Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Need to rant

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Need to rant

    Almost complete proof that my state is intentionally trying to keep people dependent on them and punishing those who advance themselves.

    In my town, there is a complex of some pretty decent public housing projects, funded directly by the state. The rent is about $700 a month with all utilities included. You are obligated to a one year lease that you cannot, under any circumstances, terminate early. Okay, certainly not unheard of. The thing is, in order to stay in this housing, you need to stay under a certain income limit (which depends on how many people are in your family). This is gross income; it does not take into account any debts, bills, or taxes you may owe. If you or anyone in your family do anything to exceed that income, you get evicted.

    So, let's say a laid off, single mother of 2 is collecting unemployment, getting a total of about $25,000 a year. She gets into this apartment. Three months later, she gets job, not knowing about this policy (which they don't tell you about) and is now making $32,000 a year. The super knocks on her door and tells her that she has less than 24 hours to leave because she is no longer eligible for public housing or assistance. She scrambles out, now homeless, and still needing to pay $700 a month for an apartment she cannot live in. A week later, with the apartment open, a new tenant moves in, signs the lease, and begins their monthly rent. However, the single mother is STILL responsible for paying the $700 of her lease. All of the other private apartments in the area cost too much for her to pay for in addition to the money she owes the public housing, so she basically has no choice but to remain homeless for the rest of the year until her lease expires and she can finally afford a small apartment. Now, social services gets involved, she loses her kids because she can't get a place to live, her credit gets ruined from getting evicted (regardless of the reason), and now, even a year later, she can't get an apartment or a loan for a house because of bad credit and a record with the state. She has no way of building her credit, so this is her life from now on.

    Thus, had this single mother turned down the higher paying job and stayed on government assistance, she'd still have a place to live and she'd still have her kids. Because she had the motivation to go out and get a job, she's not allowed in public housing, and the state is making it so she can't afford private housing, and her life is basically ruined.

    No wonder there are so many people on welfare for generations. While I know many of these people are in fact taking advantage of the system, I wonder how many stay on it because they'd be ruined if they didn't! Talk about blackmail! There is no incentive to improve oneself anymore. Keep sucking on the teat of the government, or they will destroy you. How the hell did we get this way?

    Rant over.
    "If the police have to come get you, they're bringing an @$$ kicking with them!"
    -Chris Rock

  • #2
    I feel your pain! Didn't Clinton say that?

    My governor is asking for state workers to give back $20k each. There are 45,000 state workers and he wants 1 billion in give-backs from us. No cuts to the budget in any give-away programs. They can't cut those. Those enable them to get the urban vote and keep power and the unions were a nice margin, but the 45,000 union members weren't the deciding factor, per se. That just gave them a good buffer. Time to throw them under the bus.

    Interestingly enough, we have a Democrat governor. We have a Democrat controlled Legislative branch. As a matter of fact, we are a predominately Democrat controlled state in most aspects- at both state and local levels. Funny how fast the Democrat taxpayers are ready to toss their kin away.

    The champions of the working man and unions are saying they want $20k back from those very people they say they support. There is a lesson there for everyone that thinks the Democrats are your friend. They aren't. They will turn on you faster than you can blink.

    Interesting enough, the few Republicans are asking for some concessions from the state unions, but what they are proposing is cuts in programs to make up the difference. You need to seriously look at what is going on. At this point, your real friends aren't the Democrats.
    Last edited by FNA209; 04-08-2011, 02:07 PM.
    "Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince" - Unknown Author
    ______________________________________________

    "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves." - Thomas Jefferson
    ______________________________________________

    “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.” - John Adams

    Comment


    • #3
      Both of you are in CT. I'm so glad I got the heck out of there years ago.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by GangGreen712 View Post
        The super knocks on her door and tells her that she has less than 24 hours to leave because she is no longer eligible for public housing or assistance.
        Your hypothetical seems a bit heavy on the hyperbole.

