relative peace in my home.

Link to post
Share on other sites
:iagree: and taking pictures?? On our dime? Outrageous:tongue_smilie:

 

Lisa

 

Exactly. How DARE she be proud of her child! Where's her shame?!?!

 

And these stories of system abusers. Sure, they are out there. You can't throw a stick anywhere in the US without hitting at least one jerk in the head. But when you say the system has "rampant abuse," prove it.

 

All you are "proving" with your stories of your lazy sister or your jerk cousin or whatever is that you know, well a JERK. Congratulations. I could introduce you to 6 without taking a breath in my family... Rich AND poor. :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

This is an old, tired, topic.

 

To respond to the original post. People who abuse the system like that person are a blight. No matter what system is in place there are people who will figure out how to abuse it.

 

I knew someone who was milking the system and it ticked me off. The entitlement mentality really gets to me.

 

In response to everyone else with something negative to say: For every story of someone who is abusing the system there are hundreds of people using it like it was intended. To help them over a rough patch. They want to get off assistance and all the stigma that goes with it.

 

I have had to engage with the system. In fact, with my never-insurable, chronically ill, disabled and technically terminal husband, I am trying to see how "the system" can help my family.

 

In my experience with the system, it is NOT easy to "milk" it, it would be difficult to live well "on the system", and there aren't endless possibilities to not work but get bills paid.

 

Since having to engage with the system, I have revised my understanding of people who abuse the system vs. people who don't. I've seriously revised my judgment of people in the system.

 

 

 

 

:iagree: I read an article the other day about the people that work at warehouses for big mail-order companies like Amazon or Land's End. THere is no possible way for them to get ahead financially, the jobs suck all their time, energy, and health, and they have zero job security or benefits no matter how long they work. And the work environment is completely dehumanizing.

 

Right now there are increasing numbers of jobs in this category as companies move to temporary workforces, and we shouldn't be surprised that more and more people drop out of the work world altogether, that they see work itself as dehumanizing and not worth doing and without dignity. When business is all about what you can squeeze out of the employee who is an easily replaced bit of flesh, you can bet that the bits of flesh will see the employer, or the state, or other people, as something to be squeezed for all it can give as well.

 

 

 

The assumption that the American Dream is still pervsavely possible, and that "hard work" = a way out of low income is prevalent. It's also false. The dynamic of low income work is such that it is difficult, nearly impossible in cases, to get out of the dynamic.

 

I'm confused though. I thought there was a limit to how long a person can be on welfare. Or is she making so much money from the fathers of all the kids? It doesn't make sense. Not saying there aren't people who do stuff like that, but I just wonder how they get away with it.

 

I always doubt the accuracy of the over-the-top abuse claims. It's just not my experience or observation.

 

I've come to believe that most people engaged with the system have jobs that they report, use the system for a limited time, and have integrity.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I think the worst part of this story is how it reflects poorly on those who genuinely in need. You hear about folks like this and then you hear about folks who are in dire straits and could really use the help, but will not apply for assistance because of the stigma attached. So people who shouldn't get assistance do and folks who should don't. I don't know what the solution is, but the problem is certainly frustrating.

 

I know far more people who could use a hand up who are just over the line financially and are able to get no assistance at all. Some of the laws, meant to "reform" welfare and other assistance programs are really wonky and end up hurting the folks who need help.

 

:iagree: I know just as many people who really need it and can't. One can't even get partial disability (she does have a physical deformity that prevents her from doing some things) because she works what little jobs she can. She was told to qualify she would have to quit working completely. This was when she was making just $400 a month.

 

I'm confused though. I thought there was a limit to how long a person can be on welfare. Or is she making so much money from the fathers of all the kids? It doesn't make sense. Not saying there aren't people who do stuff like that, but I just wonder how they get away with it.

 

I don't know how they do it. Some people must just know the system so well they find all the loop holes. If I could figure it out, I'd tell the ones I know who really needed it how to get it too.

 

 

If they have a beloved pet get sick, they don't have the $2000 to fix him/her. They just go get another. Blech.

 

They'll never plan a trip of a lifetime to Disney or whatever. They won't achieve their goals because they don't have any goals beyond more free food and lying around on their butts.

