Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 5:48:16 PM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline 		Relax, Peon.

I say we pay to help those kids. It costs more not to. I also think we should collectively invest in our own future. That being said, I've paid my pension out to about 4650CE for myself and my love, as a conservative back of envelope calculation. This gives me a vested interest in making sure the social contract is upheld in a way that doesn't shaft me, as well. Fortunately, that interest happens to align with the interests of everyone else, as it involves maintaining a society that works, takes care of people that need help, and is sustainable.

I'm the sort that likes to share of my abundance, even when it isn't necessary.

What gets my hackles up, however, is the assertion that I've a responsibility to do so, and the implication that responsibility can be assigned without a person taking it upon themselves, and also of course the implicit converse, the entitlement to butt into my life (let's be perfectly clear that if I ever have a kid, while I'll appreciate help, as well as being happy to let society invest in it, I will not accept the notion that anyone else is responsible for it but me and mine). The only occasion where I'd consider taking upon myself responsibility for someone else's child is if it's their dying wish, and even then I reserve the right to say no.

I'm happy to help, and I believe the most sound policy any society can have is to invest in its own future. That pretty much comes from the lowest common denominator, which is enlightened self interest. A society that forces people to participate beyond that is one that is one that's lost something important and one that has debased a good thing. And it really is a good thing to help. But I disagree that it's somehow a requirement for calling something a meaningful society that it must do this. A society, like a person, can do what it will.

Now, as for kids being a drain, that was never my assertion, and I'd appreciate if you don't infer it. Some kids are a drain, some kids are not. As a rule, we can't know which ones until after they've made their contribution, and we do know those whose needs aren't met will turn up in other budgets, so it makes every kind of sense to help those that have a problem, and to invest in the rest. Note that from my professional experience and reading, these kids make a poor investment and will normally not be the ones building our futures (but I recognize that there are exceptions). As I said, I've already paid the pension for two people out to 4650CE, assuming the money isn't profitably invested, and I'm happy to share, so long as that doesn't entail a breach of the social contract under which I paid it.

Furthermore, even if the kids in question were to prove a drain, we would be saving a penny by spending a pound if we tried to deal with that. My main concern with stemming the tide in that area is passive population shaping by incentivizing good parenting, and making sure future kids have the best parents possible, both of which are goals that would be more than adequately served (and probably most cost effectively served) by providing free access to all means of family planning to people on welfare, though I suppose one might also go for taking away any new children beyond two that are born 38 weeks or more after starting long term welfare (two arguably doesn't make a worse future for anyone).

On a final note, I don't know if it applies in the UK, but in Norway, the Statistics and Census Bureau has identified a single segment of the immigrant population which is a net loss, and we're treatybound to accept more (indeed, we're stepping up massively starting next year). That segment is notable for a high birth rate, a high crime rate, hereditary welfare with negligible participation in the workforce and negligible integration for the first five generations (we haven't gotten further than five yet). The middle alternative of the projections show they will break our welfare system entirely (as is "the numbers don't add up anymore") in a matter of decades. Still, we have time to find some less intrusive means to deal with them.

For the general population, the best option is to pay for whatever kids they have, and gently encourage those on welfare not to have more than two.

Making more sense now?

IWYW,
— Aswad.

P.S.: You have CMail.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to PeonForHer)
Profile   Post #: 141
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 6:05:03 PM   
Aswad


Posts: 9374
Joined: 4/4/2007
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

It's a TV advert - one of many and also what I eluded to in my post.


Please do not ever even compare advertisements to studies, or even polls.

Treat the former as fiction. Anything else is a grave sin against reality itself.

quote:

They take a very small sample and extrapolate that across the whole country.


That word, extrapolate, doesn't mean what you seem to think it does.

There is a huge difference between multiplying up a figure, as if a small sample would generalize to the entire population, and actually doing a rigorous renormalization of the numbers based on sound statistical relations. A sample of a thousand can give a negligible error for the major groups if you know how and what to correct for. The error is greater for any underrepresented demographics, and it's also greater when you haven't selected the sample group that will support obtaining the correction factors for a representative demographic spread, but it's absolutely possible to get very solid data from statistics, provided one actually knows statistics and uses it properly.

