Jump to content
IGNORED

The Truth Behind the Welfare Queen Myth


roddma

Recommended Posts

I have worked with people in underserved areas and yes, they do come in name brand clothing and cell phones. However, you can buy name brand stuff at Goodwill, or have it gifted to you. People can have cell phones when they are poor because it's cheaper than having a landline or they are on a family plan. I've been poor and know poor friends. I feel if people have lived comfortably all their lives, they may not realize that you can buy great items on the cheap and second hand.

That said, I've seen abuses and poor choices made by welfare recipients. It's not fraud or illegal, more like reckless behavior that contributes to economic dependency. I've seen patients who continue to have children despite being unemployed/single parent/struggling already/uninsured. I've seen patients who complain that they can't afford meds on the $4 list for their blood pressure yet continue to have a pack a day cigarette habit. My husband used to get so many patients like that as an intern that he gave up counseling patients to stop smoking and use that money to pay for their meds (because some people can't understand that priority). There are parents are only compliant with well child visits / vaccinations for the free stuff they get as a reward for their compliance----I feel people should not have to be bribed to care for their children. So while I agree that programs are needed...some people will try take advantage of everything and continue to live carelessly. I've also met patients who have heartbreaking stories, in incredibly tragic situations. It really makes anything bad in my life pale in comparison. There are people who've lost everything, who have ill family members to care for, who were abused, who were neglected. For some people, the welfare system doesn't cover their needs at all and you send them away with little more than a hotline to call and well wishes.

Welfare recipients, poor and indigent population are a mixed group,. Some try to be responsible, others not so much. Some make bad decisions, others learn from theirs'. The welfare debate fails to see people in all their dimensions. Abuses happen anywhere. It doesn't matter if it's corporate welfare or WIC programs. The debate should be centered on how to tighten restrictions so as to prevent abuses, and how to get people off of welfare programs. Believing in the importance of our welfare system does not mean I don't believe in personal responsibility. Welfare's primary goal is to tie people over until they get back on their feet. That means transitioning people to work, to school, to bettering their lives. Right now, we do ok in providing very basic stuff for most poor people, but we still get stuck at getting people out of poverty and into a better life. In that way, I'm kind of a mixture of liberal and conservative ideology. I believe that we need the welfare system, but I also believe in getting people off of it as soon as possible.

~apologies in advance if large block quotes are verboten~

I'd like to add that smart phones are the way many poor and marginalized people access the Internet regularly. For a good many of my students, their cell phones are the only reliable way they have to do everything from get homework help to research the college application/financial aid process to take practice college entrance exams. It burns me to no end when privileged conservative types scoff at poor people with smart phones. On the one hand they complain that poor/marginalized people don't do enough to better themselves, and on the other they complain when they have access to the technology that might actually help them get out of poverty.

The only other thing I'd like to add to your post is that, from my experience, at least some poor adults will never be completely self-reliant. They have mental health issues, they have physical issues, and/or they're caring for someone who can't care for themselves for whatever reason. Down the street from my house is a group home for adults who are living with issues like spina bifida and cerebral palsy. I'm sure it's subsidized housing, and I'm sure the people who live there are not paying completely out-of-pocket for the skilled nursing care and home health aids who are there seven days a week, 52 weeks a year.

When I hear people saying, "Welfare's ruinin' 'Merica. Folks need ta gitajob," I just marvel at the super duper safe bubble they live in and hope for their sake it never bursts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 100
  • Created
  • Last Reply

All of you have very good point. One thing I can add, something I heard a long time ago:

It is beneficial to the whole society, when we take care of our members who cannot take care of themselves.

I remember, 20 years ago, when I was single, pregnent and unemployed, and I was actually quite thrilled to be having a baby. I was 34, and had a career, but was in a rough patch. I remember thinking the worst thing that can happen to me in Canada is that I will be on wefare. As it happened, I never had to go there, but it was reasuring to know that I would not ever be begging on the streets. 20 years later, I have a daughter in university, a home I own with lots of equity in it, and a great job. However, even if it was only theoretical, that safety net was there for me. Otherwise, I would have likely had an abortion - oh wait, if I lived in a place without that safety net, perhaps I would have had no access to safe abortion, either.

