Cutting welfare is a step back for Civil Rights
By laglen
@laglen (19759)
United States
March 1, 2011 1:51pm CST
I dont know about you but I am so done with this dumb as5 race card. According to the Congressional Black Caucus, the budget cuts proposed by Republicans is a step back for Civil Rights.
"It's really especially poignant that this year during Black History Month, the Republican leadership has proposed a budget for fiscal year 2011 that will fall most heavily, mind you, on the backs of the most vulnerable in our society: African Americans, Latinos, and poor, those who have been shut of the American dream," said Rep. Barbara Lee (D-Calif.), who described the cuts as ill-timed and destructive.
http://thehill.com/blogs/floor-action/house/146633-black-caucus-members-say-gop-budget-a-step-backwards-for-black-americans
Are you kiddin me?
ill - timed - we are flippin broke.
Survival of the fittest. Trust me when I tell you I am not among them but I will go out fighting and working my butt off to survive WITHOUT the government "helping".
so.... are you buyin what they're sellin?
3 people like this
13 responses
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
2 Mar 11
"Survival of the fittest."
That's right laglen...let's get those kids out there on the corner begging for spare change like they did back in the good old days!
"We" are flipping broke??? No, this country as a whole is NOT flipping broke but let's make it even more difficult for the most vulnerable in our society to survive. I very seriously doubt, laglen, that you would let your children starve or freeze if you were unable to find work and had absolutely nothing.
I am so tired or reading the stereotypes of those who have to resort to welfare and other assistance programs because they lost their jobs. Lumping them in with those who do strive to make welfare a lifestyle is not only wrong, it's cruel. The poor have the smallest voice and are the first to lose their income during tough economic times.
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
2 Mar 11
If government welfare was a "right" then it would have to be made available to all, equally, without regard to need or ability to pay.
If something is reserved for a select few, it is not a right. If it requires us to belong to specific organizations to enjoy, it's no a right. If it is limited by income, it is not a right.
Sorry, no government welfare program is a "right". That doesn't mean it shouldn't exist, but the whole idea that it is "owed" anyone is proof that it has weakened us as a nation.
2 people like this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
2 Mar 11
Ted, I didn't address *rights* in my response at all so that part of your comment is totally off the mark. I also didn't suggest that anyone is "owed" anything. Assistance programs for the poor and elderly have not weakened us as a nation...allowing the poor and elderly to suffer, starve, freeze and die as they did in the past did weaken us as a nation which is why these programs were created.
Why in the world is so much money spent where laglen? It's not just welfare for those stereotypical welfare queens...the food stamp program helps poor working families, too...so do the heating assistance programs, housing assistance programs, childcare assistance programs and medical assistance programs. Without them people who definitely are NOT lazy, but who hold low wage jobs, could not make ends meet. This working group has been hit hard by the recession because they hold unskilled or low skilled jobs so are the first group cut when their employer is looking for ways to reduce expenses.
1 person likes this
@scorpiobabes (7225)
• United States
2 Mar 11
I ain't buying it.
Back in the days of the great 'Stimulus Check', I found out you had to make a specific minimum. I did not. Yet I wasn't eligible for any of the assistance offered at the time, unless I became homeless. I was so depressed, and so stressed it triggered my multiple sclerosis. I was hospitalized and while there, I was hired for a new job--the first one I had since 2005. And I've had to fight hard for what I had...I went from $7.20 an hour X 25 hours a week to $11 an hour X 24 hours a week (it was cut from 32). I am not ashamed anymore of getting food stamps anymore--heck it's the only way I could eat anymore! I lucked out finding two different people kind enough to rent rooms to me at reduced rates. But there was a time I did ask for assistance and I was turned down!
I'm not against giving help to those who need it but there are people in our society who know how to 'work the system' and they're the ones I DON'T like. They ruined it for honest folks who truly need help.
2 people like this
@scorpiobabes (7225)
• United States
3 Mar 11
I guess the old saying is true: a few bad apples can ruin the whole barrel. :(
1 person likes this
@redyellowblackdog (10629)
• United States
2 Mar 11
The statement, "Cutting welfare is a step back for Civil Rights.", is a blatently racist statement. Who but a racist would believe a reduction in welfare would affect mostly, "African Americans, Latinos, and the poor."?
