just a rant, people who refuse to work

[Joanne]

Originally Posted by stripe

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.

 

True that.

 

We want people to be accountable, transparent, live, eat, have sex, and reproduce with less autonomy simply because of assumptions we make regarding their character because they are on assistance.

 

As if poverty isn't enough - we need to prove we are better (more hard working, more responsible) than anyone on assistance. It's true for people who might qualify - the "I could have used assistance but didn't" because I worked harder, didn't want to be a burden, ............ all speak to the issues associated with the cycle of low income.

 

I've said many, many times, that you can't be simultaneously pro-life and attach judgment, assumption, and stigma to needing assistance.

[NASDAQ]

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.

 

It's not an easy process for people who are honestly sick. For a minority who are dishonest, it's worth the trouble.

 

Personally I think it's much easier to pay rent than to decamp from apartments after being evicted several times a year, but nevertheless, some people are willing to go to great lengths to avoid work.

[missmoe]

Not sure where this thread has gone--only read first page, but wanted to tell you---they are getting something, but you are getting more.

 

You are struggling, but you are teaching your kids about hard work, sacrifice, good citizenship, ect.

 

I wouldn't spend time with those people or spend so much energy worrying aobut what they do or don't do.

[Just Kate]

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.

 

There was a COBRA subsidy a few years ago (I know...it was the only way we could afford COBRA when my dh lost his job). It was only temporary though. This is OT, but I know a man who is 60 years old and recently lost his job that he had worked at for over 30 years. He and his wife used up their entire savings ($20,000) to pay for COBRA, hoping he would get a job. When he finally found a job, it was through a temp service, so no benefits for him! I agree that having a COBRA subsidy would change things for a lot of people.

[mommaduck]

There was a COBRA subsidy a few years ago (I know...it was the only way we could afford COBRA when my dh lost his job). It was only temporary though. This is OT, but I know a man who is 60 years old and recently lost his job that he had worked at for over 30 years. He and his wife used up their entire savings ($20,000) to pay for COBRA, hoping he would get a job. When he finally found a job, it was through a temp service, so no benefits for him! I agree that having a COBRA subsidy would change things for a lot of people.

We were never able to afford Cobra. All Cobra ever did was continue to offer medical insurance, but one still had to pay for it (impossible when one doesn't have extra money). Basically, Cobra is for those that lose their jobs, but have a nice size savings account.

[SKL]

Not sure why this got to be such a polarizing discussion. The OP was talking about people she personally knows are gaming the system. I think most of us can agree that assumptions about total strangers, based on a few seconds of observation, are not helpful. Though it's human nature for us to want to protect "our share," hopefully we don't let that momentary feeling impact the way we act. For that matter, even when I'm 100% sure of someone's situation, I don't say anything. My opinion isn't going to change anything.

 

How this discussion led to mistreatment and dehumanization of workers, judging people for "needing assistance," etc., is a little beyond me. If you need assistance, I hope you get assistance. I pay a lot of taxes to make sure your kids don't go hungry. I don't want your kids to be hungry or sick. I don't want your husband to be abused at work. And I don't want you to be disrespected in the grocery line. I can still have an opinion about my relative whose life goal is to get the maximum for the minimum at others' expense.

 

And I worry sometimes about the rhetoric out there watering down my kids' budding work ethic.

[nertsmommy]

I never thought my rant post would get so many pages. I usually don't spend too much energy getting upset over this stuff. It is what it is. I just had one of those moments where I was like :001_huh: How can they think this kind of life is good? It does seem like a lot of work to just try to get out of working. I know my SIL judges me for not working and for HSing. I try very hard not to judge others because it doesn't feel good. I am just focusing on trying to teach my kids the value of hard work. Even at their ages now they have jobs they do around the house and I'm trying to teach them to take pride in a job well done.

[SKL]

We were never able to afford Cobra. All Cobra ever did was continue to offer medical insurance, but one still had to pay for it (impossible when one doesn't have extra money). Basically, Cobra is for those that lose their jobs, but have a nice size savings account.

 

Actually I think COBRA was originally for those switching from Job A to Job B and having a brief time period before the Job B coverage kicked in.

