Would looking at the welfare state in a different way wake up some people or do they already know?

People on public assistance get housing, food, cash, home phone, and even cell phone service from either a state agency or a federal one

Housing (section 8)
Cash (welfare)
Food (EBT)

Now instead of thinking about that you pay just some taxes and that small amount is combined and then redistributed to all of this discretionary spending think of it like this

Over the period of your life you will pay a great deal of taxes, state, property, federal, fica, and others.

Now imagine instead of sending your money in a little at a time and it going off to some amorphous federal government imagine you were just forced to allow a boarder in your home. Some person who had no job just got to live in your house, eat your food, use your phone, and take your money to spend on what ever.

If you think about the welfare state in this manner does it seem the same safety net or does it sound like a huge scam?

http://www.lifeline.gov/lifeline_Consumers.html

Life line and Link up

Phone service for government assistance users.

The liberals on this site are just getting more and more personally vicious

You’re a liar. When do they get phone service?

9 Responses to “Would looking at the welfare state in a different way wake up some people or do they already know?”

  1. Brad Hanson says:

    "imagine you were just forced to allow a boarder in your home. Some person who had no job just got to live in your house, eat your food, use your phone, and take your money to spend on what ever."

    I see you’ve met my wife.
    .
    .
    References :
    Poor Bethy, wasting so much of her life thinking about and worrying about other people. Let it go.

  2. Françoise ☂ says:

    Why do cons hate when disadvantaged people get a leg up but could care less when hugely rich companies get tons of tax dollars to scratch their asses?
    References :

  3. Pagan Pride says:

    You’re a liar. When do they get phone service?
    References :

  4. froghugger says:

    the only difference would be that with the government we have to pay for people to do all the paper work and the person can stay on welfare forever.
    If they were in my house I could give them more help because I wouldn’t have to pay all the government workers their share and I wouldn’t let them hang out and not do anything forever, after a while they would have to get a job. also they wouldn’t be able to drink alot or do drugs while at my house and they wouldn’t be allowed to have unlimited kids.
    References :

  5. whiteflame55 says:

    Alright, so there are a few problems with your analysis. One, taking a boarder into your home assumes a lot of things beyond the mere provision of funds. Two, I don’t agree that what we give in welfare is equates to having someone in your house because welfare doesn’t exactly provide that much. "Money to spend on whatever" doesn’t exactly exist for these people. Three, it seems extremely callous of you to equate the two and pretend as though it should change analysis. If I entirely agreed with you about what’s going on, I still would be fine with it because of the next reason. Four, you assume the person has no job and leave it at that, which means you think they would have no job as a result of a lack of trying or some other mechanism. If you felt otherwise about it, you would have said "couldn’t find a job."

    At the end of the day, you’re just making a lot of untrue assumptions and, on that basis, saying it’s a scam. If the money keeps people fed and in a reasonable housing, I’m fine with that. If you want to talk about other areas within welfare that spending could be curtailed, that’s a different subject. What you’re doing here is attacking the system as a whole.
    References :

  6. Liberal AssKicker says:

    The only reason I’m giving you a star is because liberals hate you.

    I’m too lazy to read your question, and you’re really just preaching to the choir with me.
    References :

  7. think much says:

    As far as letting someone live in your house for free, plenty of people were more than willing to do that after hurricane Katrina. They allowed less fortunate people who lost their home to stay with them for free. I also did something similar and it didn’t make a huge difference in my current lifestyle just like paying taxes doesn’t impact my current lifestyle but I’m sure it makes a difference for my neighbor. And as an American I want for my neighbor what I want for myself.
    References :

  8. Nikki says:

    It’s sad…& well planned. create a depended class, aRoman mob, that looks to thegovt for all its needs. & heaven help the politician that tries to remove them.

    And don’t forget the big slice of people that WORK in the distributing bureaucracies. They’re the biggest recievers of handouts.
    References :

  9. underwearmillionaire says:

    good post, i know a girl who is 37 has 6 kids by 6 different guys and has never worked a day in her lief, and she said at 13 as long as she could have kids she would never work. yes she gets food stamps, has her house rent paid, light bill paid and gas bill paid. she also has her home phone and a cell phone paid not to mention she has cable tv. and now she is complaining that because her kids are starting to turn 18 that her income is shrinking and she doesn’t know what she is going to do. yet when u look at what she is getting she is making if u want to call it that over 30 thousand a year which is way above minimum wage. yet me and u are bad people because we think she should get a job.
    References :

Leave a Reply