At any rate, those of us in our safe, educated, middle class lives have no business judging those less fortunate. My successes have as much to do with the good fortune of being born in a province with a lot of oil, as they do with my own initiatives.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JFC, I have a question about the dole. I had a British couple come in and apply. Mrs. had accepted a job as a head nurse in a California hospital that paid over 60K a year and also received a huge bonus. Mr. quit his job in London to move with his wife. They thought that since Mr. had no income we would give the family welfare. They claimed that he would have received aid in Britian and thought that we were being mean for not giving them cash aid. Would they have qualified for aid in England?

Almost certainly not. It's why a fair few people claim not to be living with their partner. Also, if you quit your job (and are not fired) IIRC you couldn't claim for a while after.

He might still be eligible for other benefits (DLA and the like) but I would say that's a no aside from that. It's also increasingly hard to claim DLA, and if he was holding down a job it seems unlikely he would fail assessment and be eligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Almost certainly not. It's why a fair few people claim not to be living with their partner. Also, if you quit your job (and are not fired) IIRC you couldn't claim for a while after.

He might still be eligible for other benefits (DLA and the like) but I would say that's a no aside from that. It's also increasingly hard to claim DLA, and if he was holding down a job it seems unlikely he would fail assessment and be eligible.

I guess they thought that the streets of America were paved with gold, LOL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This bothers me. Failure to manage employees is not a failure by employees. If someone is capable of doing a job (as he would have been), a good manager/supervisor can explain what needs to be done. The thought that he was let go and the reasons were not explained to him makes me quite angry right now. (I'm sitting here, presumably years later and an ocean away, close to tears of frustration because of the thought of this. I might need a hug IRL today.)

I do actually know the reasons. It was nothing to do with him, the owner of the place could save money by making the other employees clean as part of their regular duties instead of employing a regular cleaner and let him go. But I couldn't tell him, and that was sad. I just tried to reassure him as best I could.

He was really like a child that's been punished for no reason, bewildered. It was like if your mum and dad told you to clean your room, and you did your best, and it was shiny and looked great. You were proud and you stood by the door waiting for Mum and Dad to come in and tell you what a good job you'd done. They came in, took a look, Dad hit you and Mum told you you were a little cunt and you weren't getting to eat again until you behaved.

A while ago now, but I do often wonder what became of the bloke and his wife.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had clients who came in to apply because dad was in an accident. He applied for Ca. disability. He was denied because disability said that he didn't pay into it. He was receiving food stamps and had to report his income. Guess what, his pay stubs showed that state disability was indeed taken out. I copied all his paystubs and he got his disability. I hope that the employer rots in hell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

California has a decent state disability program. Many of us who grew up there are familiar with it in the context of maternity benefits. When I moved to Washington I was shocked to find that there was no disability available for women who have given birth; apparently you are supposed to work a full day, give birth in the off hours and head back immediately the next day. However, CA disability is indeed a pain in the ass to apply for.

We seem to be getting poorer by the second in my home because applying to medical school is expensive, and my children have some commitments that have ended up to cost more than we expected (examples: dying/cutting hair for a school play, auditioning for and being accepted to a regional youth symphony and finding out it costs money, various crap for high school graduation). There is this perpetual cold fear to being poor, this feeling that the $5 you spend on laundry soap could be $5 you don't have for rent. The not-very-funny humorous thought that losing electric would also mean we did not have to pay for internet, which would be awesome if I did not work, go to school, and have some semblance of a social life only because of the internet. Thanks to food stamps we at least do not have to worry about feeding ourselves. The longer we live this way, the more upset I get when people pull out the whole welfare queen myth. It is so easy to be enraged at the idea, but then I fall into another stereotype: the angry, entitled beneficiary of government aid.

