|
5 registered (f00kster, 4 invisible),
78
Guests and
40
Spiders online. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
38631 Members
55 Forums
183214 Topics
1648938 Posts
Max Online: 1054 @ 07/29/08 07:31 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
31
|
|
|
|
#1743587 - 05/24/12 08:01 AM
Re: Peeing for welfare benefits
[Re: Sir.Ganga]
|
Enthusiast

Registered: 09/27/10
Posts: 289
|
"These bleeding hearts only see what they want and throw out shit like "its OUR rights", "what are you a communist?",or "well they have a right to live too". WRONG if a honest hard working person can't get a single penny to save his mortgage due to a community bred disease then why should a healthy young adult that is just PLAIN lazy, because the system has allowed him." 65. Underlying the idea that being on social assistance is a choice is the notion that life-sustaining employment is available to anyone in Canada who wants it. This is incorrect. Canada does not have an economy that provides jobs with better than poverty level incomes for everyone. This is a fact documented regularly by Statistics Canada, among others. In fact, Canada has many jobs that are part-time, temporary, casual, seasonal, and low-waged. Levels of reliance on social assistance rise and fall with fluctuations in the job market, but there are never enough stable jobs for everyone, and, particularly, not enough jobs capable of sustaining an adequate standard of living (Statistics Canada, Low Income and Low Wages, (Ottawa: Ministry of Industry, 2006); Kevin K. Lee, Urban Poverty in Canada: A Statistical Profile (Ottawa: Canadian Council on Social Development, 2000), in particular, Chapter 3: Economic and Labour Force Characteristics; and Richard P. Chaykowski, Non-Standard Work and Economic Vulnerability (Ottawa: Canadian Policy Research Network, 2005), < http://www.cprn.org/documents/35584_en.pdf> accessed 20 June, 2007). The rhetoric of self-sufficiency cannot simply be accepted at face value when the legislative initiatives carried out in its name cause suffering and social marginalization. Increasing individual employability through job training can be laudable, although its success depends on the training being appropriate to the person, well delivered, and tailored to the availability of actual jobs. Increasing equality of opportunity to compete for available jobs is a worthy goal. However, improving the employment credentials of individuals is not a sufficient goal as long as there are not enough life-sustaining jobs to go around. There must also be a social safety net to protect those for whom the market does not provide a decent, stable job. http://www.thecourt.ca/2009/07/08/the-wo...06-1-w-c-r-193/Until the underlying "musical chairs" quality of employment in Canada is fixed, your quaint view is simply wrong. There's also a rational decision to be made. If someone is choosing between welfare and working 160 hours a month for only a bit more money than welfare, he'd be stupid to waste 160 hours of his time, to choose between Poverty Income A and Poverty Income B. Further, it is a right to collect welfare. Your "work or starve if you're 'healthy'" attitude is barbaric--who are you to be so Marie Antoinette? You realize that without welfare people would starve worse than they already do, right? And I am talking nutrition, not calories, so we can avoid right-wing talking points re: fat people on welfare. So if they're healthy after that 90 days, without any money for food health will rapidly decline. What are you, some sort of retarded doper who think people eat sunshine? "Look people our societies are in such an economical nightmares that between taxing cannabis sales and tightening up our welfare system, they could go along way in getting all of us out of the hole we are in." Yes, I want to live in a dystopian right-wing society where there's legal dope and people are kicked off welfare after 90 days. Our societies are in an economical nightmare because old people like you are clearly incapable of rational thought---everything has an expiry date; the brain's is probably thirty years after birth. "f a man with a mortgage and bills and a family to support with cancer doesn't qualify" Welfare is not to pay a mortgage or bills. It is to provide the necessities of life. Debt is not a necessity of life. Sorry, you were an irresponsible worker and now you are an embittered old man who wants to take it out on the welfare crowd---like lots of Americans these days, incidentally. You, like Icarus, attempted to fly too high (contracted too much debt) and got burned. Rather than "nobody's fault but mine," there must be some poor people for you to blame, right? People get cancer. You should have been more responsible. Or is personal responsibility one of those things that only applies to the poor, not you?
_________________________
universitatis is the proper Latin word for corporation. (8 Mod. 164)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1743598 - 05/24/12 11:08 AM
Re: Peeing for welfare benefits
[Re: Ohigho]
|
Pooh-Bah
Registered: 06/12/07
Posts: 1753
Loc: DABBIN
|
Dude anger at the few abusers does not justify it, its like bombing ants and missing 99% of the time. And what does white people or color at all have to do with it? bcuz i lived in an area that was mostly inhabited by white ppl (less than 5% black ppl) those white trash fuckers traded food stamps for cigarettes or dope all the damn time. pretty sure it happens the same way in other places too go live in the shittiest part of ur state for a few months like i said u prbly will b sick of govt handouts too. ever worked with someone who cant have to many hours bcuz of section 8? they give ppl with no life skills and most of the time SERIOUS drug problems free money every month is thr any incentive to better ur life? NO! seems like if ur PO can just stop by and demand u piss whenever they feel like it ur social worker should have the same right. anybody who cant pee clean should never ever be eligible for another dime in thr life. like i said before if u dont want the govt doing that to you then pull ur head out of ur ass quit tweeking and go get a job.sucks for all the weed smokers but lifes a bitch deal with it
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1743606 - 05/24/12 03:15 PM
Re: Peeing for welfare benefits
[Re: Sir Robin the Fisherman]
|
Veteran
 
