5 ms·

No they should be 3rd class citizens. We live in the most wealthiest nation in the world. You have illegal aliens coming here with no wealth and no access to w

No they should be 3rd class citizens. We live in the most wealthiest nation in the world. You have illegal aliens coming here with no wealth and no access to welfare who manage to not only survive but also send money back to their families. Giving people with crippling financial education/management problems and worse access to luxuries via welfare checks is to put it politely (so that señor Dang wont ban-ish me) very silly. Its like giving free clean needles to addicts (oh wait), you're explicitly enabling and implicitly encouraging their dysfunction. I'm not a huge fan of welfare in its current form but if we are gonna do this and by this I mean steal money from the best capital allocators in society and give it to those that can't help themselves, at the very least it should come with a lot strings attached: 1. Heavily discourage dysfunction with penalties. 2. Heavily encourage KPIs such as reduced discretionary spending and improved efficiency. I can dive deeper into what would strings look like here but I think you guys get the gist of it. Giving checks to these people without any strings, is in my opinion the worst of both worlds. You're giving them just enough comfort to continue suffering in their current station in life.

pc_edwin 3y ago
P.S. If you don't think instant fast-food/grocery delivery is not a luxury, to put it politely (I really don't want to) I'm of the respectful* opinion that you might wrong here. Also if you think these people who are on welfare are mostly normal hard working expedient enterprising people who just happened to get a bad hand. Again I have politely* with all due respect* disagree. I grew up around poor people all my life, in India, in the UK and finally America. Almost always its their own doing. Almost always its people who can't help themselves. This is not usual false virtue signalling privilege checking either, when I say grew up around I mean family, neighbours, friends. People I lived with, people I grew up with and hanged around with. Its always either people who fall under these categories or people who have never interacted with the former that come up with these postmodern notions and utopian solutions.
- hotpotamus 3y ago
  > Almost always its people who can't help themselves. Well then maybe they need help from someone else.
  - pc_edwin 3y ago
    I don't disagree but it should proportional with strings attached. In a civilised society nobody should starve to death or die because they can't afford healthcare. But neither of these things should come without any strings. These people only exist because we fortunately live in a society where most of the rough edges are nerfed out. That doesn't mean we should be accepting or normalising this. It should be frowned upon and be something not to be proud of. Something like: You are poor. Your living off other people. You provide less than zero value to society. However, heres a path to redemption: If you commit to XYZ we will assist you in your journey to becoming worthy of participating in civilised society. If you chose to not commit then society reserves the right to forsake you. P.S. Lol I know this post is going to get downvoted to oblivion probably even flagged. Deep down you guys know I'm right but you'd rather live in a world with compounding dysfunction than accept uncomfortable truths.
    - hotpotamus 3y ago
      Supposedly we live in a world of compounding wealth rather than dysfunction, or so I am told, though I agree it seems a bit hard to believe. If we want to be start talking about uncomfortable truths, then I always think of all the other "productive" work these people could do - robbing homes/cars, kidnapping peoples' children for ransom, selling black market goods/drugs, etc... The things I might be inclined to take up if I was repeatedly told I wasn't fit for society. The police sure don't seem all that interested in working anymore either, so it may be the case that crime does pay after all.
      - dahfizz 3y ago
        So tired of this notion that poor people have no morals. Someone who is capable of kidnapping a child for ransom is seriously fucked up. Paying that person off with welfare so they don't "have" to resort to heinous crimes, as if that's the default, is unconscionable.
- SkipperCat 3y ago
  There are a lot of people who use government assistance responsibly. There is also a lot of people who abuse the system. But SNAP and other benefits are 1.9% of our Federal budget, so I'm not going to sweat too much about waste/fraud/abuse. We need to fix the inequalities that remove hardworking middle class values from our society. That's the real problem. Until that happens, I'm not going to demand anyone suffer or go hungry (even if there is fraud in the system). I say this not because I'm trying to virtue signal. I say it because its just such a tiny amount of money and not worth fighting over. Also, FWIW, I live in NYC. I see people use SNAP benefits to buy the stupidest things. Its frustrating but the alternative just seems a lot worse.

pc_edwin 3y ago

P.S. If you don't think instant fast-food/grocery delivery is not a luxury, to put it politely (I really don't want to) I'm of the respectful* opinion that you might wrong here. Also if you think these people who are on welfare are mostly normal hard working expedient enterprising people who just happened to get a bad hand. Again I have politely* with all due respect* disagree. I grew up around poor people all my life, in India, in the UK and finally America. Almost always its their own doing. Almost always its people who can't help themselves. This is not usual false virtue signalling privilege checking either, when I say grew up around I mean family, neighbours, friends. People I lived with, people I grew up with and hanged around with. Its always either people who fall under these categories or people who have never interacted with the former that come up with these postmodern notions and utopian solutions.

hotpotamus 3y ago
> Almost always its people who can't help themselves. Well then maybe they need help from someone else.
- pc_edwin 3y ago
  I don't disagree but it should proportional with strings attached. In a civilised society nobody should starve to death or die because they can't afford healthcare. But neither of these things should come without any strings. These people only exist because we fortunately live in a society where most of the rough edges are nerfed out. That doesn't mean we should be accepting or normalising this. It should be frowned upon and be something not to be proud of. Something like: You are poor. Your living off other people. You provide less than zero value to society. However, heres a path to redemption: If you commit to XYZ we will assist you in your journey to becoming worthy of participating in civilised society. If you chose to not commit then society reserves the right to forsake you. P.S. Lol I know this post is going to get downvoted to oblivion probably even flagged. Deep down you guys know I'm right but you'd rather live in a world with compounding dysfunction than accept uncomfortable truths.
  - hotpotamus 3y ago
    Supposedly we live in a world of compounding wealth rather than dysfunction, or so I am told, though I agree it seems a bit hard to believe. If we want to be start talking about uncomfortable truths, then I always think of all the other "productive" work these people could do - robbing homes/cars, kidnapping peoples' children for ransom, selling black market goods/drugs, etc... The things I might be inclined to take up if I was repeatedly told I wasn't fit for society. The police sure don't seem all that interested in working anymore either, so it may be the case that crime does pay after all.
    - dahfizz 3y ago
      So tired of this notion that poor people have no morals. Someone who is capable of kidnapping a child for ransom is seriously fucked up. Paying that person off with welfare so they don't "have" to resort to heinous crimes, as if that's the default, is unconscionable.
SkipperCat 3y ago
There are a lot of people who use government assistance responsibly. There is also a lot of people who abuse the system. But SNAP and other benefits are 1.9% of our Federal budget, so I'm not going to sweat too much about waste/fraud/abuse. We need to fix the inequalities that remove hardworking middle class values from our society. That's the real problem. Until that happens, I'm not going to demand anyone suffer or go hungry (even if there is fraud in the system). I say this not because I'm trying to virtue signal. I say it because its just such a tiny amount of money and not worth fighting over. Also, FWIW, I live in NYC. I see people use SNAP benefits to buy the stupidest things. Its frustrating but the alternative just seems a lot worse.