 

It's true that having a savings account can keep you on COBRA for a while, but ultimately if it runs out before you have a job, you're in the same place you'd be in if there was no COBRA and no savings account. Possibly worse, considering that most people pay a lot more into insurance than they get out of it during their years in the active labor force.

[Bluegoat]

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.

 

This is true, but it is possible. My uncle, who I mentioned in an early post, has recently had himself diagnosed with depression so he can claim a larger disability. He has worked pretty hard to get all the disability claims he has - he spent a lot of time appealing decisions and just making himself a PITA to the relevant government departments. And his case isn't totally implausible, just completely dishonest - he has some real health problems.

 

It is almost like a kind of work, really, filling out forms, keeping up on what's available, thinking of how to claim more than is really justified.

 

But as I also said, I don't see that in the end it is a lot different from the rich looking for tax breaks or cost-cutting measures that are not meant to be used in the way they are using them. Companies that come to a place as long as they get a tax break and leave as soon as they are gone. The mind-set seems very similar.

Edited May 22, 2012 by Bluegoat

[Free]

I pay a lot of taxes to make sure your kids don't go hungry.

This makes it sound like paying taxes is some form of charity which it is not. Taxes pay for services that citizens use. Many of those using assistance now have also at some time paid taxes themselves. One may of course feel that some of the tax funding should be cut from services which they personally find no use for...but there are other citizens who do use those services.

 

If instead of saying "I pay for you", we said "We pay for us", these discussions would not be so polarizing.

[Bluegoat]

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.

 

I can't convince you if you think such jobs don't exist. I'm not sure why you would think they don't, though? Human nature has always been willing to treat other people in these ways, including on a pretty massive scale. Sweat shops and working slums have never been in short supply. Just as some people are willing to screw-over taxpayers who are anonymous to them, other people are willing to screw-over employees who are anonymous. Like some take advantage of family they know, some take advantage of employees they see every day. Historically if the social and legal conditions for this are loose, it happens a lot.

 

The kinds of examples I am thinking of include contracting out work to temporary agencies so as to avoid the expense of full-time employees. These jobs have the same people working in them for years at a time with no benefits or job security. They are using a loophole to get around regulations for full-time workers in order to avoid paying people. This is not different from a person who uses a loop-hole to get more money from the government.

 

Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. When we allow exploitation it doesn't stay in one segment of society.

 

Human resources, by the way, used to be called personnel departments.

[mommaduck]

Actually I think COBRA was originally for those switching from Job A to Job B and having a brief time period before the Job B coverage kicked in.

 

It's true that having a savings account can keep you on COBRA for a while, but ultimately if it runs out before you have a job, you're in the same place you'd be in if there was no COBRA and no savings account. Possibly worse, considering that most people pay a lot more into insurance than they get out of it during their years in the active labor force.

When one is moving from a job that just pays the bills and insurance is completely covered by the employer (as we dealt with back when Cobra was first introduced) then Cobra is pointless.

[SKL]

This makes it sound like paying taxes is some form of charity which it is not. Taxes pay for services that citizens use. Many of those using assistance now have also at some time paid taxes themselves. One may of course feel that some of the tax funding should be cut from services which they personally find no use for...but there are other citizens who do use those services.

 

If instead of saying "I pay for you", we said "We pay for us", these discussions would not be so polarizing.

 

Re the bolded: in my personal observation, many those needing but NOT qualifying for assistance have paid taxes themselves. That adds insult to injury.

 

Re the overall point: I used the term "I" because some of the comments here have approached personal attacks. I tend to take it personally when I see sweeping statements about how rotten capitalists are. Of course taxes are not voluntary and paying them doesn't make me a saint (though I could protest them etc.). I could have added that I also donate to charity, pay above-average wages, and assist family and friends, but we're discussing tax-funded benefits here.

 

Point is, can we stop demonizing everyone who has a few bucks? That's no less fueled by false assumptions than "shaming" the poor is.

[cdrumm4448]

From Snopes

 

Landlines provides access to those things. Cellphones are a luxury. Landlines are necessary to modern life, not cellphones.