It is more likely that welfare is an enabler for many bad behaviors and that it's reduction will benefit those receiving it, in the long term. So, instead of "Cutting welfare" being a step back for civil rights, "Cutting welfare", is a step forward toward the American dream through increased personal responsibility and self respect.
2 people like this
@GardenGerty (160663)
• United States
12 Mar 11
I do not think that entitlements are about race and civil rights. We are all hurting in this economy. We need to keep the kids from going under, and provide for them, but the way we are doing it does not seem to be efficient. I do not think cuts need to be so politicized.
2 people like this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
1 Mar 11
Well apparently it's a "right" to get free money from the government. Those vulnerable people aren't shut out of the American dream by any stretch of the imagination. If they want the American dream they can get off their lazy butts, fill out a FAFSA, get a student loan and go to school to learn a marketable skill instead of lounging on a couch collecting welfare.
I know I'll get all those people who say "Oh no, that's a small group of welfare recipients. Most don't want to be on welfare!" Well if they don't want it don't take it. Wash cars, mow lawns, shovel snow, and do what it takes to take care of yourself. There are freaking children in my neighborhood making money shoveling snow and yet able-bodied adults mooching off the system act like it's impossible to get a job or create one for themselves.
Seriously, it's time for some tough love and we need to ween these people off the government teet for their own good and the good of the nation.
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
2 Mar 11
I'm sorry, taskr, but you're starting to sound like rose. With the way the economy is do you really believe that there are enough people able to afford to pay someone to mow their lawns or shovel their sidewalks? Does it snow every week so that folks in the north can earn that snow shoveling money on a regular basis? You know that I live in Florida and the lawn service companies out here in Hooterville are hurting because people have cut back and are mowing their own lawns. As far as paying someone to wash your car in this economy.....I won't laugh because that would be rude...but you've got to be kidding me.
1 person likes this
@hofferp (4734)
• United States
1 Mar 11
Well, I think Rep. Lee would have felt better if the Republican leadership had waited to propose its budget cuts until White History Month; I think that's all she was saying! Otherwise, I think she's fully on board for cuts...it was just bad timing on the part of the Repubs. I'm hoping she'll get over it...
1 person likes this
@debrakcarey (19887)
• United States
2 Mar 11
Wasn't February Black History Month? This is now March, the vote was today right?
1 person likes this
@bobmnu (8157)
• United States
2 Mar 11
Any time you say something that these race baiters don't like you are called a racist.
How do you end poverty? You make it uncomfortable and make them take responsibility for them selves and their children. If you want to have a permanent dependent class keep with the current welfare system.
1 person likes this
@ParaTed2k (22940)
• Sheboygan, Wisconsin
2 Mar 11
The set back in civil rights is the fact there are still government sponsored organizations that limit membership by race...
Or has the Congressional Black Caucus started admitting people who aren't Black?
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
2 Mar 11
They don't. I clearly remember white congressman attempting to join because they represented districts that were predominately black. Pete Stark was one, the other was a guy in Louisiana whose name I can't remember. Both were rejected based solely on their race.
1 person likes this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
22 Mar 11
If you're done with it, then why are you so blatantly playing the race card with this discussion? I don't think it is correct to refer to African Americans and other minorities as the most vulneralbe people in America. After all, we do have a black president now. The world doesn't owe anyone a living. The cuts are necessary for the health of our economy and I hope when the jobs do come back everyone will stop whining about their benefits being cut and get a job!
1 person likes this
@clrumfelt (5490)
• United States
22 Mar 11
Ah yes, sarcasm. You are right I didn't read closly enough. It seems we agree more than disagree.
1 person likes this
@dreamy1 (3811)
• United States
1 Mar 11
I hope they do cut welfare. Welfare should not be a lifetime thing. Yes people fall on hard times and they should get help once in a while but not their entire lives. I'm sick of my money going to support lazy leeches who don't want to get up off their butts. There needs to be a limit.
1 person likes this
@max1950 (2306)
• United States
1 Mar 11
i must be going blind i thought it said medicare then i saw welfare, well well well you dont want me to answer that question here *(*(&)(*&^&*^^&$#^%&*(^(*_)(U*_)(*(&^%&^%^%#$^%$^&% and further more *(&&^*$%&^%^%$%^^T)(&*&)(* lazy s.o.b.'s ok i think im done....for now.
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
2 Mar 11
Most, if not all, states have limitations on the amount of time one can collect welfare benefits and require education/work training as well. Welfare is no longer a multi-generational lifestyle in most of the country.
