| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - December 29 2006 : 6:53:51 PM
From "Outdoors Unlimited" ....
http://www.outdoorsunlimited.net/cgi-bin/news/viewnews.cgi?id=1167320131 |
| 11 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| RedFraggle |
Posted - January 12 2007 : 3:42:58 PM
I went to college (the first time!) in central Texas. Now that's a place with a lot of welfare abuse! I briefly worked collections for a jewelry store when I was there, and people living off of welfare and foodstamps were buying $900 pieces of jewelry, in addition to boats, cars, and motorcycles. Go figure!
Oh, and I agree with you too, WW.  |
| Obediah |
Posted - January 12 2007 : 12:27:07 PM
Amen, WW; I've been down that road myself in the dim past.  People down on their luck must be helped. Sadly, way too many people DO NOT want to work.  My wife works for a staffing agency; I get to hear all sort of horror stories about these goobers.
And on a related note, I can't begin to tell you how great it is to hear people bashing states other than the PRK.  |
| Light of the Moon |
Posted - January 11 2007 : 5:02:30 PM
Couldn't agree more, WW. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - January 06 2007 : 11:45:01 PM
I hope everyone understands that I was being extremely sarcastic in my post above. I think it's a great idea, too. I just highly doubt that Oregon voters would ever go for it.
I had a time in my life when I needed to take my turn at receiving some assistance from the government, after years of paying my taxes to help others. I was a divorced, working Mom with 2 small children (and virtually no child support). 50% of my meager wages went to a babysitter, and I had to apply for Medicaid, because I had no health insurance, and food stamps so we could eat. It was a pretty rough time in my life and I was grateful for the assistance.
So, I agree completely, MG, I wouldn't ever deny help to anyone who really truly needed it like I did. But I also agree that something has simply got to be done about people who are perfectly capable of working at some sort of job and who refuse to do it. I am so tired of the welfare system being taken advantage of. I don't know what the answer is, but I sure like the idea of cutting back on assistance to those who are not working, and rewarding those who are by giving them a bit more. A little incentive might work in many cases. |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - January 06 2007 : 5:54:58 PM
I'm sure no one has a problem with helping ANYONE who's down on their luck so to speak. That could happen to almost anyone under the right circustances. It's when folks life style becomes dependent on a monthly government check, - and they make no effort to improve their situation that things get a tad dicy. There's always something that they can do, - we used to have street sweepers for example, something to "entice them" to make an attempt to fend for themselves. Not all that long ago, Boston (at the urging of Uncle Sam) made an attempt to clean things up. They actually had some success, - but not exactly a huge amount. We are talking about Boston after all. During some hearings on the "problem" - there were folks that had been on welfare for three generations! ... In three generations - NO ONE could find some sort of employment? Hello .... |
| Fitzhugh Williams |
Posted - January 06 2007 : 5:02:44 PM
quote:
I find it hard to believe since there are still so many people on welfare and McDonald's always has a sign hanging that says "NOW HIRING".
Would you want to eat food prepared by these people? I wouldn't! And I feel sure that most of McDonald's customers wouldn't. There are those that are down on their luck, and then there are those who people will not hire. Some are incapable of doing the job, some just don't care, and some are of a different mindset that us. I fully agree on drug tests, but what then. Say they fail, what do you do with them? People have been asking that question since the Elizabethan Poor Laws of the 16th century. At one time they were cared for by the church, then Henry VIII consficated the church's property and suddenly the country side was overrun with indigent people. Thus they became wards of the state and have been so ever since. |
| Dancer |
Posted - January 06 2007 : 4:40:08 PM
Hate me but I love it!!!!! I am all for urine test for state-assistance recipients. I have to admit that I too, time to time, feel aggravated that I am working a job to pay my way in life and then there is that person who is mooching off of my hard labor and not doing a thing to make their own way. I say that state assisted persons should have to turn in forms or something showing that they have made a continuing effort to get a job and support themselves. My boyfriend tells me that this is already a requirement in most states but I find it hard to believe since there are still so many people on welfare and McDonald's always has a sign hanging that says "NOW HIRING". Too good for McDonald's but not too good for welfare? What is wrong with this picture? |
| Monadnock Guide |
Posted - January 05 2007 : 12:31:01 PM
Heh, heh, - no one's gonna get bounced of welfare because the flunked a drug test. It would only qualify them for more assistance, - a tax funded drug rehab program. Ohio is indeed a liberal state, - but ol' Taxachussetts has to be about the worse. After all, they were the ONLY state in the country that went for George McGovern - now that's liberal! |
| Light of the Moon |
Posted - January 05 2007 : 11:39:44 AM
I don't know, WW.
Other states are moving in that direction in an effort to rid the system of "mooches".
Why would Oregan be exempt from this type of change just because they are liberal? Cincin-nasty has had a well known liberal stand. In fact OHIO has been declared the most liberal state in the great US of A and they are working on implementing a law that would require drug testing.
So, I think if enough states follow suit Oregan will be with them. |
| Wilderness Woman |
Posted - January 01 2007 : 10:57:19 AM
Are you kidding? My home state of Oregon, which is one of the more liberal states in the union, would never do something like that! I mean, you are talking about a state whose voters implemented and have upheld the Death With Dignity Act (assisted suicide)! Come on! They would never insist on urine tests for welfare recipients. Good Heavens. That might infringe on someone's basic right to privacy.
I love my home state, and it has done many good things, including fighting for a cleaner environment, but sometimes I just shake my head in wonder. |
| Obediah |
Posted - December 30 2006 : 9:09:09 PM
BRAVO!
I can see this happening in Oregon, but never in the Peoples' Republik of Kalifornia!  |
|
Around The Site:
~ What's New? ~
Pathfinding
|
Mohican Gatherings
|
Mohican Musings
|
LOTM Script
|
History
|
Musical Musings
|
Storefronts on the Frontier
Off the Beaten Trail
|
Links
Of Special Interest:
The Eric Schweig Gallery
|
From the Ramparts
|
The Listening Room
|
Against All Odds
|
The Video Clips Index
DISCLAIMER
Tune, 40, used by permission - composed by Ron Clarke
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