 

I would never give up my landline (or my corded phone which works well in a power outage or emergency) but I could easily give up my cellphone. I'm not the only one.

[cdrumm4448]

Also, the recipient of a welfare paid phone doesn't get to choose the phone. You are sent one of three phones. They decide. It's all set up with a contract with those companies.

 

Wow, that's really tough. I don't know how people stand for it.

[cdrumm4448]

The basic problem is that people who are paying taxes are giving up both luxuries and necessities (especially in the food dept) in order to pay taxes to support other families. They don't like seeing their handouts go for other people's luxuries, but they are fine with it going for necessities...and that's a nationwide opinion, that you can find if you dig up the research. .

 

:iagree:We give up a lot of luxuries.

[cdrumm4448]

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?

 

Do these job-seekers not have homes? I routinely make and receive calls on my landline at home to other people's landllines at home, as well as businesses. I know of one person in my sphere who has given up their landline for a cellphone exclusively.

 

Using job interviews as an excuse for needing a cellphone doesn't hold water with me. But, I actually lived, applied for jobs, conducted interviews and generally got along in life just fine before cellphones and the internet.

[Bluegoat]

Landlines provides access to those things. Cellphones are a luxury. Landlines are necessary to modern life, not cellphones.

 

I would never give up my landline (or my corded phone which works well in a power outage or emergency) but I could easily give up my cellphone. I'm not the only one.

 

 

If you look back, a pp said that they will pay for land-line OR a cell, not both.

 

It is increasingly common for people to make the opposite choice to your preference. I know quite a few people who don't have land lines at all, and they are people who could have both if they wanted.

 

There are many reasons people might find a cell better than a land-line if they had to choose one or the other. Maybe they don't have a home, or they need to be away all day (at the job seekers site, at a public computer terminal, watching the kids and taking them to the park?)

 

I'm not sure why you would assume that because you prefer land-line it makes the most sense for everyone.

[cdrumm4448]

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?

 

The bolded is a far-reaching assumption. Your subsequent statement regarding judgement is in itself a judgement. When I worked several low-wage jobs they taught me one thing. If I didn't like my low-wage job I could increase my skills and education to earn a higher-wage job. Stop acting like it can't be done. I did it. So have most of the people I know who are currently somewhat successful.

 

And you are right about one thing: we need to reduce ALL forms of welfare (corporate and private). Eliminating mortgage deductions would help people stop relying on credit when buying a house. I'm all for no debt.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

Do these job-seekers not have homes? I routinely make and receive calls on my landline at home to other people's landllines at home, as well as businesses. I know of one person in my sphere who has given up their landline for a cellphone exclusively.

 

Using job interviews as an excuse for needing a cellphone doesn't hold water with me. But, I actually lived, applied for jobs, conducted interviews and generally got along in life just fine before cellphones and the internet.

 

Well, aren't you just precious.

 

FYI, some of those job seekers don't have homes. Some are on the streets, and some live in situations where they cannot access a landline.

[cdrumm4448]

Well, aren't you just precious.

 

FYI, some of those job seekers don't have homes. Some are on the streets, and some live in situations where they cannot access a landline.

 

I'm confident you know just how much that means to me.

 

Link to stats showing percentage of current job seekers who are homeless?

 

This conversation has made it quite apparent how far we've come in the want more, more, more category in society.

[ChocolateReignRemix]

I'm confident you know just how much that means to me.

Link to stats showing percentage of current job seekers who are homeless?

 

This conversation has made it quite apparent how far we've come in the want more, more, more category in society.

 

 

I am not sure if that number is available, but let's see what we can dig up...

 

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/employment.html

44% of the homeless are currently employed.

Another link states 1/3 to 1/2 have jobs.

http://www.squidoo.com/why-homeless-people-dont-just-get-a-job

(The above link also explains the need for someone homeless to have a cell phone.)

[SKL]

If you look back, a pp said that they will pay for land-line OR a cell, not both.

 

It is increasingly common for people to make the opposite choice to your preference. I know quite a few people who don't have land lines at all, and they are people who could have both if they wanted.