In some cases, one will twist the statistics to obtain a result that doesn't reflect reality, such as when creating advertisements or doing a shitty piece in a newspaper, but acknowledging that is not the same as saying statistics are useless or inherently unreliable. It just isn't generally in the skillset of the average citizen to verify the statistics they are presented with, which is why some skepticism is suggested. That, however, should never be confused with a licence to arbitrarily generalize blindly from one's own experiences and to posit the generalization as factual; at best, it's one's own best guess, which should be set forth with the humility to recognize one's limitations.

Your experiences are not good evidence of fraud, on account of your experiences being with cases that are as rare as winning the lottery.

Someone wins the lottery every time, but the rest of those who play do not.

You may know a lottery millionaire, but you can't legitimately submit that as evidence that the lottery makes a decent investment.

Same with baby machines and welfare fraud.

IWYW,
— Aswad.


_____________________________

"If God saw what any of us did that night, he didn't seem to mind.
From then on I knew: God doesn't make the world this way.
We do." -- Rorschack, Watchmen.


(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 142
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 7:21:17 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

I'm not saying it's common. Far from it.

But... It does happen.


Its not going to happen to a woman 6 times.

As far as capping the system. What happens if a woman gets raped while on the program and keeps the baby? Then she is now penalized for being raped. Thats not gonna happen.. so they make an exception for rape.

How many women would then scream they have been raped?

Its far better to limit the time, insist they get an education in a marketable skill, then to say.. more kids and you get no more money.

Now you have gone and done it Tazzy.
Right there is why so many anti choice folks hate the "rape exception".
That fear that every unwanted pregnancy would almost automatically become the result of a rape...an unreported rape to boot.

Let me be perfectly clear I am not taking this position ,I am just trying to illustrate an argument...one that leads some idiot republicans to mouth such unfortunate phrases such as "real rape' and such .

_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 143
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 7:30:42 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		Well, Mike, allow me to dispel any misconceptions.... there is very little I would not have done to ensure my child had food on the table and a roof over his head. My morals would hit the road if faced with a hungry child.

These politicians dont have to tell children.... we are cutting your check. They dont have to look into their eyes. They get to go home to their well fed/well bred children and their perfectly groomed wives and sit down to meals made by a cook in a house cleaned by a maid.

And what did many of them do to earn those luxuries? Cutting the benefits of the poor.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 144
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 7:40:38 PM   
slvemike4u


Posts: 17896
Joined: 1/15/2008
From: United States
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Well, Mike, allow me to dispel any misconceptions.... there is very little I would not have done to ensure my child had food on the table and a roof over his head. My morals would hit the road if faced with a hungry child.

These politicians dont have to tell children.... we are cutting your check. They dont have to look into their eyes. They get to go home to their well fed/well bred children and their perfectly groomed wives and sit down to meals made by a cook in a house cleaned by a maid.

And what did many of them do to earn those luxuries? Cutting the benefits of the poor.

On all the above I wholeheartedly agree...and apologize if I gave any other indication.
If I had found myself with no other outs I would have robbed a bank to see to my sons needs....thankfully I had the ways and the means.
To get back to the OP,I like Kristof,he's a good writer,but I think with this article he did the cause of liberalism a disservice.
Owner is/was right...any actual effective safety net will,almost of necessity lend itself to instances of abuse(though again Owner is correct,this will pale in comparison to defense and corporate malfeasance) to shine a light on the few is to the detriment of the many who have no other way and are just scraping by with the assistance they are receiving.


_____________________________

If we want things to stay as they are,things will have to change...Tancredi from "the Leopard"

Forget Guns-----Ban the pools

Funny stuff....https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eNwFf991d-4


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 145
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 8:09:08 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline 		Lets also be clear. For those who bilk the system for hundreds of thousands... Throw the key away after locking them up. Someone went without while they robbed the system blind.

But telling a man who works hard, and still struggled, that he makes 14 dollars too much to qualify for any assistance to me is ludicrous. Its things like that which has lead to the so called "welfare fraud". Instead of bolstering someone who is working and eager to keep his family together, the system knocks them aside and doesnt even say sorry.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to slvemike4u)
Profile   Post #: 146
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 8:46:46 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

Pulling your children out of a learn-to-read program so you don't fuck up the welfare isn't "taking advantage," Erie.


Sounds like common sense. If the kids won't have a roof over their head, or food on the table, it doesn't matter much if they can read and write. Of course, it strikes me as ludicrous to require parents to be the only ones to invest in children that will be supporting the population and building our futures in the first place.

quote:

It ought to be grounds for removing those children from the home.