We have a firm end-date on being poor and it is getting nearer and nearer. It cannot get here soon enough as far as I am concerned. People need that hope, whether it is job-training or student loans for education. There has to be a way out, otherwise what is there?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I notice that the richer someone is, the wilder their idea of your typical welfare recipient. It would be amusing if being rich didn't make people so much more likely to take you seriously.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when I was a kid and living with my grandparents my grandfather was in his mid fifties when his health started to fail first he had to have knee surgery, then he was diagnosed with heart problems, then Parkerson's disease he finially won his disability at the age of 59 when he was dying of stomach cancer. This was a WWII vet who at the time of his illness had worked for the state police for decades he wasn't by any means lazy. My grandmother couldn't work outside the home because she had me and my bed-ridden great-grandmother to care for. She helped make ends meet by doing custom sewing for people as she was a very talented seamstress. It pisses me off when all people needing assistance are lumped together as being lazy leeches on society.

My husband and I have needed to go on assistance recently not because he doesn't work but because his company has had a freeze on pay raises for the last couple years with the prices on everything going up and his pay staying the same we have gone from lower middle class to the working poor. My husband works a full time factory job often putting in 10 or more hours of overtime a week so he's far from lazy. He would look for another job but nothing in the area is hiring and because of learning disabilities that were never properly addressed back in school my husband is practically illiterate. I have health issues that rule out the typical factory fast-food, or retail jobs that make up the job market in my area. I have been working on a college degree for the last couple years though.

We have a few nice things but it is because my husband has worked hard to try and build up his credit score we have android phones because he has always paid his cell phone bill even when all we could afford was the cheapo phones to start with

My kids have some name brand clothes, but trust me I do not shop at Aeropostle, Baby Gap, A Children's Place or Old Navy. I do shop thrift stores, consignment shops, Goodwill stores and yard sales.

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

JFC, I have a question about the dole. I had a British couple come in and apply. Mrs. had accepted a job as a head nurse in a California hospital that paid over 60K a year and also received a huge bonus. Mr. quit his job in London to move with his wife. They thought that since Mr. had no income we would give the family welfare. They claimed that he would have received aid in Britian and thought that we were being mean for not giving them cash aid. Would they have qualified for aid in England?

No, they wouldn't have got welfare.

Had he paid a full national insurance stamp, he would have been able to claim job seekers allowance (contribution based) for a limited time. However I am pretty sure that as he quit his job voluntarily he would have had that payment suspended for a period of time (6 months I think). But that's all, he wouldn't get job seekers allowance (income based) as that one is means tested.

If he was disabled or sick, he would be able to claim one of the non means tested disability related benefits, but that still doesn't mean he would have got them. They are pretty hard to get. My daughter gets the child version of disability living allowance and shit is it hard to get. You have a 58 page form to fill in that delves into absolutely everything and have to supply several doctors reports. Even then they will often call you in for a medical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have worked with people in underserved areas and yes, they do come in name brand clothing and cell phones. However, you can buy name brand stuff at Goodwill, or have it gifted to you. People can have cell phones when they are poor because it's cheaper than having a landline or they are on a family plan. I've been poor and know poor friends. I feel if people have lived comfortably all their lives, they may not realize that you can buy great items on the cheap and second hand.

That said, I've seen abuses and poor choices made by welfare recipients. It's not fraud or illegal, more like reckless behavior that contributes to economic dependency. I've seen patients who continue to have children despite being unemployed/single parent/struggling already/uninsured. I've seen patients who complain that they can't afford meds on the $4 list for their blood pressure yet continue to have a pack a day cigarette habit. My husband used to get so many patients like that as an intern that he gave up counseling patients to stop smoking and use that money to pay for their meds (because some people can't understand that priority). There are parents are only compliant with well child visits / vaccinations for the free stuff they get as a reward for their compliance----I feel people should not have to be bribed to care for their children. So while I agree that programs are needed...some people will try take advantage of everything and continue to live carelessly. I've also met patients who have heartbreaking stories, in incredibly tragic situations. It really makes anything bad in my life pale in comparison. There are people who've lost everything, who have ill family members to care for, who were abused, who were neglected. For some people, the welfare system doesn't cover their needs at all and you send them away with little more than a hotline to call and well wishes.

