Can we pursue capitalism____

[Dr. Shane]

Most that have their baby while young do not normally marry the child's father.They stay on welfare and have more children

The don't need to marry the baby's father. Most don't. It doesn't matter who they marry. Once married they normally get off the welfare roles.

Of course, if we make them work as prostitutes to feed their baby, their chances of getting married may well drop. But hey... at least they won't be getting food stamps. That should make some cold-hearted conservatives happy.

[Dr. Shane]

The food banks normally are not used by people on food stamps.

Oh, how wrong can one possibly be? Or maybe just that far out of touch! I remember going to food banks throughout my childhood. The food stamps just weren't enough to cover the whole month. We would dig through those boxes of food like someone who had just won the lottery. We were so hungry and getting a can of beans to eat was a treat. Being the good Adventists we were we would always find the pork in the can and throw it away but we couldn't afford to toss out the whole can just because it had been cooked with pork in it.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

The food banks normally are not used by people on food stamps.

Oh, how wrong can one possibly be? Or maybe just that far out of touch! I remember going to food banks throughout my childhood. The food stamps just weren't enough to cover the whole month. We would dig through those boxes of food like someone who had just won the lottery. We were so hungry and getting a can of beans to eat was a treat. Being the good Adventists we were we would always find the pork in the can and throw it away but we couldn't afford to toss out the whole can just because it had been cooked with pork in it.

You may have,that does not make it something that is normally done.

Food banks are more frequently used by people not on food stamps and little money. People on food stamps have a safety net than those that don't qualify. If you had ever helped at one you might know that.

There does come a time when even welfare parents should be expected to use their food stamps a little more wisely.

Expensive processed food candy and cookies should be on the list as cigarettes and alcohol not paid for by food stamps

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

We walked,didn't have bikes,we couldn't afford them. 2.5 miles each way and in all weather.TV was non-existent.Not B&W

Man had actually walked on the moon already when I was born.

So clever Shane. It seems that you believe the difference in age made distance more and material items your due.

I know you are a big proponent of climate change but in the fifties rain was still rain and wet. Jan and Feb were mighty cold in MN.

TV B%W or color was beyond my parents budget.We weren't on welfare,we could not afford it. Bikes were something the neighbor kids had,we couldn't afford them unless we were on welfare.

You are far from unique. Many had it far worse than you or I

[bonnie]

No, there is a conservative train of thought that makes one cold-hearted. And one has to be very aware of that when listening to and reading conservative commentators.

There is also a liberal train of thought that makes one very secular-minded. And one has to be very aware of that when listening to and reading liberal commentators.

It seems you have been appointed a role far past that of ordinary moderator. You know who gives and to what extent.

Not sure what radio commentators have to do as a bench mark of giving.

They may influence you, that is your problem. Liberal or conservative hasn't a thing to do with what I personally do.

I don't have the special,unique insight you possess to know how to judge the heart of either.

We had a man in our church,fantastically wealthy. Many condemned him for not giving more.He didn't feel the need to broad cast who and where he helped.Our SS teacher actually said in class his daughter left the chruch because RS would not pay his daughter's tuition to Maple Wood.

Very few knew how generous this man was. He gave and gave.When he felt the giving was anticipated and no change in behaviour was seen he found others to give to.Those that would use the hand up he gave them to prosper and go on to help others

Since then I have been a little reluctant to single out someone and profess to know how much someone actually gives and attempt to reserve a special place in hell for people like him.I will let you be the one to listen carefully and find them that special place in hell.

[bonnie]

Quote:

Nope. Sorry. Not true. Five years is not a generous amount of time which goes to show MN has not always had some of the most generous benefit programs.

Sorry,Shane saying it is not true does not make it so.

MN has always had generous welfare benefits. They finally had to try a residence rule to try to cope with those moving from other states.

Quote:

Five years = Cold-hearted. I am not big on taking bread out of the mouths of poor children after five years. Children crying hungry at bedtime just does seem like good public policy to me. Although I know many cold-hearted conservatives disagree. I mean,,, really,, if the mother can work as a prostitute why should she get food stamps? God bless President Bush that he didn't think that way. And God bless President Obama too.

Again you are being dishonest in replying to anything that has been said.

Parents or a parent that is mentally competent and physically cannot feed their children with free education,free medical,free daycare,subsidized housing and food stamps after five years the parents ability and desire to feed and raise their children need to be looked at.

For you,continued welfare and handouts is the measure of christian.

For some the desire to see others achieve and prosper no matter what their background,to give the necessary hand up is the measure of what we should be doing.