In cases where the family can get by without what they'd otherwise lose, certainly.

— Aswad.



I strongly suspect, Aswad, that this isn't the money that keeps a roof over the heads (that's what Section 8 housing subsidies are for), or puts food on the table (SNAP/food stamps takes care of that). Maybe the health insurance, since Social Security disability comes with MedicAid, but I don't know how the State of Kentucky administers health care with the welfare. If the parents are so stupid and short-sighted themselves, to be doing this, I must question their ability to think big-picture on insurance.

I mentioned in another post that the general tendency is to always feel a need for a little bit more than you have. I also think this is an asset of human nature, that helped move us out of the caves and temporary structures, and into homes with central heating, along with all the other advances of the human condition. There is no doubt in my mind that it would hurt these families if they lost the additional money. I don't believe that outweighs terminating the barest possibilities of those children leaving poverty.

On another subject that has come up in the discussion, California addresses the practice of having more children to get more welfare with what is known as the Maximum Family Grant. If you are pregnant when you start receiving aid, that child will be aided. Any children conceived while the family is on assistance however, will not be eligible for cash assistance. Reduced food stamps and medical insurance only, and MFG is a permanent status for the child, not just for the parent's specific case. Parts of the law are very badly written, and very likely violate Equal Protection in the US Constitution, but it hasn't been around long enough for those children to sue. Some parents have successfully pursued appeals on the MFG ruling already, receiving significant lump sum awards, if they were of the highly prolific category.

_____________________________

If you lose one sense, your other senses are enhanced.
That's why people with no sense of humor have such an inflated sense of self-importance.


(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 147
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 9:25:11 PM   
jlf1961


Posts: 14840
Joined: 6/10/2008
From: Somewhere Texas
Status: offline 		Heretic, actually if you are on Social Security Disability you get medicare, if you are on Social Security Supplemental Income, then you get medicaid. They are two different programs, and IMO SSI is more often abused than SSDI.

SSI usually starts when a child is declared disabled.

Okay, all well and good, a family with a disabled child needs additional assistance.

However, since the programs inception, the allowed disabilities have expanded to include ADD/HD and other learning disabilities. Now, I am an adult with ADD/HD, so I probably had it as a child. Things were different when I was in school, for one thing, the student to teacher ratio was smaller, so there was more one on one instruction. Maybe I was lucky, because I was blessed with a series of creative teachers that found ways to keep my attention on what was being taught and the work that needed to be done. So, even though I probably had the problem as a child, I learned by luck how to deal with it, learn in spite of it, and come graduate high school as a hybrid jock/brain.

My point is that other than medications (which I think are used more often than is probably needed, either that or just about every child born since 1975 is ADD/HD) there are ways to get a child with the problem to learn, and to do it effectively.

Now it is a disability, one that can be a social security check for life. See the problem?

I have a nephew who, due to lack of good parenting, is of the opinion that because he has ADD/HD he is entitled to a government check for the rest of his life. He has no idea of what personal responsibility is, what it means to consider others, and all in all has a bad attitude. I allowed him to live with me twice, only because my sister (not his mother) talked me into letting him come back. When I threw him out the last time, he owed us just over a thousand dollars, the rent he had not paid, and also a bill for repairs to dry wall where he put his fist through it.

Unfortunately, I have seen a lot of young people with the same attitude, collecting social security they never contributed to and the only reason they cannot work is the simple fact that they do not want to.

Dont get me wrong, kids with physical impairments, mental disorders that affect cognitive skills, are blind, deaf or mute need the program until they learn the necessary skills to lead a productive life, IF THEY CAN, or if they cannot, they need the program to pay for their care.

But I am sick and tired of a child getting a life time of ssi because some doctor or teacher told his parents he/she has ADD/HD, needs to be medicated, and will not be able to function satisfactorily in a class room environment simply because the teacher is already overworked and is unable to cope with a challenge.

The reason these kids do not or cannot learn is not because of the problem, but because the education system in this country is not geared for "problem" students. There is no school district I know of that has provisions for kids with the problem.

Oh, one more thing, ADD/HD is the most misdiagnosed malady in children today. Most of the medications have severe side effects, and some are, IMO, down right dangerous.

My son was diagnosed with ADD/HD before I gained custody of him. When I got custody of him, he was always complaining of headaches. I took him to a doctor and told him what his diagnosis was.