Welfare recipients, poor and indigent population are a mixed group,. Some try to be responsible, others not so much. Some make bad decisions, others learn from theirs'. The welfare debate fails to see people in all their dimensions. Abuses happen anywhere. It doesn't matter if it's corporate welfare or WIC programs. The debate should be centered on how to tighten restrictions so as to prevent abuses, and how to get people off of welfare programs. Believing in the importance of our welfare system does not mean I don't believe in personal responsibility. Welfare's primary goal is to tie people over until they get back on their feet. That means transitioning people to work, to school, to bettering their lives. Right now, we do ok in providing very basic stuff for most poor people, but we still get stuck at getting people out of poverty and into a better life. In that way, I'm kind of a mixture of liberal and conservative ideology. I believe that we need the welfare system, but I also believe in getting people off of it as soon as possible.

About "personal responsibility": I believe it's important, and that the goal of social services should be to give people a hand up, not to keep them in poverty. However, the stereotype of the irresponsible poor person is really tired. The truth is that everyone makes poor decisions at times. It's just that the well-to-do have more of an existing cushion for their choices. If you are rich, you can make some poor financial decisions and still be quite off. If you are poor, much more responsibility is required, b/c there is no cushion.

I like this article by Ezra Klein:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezr ... nsibility/

One trend that I've been seeing in the comments on articles on poverty (which I really shouldn't read, b/c they make my blood pressure rise) is this sentiment of "well, I was in this supposedly poor neighborhood and I saw all these people with televisions, tattoos, etc.). The tattoo one stood out to me, b/c I saw a couple comments about welfare recipients and tattoos. I dunno if they are seen as a vice, sort of like people spending welfare $ on alcohol or strippers or something? I have a friend who, yes, has made some bad decisions, but she's had some mental issues and is on disability because of them. She is a bit obsessed with tattoos and has a couple. One she got because her cousin is a tattoo artist, the other small one I actually bought her for $35 dollars for her birthday. But yeah, tattoos among welfare recipients seemed to bring out people's rage.

Certainly people who are on the "dole" may not spend every dollar wisely. But if you (generic you) knew you weren't going to be able to make the rent or pay the utility bill, you would more likely spend that money on something you think is going to make you feel better than save it knowing it wouldn't make much of a difference.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think one thing to consider while talking about welfare as something to be used occasionally and for as little time as possible is that (to poorly quote Bridget Jones) some people are just hopeless. They're not mentally or physically ill and while stupid, they don't meet the criteria for being declared intellectually disabled. They've received minimal education, have probably had a pretty rough upbringing, have no support system outside of similarly minded people and no sane employer is going to hire them. A lot of these people are so hopeless that they absolutely can't change, no matter how much help you throw at them. Why not let them stay on welfare? I'd rather have someone with zero prospects be given enough cash to keep himself afloat than that same person try and fail to get a job and resort to crime to eat and pay the rent on his crummy apartment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I remember when I was a kid and living with my grandparents my grandfather was in his mid fifties when his health started to fail first he had to have knee surgery, then he was diagnosed with heart problems, then Parkerson's disease he finially won his disability at the age of 59 when he was dying of stomach cancer. This was a WWII vet who at the time of his illness had worked for the state police for decades he wasn't by any means lazy. My grandmother couldn't work outside the home because she had me and my bed-ridden great-grandmother to care for. She helped make ends meet by doing custom sewing for people as she was a very talented seamstress. It pisses me off when all people needing assistance are lumped together as being lazy leeches on society.