        I'm no expert on these matters, but, last time I checked a "super" is required to provide written eviction notice. A typical eviction includes a 5 day notice. I've never, ever, heard of 24 hours notice. Further, a typical eviction notice will include information on the grievance procedure. If you start the grievance process you cannot be evicted until its settled.

        Do you think any court would find 24 hours, and no grievance process, a resonable scenario?

        Also, nowadays, most public housing subsidies are based on a sliding scale. Your income goes up, your subsidy goes down. The notion that you make $701.00 dollars, $1.00 more than 'the limit', and suddenly you're tossed out doesn't ring true.

        That said, I agree that welfare can be a noose dipped in parfume (as I heard it described once).
        ...hunter of the shadows is rising...

        Comment


        • #5
          I feel your pain. I live in NY, to be exact, I live east of NYC.

          America once used to be a place where people were rewarded for being hard workers. You worked hard and did the right thing, then you were able to move up both financially and socially. but now, if you make more money, the Government will tax the hell out of you and give your hard earned money to lazy people.

          For many politicians, keeping people under the control of government dependency means job security for them, so they'll do whatever it takes to increase the number of people depending on their social programs and will not incentivise to move up on financial ladder.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by FNA209 View Post
            I feel your pain! Didn't Clinton say that?

            My governor is asking for state workers to give back $20k each. There are 45,000 state workers and he wants 1 billion in give-backs from us. No cuts to the budget in any give-away programs. They can't cut those. Those enable them to get the urban vote and keep power and the unions were a nice margin, but the 45,000 union members weren't the deciding factor, per se. That just gave them a good buffer. Time to throw them under the bus.

            Interestingly enough, we have a Democrat governor. We have a Democrat controlled Legislative branch. As a matter of fact, we are a predominately Democrat controlled state in most aspects- at both state and local levels. Funny how fast the Democrat taxpayers are ready to toss their kin away.

            The champions of the working man and unions are saying they want $20k back from those very people they say they support. There is a lesson there for everyone that thinks the Democrats are your friend. They aren't. They will turn on you faster than you can blink.

            Interesting enough, the few Republicans are asking for some concessions from the state unions, but what they are proposing is cuts in programs to make up the difference. You need to seriously look at what is going on. At this point, your real friends aren't the Democrats.
            wow. your hyper partisanship shines through yet again....

            When a Republican governor makes cuts to public employee wages, you called it the right thing to do.
            Yet in the passage above, when a Democrat makes cuts to public employee wages, you portray him as a traitor. He "turned on them"

            Clearly, in the end, taking the issues independently isn't an option for you. Its simply a matter of "us vs. them"

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by M1garand View Post
              I feel your pain. I live in NY, to be exact, I live east of NYC.

              America once used to be a place where people were rewarded for being hard workers. You worked hard and did the right thing, then you were able to move up both financially and socially. but now, if you make more money, the Government will tax the hell out of you and give your hard earned money to lazy people.

              For many politicians, keeping people under the control of government dependency means job security for them, so they'll do whatever it takes to increase the number of people depending on their social programs and will not incentivise to move up on financial ladder.
              I recognize that its a pretty common theory - especially among conservatives - that welfare recipients largely vote Democrats into office....

              Is there any kind of proof or facts of such a thing? Or is it simply one of those wedge arguments that makes for effective sound bites ?

              Comment


              • #8
                r
                Originally posted by SkepticAlways View Post
                Your hypothetical seems a bit heavy on the hyperbole.

                I'm no expert on these matters, but, last time I checked a "super" is required to provide written eviction notice. A typical eviction includes a 5 day notice. I've never, ever, heard of 24 hours notice. Further, a typical eviction notice will include information on the grievance procedure. If you start the grievance process you cannot be evicted until its settled.

                Do you think any court would find 24 hours, and no grievance process, a resonable scenario?