[bonnie]

Quote:

The don't need to marry the baby's father. Most don't. It doesn't matter who they marry. Once married they normally get off the welfare roles.

Of course, if we make them work as prostitutes to feed their baby, their chances of getting married may well drop. But hey... at least they won't be getting food stamps. That should make some cold-hearted conservatives happy.

You need to do a little more fact checking.And you definitely should acquaint yourself with honesty.Again,conservatives outgive the righteous liberal,especially the liberal that goes for the redistribution of wealth.

A large segment of unwed single mothers do not marry for sometime.Getting married probably will take them off the welfare roles.

Shacking up with a variety of men does not.

I worked with two young mothers. Babies fathers in the home most of the time. They planned on getting married to the babies father's at some point,but did not want to let go of food stamps and WIC yet. Babies are both over 2,parents still not married.

That was one of the reasons the rule was put into place that if welfare is granted to a single mother in subsidized housing they cannot have a man stay over night more than one night in seven. They can have seven different men in a week tho and that is alright.

Never mind the children.

[bonnie]

Shane,I will give you the benefit of the doubt and ask you for names,assuming at least for now you can provide them.

You have mentioned talk radio altho not sure why as proof of cold hearted conservatives.

Can you tell me which ones have advocated not having a safety net or wanting to take food out of the mouth of children. Seems you would like God to search for a special place in hell for them. Who are they? Who wants the mother in prostitution instead of on food stamps?

Who are the politicians with the influence to let children starve? I am sure you can share that as you have no problem sharing that you would like to see these people in hell,In a very special place no less.

I know private citizens that I suspect would probably not help their own mother.Also those that are incredibly generous.I do not know anyone of either camp to judge them or know what they actually do privately.You seem to have such knowledge.

I have a neighbor that I would have sworn would not have helped a hungary child no matter what. I was involved with a local program that required approaching others to contribute.I almost did not even bother with her,she appears to be the coldest woman you would ever meet. I finally did ask her and was floored at the willingness to help and to what extent. I have since found out just exactly how much this woman does.It was another reminder that I have no business judging another based on what I think.

I am not sure but I wonder if God has a special place in hell for those that believe they can make God's decisions for him

[Robert]

?

[bonnie]

Moderator's note: the quote from Robert was removed as it doesn't need to be repeated.

I am assuming that you knew this...Talk to the hand, I am thru with you would not affect my day,RIGHT??

Hard times? Your crystal ball is failing you,so is your holier than thou attitude. Maybe you should consider stepping down off your haughty,judgmental high horse.

.You need to be put in the shoes of the poor and then you wouldn't

This is just about funny if you weren't so arrogant. Generally speaking I do not get real specific about my childhood.Not ashamed of it,it just is no longer relevant. We would have thought we were rich if we could have walked in the shoes of the ordinary poor.

I was well acquainted as a child with hunger. Had we had the help Shane had as a child it would have been like christmas. Parents that desperately needed help due to a accident/drunk driver that left them with terrible injuries and the loss of two daughters. They were unable to work consistently for a very long time. Being without electricity and phone was common place. Fear of being taken from our parents was a very real fear. We learned at a young age to hide if a unfamiliar car pulled in the yard,

We were grateful for the year a neighbor offered my brothers and I to hand pick a acre field of corn.10 cents for a long row,5 cents for a short row. It bought thanksgiving dinner that year. Never occurred to us to resent it.We were so proud we could do that for our parents.

In the winter if we had a heavy snowfall we knew we would have snow on our blankets in the morning. During the summer when it rained we slept on the floor downstairs.

Except for the roof over our heads my brothers and I have been self supporting since we were 13 and 14. My older brothers quit school following their freshman and sophomore year. Lack of opportunity and education was not a excuse.They went on to become very successful in their chosen fields. My brothers and I can laugh today that these were the good memories of our childhood.

Poor is not a terminal illness unless someone chooses to have it so. Poor does not have to be synonymous with ignorant. Poor is not synonymous with inability,nor excuses someone from sitting there waiting until conditions are just right for them to help themselves

Nor does poor entitle anyone to what another has. The personal christian responsibility of others is not a entitlement to never ending welfare and hand outs.

While I would not be crazy about reliving portions of my childhood,I am thankful for much of what it taught me.

If believing that providing food,medical,housing,education and expecting at the end of five years most recipients should be able to provide for themselves and their families is haughty and holier than thou,so be it.

I am thankful that I was never told that I had to live a lifetime on handouts because I was to ignorant and incapable of taking care of myself.

[Guest]

Moderator's note: The quote from Robert was removed as it doesn't need to be repeated.