My husband and I have needed to go on assistance recently not because he doesn't work but because his company has had a freeze on pay raises for the last couple years with the prices on everything going up and his pay staying the same we have gone from lower middle class to the working poor. My husband works a full time factory job often putting in 10 or more hours of overtime a week so he's far from lazy. He would look for another job but nothing in the area is hiring and because of learning disabilities that were never properly addressed back in school my husband is practically illiterate. I have health issues that rule out the typical factory fast-food, or retail jobs that make up the job market in my area. I have been working on a college degree for the last couple years though.

We have a few nice things but it is because my husband has worked hard to try and build up his credit score we have android phones because he has always paid his cell phone bill even when all we could afford was the cheapo phones to start with

My kids have some name brand clothes, but trust me I do not shop at Aeropostle, Baby Gap, A Children's Place or Old Navy. I do shop thrift stores, consignment shops, Goodwill stores and yard sales.

.

What struck me about your post is the (maybe unintended) sense of defensiveness - that somehow you have to explain and explain that there are valid reasons for your family to need assistance. And that pisses me off - not that you need assistance but that you might AT ALL feel the need to justify it to anyone EVER. If you need help, you need help and as far as I'm concerned that's your PRIVATE business. Don't get me wrong; I'm not chiding you for sharing. I just want you to know that there's at least one person (me) who is grateful that there are resources that can help your family in any way you need it. I hope things improve for you and your family. Hugs. :romance-grouphug:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

the stereotype of the irresponsible poor person is really tired. The truth is that everyone makes poor decisions at times. It's just that the well-to-do have more of an existing cushion for their choices. If you are rich, you can make some poor financial decisions and still be quite off. If you are poor, much more responsibility is required, b/c there is no cushion.

Co-sign.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Co-sign.

Being unable to pay your bills actually encourages financial irresponsibility.

I used to be a budgeter. I made categories and split our money into those categories and then we stuck to the budget. We lived within our means because of that budget.

Now? I avoid budgeting like the plague. Why? Because I know that my income does not add up to equal our expenses, no matter how I move things around. It sounds silly to say this is a reason not to budget, but it is fucking useless if all it does is drive home the fact that we don't have enough for our basic needs. I don't need to have that point driven home, I totally get it.

But I still buy my kids toys and clothing. Modest toys and clothing, of course. I cannot afford it, but they have to have coats and shoes and Hanukkah presents. So I just buy them and then deal with the aftermath later.

I was not raised this way; I was raised with voluntary simplicity and parents who were cheap as fuck. Materialistic culture was a bad thing whereas for many people external signs of wealth are seem as something positive. So my "splurges" are things like $10 shoes because of my training and upbringing. A lot of people sincerely believe that being a good parent means namebrand shoes and a room full of electronics. No one needs that stuff, whether rich or poor, but we are told as a society that it is important. Poor people get the same message.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Now? I avoid budgeting like the plague. Why? Because I know that my income does not add up to equal our expenses, no matter how I move things around. It sounds silly to say this is a reason not to budget, but it is fucking useless if all it does is drive home the fact that we don't have enough for our basic needs. I don't need to have that point driven home, I totally get it.

I so hear this :clap: :clap: I was the same way when I worked. Now it's just futile and depressing to budget.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate how the articles that argue against the welfare queen myth *always* make it a point to note that the vast majority of people receiving benefits are "deserving" -- the elderly, children, and the working poor. My mom did foster care for many, many years - she worked with many people who would be classified as that other 9% and even that issue is more complicated. I feel like, by reiterating that statistic, we're still subtly implying that there is a subset of the population who doesn't deserve basic clothing, shelter, food, and medical care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Being unable to pay your bills actually encourages financial irresponsibility.

I used to be a budgeter. I made categories and split our money into those categories and then we stuck to the budget. We lived within our means because of that budget.

Now? I avoid budgeting like the plague. Why? Because I know that my income does not add up to equal our expenses, no matter how I move things around. It sounds silly to say this is a reason not to budget, but it is fucking useless if all it does is drive home the fact that we don't have enough for our basic needs. I don't need to have that point driven home, I totally get it.

