WELFARE ABUSE: 32 years old Austin, TX welfare recipient says working is stupid.

This is this administrations idea of accomplishment.....the one thing they do well, tax and spend

http://safeshare.tv/w/csrqsTAmSx

yep, scammers come in all income brackets

though Im not sure this woman is really on welfare, just cause she calls into a radios show claiming to be



the philosophy that if someone is dumb enough to leave their door open they deserve to be robbed, if someone is dumb enough to work for five dollrs an hour so I can make millions in profits, if someone is dumb enough for me to scam, they deserved being scammed

is deplorable,, and little to do with economic status or income source

Since when does any presidential administration control the morality or attitude of a welfare recipient?

You must be getting desperate if you are wanting to use this particular case in an attempt to sling mud at the current presidential administration.

To take from one because it is thought that his own industry and that of his father’s has acquired too much, in order to spare to others, who, or whose fathers, have not exercised equal industry and skill, is to violate arbitrarily the first principle of association—the guarantee to every one of a free exercise of his industry and the fruits acquired by it.

Thomas Jefferson

seems they don't make Presidents as they used to!


“Do not blame Caesar, blame the people of Rome who have rejoiced in their loss of freedom who hail him when he speaks in the Forum of more security, more living fatly at the expense of the industrious. – Cicero


When the people find that they can vote themselves money, that will herald the end of the republic." -- Founding Father Benjamin Franklin


There is no virtue in compulsory government charity, and there is no virtue in advocating it. A politician who portrays himself as "caring" and "sensitive" because he wants to expand the government's charitable programs is merely saying that he's willing to try to do good with other people's money. Well, who isn't? And a voter who takes pride in supporting such programs is telling us that he'll do good with his own money – if a gun is held to his head. ~ P.J. O'Rourke

It's hard to argue with the figures under the present admin in regards to people now on entitlement programs.

Sure, the economy sucks, but it didn't just happen that way, it was created. Congress has failed in its duty to protect and defend, have given over their powers to the executive who has caused this mess, stir in a failed healthcare law, record high taxes, 2 wars and countless other involvements, scandals, crony capitalism and corruption at the highest levels, a DOJ who is supposed to see it doesn't happen or is prosecuted when it does (which Holder does not), a POTUS who wields power he does not possess under the Constitution......

Yeah, I'd say Obozo can own this one too. He is the POTUS, and with such things rampant to extreme under his watch, he is failing miserably in that capacity.

We have just concluded the 5th fiscal year since President Obama took office. During those five years, the federal government has spent a total $3.7 trillion on approximately 80 different means-tested poverty and welfare programs. The common feature of means-tested assistance programs is that they are graduated based on a persons income and, in contrast to programs like Social Security or Medicare, they are a free benefit and not paid into by the recipient," says the minority side of the Senate Budget Committee.

"The enormous sum spent on means-tested assistance is nearly five times greater than the combined amount spent on NASA, education, and all federal transportation projects over that time. ($3.7 trillion is not even the entire amount spent on federal poverty support, as states contribute more than $200 billion each year to this federal nexus primarily in the form of free low-income health care.)

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/report-us-spent-37-trillion-welfare-over-last-5-years_764582.html

No one is wanting to use this particular case in an attempt to sling mud at the current presidential administration. Just simply wanting to commend them on a job well done.
It's an amazement to me how the government can print fiat money so fast.
After all, It's not real money.

last I checked, children CANT And shouldn't have to pay into the system, but their parents will spend the majority of their lives doing so

not to mention the time and energy they contribute towards their minimum wage jobs that allows someone else to line their pockets enough to pay those taxes,,


so its not exactly true to say the recipients don't pay in,, they pay in towards others needs too,,and they pay in time and effort that permits others to pay in,

its a responsibility americans should own proudly, to care about other americans in bad times, because they may be THAT AMERICAN sometime during their life

even religion says "god helps those who help themselves"... i believe that and i'm not religious... but i won't help people who lie and cheat, and just expect good people to help them...if they show they ae trying to not be part of the problem, then i would help, maybe...

unfortunately, without personally being involved in another's life, we rarely know if someone in need 'lies' or 'cheats',,, we just know they are in need, or their children,,,,

Oh? What religion would that be?

That quoted expression isn't in the Tanakh (a.k.a Old Testament) or in the New Testament.

It was the 17th-Century English politician Algernon Sidney who originated the expression "God helps those who help themselves".

so why you asking me then?

The problem comes with defining the term 'need' everyone on welfare claims to be in 'need' and honestly probably even the scammer's think that 'need' is real, and that it is someone else's responsibility to take care of that 'need'. According to the government growing up my family was in 'need' that was because my parents made less than $19,000/yr and I have 5 brothers and 4 sisters. However, my mom voted against welfare and as a result refused to accept assistance, and never thought it was anyone else's responsibility to take care of the 'needs' she created. Did we starve? nope. We couldn't afford to live in the city, so we moved to a smaller town where it was cheaper to live, feeding 10 kids was a big bill, so instead of getting on food stamps, we again moved to a smaller house, and then with the savings from rent bought chickens and a cow, and then 3 pigs, we had one cow, that we would milk, 50 chickens, so eggs we had plenty of, we bred our cow, and then when the baby was big enough we butchered it for meat, we also butchered our hogs, when we ran out of meat from one we butchered the other. I started out in the city, ended up living on a mini-wannabe farm.