The doctor took him off Ritalin, made an appointment with a child psychologist for another evaluation, which found he was not ADD/HD at all, he had PTSD from being in an abusive environment. The medication was changed, and the first year he was in my custody he was making A'a and B's, and seeing a counselor to deal with his experiences.

I was told that the diagnosis was made because it was easy to label and required no further investigation.

_____________________________

Boy, it sure would be nice if we had some grenades, don't you think?

You cannot control who comes into your life, but you can control which airlock you throw them out of.

Paranoid Paramilitary Gun Loving Conspiracy Theorist AND EQUAL OPPORTUNI

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 148
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 11:05:09 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

Kids between 16 and 18. You have a legal obligation to care for them, so you can't just kick them out into the streets to fend for themselves - you'd be prosecuted by the social services for abandonment.
I know, I tried to do that with my step-son who was living with us under a court order and he was a right little shit. We had to wait until he had his 18th birthday before I could properly and legally serve him notice to quit.


Sucks to be a parent at times... but none of these kids asked to be born. Parents take on that responsibility every time that sperm swims its way into her "love canal".

There is a price for everything... including having sex. Allowing one parent off the hook because he didnt carry it for 9 months is pretty shitty. Which is why I feel the way I do about birth control and abortions. But thats another topic.

You admit there is no training there.

You admit the job market is pretty dismal.

And then you bash these women for finding a way to survive.

Could it be that you are upset because its only women who have this out?


You have a point there.
I guess my views are somewhat tainted because the whole system is completely one-sided.
Although single-parent dads, when you can find one, are able to get the same benefits.

I think the main difference here is that, for the most part, a single parent father would try to find out if his kids had a medical condition first but would otherwise struggle with the kids on what he gets. It does seem that a fairly large proportion of the women, apparently, jump on the bandwagon first and ask questions later.

I do actually know a single parent father who lives a few streets away from us.
His idea of cheating the system is to try and find a bit of work on the side with cash-in-hand payments.
Just like I would have done if I didn't have my partner.
Neither he nor I would have thought about letting the kids run riot and claim disability payments for ADD/ADHD.

Maybe it's the mindset of these women in the way they cheat the system that I'm kicking against.
I certainly know that the disability payment cheat is very lucrative even if you compare it to a full-time job let alone some small underhand job on the side for a few hours a week.

True, being a parent does have that responsibility and most of us rational people take that view.
These benefit scroungers seem to be wired differently and won't accept that responsibility.
They seem to be of the mind that they can fuck like crazy and have as many kids as they like and the state has a duty to pay for them and house them.

It's the modern world mindset of 'the state owes me a living' kind of thing.
I am a lot older and was taught all through my life to be honest and upstanding (whatever that is supposed to mean).
My step-son is one of those scrounger type people as is his natural father.
I guess he's one of the bad apples in the barrel.


(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 149
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 11:37:16 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: freedomdwarf1

It's a TV advert - one of many and also what I eluded to in my post.


Please do not ever even compare advertisements to studies, or even polls.

Treat the former as fiction. Anything else is a grave sin against reality itself.

quote:

They take a very small sample and extrapolate that across the whole country.


That word, extrapolate, doesn't mean what you seem to think it does.

There is a huge difference between multiplying up a figure, as if a small sample would generalize to the entire population, and actually doing a rigorous renormalization of the numbers based on sound statistical relations. A sample of a thousand can give a negligible error for the major groups if you know how and what to correct for. The error is greater for any underrepresented demographics, and it's also greater when you haven't selected the sample group that will support obtaining the correction factors for a representative demographic spread, but it's absolutely possible to get very solid data from statistics, provided one actually knows statistics and uses it properly.

In some cases, one will twist the statistics to obtain a result that doesn't reflect reality, such as when creating advertisements or doing a shitty piece in a newspaper, but acknowledging that is not the same as saying statistics are useless or inherently unreliable. It just isn't generally in the skillset of the average citizen to verify the statistics they are presented with, which is why some skepticism is suggested. That, however, should never be confused with a licence to arbitrarily generalize blindly from one's own experiences and to posit the generalization as factual; at best, it's one's own best guess, which should be set forth with the humility to recognize one's limitations.

Your experiences are not good evidence of fraud, on account of your experiences being with cases that are as rare as winning the lottery.

Someone wins the lottery every time, but the rest of those who play do not.

