When Welfare Goes Wrong...

[lookout123]

I know a gentleman who came from a very poor background to become a very very insanely wealthy man. About 15 years ago he was sitting around with a group of men thinking back to the days he would show up to school in ratty clothes and no school supplies. He was self conscious and a loner. One year a teacher spotted his embarrassment and gave him a new sweater, shoes, a backpack, a couple notebooks, and some pencils without drawing attention to the gift. He still draws on that day as one of the defining moments in his life.

He asked one of the other guys at the table how difficult it would be to identify all of the children in a school who might be in the same type of situation he was as a child. The other man who was a school superintendent let him know it wasn't hard. The gentleman announced that while he understood it wouldn't solve all the problems in life, he wanted every child within reach to start the school year with a two new sweaters, shoes, and a backpack filled with supplies. He stood up, told the school superintendent he wanted the number of children within 24 hours. Not just for his school, but for every school in the area. The men all laughed because they knew he was rich but to provide those items to the thousands and thousands of kids in the system would come out to a huge number. He nodded and left.

The next day the superintendent stopped at his office and gave him a list that was even larger than expected. He told the gentleman that while it was a worthy idea the cost was just too high to make it workable. Maybe just some shoes? Just school supplies? The gentleman laughed, told the school superintendent to sit down, and picked up his phone. He made five phone two minute phone calls. Every year since then the gentleman and five friends have made sure that every single child in that region starts school with two new sweaters, new shoes, and a backpack full of supplies. Does it solve all their problems? Hell no. But it does possibly lessen the embarrassment for one or two kids who might someday go on to help others.

Only a very small number of people know that story because he didn't set up a charity, run a news story, or accept any awards. It is a private act by private citizens. When I asked him about it he simply pointed out that not everyone with money is a greedy bastard. Most people just need to know a need exists and they'll do what they can to help.

This is the same guy who was disheartened to find out school scholarships were either ethnic or achievement oriented. He promptly started a new scholarship open to anyone involved in any community service of any sort. But that's another story.

[Shawnee123]

Ty Webb: You know who that guy was, Danny?

Danny Noonan: Bob Hope?

Ty Webb: Ha ha... No, that guy was Mitch Comstein, my roommate. He was a good guy.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by lookout123

Most people just need to know a need exists and they'll do what they can to help.

Once they realize the government doesn't provide for everyone's needs, and the poor aren't getting rich on welfare.

This is the same guy who was disheartened to find out school scholarships were either ethnic or achievement oriented. He promptly started a new scholarship open to anyone involved in any community service of any sort. But that's another story.

For the people that Shawnee is always worried about. Not the people with no means, but not enough means.

[classicman]

(CNSNews.com) – As a candidate for president, Barack Obama decried the financial toll that the Iraq war was taking on the economy, but Obama’s proposed spending on welfare through 2010 will eclipse Bush’s war spending by more than $260 billion.

“Because of the Bush-McCain policies, our debt has ballooned,” then-Sen. Barack Obama told a Charleston, W.V., crowd in March 2008. “This is creating problems in our fragile economy. And that kind of debt also places an unfair burden on our children and grandchildren, who will have to repay it.”

During the entire administration of George W. Bush, the Iraq war cost a total of $622 billion, according to the Congressional Research Service.

President Obama’s welfare spending will reach $888 billion in a single fiscal year--2010--more than the Bush administration spent on war in Iraq from the first “shock and awe” attack in 2003 until Bush left office in January.

Obama’s spending proposals call for the largest increases in welfare benefits in U.S. history, according to a report by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank. This will lead to a spending total of $10.3 trillion over the next decade on various welfare programs. These include cash payments, food, housing, Medicaid and various social services for low-income Americans and those at 200 percent of the poverty level, or $44,000 for a family of four. Among that total, $7.5 trillion will be federal money and $2.8 trillion will be federally mandated state expenditures.

In that same West Virginia speech last year, Obama said, “When Iraq is costing each household about $100 a month, you’re paying a price for this war.”

The Heritage study says, “Applying that same standard to means-tested welfare spending reveals that welfare will cost each household $560 per month in 2009 and $638 per month in 2010.”