Count me in on the co-sign, and I can definitely agree with Emmie's point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any system can be abused, and there will always be some people who abuse it. In the case of welfare, the abuse is very little of the national budget compared to say, corporate abuse (everything from taxes to fraudulent contracts to charging the Pentagon hundreds of dollars for toilet seats). The insanity is that the very small amount of welfare abuse is used as an excuse to promote very poor public policy. And that policy of course takes advantage of the American Puritanical strain--social benefits are fine as long as they go to the really good people who deserve them (usually me, my family, and/or people I know) and not to the bad, irresponsible people who don't (everybody else).

The welfare system is not set up to get people off of welfare and be self-sufficient--in fact, quite the opposite. Any effort to improve your situation is punished by loss of benefits--including counting the wages of teenagers who are working to save for college as part of the family income. In most cases, school is not considered a work activity. The system is designed to keep people in poverty and to provide a low-wage temporary work force for seasonal work (back when there was such a thing), keep the military supplied with recruits who have no other (legal) option to make a living, and provide public entities with free or low-cost workers to replace previously higher paid, probably unionized employees.

Welfare was not originally designed to help people get on their feet, it was to help single parents (mostly women) who were widowed or abandoned with the very limited income of the missing wage earner so that the parent could remain in the home and care for the children. It was the combination of the Reagan era and mentality, plus middle-class women entering the workforce and not wanting to pay for other women to stay at home, that led to the change.

What is lost here is that TANF goes to support children--none of whom, by definition, are abusing the system. Yes, maybe their parents made/make poor choices or shouldn't have had so many children, but those kids are here, so what about them? My father was an irresponsible, alcoholic jerk and a deadbeat, but that wasn't my fault. I got the same public education as everyone else and after he died my mom got social security benefits (and I think welfare for a time, although she'd never admit it)--and all of us are working people, a couple college educated, who have paid back far more in taxes than we received as kids.

More to the point, because we were not marginalized, we feel part of this society--own homes, work, vote, pay taxes, support our own kids (but I did take government help when I needed it and I don't feel a twinge of guilt about it--again, both me and my kid have put back way more than we took). If we deny children the basic necessities of life because we don't like how their parents are behaving, then we shouldn't be surprised when a whole demographic grows up with zero interest in playing by the rules. If you know that the game is rigged from the start and there's no chance that you can win, logical step is to stop playing the game.

I'm reminded of one response to this "debate" back in the Reagan era. Someone had written (and I still see these types of things today) a scathing letter about the "welfare queens" and the fact that people use food stamps to buy things other than dried beans and rice: saw someone use foodstamps to buy a chocolate cake, outrage, how irresponsible, etc. A woman wrote back: "I am that woman you were behind in line. We gave up some other things in order to buy the cake. It was for my daughter's fourth birthday, which will be her last."

Yeah, create a whole lousy social system because the most important thing is making sure that some irresponsible parent doesn't waste $6 in foodstamps for a birthday cake for a dying child.

This post just sums up everything I think about the welfare system so well. I just have to QFT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I hate how the articles that argue against the welfare queen myth *always* make it a point to note that the vast majority of people receiving benefits are "deserving" -- the elderly, children, and the working poor. My mom did foster care for many, many years - she worked with many people who would be classified as that other 9% and even that issue is more complicated. I feel like, by reiterating that statistic, we're still subtly implying that there is a subset of the population who doesn't deserve basic clothing, shelter, food, and medical care.

I am a foster parent. Because some of the children are in the system they are automatically placed on WIC which does help because I certainly don't get a huge stipend in our county. What I have notice is the people who look down at me when they see my other groceries.

I really noticed it one day because the store had lobster tails on sale for $5.99 each...my family likes them so I think I bought 8. Soda was on sale and I only buy it if its on sale, I refuse to spend over $3.00 a 12 pack, so there was a bunch of soda, I think I had some other meats and other stuff. I really went to the store to get the WIC items not shop, so it was those loss leaders that stores use to bring you in. I had 3 checks to use and they have to be used in seperate orders. So I had 4 orders to be rung up. If someone gets behind me I usually tell them I'm going to be awhile.