You may know a lottery millionaire, but you can't legitimately submit that as evidence that the lottery makes a decent investment.

Same with baby machines and welfare fraud.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



Aswad: "That word, extrapolate, doesn't mean what you seem to think it does.".

From Merriam Webster, Extrapolate -
Main Entry:ex£trap£o£late
Pronunciation:ik-*stra-p*-*l*t
Function:verb
Inflected Form:-lat£ed ; -lat£ing
Etymology:Latin extra outside + English -polate (as in interpolate) — more at EXTRA-
Date:1874

transitive verb
1 : to infer (values of a variable in an unobserved interval) from values within an already observed interval
2 a : to project, extend, or expand (known data or experience) into an area not known or experienced so as to arrive at a usually conjectural knowledge of the unknown area *extrapolates present trends to construct an image of the future* b : to predict by projecting past experience or known data *extrapolate public sentiment on one issue from known public reaction on others*

It is precisely the meaning given at #2 that I was using and it is a perfect example of what I was saying.
Take a small sample (of known survey data) and project that knowledge into an area not known (those people you did not survey) to arrive at a projected knowledge across the spectrum.
So don't tell me what 'extrapolate' means and my usage of the term. I used it correctly and in the manner that I intended to use it, thank you very much.

As for your other points, the point I was making was that the UK uses this (scienticifically inaccurate) method to represent so-called UK statistical figures when presenting them to the public at large.
Whether they are using TV adverts for a product, talking about overcrowded hospitals in the house of commons, debating railway safety figures at unmanned railway crossings.... the list is neverending.

A typical quote from a very recent discussion in the news was that more than 80% of our hospitals were full to to capacity and over 95% usage. You didn't find out until much later in the discussion that those figures were extrapolated from a small sample of 70-something hospitals at peak times. This argument was just one of many topics under discussion in the house of commons when they were discussing NHS spending cuts.


And I'm sorry, your analagy with lottery winners just isn't the same thing. Apples to oranges.


It's not like I've lived in the same place like 30% of UK citizens who have never lived beyond 20 miles of where they were born.
I've lived at dozens of places all over the eastern side of the UK in the past decade and my experiences from each and every place has been almost identical.
I'm not saying that my experiences can be categorically expanded across the whole of the UK - both you and I know that is a nonsense.
But... Once is a coincidence; twice is unusual; 3 times is extraordinary; dozens of the same thing does appear to create a trend that most statisticians would look twice at.

Maybe where I have lived is a different world to you and peon, but that doesn't make my comments any less valid than yours or his dismissal of it with no other facts.

(in reply to Aswad)
Profile   Post #: 150
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 11:40:58 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

I think the main difference here is that, for the most part, a single parent father would try to find out if his kids had a medical condition first but would otherwise struggle with the kids on what he gets. It does seem that a fairly large proportion of the women, apparently, jump on the bandwagon first and ask questions later.


Doesnt that make you wonder where all these fathers are?

quote:

I do actually know a single parent father who lives a few streets away from us.
His idea of cheating the system is to try and find a bit of work on the side with cash-in-hand payments.
Just like I would have done if I didn't have my partner.
Neither he nor I would have thought about letting the kids run riot and claim disability payments for ADD/ADHD.


My dad could always hustle up a job. Between construction and auto repair, he usually made ends meet somehow. Thats not quite as easy for a woman. Her fastest source of income is between her legs. Not sexist... just how it is. How many would hire a woman to come rewire their kitchen, or fix the plumbing, or to install a room.... not many, I can assure you.

quote:

Maybe it's the mindset of these women in the way they cheat the system that I'm kicking against.


A mind set that seems to 1) work... and 2) is one of the few avenues available to her, from the way you talk.

quote:

I certainly know that the disability payment cheat is very lucrative even if you compare it to a full-time job let alone some small underhand job on the side for a few hours a week.


I know many men who cheat the disability roles here as well. Thats hardly a sex-related issue.

quote:

True, being a parent does have that responsibility and most of us rational people take that view.
These benefit scroungers seem to be wired differently and won't accept that responsibility.
They seem to be of the mind that they can fuck like crazy and have as many kids as they like and the state has a duty to pay for them and house them.