 

Some I know actually can find money to pay for surgery for their animals. I also know one family who takes trips to Disney World every two years.

 

I don't understand how ANY family in this country could qualify for $1400/month in food stamps. :confused: )

 

My friend has a BIL, single, no kids, can work but won't. He gets $500/month in food stamps. :confused:

 

To the OP, it happens. Some people work the system. It's frustrating but you should try to avoid comparing yourself and what you have and can afford to them. That's very often the kind of thinking that started them down their path. If you can avoid them, do. If you can't, try to enjoy the good things about them. That lifestyle comes with some severe costs, most often intellectual and ethical. They're paying for their choices, just with a different currency.

 

Oh, I know. It just gets to be too much sometimes. I'll rant to DH and then I'm good to go again. I just don't understand their thinking. I have never felt like I deserved a hand out just for existing. DH has worked all his life starting at 16 yrs old. He saw his mom slaving away to provide for her family after her husband ran out on her. We just can understand how these ones I was talking about can think this is the way to live.

 

OK, since she's your sister, you know the details. But I have an iPhone. My parents gave it to me for my birthday.

 

It's this general attitude that makes me nervous when I shop with my WIC checks. If I am buying other groceries, I feel like people might judge me because I bought something they deem an extra. I had a cashier make a nasty comment because I bought real maple syrup. Because, clearly, if I'm going to have syrup, it has to be made from HFCS and artificial flavoring. :glare: But it could be anything. People seem to want to make a list of things poor people can't have if they want help from someone else.

 

This is why I don't give it a second thought when it's people I don't know. I don't question it at all then because I don't know their situation. It's the ones I do know. The ones who brag about what they are getting. Those are the ones that make me :angry: I know many who do actually need it and more who just need a tiny bit of help that can't get it. DH and I help them when we can. We have seen friends take what was offered because they really need it and we know they feel bad that they needed it.

 

I just see too many who really do need it who are not getting it and I can't help them all.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's absolutely possible to live off of welfare/social benefits alone, provided you have a high tolerance for risk and you're not too fussy about reporting your income, etc.

 

The five-year limit is for AFDC benefits. It doesn't apply to disability or state aid. There are certain disabilities that can only be diagnosed via self-reports or parent-reports. Yes, if you're missing two legs, that's pretty obvious, but what about depression? People working the system know which disorders get SSDI/SSI income and require the least external verification. Some of these things are extremely common to begin with, and information circulates on doctors who will just sign off to be rid of you -- the same as information circulates about doctors who are happy to sign off on obscene quantities of narcotics.

 

People work under the table. We've rented to a number of welfare recipients over the years, and all the healthy men worked. They worked day labour and odd jobs; They picked up cans. They preferred this to having a regular job because it was extremely flexible; They only worked as much as they needed to, which wasn't full-time or close to it, since they were only supplementing their income. Women who aren't working can baby-sit. You get the idea. The advantage is always that they don't need to do very much of it and/or they can do it at a much lower wage because they're not supporting themselves and don't intend to.

 

There are ways to make your living arrangements cost much less. People move in to a residence, pay a month or two, and then refuse to pay any more than that. In most places, forcibly evicting someone is a drawn-out process that can easily take months, after which the family will move on to the next residence.

 

Resell stolen goods. Steal goods yourself. Resell those narcotic scripts you got.

 

I'm not advocating any of these :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites
It's absolutely possible to live off of welfare/social benefits alone, provided you have a high tolerance for risk and you're not too fussy about reporting your income, etc.

 

The five-year limit is for AFDC benefits. It doesn't apply to disability or state aid. There are certain disabilities that can only be diagnosed via self-reports or parent-reports. Yes, if you're missing two legs, that's pretty obvious, but what about depression? People working the system know which disorders get SSDI/SSI income and require the least external verification. Some of these things are extremely common to begin with, and information circulates on doctors who will just sign off to be rid of you -- the same as information circulates about doctors who are happy to sign off on obscene quantities of narcotics.

