House Set to Ban Welfare Payments at Strip Clubs and Casinos (Page 2)

OCD_OCD: it's slavery of their free will and their self-sufficiency. the underprivileged have the ability to get an education which is either subsidized or paid for by the government. Yet a is gle mother struggles to go to school and work while she sees her neighbor having a better standard of life than she does, so she gives up.

I was here: No it isn't. They choose to stay on the system because they have no reason to leave the system.

I was here: If the government "controlled" how they could use their money...they would have reason to get off the system. Either that or adjust to the fact that they have no control over what they can and cannot have.

Currently...they can have whatever their little heart desires.

OCD_OCD: The government controls them via their purse strings. meaning votes.

LiptonCambell: I'm not quite on board with this law....I mean, I agree- if you're on Welfare, you shouldn't be pissing away money on the slots.....but this isn't like denying people welfare if they use the money to buy illegal substances....Strip Clubs and Casinos are perfectly legal.

I think its wrong for people to use that money so stupidly- but then again, I don't think it should be illegal to be stupid....

ohnonotthatguy: I totally agree with Tink "There is no reason for anyone to want to get "off" the system (the way the system is currently set up) Why would anyone want too? They have everything they need and they get to do whatever they want each and everyday."
Some years ago back here in my neck of the woods (Ontario) we had a a Premiere (like a Governor in the USA) that promised to cut welfare by 30% within his 1st 2 years in power.our province ran like clock work.
He managed to cut only 28% of welfare recipients (mostly able and fit young bodies) from the system he ran for re-election but lost the bid.
People don't need long term assistance(generation after generation) from us working stiffs,they need to justify and submit receipts as proof of purchase for their annual taxes just like us working folks.

OCD_OCD: I agree, but I don't see that happening.

Comrade_: I have no problem with that. We had something similar but I think it was a card (can't remember the name) the person would only be able to buy certain items and be restricted from buying cigarette and alcohol etc. I guess if any tax payer would like their taxes to be paid for someone else to use in gambling or a strip club they can just hand it to the person ey. Wellfare is given for a reason.

Sarcastic Dots: Bingo. I don't fall on one side or another. Welfare should exist, but it shouldn't make your life worse. Healthcare, food and housing are fine, since they are beneficial to humanity. Smoking, drinking and gambling are not fine, since they're not.

OCD_OCD: Exactly.

xmax76: I think they should do away with ALL income tax. Why pay on what you make. Illegal workers (getting paid under the table) folks DO NOT pay tax simply because their not reported. As far as gov't is concerned...they're unemployed. However....if SALES TAX (anything you purchase) is set at a certain rate (say 28%)...Everyone pays....even illegals. That's fair for everyone.

Sarcastic Dots: Income tax is guaranteed tax and allow the government to budget. Sales tax can fluxuate depending on the demand of the economy. To put it another way, military funding will be based on the whims of the shopper, rather than what the military actually needs.

Then there is the disproportionate effect it has on society. The richer you are, the less sales tax is an issue, but the poorer you are, the less you can afford big ticket items, be it important ones *like a washing machine) or unimportant ones (like a tv).

Nobody likes taxes, but I'm telling you right now, if people were voluntarily asked to donate money to the military, schools and healthcare, the size of each would great contract. People beat their chest about supporting the military, but when you have guys like Mitt Romney trying to avoid paying tax, how much do they really care?

Also, the issues with illegal immigrants is easy. Instead of finding them and deporting them, find them, give them a national insurance number and make them pay taxes.

dave3974: finding illegal immigrants a job and giving them a national insurance no , the key to all sorts of benifits -----is a sure way to get a lot more illegal immigrants ----were on earth can we piut them all -------GET REAL

Sarcastic Dots: Illegal immigrants can't claim welfare, only legal immigrants and asylum seekers can. Don't tell me to get real if you can't even be bothered to check out the, you know, law.

davidk14: .

"....Census Bureau data reveals that most U.S. families headed by illegal immigrants use taxpayer-funded welfare programs on behalf of their American-born anchor babies."

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2011/04/most-illegal-immigrant-families-collect-welfare/

.

Sarcastic Dots: I'm talking to Dave here, who is British. The law clearly states illegal immigrants can't be provided with benefits, unless they are seeking asylum. There ARE loopholes, but frankly, a reformation of the welfare system, or any system for that matter, including that of immigration, is going to have loopholes.

But telling me to "get real" is silly. Real is reality, and the reality is, the government doesn't wilfully hand out welfare to immigrants unless that immigrant indulges in illegal activities to get it.

Besides, I don't understand why it was even brought up by Dave. I was talking about illegal immigrants who are working, not ones claiming welfare.

davidk14: .

People that are in the US illegally and are working, are breaking the law and so are those that employ them.

.

Sarcastic Dots: I agree, they are. I'm not disputing that David, however I don't think the system of constant deportations works anywhere, especially given the vast majority of money it takes to do that. Like I said, I'd rather they get found and taxed, rather than finding them, pouring money into border control and then repeating the process over and over again.

But, I am glad we agree on this

"so are those that employ them."

Personally, I think the employer, including rather large companies (walmart anyone?) should be penalised far more- you may disagree, but I tend to think that if employees aren't penalised for hiring workers who, lets be honest here, work for far less than we ("we" being the developed world), then we are racing to the bottom of the barrel.

People tend to place the burden on the immigrants, not the people that hire them, especially if that company is too big to care (again walmart). Immigrants wouldn't come here if they couldn't get hired, and dodging taxes is just as appealing to an employer as it is an employee.

But, hey, those are just "my" thoughts and I understand that I have a very liberal, idealistic view of immigration, so I'm probably not going to move an inch on my thoughts... So, to avoid an argument, rather than a discussion, I'm bowing out.

davidk14: .

*liberal? tell me it ain't so*

.

OCD_OCD: The US has always accepted legal immigration. If it is not legal, it should not happen. There is a reason that people who want to immigrate to the U.S. must assimilate and become legal. Legal citizens have rights and responsibilities (in the form of taxes) that must be met. To come here and avail themselves of the right to work, without the responsibilities that it entails, is wrong...and illegal.

The fact that employers turn their backs to the illegality of hiring non-legal workers is abhorrent. The fact that cities in California choose not to enforce laws against illegal immigrants that are enforced against legal citizens is abhorrent.

If it is a law, enforce it. If it is a law that is unjust, repeal it.

the real slim DEEPy: Bill Clinton passed welfare reform in his 2nd term, and the same Bill Clinton applauded Obama, when Obama repealed the welfare reform. Add up all your monthly benefits you get as a low income individual/family aqnd the gross value is close to $3000. why would you work at mcdonalds for $1200 a month when you can gorss near $3000 in bernefits, as long as you earn less than $400 a month. once you go over $400 a month, you lose almost all your benefits. you cant work at mcdonalds and collect benefits on a sliding scale. the same with dieability, you can make up to $999 and recieve full benefits, but if you make over $1000, you lose your entire ssdi check. the wey to encourage people to get off welfare is a sensible sliding wscale system, that actually punishes underachievment and rewards trying, even at a menial job.

OCD_OCD: Welfare is slavery and entrapment wrapped in a velvet glove

davidk14: .

I work with some folks that will not work over 20 hours per week because they will lose their benefits. And those benefits are HUGE especially when you have four children and the 'spouse' does not work.

.