Virginia Gun Owners Forum - VGOF

SgtBill wrote:With all this in mind then there is only one solution GUNDERWOOD FOR PRESIDENT
Bill

He'll get my vote!

People have made some very good points in this thread. Welfare was created and should still be used to get people back on their feet and help feed them while they look for new employment. This purpose was lost a long time ago in this country. We have a large percentage of people collecting welfare that do not even search for a new job. instead of appreciating the benefit, they expect it and become dependent on it. For years, many people in Washington DC living in public housing and section 8 housing were paying only a fraction of the rent, and the majority was paid by the government for them. Many of those people had other people that were not on the lease, living in those units and selling drugs out of the houses and apartments. For many years, noone at the Housing Authority did anything about evicting any of those people. I personally saw people back in the day, walk in to a store with food stamps, purchase a single item for $1.45, and get currency back as their change. They would walk back around to the register with the cash and purchase cigarettes and beer with the money (change from the food stamp). They would also sell the food stamps for cash ($20 stamp for $15 or $10 cash) and use the money for drugs, beer, vodka, cigarettes, etc.. So you have people not looking to work, using drugs, abusing alcohol, and paying $100 a month for a 1 bedroom apartment (the rest of the rent paid by the government), on welfare and paid for by your tax dollar!!

9MMDerringer wrote:People have made some very good points in this thread. Welfare was created and should still be used to get people back on their feet and help feed them while they look for new employment. This purpose was lost a long time ago in this country. We have a large percentage of people collecting welfare that do not even search for a new job. instead of appreciating the benefit, they expect it and become dependent on it. For years, many people in Washington DC living in public housing and section 8 housing were paying only a fraction of the rent, and the majority was paid by the government for them. Many of those people had other people that were not on the lease, living in those units and selling drugs out of the houses and apartments. For many years, noone at the Housing Authority did anything about evicting any of those people. I personally saw people back in the day, walk in to a store with food stamps, purchase a single item for $1.45, and get currency back as their change. They would walk back around to the register with the cash and purchase cigarettes and beer with the money (change from the food stamp). They would also sell the food stamps for cash ($20 stamp for $15 or $10 cash) and use the money for drugs, beer, vodka, cigarettes, etc.. So you have people not looking to work, using drugs, abusing alcohol, and paying $100 a month for a 1 bedroom apartment (the rest of the rent paid by the government), on welfare and paid for by your tax dollar!!

I think that as someone else said, these people can net as much money, or more, by collecting welfare rather than working a job which might only pay minimum wage. Some people are simply inherently lazy - why make an effort (work) only to make less when you can do nothing and make as much or more? Personally, I think drive-thru places should offer a bonus incentive for employing people that speak English as their first language I also think that some older people have challenges working for younger people (I'm thinking fast food / mall type shops where your 'managers' are probably under 25 )

I think the solution (or at least part of it) is to limit the amount of time which welfare can be collected. Upon expiration of that period, the recipient would have do illustrate beyond reasonable down any extraordinary circumstance as to why they should continue to receive benefits. If they are unable to do so, welfare is cut. Simple as that. Also, a recipient should have to pass a urine test during application, before an extension is granted, and at any random intervals while receiving welfare. Fail a test? No more checks. Hey, we working people are held to a similar contract, right?

Not sure how things work across the board for living quarters - I have a relative thats living on welfare currently while she's pulling her life together, and someone from whichever department administers welfare actually comes to her apartment regularly in order to ascertain that she and her children are the only occupants, and I believe she's only allowed to have visitors on weekends. So, perhaps they're cracking down.

chfaunce wrote: I also think that some older people have challenges working for younger people (I'm thinking fast food / mall type shops where your 'managers' are probably under 25 )

Not sure about you, but I have never had any issues with the older generation of people that have worked as employees that I have been responsible for. I am currently only 25, but by the time I was 18 I was a manager of a Race Track, which was a nightmare cause I was the youngest there, but the most responsible and had to constantly be on all the other employees case for doing their jobs. Now move on to my TSA job where even though I was only about 20 I was quickly placed in charge of other screeners and it became clear who the motivated workers were and who weren't. Once again I was constantly having to watch the younger (under 30) screeners, but the screeners that had previously retired from other jobs and came to TSA looking for a job to fill their free time or just some extra income to cover what their retirement didn't were there to do the job. These screeners I could trust to assign a task to and know it would get done right the first time. These screeners had no problem what so ever working for me either. In between these two groups you had everyone else and they were a mix. Some had a great work ethic and it showed, some didn't.
The only people that had a problem with my being in charge were those from the younger generation who felt I was "too young" for the position and felt they had been passed over for the job.

I am not trying to toot my own horn here "about how great I am" for being given responsibility so young, I am simply trying to show that in my experience I have had the exact opposite happen to me from what you have described up above while being in a Supervisor/Manager position. And to be honest, if you gave me a choice of a group of the young kids versus the older retired group. I would pick the retirees any day of the week. They may not be as quick and spry as the young kids, but they get the job done right the first time.