So they are ringing through my orders, a woman comes up behind me and I tell her its going to be a while, she starts shooting me looks, the longer she sits there the more chance she has to see what's on the counter the more vocal she gets.

I so wanted to turn around and tell her to stuff it that she didn't know the facts about why I had the checks, or even the fact that lobster tails at my house was really the only place these kids have been exposed to them, that soda is a treat, and that the only people in my house that drinks the milk WIC pays for is the kids. And I'd gladly give her the number to Foster Care since they need people to volunteer to take kids, especially teenagers, and then see could see for herself. But I didn't because in the end I don't have to justify why I'm using WIC checks, I don't have to justify why I'm buying lobster tails or soda and there is no need to bring any shame to my kids because they are in the system.

The moral is don't judge.

BTW, I got even more glares when I whipped out 2 $100 bills to pay for the last order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So they are ringing through my orders, a woman comes up behind me and I tell her its going to be a while, she starts shooting me looks, the longer she sits there the more chance she has to see what's on the counter the more vocal she gets.

I so wanted to turn around and tell her to stuff it that she didn't know the facts about why I had the checks, or even the fact that lobster tails at my house was really the only place these kids have been exposed to them, that soda is a treat, and that the only people in my house that drinks the milk WIC pays for is the kids. And I'd gladly give her the number to Foster Care since they need people to volunteer to take kids, especially teenagers, and then see could see for herself. But I didn't because in the end I don't have to justify why I'm using WIC checks, I don't have to justify why I'm buying lobster tails or soda and there is no need to bring any shame to my kids because they are in the system.

The moral is don't judge.

BTW, I got even more glares when I whipped out 2 $100 bills to pay for the last order.

I just do not understand why people think it's okay to comment on what people are buying. I mean, sometimes I look at people's carts and wonder what they're up to, but that's because I like to people watch - not so I can be a judgmental bitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have a paternal uncle who just recently retired from being welfare office case worker. He said a couple of years back that welfare fraud cases weren't frequent at his office. I have a cousin on my mom's side who scammed food stamps and a few other assistance programs for several years because she claimed that the father of her two sons wasn't paying child support when he was. A few months back another relative of mine posted some picture thing on Facebook about welfare queens having manicures, cell phones, and designer clothes. When I saw that pic it reminded me of an incident back in college. There was one semester in which a group of friends and I would eat lunch at one of the campus SUB buildings once a week. There was one time when the topic of welfare came up during our meal and one friend mentioned how she used to know kids whose moms were on welfare and she said the kids she knew always Tommy Hilfiger, FUBU, etc clothes back in the late 90s when she was in middle school. Another friend and I stayed quiet during most of the conversation.

The friend who stayed quiet later told me that the welfare conservation made her feel uncomfortable. She said there was a period of a a year and a half when her family was on assistance after her father was disabled due to a construction job accident. During that time, several relatives helped out her family with different expenses. She said that one of her aunts took her and siblings clothes shopping at a mall and the aunt bought them several brand name items. Since then, I try not to judge a welfare receiptant who might have something nice. There is always the possibility that a friend or relative gave them things.

You can also find these items at second hand stores too. I'm constantly amazed at what items I find while thrifting. I've recently scored lululemond leggings/top/hoodie and it didn't cost more than $10.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That said, I've seen abuses and poor choices made by welfare recipients. It's not fraud or illegal, more like reckless behavior that contributes to economic dependency. I've seen patients who continue to have children despite being unemployed/single parent/struggling already/uninsured. I've seen patients who complain that they can't afford meds on the $4 list for their blood pressure yet continue to have a pack a day cigarette habit. My husband used to get so many patients like that as an intern that he gave up counseling patients to stop smoking and use that money to pay for their meds (because some people can't understand that priority). There are parents are only compliant with well child visits / vaccinations for the free stuff they get as a reward for their compliance----I feel people should not have to be bribed to care for their children. So while I agree that programs are needed...some people will try take advantage of everything and continue to live carelessly. I've also met patients who have heartbreaking stories, in incredibly tragic situations. It really makes anything bad in my life pale in comparison. There are people who've lost everything, who have ill family members to care for, who were abused, who were neglected. For some people, the welfare system doesn't cover their needs at all and you send them away with little more than a hotline to call and well wishes.