 

There are many reasons people might find a cell better than a land-line if they had to choose one or the other. Maybe they don't have a home, or they need to be away all day (at the job seekers site, at a public computer terminal, watching the kids and taking them to the park?)

 

I'm not sure why you would assume that because you prefer land-line it makes the most sense for everyone.

 

I don't care what kind of phone they get, as long as it isn't extravagant. But if it's so necessary for these folks to have a phone, why not issue one to everyone and get it over with? Why leave out the people who have barely enough to eat but not enough to buy their own phone? Is there any evidence that having these phones results in getting these particular people into jobs quicker?

 

One of the problems with our benefits structure is that once a person crosses some qualification threshold, he's entitled to a whole group of valuable benefits which, in real terms, puts him at a significantly higher income level than many working stiffs. There has to be a better way of distributing benefits based on needs.

[Mommy22alyns]

 

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.

 

 

This bears repeating. Plenty of people work, and work hard, and are still not able to get ahead. There are a few people on this thread, and it always comes out in these topics, who assume things about people with financial difficulties. ASSume. :rolleyes:

[SKL]

This bears repeating. Plenty of people work, and work hard, and are still not able to get ahead. There are a few people on this thread, and it always comes out in these topics, who assume things about people with financial difficulties. ASSume. :rolleyes:

 

And then there are people who can always be counted on to chant "can't."

[Joanne]

One of the problems with our benefits structure is that once a person crosses some qualification threshold, he's entitled to a whole group of valuable benefits which, in real terms, puts him at a significantly higher income level than many working stiffs. There has to be a better way of distributing benefits based on needs.

 

There is another side of that.

 

Increase in income often disproportionally knocks people out of services such as food stamps and healthcare for children. It is not a dollar for dollar replacement. Often the loss in benefits is substantial enough that it literally does not pay to work.

[Joanne]

This bears repeating. Plenty of people work, and work hard, and are still not able to get ahead. There are a few people on this thread, and it always comes out in these topics, who assume things about people with financial difficulties. ASSume. :rolleyes:

 

Yes. The percentage of income consumed by life events (medical visit, car repair, a/c goes out) is much greater for low incomes. Even a modest savings (say, the $1000 suggested by DR) presents a challenge to low income that adequate to better income is not stressed by. When each month is defined by avoiding payday loans, NSF fees, and saving enough gas to get to work the week before the next paycheck.

 

These are working, often hardworking, people.

[Dustybug]

 

 

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.

 

 

 

 

 

:iagree:

 

I really, really detest the "I did it, so can everyone else" attitude. Not everyone has the exact same opportunities, financial means, transportation means, resources, etc. available to them. My DH would LOVE to go back to school, but that requires time and money that we don't have available. He works overtime every single shift, most weekends, ALL weekend,etc. When is he supposed to go to school? Not to mention that we only have ONE vehicle because that is all we can afford and I need to have it available on occasion for dr. appts., grocery store trips, etc., which I have to SCHEDULE for when he is actually home and NOT at work. Oh, and he has to actually sleep sometimes.:glare: We live in a very rural area with no bus system. There is nothing within a reasonable walking distance except cow fields.

 

We live in a 900sq. ft. house where all three of my children share one bedroom, we have one vehicle, no cable, internet in the most basic form for school and for me to keep in touch with my family, prepaid cell phones only where we monitor carefully our minute usage, no cc, etc. Educations costs money which we do not have. We're living on a $300 or less monthly grocery budget. We are still paying off my college loans so it wouldn't be prudent to apply for MORE. The only regular extra is my DD's ballet class but we pay a minimal amount for that and it is possibly on the chopping block for next year if finances don't improve over the summer.

 

Daycare costs are ridiculous and if I did go back to work, it would only cover the costs for the childcare.

 

We are not in a situation where it is feasible to further education and move on up as easily as some would assume. Besides all that, where we are there aren't really any jobs to find even if we did! It's not always as simple as "pull up your bootstraps."

[Bluegoat]

I don't care what kind of phone they get, as long as it isn't extravagant. But if it's so necessary for these folks to have a phone, why not issue one to everyone and get it over with? Why leave out the people who have barely enough to eat but not enough to buy their own phone? Is there any evidence that having these phones results in getting these particular people into jobs quicker?