How many of these women have you spoken too directly? How many are simply the victims of circumstance? I dont mean victims as in rape. But widows? Men ran off and left them to cope as best they could? Victims of DV?

quote:

It's the modern world mindset of 'the state owes me a living' kind of thing.
I am a lot older and was taught all through my life to be honest and upstanding (whatever that is supposed to mean).
My step-son is one of those scrounger type people as is his natural father.
I guess he's one of the bad apples in the barrel.


And there you have two examples of it not being all female.

I think I took exception at that more than anything else. I would not say there arent women like you describe, but they are not the norm. Nor should those who trly need the help be penalized because there are women out there who are scamming the system.

The solution isnt to harm others for the sins of a few.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 151
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 11:42:53 PM   
tazzygirl


Posts: 37833
Joined: 10/12/2007
Status: offline
quote:

It is precisely the meaning given at #2 that I was using and it is a perfect example of what I was saying.
Take a small sample (of known survey data) and project that knowledge into an area not known (those people you did not survey) to arrive at a projected knowledge across the spectrum.
So don't tell me what 'extrapolate' means and my usage of the term. I used it correctly and in the manner that I intended to use it, thank you very much.


And yet, when you do extrapolate, and people inform you that your extrapolation isnt plausible, or feasible, or just plain in error, thats when you should back up and realize your sample is skewed and the information you are extending is in error.

_____________________________

Telling me to take Midol wont help your butthurt.
RIP, my demon-child 5-16-11
Duchess of Dissent 1
Dont judge me because I sin differently than you.
If you want it sugar coated, dont ask me what i think! It would violate TOS.

(in reply to freedomdwarf1)
Profile   Post #: 152
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/13/2012 11:46:21 PM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline 		Good post jlf.

I wish our doctors would refer all ADD/HD cases for further diagnosis instead of blindly writing out prescriptions for it.

Ans I agree with all of what you posted.

(in reply to jlf1961)
Profile   Post #: 153
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/14/2012 1:50:53 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

quote:

I think the main difference here is that, for the most part, a single parent father would try to find out if his kids had a medical condition first but would otherwise struggle with the kids on what he gets. It does seem that a fairly large proportion of the women, apparently, jump on the bandwagon first and ask questions later.


Doesnt that make you wonder where all these fathers are?

I know where most of the fathers are, figuratively speaking.
They are usually jobless guys that like playing the game and the women just use them to get pregnant and have kids to rape the benefit system. These guys aren't part of the 'family' scenario and in these cases they aren't meant to be either.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

I do actually know a single parent father who lives a few streets away from us.
His idea of cheating the system is to try and find a bit of work on the side with cash-in-hand payments.
Just like I would have done if I didn't have my partner.
Neither he nor I would have thought about letting the kids run riot and claim disability payments for ADD/ADHD.


My dad could always hustle up a job. Between construction and auto repair, he usually made ends meet somehow. Thats not quite as easy for a woman. Her fastest source of income is between her legs. Not sexist... just how it is. How many would hire a woman to come rewire their kitchen, or fix the plumbing, or to install a room.... not many, I can assure you.

As I've already pointed out tazzy - these job opportunities just aren't here in the UK.
My dad could always hussle up a job and in my earlier years I could do the same.

The whole economic climate here, and probably across most of Europe, is virtual flat-line growth, unemployment rising (particularly in those under 25), industries closing down, job losses faster than job gains (on a like-for-like basis), inflation rising, the cost of fuel (both motoring and home use) rising, the cost of basic food and living expenses rising, wage cuts, budget cuts...
Australia, by comparison, is doing rather well in these tough times.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

Maybe it's the mindset of these women in the way they cheat the system that I'm kicking against.


A mind set that seems to 1) work... and 2) is one of the few avenues available to her, from the way you talk.

Women have equal opportunities for work, if we believe what we are told.
And some of our laws actually make it illegal to discriminate against women.
So that means these women are just as likely to find a job as any guy and in almost any profession.

A single parent dad is harassed to death by the jobcentres to find a job.
A woman in the same position isn't, because the system is geared towards mum being at home and therefore doesn't have to work as she is looking after the kids.
It's very biased towards the females.

It's a tactic that works because the system allows it to work. But is it right?
Don't you think it's crazy that a lot of women get away this sort of fraud where a guy in the same boat is scrutinised and harassed by the system to be an 'upstanding citizen' and go get a job to support his kids?
As I said earlier, men wouldn't normally think along the lines of defrauding the disability benefits in the same way that these women seem to. I just think its the way the two sexes think differently.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

I certainly know that the disability payment cheat is very lucrative even if you compare it to a full-time job let alone some small underhand job on the side for a few hours a week.