 

:

 

Getting ssd (or ssi) is not an easy process. It's well known that it is a long process, most people are declined the first time, and requires *significant* documentation, and even visits to Doctors assigned by the SSA.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't believe she wasn't applying for jobs from her hospital bed, hours after giving birth! What a slacker. :glare:

 

The father and his mother visited briefly and the mom urged my roommate (the new mom) to get a private room. When informed that private rooms had to be paid for, she yelled, "Charge it to my medicaid card!!" and they all broke out into peals of laughter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
I can't believe she wasn't applying for jobs from her hospital bed, hours after giving birth! What a slacker. :glare:

 

This is to everyone who had a probem with that post about the new mom with the fancy phone.

 

I agree that the new mom's behavior was not wrong as far as I know. But I can understand the feeling of the poster. The feeling that "I wish I could send my friends and relatives a photo/text/whatever, but I can't, because in order to do that, I'd have to have the budget for a phone. This young woman does not have to worry about that. My tax dollars at work, yippee."

 

I agree that the dependent lifestyle only hurts the recipients in the long run. And I get that sometimes a "luxury" item is more cost-effective than something more basic. But it's human nature to be frustrated when you've just made a tax payment and you see it being spent on frivolities by someone who does not work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
This is to everyone who had a probem with that post about the new mom with the fancy phone.

 

I agree that the new mom's behavior was not wrong as far as I know. But I can understand the feeling of the poster. The feeling that "I wish I could send my friends and relatives a photo/text/whatever, but I can't, because in order to do that, I'd have to have the budget for a phone. This young woman does not have to worry about that. My tax dollars at work, yippee."

 

I agree that the dependent lifestyle only hurts the recipients in the long run. And I get that sometimes a "luxury" item is more cost-effective than something more basic. But it's human nature to be frustrated when you've just made a tax payment and you see it being spent on frivolities by someone who does not work.

The thing is, people are assuming that she doesn't work. For all you know, she could be headed back to work in six weeks. But, yes, it is frustrating. We tried to just get medical when I was pregnant with my first. I offered to quit my job temporarily. The told me to leave my husband and keep my job, then they would help. Sheesh!

 

We get some help now, but my husband has never been without a job and he works all the OT he can get. He busts his rear end, but we'll down fighting rather than just depending upon the system. The system is upside down. So I do understand the frustration.

Edited by mommaduck
Link to post
Share on other sites
It's just sad. How do you stop the abuses without penalizing those who really need it?

 

Let's face it, we can't even monitor CHILD abuse situations successfully, where a LIFE is at stake. How is the govt supposed to monitor every single welfare case?

 

:iagree: The only ones who are hurt by reforms are those who really need it.

 

This is what upsets me about those who use the system.

I have a close friend. They had two kids both in school. They moved and bought a van while he was still working his old job. They both worked full-time. They could pay their bills. She became pregnant by surprise. Her DH was laid off (company moved to Mexico) for several months and she wasn't able to work the last half of her pregnancy due to health issues. They got behind in their bills. Her DH has a medical condition that requires meds that cost $500/month out of pocket. Her DH finally got a new job that pays well. They are now in a higher tax bracket. However, she has health issues that make her unable to work now. They got so far behind in bills while neither of them could work that even with his pay now, they can't make ends meet. Since he is making so much now, they can't get any help to get caught up. If they could get caught up they would be able to pay all bills plus have some to put away. They are able to file bankruptcy because of their debt to income ratio. My friend says she hates to do it because she knows they owe the money and would gladly pay, but they are still getting farther and farther behind because of all the late fees and penalties they are paying besides the monthly payment. They need a new roof on their house before winter and they don't know if they will be able to get it. We have offered to let them move in with us if they need to. If they could have gotten the help they needed when her DH was laid off they would probably be doing very well right now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Wait a minute. The government provides cell phones? Who cares what they're for. That's ridiculous. And to the PP who mentioned making people lazy and dependent on the government is a great way to destroy a country, BINGO. IMO that's the plan.

 

The government gives assistance for phone. EITHER a reduced price for a land line OR a cell phone with like 200 minutes a month. There are plans where people pay in extra for more minutes and for text messaging. This assists people in getting jobs, reporting emergencies, and yes, staying in contact with their relatives.

 

It's amazing how much we want people to suffer for their poverty.

 

I's amazing how ill-treated most low-wage earners are at work. It never ceases to amaze me how much we love to deprive and judge other people.

