Posted on 11/12/2015 3:16:36 AM PST by Drango
See post 39. Yes, social security is a welfare program just like AFDC. We don’t like to call it such, but the mechanics of it are similar to AFDC or food stamps. The qualifications are somewhat different such as a minimum age and the lack of means testing. But ultimately its a government wealth redistribution scheme which lives or dies at the pleasure of the political class.
Of course my earlier post was meant to be ironic. Restricting welfare eligibility based on otherwise legal personal behaviour is a slippery slope. Today its restricting smoking for those in public housing. Tomorrow the same restrictions will be applied to recipients of SS or medicare.
Just ban it already! For Christ sake, you can’t smoke in public, you can’t smoke in your car, in your house, they don’t like you smoking outside, then why in the hell don’t they just ban it?
If they are in public housing then you can bet they have an EBT card. They should be eating beans, cheese and peanut butter for protein, the way it used to be.
I’m feeding 5 people and can barely fill up a grocery cart for the week, and believe me there isn’t much meat in there, and on Friday night at the local Wal-Mart the illegals are lined up in their brand new buckle jeans and aeropostle shirts and brand new shoes with fresh haircuts with grocery carts lined up slap full of meat. It’s all I can do not to start spitting on all of them and screaming for them to get the hell out of my country and stealing from us!
And by the way, my son speaks Spanish and told me they make fun us poor white folks who can’t afford the clothes and groceries they have because we are paying for theres. That’s why I don’t shop on Friday night. So I don’t go to jail.
It is hard to whine about the nanny state when they are living in housing provided by that same nanny state.
First time in my life that I agree on a smoking ban. Bravo, if they don’t like the ban, move the @#4% out!
I agree and concede, but in the context of the post just who receives the SS payments are those who paid into it lifetime, albeit the gov’t can change policy whimsically.
Slippery slope indeed!
“Private apartments can ban tobacco use, so why shouldn’t the government have the same right?”
Because #1. private owners will enforce the rule and the government will bill us for it, but will not enforce it. #2. where do you draw the line on what will be the next rule against something that residents have been doing in their domiciles all their lives?
Can you see the government enforcing a non-smoking rule on the general population of public housing projects? I mean, really?
The scene writes itself: Welfare single mom with five kids that don’t look at all related to each other on the news kicked out into the street by (you fill in the gov’t entity) for smoking one lousy cigarette inside her apartment when she was stressed out because her foodstamps didn’t arrive in time to feed these sweet children...
Of those of us who rent apartments from private enterprise, we non-smokers seek out units where smoking is prohibited because that is a personal preference we can afford. Those who live where the gov’t will pay a big chunk of their rent don’t have that luxury.
As to when the gov’t will have enough control on how people that receive benefits live their lives, that will always be just this next law. And then if it’s good enough for those welfare folks, you’ll be next.
What gets to me is how can people that need me to help them pay their rent and for groceries afford to smoke or use illicit drugs in the first place? That’s not policed and never will be, and other than blood or urine testing, how could it be? The gov’t would need to enter apartments to take samples of the paint on the walls to see if tobacco has been smoked in there.
Once someone get hooked on a government program or subsidy, said government gets to call the shots.
Total control/over your body and soul/pack a 9 in my pants for when it's time to roll. < /EPMD >
[[While I do not enjoy being around cigarette & cigar smoke, I predict that this idea “will not end wellâ€.]]
It will end just like big government plans it to end- with a whimper by the smokers- The government has persecuted smokers for a long time now- with massive price increases, which affect the poor the most- those who are typically the most addicted- by causing them to have to pay most of their money if they can’t quit- they are now ostracized and looked down on like dope fiends (Yet the gubmint pays dope fiends to get drugs- while leaving cigarette smokers out in the cold by forcing them to pay massive prices- )
Nop- smokers have simply complied with everything the gubmint has thrown at them and they will simply comply with this as well- We’ve seen proof of compliance all across the country already- many cities don’t allow smoking in public housing any l ogner- and people just simply complied
unless you are licking the walls you are not taking in carcinogens- Carcinogens are airbourne for the most part- once the carcinogens settle on something, it becomes lodged and stuck in a sticky residue-
You will however still have the smell of tobacco- but the smell isn’t toxic-
Just don’t lick the walks and you’ll be fine
[[WHO is going to enforce a “no-smoking†law in those enclaves?]]
Yes-
W.H.O will eventually be the ones to enforce it- our dear leader is working overtime trying to put us under international rule-
But I nthe meantime- police will enforce it when they get complaints from non smokers, and you will very likely, very soon, see smokers arrested for ‘assault’- or ‘child abuse’ because they smoke
Sound far fetched? They have after this for awhile now, and like every liberal agenda- they will not stop until they get it-
[[What is next? No allowing BBQ in public Housing?]]
Believe it or not- they HAVE gone after folks for doing just that- a woman with asthma tried to have a ‘consummate bbquer arrested for aggravating her asthma- it I believe went to trial, but I’m not sure the outcome
When you take away a smokers cigarettes they get very angry, they lash out. This will affect the neighboring communities.
What they’re going to fail at doing here is reducing heathcare costs for their always dependent voter base.’’’
Butt it’s a tingly leg moment for them lala landers. Lots of free time and plenty to eat poses the real threat health wise and otherwise.
In an unrelated story—shares of menthol cigarettes spiked sharply. . .
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.