Link

It's still Bush's fault right? We are just now paying the tab for he party that was.

Originally Posted by classicman

Link

It's still Bush's fault right? We are just now paying the tab for he party that was.

Comparing Obama "welfare" spending to Bush war spending = apple and oranges.

A more relevant comparison would be Obama's spending on these social programs compared to Bush's spending on the same programs...and then also factor in that they may have increased as a result of the 07-08 recession.

[Pie]

Originally Posted by Redux

...as a result of the 07-08-09-10 recession.

FTFY.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by classicman

Link

It's still Bush's fault right? We are just now paying the tab for he party that was.

Just let them and their children starve.

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

Again, American vs UK citizens. It does seem that an awful lot of US citizens are genetically lazy.

Genetically? I know you didn't mean genetically.

I hope.

President Obama’s welfare spending will reach $888 billion in a single fiscal year--2010--more than the Bush administration spent on war in Iraq from the first “shock and awe” attack in 2003 until Bush left office in January.

Obama’s spending proposals call for the largest increases in welfare benefits in U.S. history, according to a report by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank....These include cash payments, food, housing, Medicaid and various social services for low-income Americans and those at 200 percent of the poverty level, or $44,000 for a family of four.

The Heritage Foundation characterization of "welfare" spending is really appalling.

The actual numbers for welfare/income security programs is around $400B (est) and if you add Medicaid..another $250B (est).

So I'm assuming Heritage is including unemployment compensation, the self-funded SCHIP program, and I have no clue what else, in order to come up with their fear mongering number of $888B

[Pie]

They're probably also including defense-related spending going to Boeing, too. </snark>

Originally Posted by Pie

They're probably also including defense-related spending going to Boeing, too. </snark>

Corporate welfare is a different slice of the pie.

But then when/if they enact legislation to de-fund or prohibit future funding to ACORN, they might just have to include grants/contracts to companies like Haliburton, Blackwater Security, and nearly every defense contractor that "cheated" on their contract or had employees who broke the law or engaged in questionably activities while on the job.

[classicman]

Sheesh...

[skysidhe]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

Again, American vs UK citizens. It does seem that an awful lot of US citizens are genetically lazy. If they are not governed by a punitive system then they will take every opportunity not to work.

Luckily, there is only a minority of people in this country who live this way. Of course we have our own burden of the generally criminally minded, drug addicts of one sort of another etc. But I appreciate the American fear that if you had better welfare, just about every American would take advantage of it. We do have a welfare state and not every Brit takes advantage of it, lucky old us.

Americans are hard working. Americans hate welfare and would not take advantage of it in droves if the government offered better welfare. Europe doesn't. We are all of the same race. We are not genetically, generally or otherwise a lazy nation. It's a very small percent of people who abuse a system as it is in every good hard working country.

Originally Posted by smoothmoniker

you mean a punitive system like the free market?

I don't know wtf she means.

Originally Posted by skysidhe

Genetically? I know you didn't mean genetically.

I hope.

I can't believe I picked out one word to focus on when the whole post is a horribly biased.

Americans are not genetically or any other way inclined to take advantage of welfare.

Americans broke from Britain which would make the genetically inclined laziness statement ironic at best.

Our founding fathers are probably rolling over in their graves.

[DanaC]

@ Sky: Sundae wasn't actually suggesting that Americans are genetically lazy.

Americans broke from Britain which would make the genetically inclined laziness statement ironic at best.

And there's the clincher. It's that damned irony again. You've used the word 'ironic' without in any way taking on board the ironic nature of the post. 'At best'? Which means you actually consider the idea that she really does think Americans are genetically lazy? Wouldn't that kind of fly in the face of everything we all know about Sundae? Somewhat out of character maybe? Colloquially (and i realise this may be different for you than for me, and I suppose that's kind of the point)...colloquially that phrase, unless accompanied by the sister statement 'at worst....etc' generally denotes that the 'at best' is either unlikely, or barely less negative than the 'worst' in nature.

It wasn't 'ironic..at best' it was just plain old irony.


I am feeling most irritable. One too many episodes of House.

[skysidhe]

well ya Dana C. Of course.


One does get irritable when confronted with the ridiculous and the bizarre.