 

Why do middle class and rich people get deductions for their mortgages, anyway? Why do people get to write off child care expenses? Why is there a child tax credit?

Link to post
Share on other sites
:iagree: The only ones who are hurt by reforms are those who really need it.

 

This is what upsets me about those who use the system.

I have a close friend. They had two kids both in school. They moved and bought a van while he was still working his old job. They both worked full-time. They could pay their bills. She became pregnant by surprise. Her DH was laid off (company moved to Mexico) for several months and she wasn't able to work the last half of her pregnancy due to health issues. They got behind in their bills. Her DH has a medical condition that requires meds that cost $500/month out of pocket. Her DH finally got a new job that pays well. They are now in a higher tax bracket. However, she has health issues that make her unable to work now. They got so far behind in bills while neither of them could work that even with his pay now, they can't make ends meet. Since he is making so much now, they can't get any help to get caught up. If they could get caught up they would be able to pay all bills plus have some to put away. They are able to file bankruptcy because of their debt to income ratio. My friend says she hates to do it because she knows they owe the money and would gladly pay, but they are still getting farther and farther behind because of all the late fees and penalties they are paying besides the monthly payment. They need a new roof on their house before winter and they don't know if they will be able to get it. We have offered to let them move in with us if they need to. If they could have gotten the help they needed when her DH was laid off they would probably be doing very well right now.

 

This is what the bankruptcy law is designed for, so she should use it. She can always pay those folks back later if she finds herself able to do so.

 

This is also another reason I feel COBRA needs to be heavily subsidized. It just makes sense and I can't understand why I've never even heard of a proposal in the legislature about this.

Link to post
Share on other sites
:iagree:

My friend has a BIL, single, no kids, can work but won't. He gets $500/month in food stamps. :confused:

 

 

 

 

There is no way this is based on one person. Someone is lieing to you. There is no way one person gets this much just in food stamps The chart at the bottom shows the max one a person can get

 

http://otda.ny.gov/programs/food-stamps/

 

I will also say that it is hard as heck to even get the max amount When my son was too sick for childcare and school I lost my job and was having another baby I had no income at all period as I had yet to deal with child support my mom was paying my rent and I got assistance for my utilities I was told with having that I barely qualified for even half the max amount.

 

That was with 4 kids as well. I am not saying that some people don't know how to work it but they are not going to give one person more than is legally allowed, they are just not going to do it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
The government gives assistance for phone. EITHER a reduced price for a land line OR a cell phone with like 200 minutes a month. There are plans where people pay in extra for more minutes and for text messaging. This assists people in getting jobs, reporting emergencies, and yes, staying in contact with their relatives.

 

It's amazing how much we want people to suffer for their poverty.

 

I's amazing how ill-treated most low-wage earners are at work. It never ceases to amaze me how much we love to deprive and judge other people.

 

Why do middle class and rich people get deductions for their mortgages, anyway? Why do people get to write off child care expenses? Why is there a child tax credit?

 

We also don't know who pays for that phone. I looked into that program for my disabled son and none of the phones you get have picture things on them so I don't know how that is happening either. I could see maybe a mom or a grandma paying the extra for the girl to be able to call home

 

Here are the phones as you see they don't take pictures

 

http://www.assurancewireless.com/Public/MorePrograms.aspx

 

My son had one due to his disability and it was the cheapest thing I ever saw It worked so that served its purpose but these are not fancy phones

Link to post
Share on other sites
I dunno, I agreed with your OP but this post got under my skin. Maybe because I do have my kids getting disability benefits. My ds13 spent his 6th birthday in a children's mental health unit, not for 1 week for for 2.5. He did a stint again at 12. I have struggled for years just to getting a working Dx on my kids that will help them. I have never heard of parents saddling their children with a mental illness disorder just for benefits. Having a label like that can destroy many opportunities for kids, heck dd12 had her application to a summer camp this year refused because she has ODD/CD, she is a good kid with a bad attitude and that was enough to keep her out of camp. I don't want my kids having mental illness labels, I want them to be normal, so I don't get why parents would lie to gets that. Or how it even works. I can't get my ds13 who has significant issues properly diagnosed and treated but parents can get fake labels of serious mental illness?