 

Do you mean issue a phone to every person everywhere? We don't do that with other things that are necessities, like food or housing, so I think that would be a very different approach to providing for people, for sure. I think though that part of the answer even in the case just of the poor is that not everyone needs one. It will depend on a lot of factors and it seems silly to give a phone to those who don't need one.

 

I think it would be pretty hard to gather evidence whether or not people are more successful at finding a job with a phone based on the people actually using the programs. You'd have to set up an artificial situation which might not be all that useful a comparison. I can't see it being easy to find a job without a phone though. How would you communicate with the potential employers? I can think of ways one might try to make arrangements but they all have some serious disadvantages.

 

One of the problems with our benefits structure is that once a person crosses some qualification threshold, he's entitled to a whole group of valuable benefits which, in real terms, puts him at a significantly higher income level than many working stiffs. There has to be a better way of distributing benefits based on needs.

 

 

Yes, this is a problem. I don't know the answer though - it's pretty widely recognized but I'm not sure anyone has found a great solution.

[mommaduck]

This bears repeating. Plenty of people work, and work hard, and are still not able to get ahead. There are a few people on this thread, and it always comes out in these topics, who assume things about people with financial difficulties. ASSume. :rolleyes:

Exactly...thank you!

[mommaduck]

:iagree:

 

I really, really detest the "I did it, so can everyone else" attitude. Not everyone has the exact same opportunities, financial means, transportation means, resources, etc. available to them. My DH would LOVE to go back to school, but that requires time and money that we don't have available. He works overtime every single shift, most weekends, ALL weekend,etc. When is he supposed to go to school? Not to mention that we only have ONE vehicle because that is all we can afford and I need to have it available on occasion for dr. appts., grocery store trips, etc., which I have to SCHEDULE for when he is actually home and NOT at work. Oh, and he has to actually sleep sometimes.:glare: We live in a very rural area with no bus system. There is nothing within a reasonable walking distance except cow fields.

 

We live in a 900sq. ft. house where all three of my children share one bedroom, we have one vehicle, no cable, internet in the most basic form for school and for me to keep in touch with my family, prepaid cell phones only where we monitor carefully our minute usage, no cc, etc. Educations costs money which we do not have. We're living on a $300 or less monthly grocery budget. We are still paying off my college loans so it wouldn't be prudent to apply for MORE. The only regular extra is my DD's ballet class but we pay a minimal amount for that and it is possibly on the chopping block for next year if finances don't improve over the summer.

 

Daycare costs are ridiculous and if I did go back to work, it would only cover the costs for the childcare.

 

We are not in a situation where it is feasible to further education and move on up as easily as some would assume. Besides all that, where we are there aren't really any jobs to find even if we did! It's not always as simple as "pull up your bootstraps."

Pretty much sounds like most of our married life also. I love how people think we can just snap our fingers and everything will magically change. :glare:

[NoPlaceLikeHome]

Landlines provides access to those things. Cellphones are a luxury. Landlines are necessary to modern life, not cellphones.

 

I would never give up my landline (or my corded phone which works well in a power outage or emergency) but I could easily give up my cellphone. I'm not the only one.

We have been happily living without our landline now for almost a year:D

 

Many of those in need may be transient as well and therefore need a cell phone since where are they to hook up their phone.

 

Lastly, I am pretty sure the cost of cell and landlines are comparable so what's the beef???

[stripe]

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

 

That's illegal. Many business owners in my area have been prosecuted lately for food stamp related fraud.

 

What difference does it make to give someone a cheap cell phone with 200 minutes vs. a reduced rate on a landline? The individual can only get help for ONE. What difference does it make to someone else? I can think of many reasons a cell phone would be a better arrangement, like for a woman who has long bus commutes and long walks in the dark or has to drive a rundown car. Or, I had a friend whose neighbor hooked into her phone line and made so many calls they could only keep the phone by not being able to make outgoing calls. Not very helpful in emergencies.

 

I know DOZENS of people with college degrees -- including PhDs, who are RIGHT NOW working very hard at very low wage jobs. I am tired of the idea that all poor people are trying to game the system.

