"Entitlement programs" - please define them.

[Ciscokid]

Originally Posted by Storm

Cisco, nobody has answered me yet, so I'll ask you directly: Should people with psychological disabilities be counted as "able-bodied" and expected to work?

I don't think so. I don't want someone who has schizophrenia flying my plane.

[Storm]

Thank you for answering, I wholeheartedly agree.

[mball1297]

Originally Posted by Ciscokid

You are misrepresenting me. I don't deny there are people who clearly should be on government support and they shouldn't be made to feel bad about it.

I'm saying from MY experience I've seen a lot of people on it who don't NEED to be on it.

No, I'm not misrepresenting you. As I said, if that's your experience you should open your eyes. It's not that hard to find many people who need to be on government assistance.

What did you eat/drink before typing this nonsense? The FDA should be contacted.

Exactly. I just wish that meant that you saw that it's just showing the ridiculousness of what you wrote. It's nonsense, which is exactly what I was trying to show. Unfortunately, I fear that you don't realize it's exactly what you said in other words.

So if someone is wealthy they're a criminal?

You said "Don't take money [by force] from a wealthy person and divy it out to others. Life isn't fair, some people are rich and some aren't. ".

First, it's called taxes. Everyone has money taken from them by force. The question is how much and what to do with it.

Second, my point was that you seem to think that it's OK to be rich through capitalism, which rewards lying, cheating and stealing, and it's OK for life to be unfair in that way (as in making people unequal), but somehow it's not OK for life to be unfair when the method makes people equals.

Third, no one's saying there shouldn't be rich people. There should. And they should also pay accordingly in taxes. They can still have $100,000 in the bank and 3 houses and 4 cars, as long as they're paying their fair share of taxes.

Basically, there are two situations. One where rich people have to pay extra in taxes so that poor people have the basics. The other where the rich people don't have to pay extra and those poor people don't even have the basics. The first is seen as unfair to the rich people by willfully ignorant people. The second is seen as unfair to the poor people by most people, especially since it's capitalism that makes many of those people poor in the first place.

I don't know what the ratio is, I'm just saying the people I run across who are low income generally put themselves there.

That's why I say you need to open your eyes and expand your experience before coming to such rash conclusions.

[sdl]

I just found this sight while researching entitlement program information and have read almost all of the posts here on the topic of entitlements and wanted to put in my two cents worth.

I believe in the whole teach a man to fish idea. I believe there is a job out there for everyone disabled or not. It's just that a lot of people are actually lazy and believe everyone else owes them something.

My husband and I had been married three years before I went back to work and when I did the only job I could find was a minimum wage job. I had no problem with working for minimum wage. What I had a problem with was my husbands sister who had three kids and another on the way and a mother-in-law who felt it was mine and my husbands duty to help support them.

My sister-in-laws husband worked but didn't make enough to support them. Solution to their problem! Quit having kids. Husband gets a second job. Or here is a novel idea....wife gets a job. When I suggested she get a job her response was, "I would rather stay home than work a minimum wage job." So, as someone else wrote in an earlier post about "a hot and a cot" I agree with them. If people are not willing to help themselves how is it my responsibility to help them?

[mball1297]

Originally Posted by sdl

I just found this sight while researching entitlement program information and have read almost all of the posts here on the topic of entitlements and wanted to put in my two cents worth.

I believe in the whole teach a man to fish idea. I believe there is a job out there for everyone disabled or not. It's just that a lot of people are actually lazy and believe everyone else owes them something.

My husband and I had been married three years before I went back to work and when I did the only job I could find was a minimum wage job. I had no problem with working for minimum wage. What I had a problem with was my husbands sister who had three kids and another on the way and a mother-in-law who felt it was mine and my husbands duty to help support them.

My sister-in-laws husband worked but didn't make enough to support them. Solution to their problem! Quit having kids. Husband gets a second job. Or here is a novel idea....wife gets a job. When I suggested she get a job her response was, "I would rather stay home than work a minimum wage job." So, as someone else wrote in an earlier post about "a hot and a cot" I agree with them. If people are not willing to help themselves how is it my responsibility to help them?

Ah, great. Yet another person who thinks their experience represents an entire group of people. If you believe there's a job out there for everyone, you need to get out into the world and learn a few things.

[enchanted_one1975]

Originally Posted by sdl

I just found this sight while researching entitlement program information and have read almost all of the posts here on the topic of entitlements and wanted to put in my two cents worth.

I believe in the whole teach a man to fish idea. I believe there is a job out there for everyone disabled or not. It's just that a lot of people are actually lazy and believe everyone else owes them something.

My husband and I had been married three years before I went back to work and when I did the only job I could find was a minimum wage job. I had no problem with working for minimum wage. What I had a problem with was my husbands sister who had three kids and another on the way and a mother-in-law who felt it was mine and my husbands duty to help support them.

My sister-in-laws husband worked but didn't make enough to support them. Solution to their problem! Quit having kids. Husband gets a second job. Or here is a novel idea....wife gets a job. When I suggested she get a job her response was, "I would rather stay home than work a minimum wage job." So, as someone else wrote in an earlier post about "a hot and a cot" I agree with them. If people are not willing to help themselves how is it my responsibility to help them?

You need to tell the folks in Northeast Ohio that there are jobs waiting for them all. They apparently have not gotten that news yet. Who takes care of the three kids while their pregnant mommy is out flipping burgers for minimum wage? Maybe there are jobs for the kids too...