|
Or Become A New Monthly Donor Or
Give What You Can
Posted on 07/29/2011 7:37:42 AM PDT by econjack
Put me in charge . . .
Put me in charge of food stamps. I'd get rid of Lone Star cards; no cash for Ding Dongs or Ho Ho's, just money for 50-pound bags of rice and beans, blocks of cheese and all the powdered milk you can haul away. If you want steak and frozen pizza, then get a job.
Put me in charge of Medicaid. The first thing I'd do is to get women Norplant birth control implants or tubal ligations. Then, we'll test recipients for drugs, alcohol, and nicotine and document all tattoos and piercings. If you want to reproduce or use drugs, alcohol, smoke or get tats and piercings, then get a job.
Put me in charge of government housing. Ever live in a military barracks? You will maintain our property in a clean and good state of repair. Your "home" will be subject to inspections anytime and possessions will be inventoried. If you want a plasma TV or Xbox 360, then get a job and your own place.
In addition, you will either present a check stub from a job each week or you will report to a "government" job. It may be cleaning the roadways of trash, painting and repairing public housing, whatever we find for you. We will sell your 22 inch rims and low profile tires and your blasting stereo and speakers and put that money toward the common good.
Before you write that I've violated someone's rights, realize that all of the above is voluntary. If you want our money, accept our rules.. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.
If we are expected to pay for other people's mistakes we should at least attempt to make them learn from their bad choices. The current system rewards them for continuing to make bad choices.
AND While you are on Govt subsistence, you no longer can VOTE! Yes that is correct. For you to vote would be a conflict of interest. You will voluntarily remove yourself from voting while you are receiving a Govt welfare check. If you want to vote, then get a job.
Amen! Alleluia!
It is only extreme in its delivery. Change how it is presented, and bam, it is almost a mirror image of FDRs Civilian Conservation Corps. Even that bastion of liberalism didn't just hand out money. Just say we are returning to FDRs programs to deal with welfare and see if the Dems can argue against it.
We could use as the spokesperson for the program a person with a job that has to use a wheelchair to do his/her work and pay taxes. (FDR reference).
If you want our money, accept our rules.. Before you say that this would be "demeaning" and ruin their "self esteem," consider that it wasn't that long ago that taking someone else's money for doing absolutely nothing was demeaning and lowered self esteem.
There was a time that the goal of the "Progressive" movement was to teach people how to better themselves.
Of course, that was back when Progressives were more interested in improving society than in getting the government to pay for it. It's so much easier to buy votes once you give up on trying to convince people to change, and spend your time on explaining why every problem is someone else's fault.
Require all welfare or other recipients of public assistance to use E-Verify to establish their bonafides. This will be especially hard on illegals.
I don’t see any controversy. The cost to administer your ideas would still be lower than the amount wasted on deadbeats collecting welfare for years, nay, decades.
Lot of good things going on in Waco these days including Ted Nugent’s ranch is nearby.
|
Excellent. I’d like to see it implemented today.
Aside from the ‘reproduction line’, agree with you wholeheartedly. The government should not be paying for sterlization or contraceptives.
Or unwed mothers children.
In San Antonio yesterday it was announced that after January 1st, 2012, no smoking will be allowed inside Public Housing, nor within 20 feet of the buildings.
Some people in Public Housing liked the new rule.
Some people were complaining on the news last night that it was a violation of their rights for the Housing Authority to implement this. Also, one guy said that the government will have to build gazebos, or structures for Public Housing recipients to smoke in so that in inclement weather, they can smoke.
It will be interesting to see how it is enforced.
b
Rather than norplant, I think we can achieve the desired result by simply cutting welfare for each added child. Get $100 total for one child, $80 total for two children, and so on. Make an extra mouth to feed a burden again and people will stop having kids they can’t afford.
good to go with this one
operating manual should be about one page
The children aren’t responsible for their situation.
I agree. Normal, working people don’t get a raise every time they have another child, but deadbeats do!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.