 

Anyway, this particular post got under my skin because it makes it sound like parents who have their kid in the mental ward, or have them Dx to get disability benefits are just lazy lieing sods, and as a parent who has done those things to help my kids it irks me.

 

Oh and I won't lie. The 2.5 weeks my son spent on the ward were a huge break for me and I loved it. I did not love having him gone, I loved having 2.5 weeks of relative peace in my home.

 

NO, sorry, I didn't mean to offend anyone. I do know that some kids do need this. Where I live though, there are several who do this for other reasons than need. DH's nephews do this. They don't want to work so they studied symptoms of bipolar so they could get diagnosed. One is now trying to get his two daughters diagnosed. He started with the one when she was 3 yrs old. There are teens here who use threats of checking themselves into the mental ward when they don't get their way. I don't think some of them realize what the diagnosis will do to their future. That's what I was referring to. Not the ones who really need it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
There is no way this is based on one person. Someone is lieing to you. There is no way one person gets this much just in food stamps The chart at the bottom shows the max one a person can get

 

http://otda.ny.gov/programs/food-stamps/

 

I will also say that it is hard as heck to even get the max amount When my son was too sick for childcare and school I lost my job and was having another baby I had no income at all period as I had yet to deal with child support my mom was paying my rent and I got assistance for my utilities I was told with having that I barely qualified for even half the max amount.

 

That was with 4 kids as well. I am not saying that some people don't know how to work it but they are not going to give one person more than is legally allowed, they are just not going to do it.

 

We can't figure it out either, but he was trying to sell her his food stamps because he didn't need them all.

Link to post
Share on other sites
We can't figure it out either, but he was trying to sell her his food stamps because he didn't need them all.

 

 

Then he has not used the amount each month he gets and it has just been adding up. It don't just vanish at the end of the month it rolls over if it wasn't used.

Link to post
Share on other sites
We can't figure it out either, but he was trying to sell her his food stamps because he didn't need them all.

 

It sounds more like he had unused food stamps on his card, accumulated and rolled over from previous months.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For those who say it is hard to get help: that assumes you're telling the truth on the paperwork and such. This is a big assumption with people who seem to make it their life goal to work as little as possible.

 

They just think differently. In their minds, they are doing the right thing. My relative whom I mentioned earlier - during the short stint when she was married and "home" with her little ones, she got bored and lonely during the day because her husband had a job - a new experience for her. She got on the internet and arranged trysts with men. A friend whom she'd brought along on a "tryst" got disgusted and told her husband. Husband took away her internet access.

 

According to her mother, it is only natural that she needed a divorce since she wasn't getting enough sex, what with a working husband and all. How dare her husband expect her to be faithful? And of course she should keep the van and stick MIL with the bill. I mean, wouldn't anyone? Need I point out that said mother was also on welfare for many years and actually was convicted of welfare fraud (but it was all her ex-husband's fault)?

 

And the arrival of her 4th kid was timed interestingly, just around the time #3 turned 5.

 

Who knows what else is going on over there, but I don't think Mr. Conscience has visited that house for a long time. Meanwhile, every time I see her daughters, they tell big whopper lies. I wonder what their career will be.

Link to post
Share on other sites
For those who say it is hard to get help: that assumes you're telling the truth on the paperwork and such. This is a big assumption with people who seem to make it their life goal to work as little as possible.

 

They just think differently. In their minds, they are doing the right thing.

 

I agree that people who lack integrity *think* differently. In college, I worked off campus at a restaurant (after doing a management internship there). A worker would start stealing only when a new employee began work. How brilliant is THAT? I would never think like that.

 

However, the system is not, IME, that easy to "milk" or "scam".

Link to post
Share on other sites
It sounds more like he had unused food stamps on his card, accumulated and rolled over from previous months.

 

That could be it then. I didn't know they rolled over. We've been scratching our heads about it for awhile. That's why I try not to judge when I don't know the whole situation. I have to admit though that I will probably still judge him because he wanted to sell them so he could buy drugs.

 

I'm good now that I got my rant out over my original post. I'm moving on to my new frustration. How many ways can I explain what a rhyme is...lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...