My point is this, if you can't meet your 'needs' it's not the government's responsibility to meet them for you. Instead it is your responsibility to change what your 'needs' are.

Currently there is a program to provide free cell phones- that is NOT a NEED

There are programs to provide a free car-That is NOT a NEED, take the bus, transit, or ride bike.

There are programs to "help pay rent"-Housing is a Need but not housing in places like San Diego, Seattle, New York-It should be that families responsibility to find a cheaper place to stay, if that means moving to another state so be it.

I agree that Food is a need-But that doesn't mean that Carl's Jr should accept Food stamps(or EBT), Sorry FAST FOOD is NOT A NEED.

If the family has done all they can to change their needs, and they are still in need, I have no problem with giving it to those that TRULY NEED it.

First of all, not everyone can simply purchase land that is zoned for farming (if inside an incorporated area) or live in an area that is suitable for farming.

Second, cell phones are used for the purpose of making contact with emergency services, doctors' offices and any other needed services. You try living without any kind of phone service during the 21st Century while living in the USA, and see how well that you do.

Third, public transportation is useful if you live where public transportation is available whenever you need it. However, when you live in a rural community, your transportation is often limited to private vehicles. Also, I'd like to see someone ride a bicycle during foul weather.

First, we didn't buy any land, we rented, which if you compare rural areas with city ones is MUCH MUCH MUCH cheaper.

Second.
Phones are used, not CELL phones specifically, They already have programs to provide free house phones...they don't need one for cell phones.

Third. even in areas where public transit there are other ways of getting private transportation without a government-sponsored program, there are charities, church programs, and others as well that do help, also if you're in a smaller town, chances are you know someone who may be willing to help.

Worse case scenario, if their not working, find some work, if this means 'lowering' themselves to mowing lawns, doing dishes, splitting wood, or hell even holding a car wash like teens do when they need money for something than they should suck up their pride and do what it takes save money, and purchase their own transportation.

If they are working, maybe try selling something, of course if they have exhausted all these means, and still are struggling then I don't mind them receiving money, but I don't think that money should come for free,

Meaning if they receiving the money, they should be REQUIRED to do something for it, if that means taking care of the grass at the local park, attending a Resume writing class, or something else.

Cell phones aren't a need..they are a convenience that Americans have come to think of as a need.

Also how is getting 250 "free" texts (most tax payers don't think they are free) a month a necessity? Do we text 911 if we have an emergency?

And besides that Carlos Slim (a Mexican) is making a killing off those phones. Even the Huffington Post was critical of him making money off the poor. (as if the poor pay for those phones)

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/10/carlos-slim-obamaphones_n_1955929.html

cell phones aren't a need unless you are on welfare

this is why, if one is on welfare, often times, they STILL Have to work,,,if they are looking to better their situation to find BETTER Work,, they do need a way to contact employers when not at home (Which taxpayers don't want them to be if they are on the taxpayers dollar),,,thus, a cell phone is very important as a resource to GET OFF OF WELFARE,,,


as to the rest, people are confused about what matters ,, it is not about INCOME exclusively,, it is about RESOURCES,,,

someone can not be working at all, have investments, have savings, have family, have friends, etc,,,,,all these things are resources which are AS GOOD AS MONEY

so, in ISaacs case, obviously, despite income, that family had RESURCES

two parents,, meaning one can work at an earned income job and the other can work caring for children and animals

savings to pick up and move, moving expenses, first and last month and security, and farm animals to boot


,,,its always interesting to note those who are boastful (not necessarily Isaac) about how they never resorted to welfare also saying they qualified

you would be surprised what does or doesn't qualify , and resources are considered as well as able bodied adults involved

most would also be surprised to learn how many are 'working' that are in need of and receiving welfare,,,,,,as opposed to just sitting around and getting a check






its a needed program because millions of people without ANY RESOURCES will fall upon hard times and need help, and in a country this wealthy, there is no excuse (in my mind) for them not to receive it,,,especially in return for WORKING And contributing to society in the many ways that the working poor and single parents and elderly have and do every day

According to Deuteronomy 26:12 of the Old Testament (a.k.a Tanakh), tithes are supposed to be used to take care of the physical needs of people trapped in physical poverty.

If churches were to use tithes in the way dictated by the Bible, then the U.S. government could get out of the welfare business.

that command was given about a specific year (The third year) to a specific people about an abundance GOD had given them and what was expected in return, it was a people who were as a culture tithing and farming and setting aside the ABUNDANT food to feed others



I do agree that if more went to and contributed to churches, and more churches could therefore distribute that contribution to help others,, there would not be AS MUCH A need for welfare



I think in a culture of multiple religious and non religious lifestyles , and technology, and just different environment altogether than that of the CHOSEN in their CHOSEN land,,,,there will always be some need for government (people) to have this set aside for those amongst them in hard times