                Also, nowadays, most public housing subsidies are based on a sliding scale. Your income goes up, your subsidy goes down. The notion that you make $701.00 dollars, $1.00 more than 'the limit', and suddenly you're tossed out doesn't ring true.

                That said, I agree that welfare can be a noose dipped in parfume (as I heard it described once).

                Ypu have no idea how bad it is in CT and has been for many years.
                MY tax dollars paid for welfare slime to live below me and across from me in a condo I owned.
                The welfare slime would come home god knows what hour and block my car in. I would call the condo association and maybe someone would be coming in 4 hours. Gee I need to go to work. So I had to go and pound on her dooSr and risk my life to get her to move her brand new car.
                That was real fun. MY ta money paid or her to send her 5 year old to schoool in a taxi.
                She broke all the rules but noone would enforce them because she was a minority welfdare slime. I sent pics of all the rules she broke.
                Guess what happened. They tried to go after me for watering my plants that splashed mud on her illegal laundry drying on the railing against the rules.
                She should have been tossed and if I had my way eilimated from the planet.
                Last edited by luvmylabs; 04-09-2011, 10:50 AM.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by dlo View Post
                  I recognize that its a pretty common theory - especially among conservatives - that welfare recipients largely vote Democrats into office....

                  Is there any kind of proof or facts of such a thing? Or is it simply one of those wedge arguments that makes for effective sound bites ?
                  Reality is not a theory. When programs are established not to assist some one to get back on their feet but to subsidize a certain quality of life, that individual ceases to be a productive member and becomes dependent on government assistance via taxpayer dollars from those that actually are being productive. I have personally seen people on welfare pull up to a pharmacy, get free medication while driving an SUV with aftermarket rims and tires. I personally love the cell phone users in said ranks. Its amazing how they have money to pay for cell phones but can't pay for cough syrup for their kids that they just brought to the emergency room that will cost me thousands of dollars. I have also have seen and know people on welfare who have multiple kids whom I get the bill to pay for with my taxpayer dollars and they think I owe it to them. I'm paying thousands more per public school student versus a private school only to see the offspring of said children instead of putting a book in their hands rather they put a ball in their hands only to complain about their "educational opportunities." It is not a theory when I look around New Orleans, where I use to work after Katrina, and see the medians covered with "NOW HIRING" so thick in the medians one can not cross them only to look over at the welfare loving community sit on their behinds and complain that the government is being too slow to help them meanwhile Coca-Cola and Budweiser went into a little wage war against each other right after Katrina as they had no drivers to deliver their products. I can tell you for a fact that Budweiser was paying the drivers $1500 a week and even had lunches for the drivers yet our dearly beloved welfare community was too busy to apply for a job while they attempted to play the role of an invalidic individual.

                  And the reality is this: Many of us are tired of working hard to pay absurd taxes to a government that throws our hard earned earnings away while running up trillions in debt while some one else sits on their rears screwing off. Think about that during this tax season when the welfare community gets thousands back in tax returns that they never paid into. You could even call and ask them on their cell phone that taxpayers paid for.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Rifleguy View Post
                    Reality is not a theory. When programs are established not to assist some one to get back on their feet but to subsidize a certain quality of life, that individual ceases to be a productive member and becomes dependent on government assistance via taxpayer dollars from those that actually are being productive. I have personally seen people on welfare pull up to a pharmacy, get free medication while driving an SUV with aftermarket rims and tires. I personally love the cell phone users in said ranks. Its amazing how they have money to pay for cell phones but can't pay for cough syrup for their kids that they just brought to the emergency room that will cost me thousands of dollars. I have also have seen and know people on welfare who have multiple kids whom I get the bill to pay for with my taxpayer dollars and they think I owe it to them. I'm paying thousands more per public school student versus a private school only to see the offspring of said children instead of putting a book in their hands rather they put a ball in their hands only to complain about their "educational opportunities." It is not a theory when I look around New Orleans, where I use to work after Katrina, and see the medians covered with "NOW HIRING" so thick in the medians one can not cross them only to look over at the welfare loving community sit on their behinds and complain that the government is being too slow to help them meanwhile Coca-Cola and Budweiser went into a little wage war against each other right after Katrina as they had no drivers to deliver their products. I can tell you for a fact that Budweiser was paying the drivers $1500 a week and even had lunches for the drivers yet our dearly beloved welfare community was too busy to apply for a job while they attempted to play the role of an invalidic individual.