1 person likes this
@Adoniah (7513)
• United States
1 Mar 11
Common sense tells us that when times are bad we should not propagate. If we are not propagating then we do not need welfare. Why do people want to bring children into the world when they know that they cannot provide for them?
I know a lady who is 28 and she is a grandmother...let that sink in for a minute...she is on welfare her daughter is on welfare...her mother now on SSI was on welfare. This is a family tradition. Its how they think you should raise a family...By the way Who's the daddy of all the kids...Will they know their daddy and will they know if they accidentally have kids with a relative??
@dreamy1 (3811)
• United States
1 Mar 11
Why do people want to bring children into the world when they know that they cannot provide for them?
Because they know someone else (taxpayers) will take care of it.
I know a lady who is 28 and she is a grandmother...let that sink in for a minute...she is on welfare her daughter is on welfare...her mother now on SSI was on welfare. This is a family tradition. Its how they think you should raise a family...By the way Who's the daddy of all the kids...Will they know their daddy and will they know if they accidentally have kids with a relative??
This is what I hate. What happened to personal responsibility?
1 person likes this
@spalladino (17891)
• United States
2 Mar 11
"I know a lady who is 28 and she is a grandmother"
For some reason I find that hard to believe...not calling you a liar or anything but simple math says that both females gave birth at 14 years of age for that to be possible. That certainly is not the norm, even for welfare queens.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
2 Mar 11
I hate to break it to these folks, but people being "shut out of the American dream" don't suddenly live it by receiving subsidies.
Things got a lot better after welfare reform in the 90s. People needing to support themselves started supporting themselves.
It's more than the race card; it's the poor, downtrodden, cruel, Republicans-are-greedy, share the wealth, we're-entitled-to-this card.
Those who truly need assistance will still receive it, no doubt. But to equate government handouts with "civil rights" is ridiculous.
Nothing says racism quite like asserting minorities need more help. It's only one of two things: 1) you're suggesting America is a racist country, intentionally holding minorities down, or 2) you're suggesting minorities don't have what it takes to make it on their own.
1 person likes this
@matersfish (6306)
• United States
2 Mar 11
Growing up in and around a few inner cities and ghettos and PJs and towers, I couldn't tell you what "racism" was. If someone was holding down the poor black people, then, sht, they were holding down the poor white people, too, as they struggled just as hard.
No advocate ever came in screaming through the megaphone about the poor white people being behind the 8 ball. I'm not aware of them ever stopping in at a trailer court either.
So I really didn't know how most people viewed "racism" until I got older. Now that I know "racism" in the mainstream is white people vs. minorities, it just seems ridiculous on a few levels.
To me, the epitome of racial discrimination is assuming someone cannot do something simply because of their skin tone. Like I said - it's either assuming that America's a racist country or that minorities simply can't do for themselves.
If you tell a person "I don't want you to do this because you're a minority," that can be and will be fixed. But when you implant the thought that "You can't do this because you're a minority; you need help," that's often embraced and clung to with a sense of vengeance.
No one likes being told what they can't do. For some, it makes them want to get out and do it more. But for others, it makes them scream "F U!" while they seek to collect what they've been told is entitled.
I'm speaking from a little bit of experience, unlike some others who spout off, and I can say that I've seen plenty of both types, so that "Oh, it's not that many" crap is for the birds.
It sounds cruel on its face, but further reform is needed to separate the truly helpless who need a hand-up from the gamers seeking a handout. We simply can't afford it anymore.
1 person likes this
@Taskr36 (13963)
• United States
2 Mar 11
"2) you're suggesting minorities don't have what it takes to make it on their own."
That's what I think it really is. In another thread recently a poster said that, in no uncertain terms, minorities couldn't pass a written test for a job without preferential treatment.
1 person likes this
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
2 Mar 11
A step back? Have you seen the welfare queens living in object poverty from years "stepping forward" if that's what you call it?
What a joke. Making these people become adults, and get some self-respect by earning a real living, will do more to move the black community in our country forward, than anything the Democraps have done for the past 60 years.
1 person likes this
@andy77e (5156)
• United States
3 Mar 11
Of course. To a child, there's no excuse for not getting everything you want. Therefore government should give everyone everything. They'll never understand the concept of 'get off your butt and earn a living like an adult, you baby!'.
American simply has too many children in adult bodies, that think they ought to be a Peter Pan wannabie.
1 person likes this