 

I'm not passing judgments. I have just observed an incredible amount of hostility. And it's sad beause instead of being anger at billion dollar a day wars, or at banks getting big paychecks after gambling away money, it's anger at regular people. Regular poor people and regular rich people and regular people in the middle, all fighting with each other, and ALL MISSING THE POINT.

Edited May 22, 2012 by stripe

[nertsmommy]

That's illegal. Many business owners in my area have been prosecuted lately for food stamp related fraud.

 

We knew that. She declined his offer.

[SKL]

Pretty much sounds like most of our married life also. I love how people think we can just snap our fingers and everything will magically change. :glare:

 

Maybe we're not talking the same language. Of course things aren't going to magically change overnight, or even in one year. It can take a decade or two or even longer to graduate from hand-to-mouth. That may sound like a long time, but considering that we work for five or more decades, it really isn't.

 

Five decades. That's a long time to choose to be unhappy about the reality that we all have to work, and most of us have to work hard, and most of us have to be frugal while doing so.

 

I'm a 45yo single mom of 2, and I've never "not" worked overtime. Two nights this week I was up working until 5am. I just don't view hard work so negatively. Maybe I'm the weird one.

[Dustybug]

Maybe we're not talking the same language. Of course things aren't going to magically change overnight, or even in one year. It can take a decade or two or even longer to graduate from hand-to-mouth. That may sound like a long time, but considering that we work for five or more decades, it really isn't.

 

Five decades. That's a long time to choose to be unhappy about the reality that we all have to work, and most of us have to work hard, and most of us have to be frugal while doing so.

 

I'm a 45yo single mom of 2, and I've never "not" worked overtime. Two nights this week I was up working until 5am. I just don't view hard work so negatively. Maybe I'm the weird one.

 

I absolutely do not view hard work negatively. In fact, I think it builds character and instills great work ethics. What I do not like is the assumption made by many that people in a hand-to-mouth scenario are staying there because they lack the gumption to just pull themselves up. It's frustrating and erroneous.

[NatashainDFW]

On the cell phone thing....you can get a discount on your land line or a free cheap cell phone and 250 minutes a month. For someone with no income getting the cell phone is the only option because they can't afford the rest of the bill for the landline.

[TranquilMind]

Heigh Ho:

 

The basic problem is that people who are paying taxes are giving up both luxuries and necessities (especially in the food dept) in order to pay taxes to support other families. They don't like seeing their handouts go for other people's luxuries, but they are fine with it going for necessities...and that's a nationwide opinion, that you can find if you dig up the research.

 

 

 

Agree that people being supported by other people involuntarily (taxes) should not have to support their luxuries.

 

 

In my area, you don't see it with cell phones as much as you see it with property. There are sooo many exemptions on property tax that everyone else's bill is jacked up to cover those exemptions, and we have single older people in large houses on 3 acre lots b/c the younger families are being taxed to pay for senior subsidies (taxes, fuel, transportation, medical care, snow removal, etc) while families struggle in trailers and small summer cottages that have been converted to year-round. If the families didn't have to pay such high taxes to subsidize others, they could actually afford good food for their children as well as enough space that a kid could study in peace.

 

But this was true in our parents generation too. They made little and paid high taxes, relatively. Old people still had good insurance and were able to stay in the homes they worked for and paid off. Only one parent worked, often in a blue collar job, and they still made it work.

 

I'm not sure what you are suggesting here. Old people should be forced out of the homes they paid off?

 

We've noticed that our senior citizen family members actually make more money working part time min wage than the non-gov't wage earning younger men because of all the exemptions and subsidies the seniors are entitled too.

 

I don't know where you are or what exemptions and subsidies you are talking about, except for Medicare. But if it is still solvent, you will get it too. Though I'd be just as happy to dismantle health insurance altogether and go back to paying your doctor directly.

 

 

But hey, don't take my word for it. Taxes are public record...add up the bill for your zone and the exemptions. How much are you paying for others?

 

I'm paying TONS for others, as a real estate rental property owner. Some day, my payoff will come....maybe, if the market ever recovers.