                    And the reality is this: Many of us are tired of working hard to pay absurd taxes to a government that throws our hard earned earnings away while running up trillions in debt while some one else sits on their rears screwing off. Think about that during this tax season when the welfare community gets thousands back in tax returns that they never paid into. You could even call and ask them on their cell phone that taxpayers paid for.
                    What does any of that have to do with dlo's question? You went through the trouble of quoting him, but then didn't address the issue.
                    ...hunter of the shadows is rising...

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Reality is not a theory.
                      so if it is reality... then you should have no trouble producing stats that answer my question ?

                      Or should I just trust you that its "true" ?

                      When programs are established not to assist some one to get back on their feet but to subsidize a certain quality of life, that individual ceases to be a productive member and becomes dependent on government assistance via taxpayer dollars from those that actually are being productive. I have personally seen people on welfare pull up to a pharmacy, get free medication while driving an SUV with aftermarket rims and tires. I personally love the cell phone users in said ranks. Its amazing how they have money to pay for cell phones but can't pay for cough syrup for their kids that they just brought to the emergency room that will cost me thousands of dollars. I have also have seen and know people on welfare who have multiple kids whom I get the bill to pay for with my taxpayer dollars and they think I owe it to them. I'm paying thousands more per public school student versus a private school only to see the offspring of said children instead of putting a book in their hands rather they put a ball in their hands only to complain about their "educational opportunities." It is not a theory when I look around New Orleans, where I use to work after Katrina, and see the medians covered with "NOW HIRING" so thick in the medians one can not cross them only to look over at the welfare loving community sit on their behinds and complain that the government is being too slow to help them meanwhile Coca-Cola and Budweiser went into a little wage war against each other right after Katrina as they had no drivers to deliver their products. I can tell you for a fact that Budweiser was paying the drivers $1500 a week and even had lunches for the drivers yet our dearly beloved welfare community was too busy to apply for a job while they attempted to play the role of an invalidic individual.
                      I believe it.
                      I'm sure there's lots of people who try to abuse the system.
                      Even if there was no such thing as "welfare" there would be people who are parasites.

                      But i asked if it is actually proven that welfare recipients vote overwhelming for Democrats.
                      Or if its just a sound bite that conservatives like to use

                      I'd be a little surprised if the "welfare queens" and other folks who are too lazy and too self-centered to get jobs even know when election day is.. or would even bother to get off the couch.

                      Furthermore - it seems that a lot of solidly "red states" also spend plenty on welfare.

                      And the reality is this: Many of us are tired of working hard to pay absurd taxes to a government that throws our hard earned earnings away while running up trillions in debt while some one else sits on their rears screwing off. Think about that during this tax season when the welfare community gets thousands back in tax returns that they never paid into. You could even call and ask them on their cell phone that taxpayers paid for.
                      I don't know about "absurd taxes". Americans are taxed pretty low, compared to other industrialized nations

                      welfare hasn't put us trillions in debt

                      but i do understand the frustration of seemingly "wasted government dollars". that does bother me

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by SkepticAlways View Post
                        Your hypothetical seems a bit heavy on the hyperbole.

                        I'm no expert on these matters, but, last time I checked a "super" is required to provide written eviction notice. A typical eviction includes a 5 day notice. I've never, ever, heard of 24 hours notice. Further, a typical eviction notice will include information on the grievance procedure. If you start the grievance process you cannot be evicted until its settled.