I know many men who cheat the disability roles here as well. Thats hardly a sex-related issue.

It doesn't appear to be that way here and I never said it was a sexist issue.
Guys think along different lines.
There are no doubt some guys that do, but from the statistics taken from just my immediate area here and my local jobcentre, the women outnumber the guys doing this type of fraud by at least 20 or 30 to one.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

True, being a parent does have that responsibility and most of us rational people take that view.
These benefit scroungers seem to be wired differently and won't accept that responsibility.
They seem to be of the mind that they can fuck like crazy and have as many kids as they like and the state has a duty to pay for them and house them.


How many of these women have you spoken too directly? How many are simply the victims of circumstance? I dont mean victims as in rape. But widows? Men ran off and left them to cope as best they could? Victims of DV?

I speak to probably 10 or 20 women every week while I'm at the jobcentre doing my required jobsearch.
I also overhear many more than that while I wait to be seen.
I have not met a single widow claiming these benefits - they are usually on a widows pension and don't need to frequent the jobcentres.
Some of thes girls do have boyfriends but most don't, they are single mums and deliberately chose to be so.
And from my conversations and what I overhear, most are not victims of boyfriends running off when they got pregnant. There are some, granted. But they are few in number by comparison.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
quote:

It's the modern world mindset of 'the state owes me a living' kind of thing.
I am a lot older and was taught all through my life to be honest and upstanding (whatever that is supposed to mean).
My step-son is one of those scrounger type people as is his natural father.
I guess he's one of the bad apples in the barrel.


And there you have two examples of it not being all female.

Those are just social security scroungers. Neither of them are defrauding the disability benefit system claiming that kids are ADD/HD.

I am claiming that the majority of those defrauding the system in this way are female.

quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl
I think I took exception at that more than anything else. I would not say there arent women like you describe, but they are not the norm. Nor should those who trly need the help be penalized because there are women out there who are scamming the system.

The solution isnt to harm others for the sins of a few.


Try going to any jobcentre here in the UK and just stand around for a while watching all the single mums milling around.
Come back later in the day and you'll see 90% of those same women still milling around.
They nearly all have brand new baby strollers - and not the cheap brands either.
They are mostly dressed in new or nearly new designer-label gear - even their kids are.
A lot of them are smoking and drinking, and I don't mean fizzy pop.

Speak to the security guards and most will tell you they are just lazy layabout scroungers that play the system and don't want to go to work or go on any training scheme even if it was offered.

And wherever I have lived in the last decade, I have seen and met and spoken to single mums in identical scenarios - it's not just here where I live now.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 154
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/14/2012 1:54:21 AM   
freedomdwarf1


Posts: 6845
Joined: 10/23/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: tazzygirl

Lets also be clear. For those who bilk the system for hundreds of thousands... Throw the key away after locking them up. Someone went without while they robbed the system blind.

But telling a man who works hard, and still struggled, that he makes 14 dollars too much to qualify for any assistance to me is ludicrous. Its things like that which has lead to the so called "welfare fraud". Instead of bolstering someone who is working and eager to keep his family together, the system knocks them aside and doesnt even say sorry.


And that's my point too.

Unfortunately, guys will be imprisoned and have his kids taken away for such fraud.
Women doing the self same thing get away with it because the whole childcare thing is biased in our society and judiciary here.

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 155
RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets - 12/14/2012 3:31:54 AM   
Politesub53


Posts: 14862
Joined: 5/7/2007
Status: offline
quote:

Freedomdwarwf

And this new "Personal Independence Payment" system requires that you register every week via the internet to get your payments or you won't get paid.
Not everyone has a smart phone or a computer to be able to get onto the internet to make their claim.


Again you quote stuff that isnt true. As well as the above claim, you wont have to be tested every three months either.

I can just about stand your whinging because you are unhappy with your own situation but I cant tolerate the lies.

"Depending on your circumstances you may get a short award of up to 2 years or a longer award lasting up to 5 or 10 years. If you are given a longer award you may still be contacted, during this time, to see if your needs have changed."

Source; http://www.disabilityrightsuk.org/f60.htm

(in reply to tazzygirl)
Profile   Post #: 156
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: Welfare scrounging - about as low as it gets Page: <<   < prev  4 5 6 7 [8]
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.109