My old man is a teacher on a reservation (and it's rough even by reservation standards). Where do I even begin? There are literally no jobs on the reservation. No local economy, it's over an hour to town. I could go on about how their traditional culture and societal structure was systematically destroyed in the 19th through mid 20th century but I think most people here are aware of that story.

My dad makes no bones that these folks only get enough in to subsist- not live. But he too feels frustrated at the poor financial decisions so many people make. I think that so many folks die young here - suicide and alcohol are the usual suspects - there is no concept of saving for tomorrow as you probably won't live to see that day. It would require a massive cultural shift in the leadership down to the grassroots of the tribe to instill a change like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that always irritates me about the welfare discussion is that the most vocal opponents of food stamp programs that I know are Christians.

I was always taught that Christ told his followers to help the poor. There was never any mention of "if someone asks for your coat, give him your shirt as well...unless he's got a smartphone and steak in his shopping cart. Then say unto him get a job."

Most of my non-religious friends understand that the basic welfare of other human beings is everyone's responsibility. Children who need food is everyone's responsibility. Women who have a family to clothe and have no help is everyone's responsibility. Men who have been emotionally beaten down because they lost their jobs and can't pay their rent is everyone's responsibility. But even though Jesus himself put no conditions on helping the poor, a lot of his followers seem to do . I don't recall Jesus checking out people's make and model on their camels before giving them all free bread and fish. The friends I have who don't even believe Jesus was real do more Christlike giving than most Christians I know who invoke his name at every juncture....and I know a lot of them.

Furthermore, the vast majority of people who utilize welfare programs are truly doing their best. And the ones who are just taking a ride on the state's dime are a minority. But lets say the opposite was true. Let's pretend these so-called "welfare queens" were the majority, and those who are hard-working but down on their luck are the minority. I would still be more than happy to pay my taxes knowing that those who are in the minority are getting what they need to survive. Food stamps are a TINY percentage of what I pay in taxes compared to all the other things that this money goes to. It doesn't cause me one iota of hardship to help somebody who needs foodstamps, regardless of if they "deserve" that help or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The thing that always irritates me about the welfare discussion is that the most vocal opponents of food stamp programs that I know are Christians.

I was always taught that Christ told his followers to help the poor. There was never any mention of "if someone asks for your coat, give him your shirt as well...unless he's got a smartphone and steak in his shopping cart. Then say unto him get a job."

Most of my non-religious friends understand that the basic welfare of other human beings is everyone's responsibility. Children who need food is everyone's responsibility. Women who have a family to clothe and have no help is everyone's responsibility. Men who have been emotionally beaten down because they lost their jobs and can't pay their rent is everyone's responsibility. But even though Jesus himself put no conditions on helping the poor, a lot of his followers seem to do . I don't recall Jesus checking out people's make and model on their camels before giving them all free bread and fish. The friends I have who don't even believe Jesus was real do more Christlike giving than most Christians I know who invoke his name at every juncture....and I know a lot of them.

Furthermore, the vast majority of people who utilize welfare programs are truly doing their best. And the ones who are just taking a ride on the state's dime are a minority. But lets say the opposite was true. Let's pretend these so-called "welfare queens" were the majority, and those who are hard-working but down on their luck are the minority. I would still be more than happy to pay my taxes knowing that those who are in the minority are getting what they need to survive. Food stamps are a TINY percentage of what I pay in taxes compared to all the other things that this money goes to. It doesn't cause me one iota of hardship to help somebody who needs foodstamps, regardless of if they "deserve" that help or not.

THIS! Jesus did not put any conditions on helping the poor. But, helping the poor and needy isn't a religious thing. It's plain human decency.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.