 

 

MIL is very happy...she gets $7K a year from everyone else just for her property taxes and pays no taxes otherwise.

So she should have to go back to work to afford her property taxes?

[Renee in NC]

Pretty much sounds like most of our married life also. I love how people think we can just snap our fingers and everything will magically change. :glare:

 

Most of you know where we have been. And how long it has taken us to get where we are now. We are on the *cusp* of the working class to upper middle class jump.

 

What has it taken? Insane amounts of work on my part. Sacrifices on the part of my dc. Many nights of little sleep where I studied, wrote papers, planned homeschool, etc. Weekend days at McDonalds (free internet) while dh holds down the fort.

 

It will be worth it! However, for anyone who thinks it is so *easy* to get beyond...I call B.S. From someone who has been there and is there.

 

Am I ashamed for taking aid? No. Do I want to stay here forever? NEVER.

 

Signed, Renee - Masters degree earning, CPA-to-be, homeschooling mom of 7. Who was able to do this because God blessed me with well above average intelligence, an upper middle class upbringing, and no health/mental/drug issues. Without those things in my favor, I would NOT have been able to do this!

 

(SKL, this isn't directed at you, but it seemed like a good place to throw in my 2 cents.)

[Jennifer3141]

Renee, I LOVED your post!!! And I'm very proud to "know" you. :001_smile:

[mommaduck]

I am not sure if that number is available, but let's see what we can dig up...

 

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/employment.html

44% of the homeless are currently employed.

Another link states 1/3 to 1/2 have jobs.

http://www.squidoo.com/why-homeless-people-dont-just-get-a-job

(The above link also explains the need for someone homeless to have a cell phone.)

To add to that, I looked up the income limits for section eight or housing assistance with rent, and the first thing on the county site is "we are not accepting applications with an explanation that there is more need than there are vouchers. So you can work, qualify for housing assistance, and not be able to receive that assistance simply because there is not enough to go around.

[Jennifer3141]

To add to that, I looked up the income limits for section eight or housing assistance with rent, and the first thing on the county site is "we are not accepting applications with an explanation that there is more need than there are vouchers. So you can work, qualify for housing assistance, and not be able to receive that assistance simply because there is not enough to go around.

 

Let's bump that one for her too. :001_smile:

[emzhengjiu]

In the area when I live, there is no section 8 housing available currently. Even the waiting list is closed and has been for a couple of years. The more rural areas have section 8 vouchers, but few jobs.

[Audrey]

Nice rant. You'd be less aggravating by other people and what they do or not do if you just realized that so much of what people claim to do or not do is b-llsh-t.

[Joanne]

Maybe we're not talking the same language. Of course things aren't going to magically change overnight, or even in one year. It can take a decade or two or even longer to graduate from hand-to-mouth. That may sound like a long time, but considering that we work for five or more decades, it really isn't.

 

Five decades. That's a long time to choose to be unhappy about the reality that we all have to work, and most of us have to work hard, and most of us have to be frugal while doing so.

 

I'm a 45yo single mom of 2, and I've never "not" worked overtime. Two nights this week I was up working until 5am. I just don't view hard work so negatively. Maybe I'm the weird one.

 

I'll play. I have nearly always worked more than one job and juggled more than one major role.

 

At 13, I began waiting tables. I was part of a custody battle between the owner of the restaurant and his waitress/soon to be xw. She wanted me for babysitting, and he wanted me to take her shift waitressing. :lol: I chose the waitress; it seemed more glamorous.

 

At one point in High School, I attended school, had a major part time job, and was part of a touring handbell choir that had several performances a month (in addition to church) and practice 2x a week.

 

Even my undergraduate years: I earned 2 full B.A. degrees while working work-study AND an off campus job (I was literally the only one on campas that worked off campus.)

 

These last 7 years (after I divorced), I have worked a minimum of 2, but up to 4 jobs. I have done everything from teach to clean toilets to sell fireworks to run "free" poker tournaments. Some of that was while a full time grad student. It was all while being a mother and wife.

 

I don't view hard work negatively, either. But I do understand the shackles of low income and how and why some people never escape, in spite of decades of hard work.

