When used properly as temporary support for a transition period between jobs or layoffs (shit happens), it can be a great thing. It is currently abused to the highest extent, just as the fed gov’t does with any power it gets its hands on.
6 Likes
I can agree in some ways with that. For veterans such as myself, siblings and others I have served with directly, the closest we got to on the ground combat was the coast of Iraq. Understand that the people doing these things are the minority, not the majority of those in service. Particularly National Guard members and Reserves, I have met very few active duty who would ever cross those lines.
With that being said, I do not believe the government should be paying for any transitional surgeries as that is not the responsibility of the federal government. Such things place a service member in a non-deployable status due to the need for hormone therapy that is not always available in deployment locations. Given that this would negatively impact mission readiness, there is no reason to ever allow this let alone pay for it.
The armed services have always been held to a specific standard and regulations relaxing is why we seem to be having so many problems of this sort within the branches. If you do not like the rules and regulations, don’t join. It’s that simple. Those are the entitlements I would say need to be addressed. Not the pension of those who earned it through years of service.
4 Likes
My personal experience is that there are people on SNAP eating better meals than I do as a person not on welfare, and that is a very tempting situation to stay in.
The government is far to complacent about throwing money at problems rather than coming up with solutions. The #1 problem that I see is that people need marketable skills far more than money in order to survive. And I think that would need to be part of a whole-life makeover for people who have been in the system long-term.
8 Likes
As it was supposed to be
1 Like
Social Security needs to be phased out and people need to be allowed to save their own money and get incentives to do so for their retirement.
Veterans benefits are not an entitlement. They are a retirement program for people who were injured in the line of duty serving their country.
Social Security at this point has never been an entitlement people put money into it and therefore just ask for their money back and they usually don’t get it all back. For instance, my son died at the age of 38 after working for 20 years. The government got all his money.
In fact, more than 20% of the country dies before ever collecting Social Security.
5 Likes
Bureaucratic Drift
The original intent of pensions was compensation for anyone in the military who contracted a disease or was wounded in service.
If a person’s life wasn’t at risk and was compensated fairly during service then they should have no special privileges. If a person wants free payments, then negotiate these luxury benefits in the private sector. Otherwise, there’s no reason for citizens to pay something for nothing in perpetuity.
1 Like
The Veteran’s Pension program is actually a program available to service members who were discharged under Other than Honorable conditions, meet both income and disability requirements, and is needs based. Personally, I dont believe any veteran discharged under Other than Honorable conditions should be able to utilize the government programs. This is different than the Veteran Disability and Compensation awarded to veteran’s injured while active and the Retirement program from active duty.
The VA could use some reform in ways as well. Perhaps if we put the money from some unnecessary programs into others, we’d have money for better care.
1 Like
Probably why the Retirement program for the military was shifted to be more along the lines of a 401k with matching contributions.
Either way, anyone who goes active duty accepts that their life could be in danger at any time if the need arises and we pay into the taxes to recieve those payments just like everyone else. Military pay is never enough to give you a cushioned life, but you get by. I think in some aspects we will agree to disagree on this one. Thank you for the input and added knowledge, the valuable perspective gives me a bit more to ponder on
1 Like
The purpose of the military is to train to deploy and defend your country. The peacetime army is filled with fraud, waste and abuse. The real solution is to go back to national guard and reserves to fill a war time military. It is not a full-time job to carry rifle in the woods. The rest of this discussion is no US military personnel in foreign countries unless agreed to by all involved and completely funded by foreign government. The rest of the discussion will involve who is allowed to use deadly force in the USA. Most of the federal “investigation” three letter agencies should never be allowed to arrest anyone. They investigate, then present to judge for arrest warrant, then arrest carried out by ELECTED, never appointed, law enforcement officers.
1 Like
We also need mandatory Drug testing for those applying and already in the program and recertification. The amount of snap benefits being sold for drugs is ridiculous.
6 Likes
Thats a great point! I wholeheartedly agree with this as well. To recieve any government benefits such as these, this should be mandatory and enforced.
2 Likes
YES…limit amount of time it can be used. Like 5yrs. on
5yrs OFF. ONLY pay for limit of children like 2.
ALSO…no “anchor babies”. people come to this
country - have tons of kids just to get welfare.
We should also allow 18-29yr old SINGLE adults
no children US citizens apply. will help them get
a leg up affording a home or groceries.
2 Likes
Limits on welfare:
- Limit time on welfare for people capable of working.
- Verify with stringent testing if someone is in a permanent state of handi-cap that makes them unable to work (like a quadriplegic)
- Ensure that foods included in the SNAP program are healthy, minimally processed, foods. For example, when walking through the grocery store, I’m disgusted that our tax dollars are paying for people to buy chips and cookies. When we pay for junk food, then we also end up paying more in health insurance coverage for these same people because they (and their children) are becoming obese, which leads to innumerable other health complications and additional medications being pushed and again paid for by our tax dollars. If tax dollars are paying for it, it should not be luxurious. For many people, making it a little more uncomfortable would get them off of it faster. I know several people on food stamps and have worked with many more from impoverished communities that eat better than I do working a 40-hour salaried blue-collar job.