So now you are pointing out the ones who need to experience real real hard times? And who needs to be humbled?

Do you think you're God Robert?

Talk to the hand, I am thru with you....

How old are you Robert? Does your mommy know you're playing on the computer?

Moderators note: Let's try not to be inflammatory. Let's take the high road when others go on the attack.

[bonnie]

Quote:

So now you are pointing out the ones who need to experience real real hard times? And who needs to be humbled?

Do you think you're God Robert?

Those like Robert have been appointed by God to determine who needs to be humbled and walk in the shoes of the poor. God seems to have needed help.

At times it might prove interesting to see how much some do besides talk. Both Shane and Robert seem to be protesting a bit to much about their generous christian beliefs.I am only responsible for what I can do,condemning others to hell doesn't increase what that is. Nor has God given me that special insight that Robert and Shane have. Poor is not the worst that can happen to someone. A self righteous attitude can be far more damaging.

A desire to keep someone dependent as long as possible,not having expectations for them to use their God given abilities is demeaning and degrading. Who knows tho,it may make some feel superior

Shane has stepped up to the plate and accepted the role of determining who needed a special place in hell.

Both assume they have been given the special insight into the hearts of others.Must be a awesome responsibility.

Talk to the hand, I am thru with you....

[Dr. Shane]

Food banks are more frequently used by people not on food stamps and little money. People on food stamps have a safety net than those that don't qualify. If you had ever helped at one you might know that.

I have helped at one which is why I know that is not true. We actually ask for proof a family is receiving assistance. If they are not receiving assistance they have to provide us a bunch of income and employment information to show they qualify. The vast majority are receiving assistance.

[Dr. Shane]

Getting married probably will take them off the welfare roles.

That is definitely a problem with the system and something that needs to be fixed. Women should be able to remain on welfare for a year after getting married regardless of their husband's fixed assets. She should only lose welfare if her new household income exceeds that of 1.5 times the poverty rate. Even then, she should be able to keep her medical benefits for that first year.

[Dr. Shane]

Shane,I will give you the benefit of the doubt...

It's not about me. This thread is about capitalism and, in contrast, socialism. It's not about Shane, Bonnie or Robert.

[Dr. Shane]

My personal experience simply places a context to my comments. I have no problem with anyone making comments about the relevance of my personal experience to the topic.

What we have seen in this thread is Bonnie stating that I am dishonest. That is a personal attack that has no place in a healthy discussion of ideas. We have also seen Robert tell Bonnie that she needs to be humbled. That is also a personal attack that has no place in a healthy discussion of ideas.

We can disagree with someonelse's ideas and their conclusions without telling them they are dishonest or prideful for holding such ideas or coming to such conclusions.

[lazarus]

What we have seen in this thread is Bonnie stating that I am dishonest. That is a personal attack that has no place in a healthy discussion of ideas. We have also seen Robert tell Bonnie that she needs to be humbled. That is also a personal attack that has no place in a healthy discussion of ideas.

There seems to be a common denominator.

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: Shane

What we have seen in this thread is Bonnie stating that I am dishonest. That is a personal attack that has no place in a healthy discussion of ideas. We have also seen Robert tell Bonnie that she needs to be humbled. That is also a personal attack that has no place in a healthy discussion of ideas.

There seems to be a common denominator.

Yes it does seem to be. Had Shane worried about honesty he would not have continually brought up accusations against others that had no part of the discussion. Nor would he have decided that he, Shane is qualified to want others in a special place in hell.

No one suggested or even hinted that there should not be help available,except Shane making his statements and accusations.

There are cold hearted people of every religion and political ideology. That is not reserved for one party of anything,nor does Shane possess the right to condemn any one to hell. He is moderator not God and seems to have mixed the two up

[bonnie]

Quote:

I have helped at one which is why I know that is not true. We actually ask for proof a family is receiving assistance. If they are not receiving assistance they have to provide us a bunch of income and employment information to show they qualify. The vast majority are receiving assistance.

I don't really know what you have in your area. I have also worked at a couple.The vast majority are not receiving regular assistance.These the now unemployed,under employed and are receiving help for their utilities as well. Utility bills with assistance typically runs 10.00 a month

People do show ID.They have gone thru the process of approval to show they need help with food. Those that are in the "need food immediately" catagory,meaning those that have lost their jobs and have no source of income are placed thru another service. Giving them food same day. There are at least three other services and then the food stamp program itself.In addition all of the local grocery stores take donations for food bags.Don't know what their procedure is but do know they ask for a 5.00 donation and the store will match it and have large bags of staples for those who need it. Many chruches are also on call to provide emergency food for a family and if needed transportation and help going thru the process

The ones coming thru are the umemployed,senior citizens that have seen their expenses rise and their incomes stay the same.