                        Do you think any court would find 24 hours, and no grievance process, a resonable scenario?

                        Also, nowadays, most public housing subsidies are based on a sliding scale. Your income goes up, your subsidy goes down. The notion that you make $701.00 dollars, $1.00 more than 'the limit', and suddenly you're tossed out doesn't ring true.

                        That said, I agree that welfare can be a noose dipped in parfume (as I heard it described once).
                        You really have to understand Connecticut. The liberal lawyers and unions control everything. The state is HEAVY in legalism and expects absolute perfection from everyone except themselves. Example: Where I work, we get letters of warning if any of the paperwork we send in has a date written in any other form other than mm/dd/yyyy (never mind the fact that all licenses and permits have dates in the form of mm/dd/yy). $701 made when you are in a $700 bracket can and WILL get you evicted. It would not be out of character for them. CT is that strict. They also expect things to be done immediately (though it usually takes them about 4 weeks at the least to get anything done), so giving only a 24 hour eviction notice would also be keeping in their character.
                        "If the police have to come get you, they're bringing an @$$ kicking with them!"
                        -Chris Rock

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by dlo View Post
                          wow. your hyper partisanship shines through yet again....

                          When a Republican governor makes cuts to public employee wages, you called it the right thing to do.
                          Yet in the passage above, when a Democrat makes cuts to public employee wages, you portray him as a traitor. He "turned on them"

                          Clearly, in the end, taking the issues independently isn't an option for you. Its simply a matter of "us vs. them"
                          Wow. Your inability to read what someone posts and understand it shines through .... again.

                          I think I clearly articulated the difference between Republicans asking for fairly reasonable give-backs and a Democrat controlled system raping the same people. Under a Republican governor, we gave back about $2k to 3k each three years ago. The union was upset about that and campaigned heavily for a Democrat governor. All during the campaign, he wooed the union vote and promised support for the union. The Republican candidate was honest and said he'd be asking for reasonable give-backs. The Democrat candidate won and is asking for a massive, unreasonable give-back. How would you wish to phrase it? Man, if you can't see my point, you're are obviously too mired in your own little "hyper partisanship" make-believe world where Democrats obviously crap out rainbows and do no wrong.

                          And I think I made the point that the Democrats are clearly in bed with the unions and now the unions should be figuring out it was little more than a one-night stand. The Democrats liked it as long as they ended up being satisfied the next morning (since they ensured the union would vote their way), but when times get bad, the Democrats could care least if the unions climaxed as long as the Democrats got their kicks during the night. Basically, the Democrats know that the next night they go "bar-hopping" for votes, they'll find another cheap one-night pick-up to take home that will give them satisfaction again.
                          "Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince" - Unknown Author
                          ______________________________________________

                          "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves." - Thomas Jefferson
                          ______________________________________________

                          “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.” - John Adams

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by dlo View Post
                            I recognize that its a pretty common theory - especially among conservatives - that welfare recipients largely vote Democrats into office....

                            Is there any kind of proof or facts of such a thing? Or is it simply one of those wedge arguments that makes for effective sound bites ?
                            Shouldn't have said welfare recipient, but rather people who abuse the system tend to vote or support Democrats...There are people who fall on hard times and need help, and that's fine (but as soon as they find work or something comes along once they're on their feet they're off the system), but you also have people who don't want to get off the system...

                            Just keeping it real...

                            Something I don't understand is Democrats voters, who "love" the way Democrats run the show, who move to conservative places and want to bring their Democrat views with them...If you like the way democrats do things so much stay where you're at or move to a place that is highly Democrat....
                            sigpic

                            Comment

                            MR300x250 Tablet

                            Collapse

                            What's Going On

                            Collapse

                            There are currently 6358 users online. 374 members and 5984 guests.

                            Most users ever online was 26,947 at 07:36 PM on 12-29-2019.

                            Welcome Ad

                            Collapse
                            Working...
                            X