- Do away with paying for air conditioning. Any newly built government housing should be built in a manner that allows for windows to be open and drafts to come through. Older Victorian era homes were built this way and people have survived for thousands of years without this modern convenience.
- Government stipend cell phones should cease to exist.
- For anyone on welfare, surprise on the spot drug tests should be mandatory, at random, at least 3 times per year. If drugs are found in their system, welfare stops. If you can afford drugs, you can afford to not be on welfare.
- Mandatory classes on a monthly basis (I know some HUD properties do require the already) that teach skills for success in life: resume building, customer service, appropriate interactions with colleagues and how to respond to people you don’t like, how to raise chickens and grow a garden to supply much of your own food. I’d be in favor of paying for seeds, over excessively generous SNAP programs.
Much of this will sound harsh to many, but before the government took over, neighbors took care of neighbors and churches helped people in and out of their congregation. Let the people decide how to use their own money and who is truly in need of help, instead of taxing us to death to pay for things that make it easier for people to be complacent with government assistance and interference.
7 Likes
100% amen to that!Each and every single one of these things! I am a firm believer that as harsh as some may feel this is, it is because of these extra allowances that people sit on welfare longer and longer.
2 Likes
children growing up with parents of this mindset are generally also very neglected, not only mentally but to some degree physically, and in more drastic cases these children are abused or subject to drug abuse all around them. cutting off those parents cuts off those children, our society needs a complete overhaul before we just start starving children so their parents won’t get food stamps and assistance with electricity bills.
after we’ve stopped poisoning the kids with flouride, and start to educate them, we will naturally see drastic reductions in welfare.
save the kids, and they won’t need welfare when they are adults.
3 Likes
I totally agree! They should have programs to help parents achieve goals. They did have welfare-to-work but the welfare workers pick who gets the help. If they had an an issue of jealousy you would not be picked. Just keeping it real… As i believe, I wasn’t the right race. My sister in law, who is hispanic, had previously been completely set up by the welfare dept in Stanislaus County, CA. I mean completely. They made her an time to get her GED all she had to do is show up. Then too, they set her up immediately with a job at the Assessors office, with no work experience .whatsoever. And arranged her child care. They did all this for her! She was not on aid for that long at all!
In 1999, after leaving an abusive husband, having 7 kids, I applied and received afdc. I informed them i wanted to get in the same “program” as my sister in law. But they told me they don’t do that. But they did and other hispanic people i knew went through the same “program.” They would not help me do anything. And the fact my ex was affiliated with Social Service did not help either. He turned me in for welfare fraud every 6 months! Getting welfare was a complete nightmare! If i would have gotten CHOSEN for welfare to work, it may not have been so bad. If they did that “program” for ALL it would have been so much easier to get off.
That program needs a complete reformation, and i think it should first start by firing those in charge of it now. Obviously they do not know what they are doing.
3 Likes
I don’t think they’re having babies for an extra 3,000 tax credit, the child benefit payments, brought in in 2021, are meant to alleviate child poverty which existed long before it.
2 Likes
Not meant to add any debate on this, but I do know a tidbit off the top of my head related: 2022 child poverty increased 2022 vs 2021, and 2023 vs 2022. 2023 stats came out in september.
Figure 5 in the link below shows that:
1 Like
I agree with most of your premise, especially not allowing any immigrants, migrants, illegal aliens, and foreigners here on visa or by temporary protected status should not be allowed access to our Welfare system. However, limiting the time allowed on Welfare is not the answer to fixing this issue. A lot of single mothers that rely on the system are actually held back by the rules and need to be helped instead of punished when they try to improve their situation. For example: single mothers who get a great raise at their part-time job and suddenly make more than the arbitrary adjusted poverty level, will lose their Medicaid coverage. They are then referred to the Obamacare insurance page where they see that they can’t afford to pay for medical insurance. Therefore, a lot of them choose to work less so they can still remain on Medicaid. Medical Insurance is not affordable for a lot of single parent families. My suggestion is simple. Make welfare a graduated system that allows low income families to pay a proportion of the cost (maybe 25% to 50% of the amount over the poverty level) of healthcare and other benefits until they reach an income level where they become self-sustaining. This would make working more a benefit to their lives and not a punishment.
3 Likes
I will propose to amend:
Limit SNAP, WIC, TANF to only citizens of the US who meet the following criteria:
Orphan, widow, married couples below the poverty line (double single poverty line metric since two people are considered).
This policy adjustment will reverse LBJs model cities impact on the nuclear family
2 Likes