Food stamp allottment is sufficient if using their head when shopping. I realize you think they are to ignorant to know the difference between buying pastry and decnt food supplies,but then they need to learn. Doesn't take a whole lot to add and subtract

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

Getting married probably will take them off the welfare roles.

That is definitely a problem with the system and something that needs to be fixed. Women should be able to remain on welfare for a year after getting married regardless of their husband's fixed assets. She should only lose welfare if her new household income exceeds that of 1.5 times the poverty rate. Even then, she should be able to keep her medical benefits for that first year.

Why not do the same for the working married intact families that are struggling. Or for everyone married or not that does not exceed 1.5 times the poverty rate. Or provide everyone free medical for a year regardless of their income.

With the amount spent on welfare now the money is not available nor should it be. I know you think welfare amounts to a pittance but that is not true.

We spend more and more and do very little in terms of success.When the true cost of welfare is calculated it is enormous.

It is the third most costly government program. It is not helped move most off but encouraged to keep career welfare recipients on.One dollar in seven was spent on welfare

In 2008 714 billion was spending for means tested welfare.That is not taking into account the current economic conditions. The amount of welfare amounts to 16,800 for each poor person in the US.We also fund those below 200% or 44,000 per year for a family of four.

With over 15 trillon spent since LBJ's big war on poverty,we are not only not ahead but are falling further and further behind.

Expectations and requirements should come with the hand outs.

Human nature being what it is,free living will be more in demand.If there is no effort required,little value is placed on anything.

[bonnie]

Education is more readily available to the poor than it was even for our own four boys.

They did not have any special skills,rich parents or great opportunities.

What they had was the knowledge if they wanted a college education there was only one way they would get it.That was the hard way My husband and I did not pay anything towards college tuition

No one would provide provide them medical or food stamps or a check at the first of the month.It was work at anything they could find and the old skimp routine.

Being incapable,ignorant and unmotivated because you are poor is an excuse. Especially with the help available. There is no excuse to having one baby after another while living off others with the free birth control offered. If you are not grateful enough to better your situation with five years of your needs met

to bad. Most that don't qualify for type of help would feel like they had won the lottery.

Give them help along with expectations and demands for others footing the bill for them

[Dr. Shane]

Why not do the same for the working married intact families that are struggling. Or for everyone married or not that does not exceed 1.5 times the poverty rate. Or provide everyone free medical for a year regardless of their income.

Currently, many do not get married because getting married will cause them to lose their benefits. So public policy is effectively discouraging marriage. That is not a theory it is documented behavior that is taking place.

So we know the current policy discourages marriage. What else do we know?

We know that married couples are less likely to live in poverty and need assistance.

So knowing those two things - is there a need for change? Yes. What kind of change? A change that would encourage marriage instead of discouraging marriage - obviously.

[Dr. Shane]

. I know you think welfare amounts to a pittance but that is not true.

We spend more and more and do very little in terms of success.

[Robert]

Education is more readily available to the poor than it was even for our own four boys.

Education is not the answer to everything. There are many educated folks out of work and on food stamps.

Again Bonnie, you have a very snooty way of looking at folks who are poor. This world is wicked and there are many who try but are knocked down again and again....I see exploitation everywhere....I see the good old boy system at work. Everything is not all rosy for many. I wonder what you would do in such circumstances? Cry like a baby....?

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

Why not do the same for the working married intact families that are struggling. Or for everyone married or not that does not exceed 1.5 times the poverty rate. Or provide everyone free medical for a year regardless of their income.

Currently, many do not get married because getting married will cause them to lose their benefits. So public policy is effectively discouraging marriage. That is not a theory it is documented behavior that is taking place.

So we know the current policy discourages marriage. What else do we know?

We know that married couples are less likely to live in poverty and need assistance.

So knowing those two things - is there a need for change? Yes. What kind of change? A change that would encourage marriage instead of discouraging marriage - obviously.

Explain to me why we need to pay people to get married if as you say this is true......

know that married couples are less likely to live in poverty and need assistance.

Why would someone that has received welfare getting married need welfare assistance anymore than most of us?

There is a four letter word many of us have had to learn.It is called WORK.A former welfare mother can work as well as I can.Whether or not there is a college education there are numerous possibilities.

There is a need for change but it is not paying people to get married.

Not getting married because they will lose their handouts explains the mentality of welfare.