Registered: 02/24/11
Posts: 1381
|
Until the underlying "musical chairs" quality of employment in Canada is fixed, your quaint view is simply wrong. There's also a rational decision to be made. If someone is choosing between welfare and working 160 hours a month for only a bit more money than welfare, he'd be stupid to waste 160 hours of his time, to choose between Poverty Income A and Poverty Income B. This is what Im talking about...totally riduclous statement. Maybe all of us should go on welfare then...but...wait....who would pay? Further, it is a right to collect welfare. Your "work or starve if you're 'healthy'" attitude is barbaric--who are you to be so Marie Antoinette? You realize that without welfare people would starve worse than they already do, right? And I am talking nutrition, not calories, so we can avoid right-wing talking points re: fat people on welfare. So if they're healthy after that 90 days, without any money for food health will rapidly decline. What are you, some sort of retarded doper who think people eat sunshine? Retarded doper? Have you read your position? Sadly that is the problem..No one has the right to anything, your living in a dream world if ya think that. I have been able to keep a roof over my head while probabaly helping pay for yours, so don't talk to me about rights. FUCK them if they can't be a productive part of society. let em starve, use em for target practice, make them sell their organs I DON'T CARE. Welfare is not to pay a mortgage or bills. It is to provide the necessities of life. Debt is not a necessity of life. Sorry, you were an irresponsible worker and now you are an embittered old man who wants to take it out on the welfare crowd---like lots of Americans these days, incidentally. Hey Fucktard! Thats what the system was orignally set up for, not for herion addicts. Sorry I was a responsible citizen that got sick. One twisted view for sure? Fly to high hey? I work hard for what I have and when Im sick its my fault?? But when a deadbeat wants money for herion and is not willing to make an effort...Fuck off
_________________________
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#1743620 - 05/24/12 06:18 PM
Re: Peeing for welfare benefits
[Re: Sir.Ganga]
|
Enthusiast

Registered: 09/27/10
Posts: 289
|
"This is what Im talking about...totally riduclous statement. Maybe all of us should go on welfare then...but...wait....who would pay?"
Well, luckily there are plenty of people who enjoy high-rolling, flying high. I mean, are you suggesting the Government doesn't pay enough to have an adequate quality of life? I mean, that means the rates aren't _high enough_, let alone too high. Working depletes natural resources and gives you a larger income, so you can deplete them faster. You'll also generate income for other companies incidentally, allowing them to generate more debt, employ more people, despoil more nature. It depends on what one values.
"No one has the right to anything, your living in a dream world if ya think that."
OK, then you don't have the right to any marihuana, and prohibition is just fine.
"FUCK them if they can't be a productive part of society. let em starve, use em for target practice, make them sell their organs I DON'T CARE."
That is just it, you don't care. Where's the love?
"Hey Fucktard! Thats what the system was orignally set up for, not for herion addicts. Sorry I was a responsible citizen that got sick. One twisted view for sure?"
No it was not. It is and always has been a labor-extraction device. For a time you were riding high, collecting the legal tender enabled by that labor-extraction machine. Then, not so much. Buying debt is _very_ expensive.
Anyway, as far as I am aware modern science/medicine views heroin addiction as a wholly medical problem, not a moral failing, and as far as I am aware most research indicates that most people won't starve to death in an urban setting---they'll eat just enough to survive, irrationally, stealing car stereos to buy more junk. Or something like that. It ends up being better for all parties to give them junk, a place to live and enough for healthy food. And if you think that is going to inspire many people to become junkies, well, great.
Jobless Junkies have a lower carbon footprint than workers. Go Green---stop working!
_________________________
universitatis is the proper Latin word for corporation. (8 Mod. 164)
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
Moderator: BongPixie, CaliGrower, chrisbennett, Dana Larsen, FranCouver, Fred_the_Plumber, frmrgrl, goodster, jacob, JodieEmery, Marc Scott Emery, MICHY, OCNORML, puff_tuff, Rudy, stinkweed, voodoodol
|