[Joanne]

Most of you know where we have been. And how long it has taken us to get where we are now. We are on the *cusp* of the working class to upper middle class jump.

 

What has it taken? Insane amounts of work on my part. Sacrifices on the part of my dc. Many nights of little sleep where I studied, wrote papers, planned homeschool, etc. Weekend days at McDonalds (free internet) while dh holds down the fort.

 

It will be worth it! However, for anyone who thinks it is so *easy* to get beyond...I call B.S. From someone who has been there and is there.

 

Am I ashamed for taking aid? No. Do I want to stay here forever? NEVER.

 

Signed, Renee - Masters degree earning, CPA-to-be, homeschooling mom of 7. Who was able to do this because God blessed me with well above average intelligence, an upper middle class upbringing, and no health/mental/drug issues. Without those things in my favor, I would NOT have been able to do this!

 

This. I could have written this, with some minor changes.

[Lang Syne Boardie]

Nice rant. You'd be less aggravating by other people and what they do or not do if you just realized that so much of what people claim to do or not do is b-llsh-t.

 

That is so true.

 

Here's another truth: Sometimes people in tough situations lack total understanding of their situation. They lack math and comprehension skills and are telling you what they've worked out in their mind, not what is real. On the other end of the situation is a social worker who has given up trying to get them to understand, just pleased she's got them correctly going through the paces.

 

You don't have to take everything that everyone says as gospel.

Edited May 23, 2012 by Tibbie Dunbar

[FairyMom]

Most of you know where we have been. And how long it has taken us to get where we are now. We are on the *cusp* of the working class to upper middle class jump.

 

What has it taken? Insane amounts of work on my part. Sacrifices on the part of my dc. Many nights of little sleep where I studied, wrote papers, planned homeschool, etc. Weekend days at McDonalds (free internet) while dh holds down the fort.

 

It will be worth it! However, for anyone who thinks it is so *easy* to get beyond...I call B.S. From someone who has been there and is there.

 

Am I ashamed for taking aid? No. Do I want to stay here forever? NEVER.

 

Signed, Renee - Masters degree earning, CPA-to-be, homeschooling mom of 7. Who was able to do this because God blessed me with well above average intelligence, an upper middle class upbringing, and no health/mental/drug issues. Without those things in my favor, I would NOT have been able to do this!

 

(SKL, this isn't directed at you, but it seemed like a good place to throw in my 2 cents.)

 

Love this, Renee! Well said. :)

[FairyMom]

Do these job-seekers not have homes? I routinely make and receive calls on my landline at home to other people's landllines at home, as well as businesses. I know of one person in my sphere who has given up their landline for a cellphone exclusively.

 

Using job interviews as an excuse for needing a cellphone doesn't hold water with me. But, I actually lived, applied for jobs, conducted interviews and generally got along in life just fine before cellphones and the internet.

 

Hmm, not really sure what to say here....

 

Well, aren't you just precious.

 

FYI, some of those job seekers don't have homes. Some are on the streets, and some live in situations where they cannot access a landline.

 

:iagree: They also have memberships to gyms to be able to shower and clean up for the interviews to be able to get the luxury of a landline.

 

I'm confident you know just how much that means to me.

 

Link to stats showing percentage of current job seekers who are homeless?

 

This conversation has made it quite apparent how far we've come in the want more, more, more category in society.

 

I am not sure if that number is available, but let's see what we can dig up...

 

http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/employment.html

44% of the homeless are currently employed.

Another link states 1/3 to 1/2 have jobs.

http://www.squidoo.com/why-homeless-people-dont-just-get-a-job

(The above link also explains the need for someone homeless to have a cell phone.)

 

<crickets>

[cdrumm4448]

We have been happily living without our landline now for almost a year:D

 

Many of those in need may be transient as well and therefore need a cell phone since where are they to hook up their phone.

 

Lastly, I am pretty sure the cost of cell and landlines are comparable so what's the beef???

 

I believe in being prepared in an emergency. We live in an industrialized area that sometimes requires emergency evacuation. The towns here reverse-911 people to notify them to evacuate. We are not able to reverse-911 to a cellphone.