fandomsecrets | [ SECRET POST #2496 ]

[ SECRET POST #2496 ]

⌈ Secret Post #2496 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.

__________________________________________________

02.

__________________________________________________

03.

__________________________________________________

04.

__________________________________________________

05.

__________________________________________________

06.

__________________________________________________

07.

__________________________________________________

08.

__________________________________________________

09.

__________________________________________________

10.

Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 071 secrets from Secret Submission Post #357.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

I'm almost afraid to ask what you mean by "entitled"...

The example that comes to mind is someone I knew in high school. We graduated ten years ago. She has not gone to school, has not sought jobs that give her in-demand skills, and was content to live off her boyfriend until he dumped her. She keeps whining about how she's too good for retail jobs and nothing pays enough so she's just gonna live on welfare.

Another example was this one woman I talked to who went to cash a check at a bank. Since she didn't have an account they charged her a percentage. This is obviously a big business taking advantage of the little guy and government should step in to stop this horrific abuse.

It's one thing if somebody NEEDS help, or if there is a legitimate issue that the government needs to address. It's another kettle of fish if somebody is just lazy and needs to get their shit together.

These seem like really weaksauce reasons? IDK I just think we have a lot bigger problems than a handful of lazy people. Like giant corporate welfare queens who own our politicians and seem determined to run our country into the ground. They sure as hell seem to do a lot more damage than all of the anecdata lazies put together, though they use the anecdata as sleight of hand to distract from their abuse so I guess you could make the argument that if everyone bootstrapped up they'd have nothing left to hide behind?

The system is broken, I don't think anyone argues that. I just don't understand how blaming the individuals victimized into/or taking advantage of the system is going to fix it.

eta: also I strongly agree with you that it's ridiculous someone would rather stay on welfare than get a retail job, just not for reasons you might think. I mean, why would a retail job pay less thanwelfare which is by definition supposed to be just enough to ensure a basic living standard.

In my area I know way too many girls who didn't receive adequate sexual ed or sexual health resources then got pregnant, couldn't afford college and now can't get a job that wouldn't cost them to give up welfare for. No one is going to take a job that pays a less than survivable wage, add in daycare expenses, and be away from their child just to have the "dignity" of working.

Edited 2013-11-03 02:01 (UTC)

The women I knew when I worked retail still received things like WIC because we worked 30-35 hours (sometimes less, and cutting our hours to less than 20 happened on occasion without warning) a week on average at at little above minimum wage ($6 starting for me). So, being employed doesn't mean you are making enough to support your family without welfare.

I focused on why someone would choose not to work at all in favor of welfare but I can absolutely confirm this is the case. Where I work is hands down the only place in my city a mother without a college degree can get a job that pays above minimum wage outside of a family business or stripping and all of my mothers to the exception of two receive WIC and/or foodstamps and I'm not absolutely sure the two who don't wouldn't qualify.

My mother, a recent college graduate, works at a medical clinic that caters to the upper middle class and moderately wealthy people of our city and all of her coworkers have college degrees and two of them rely on foodstamps

nayrt

I would argue that it's better to benefit some people who are lazy shitheads if it allows us to make good policies that benefit people who need help and who are facing legitimate issues, rather than to screw over people who really need help if it allows us to also punish people who are lazy and need to get their shit together.

I mean, at the end of the day, I don't know if you can be granular like that with policy. I think it makes more sense to think about the policy being good or bad on the basis of its effect, and I think a strong welfare system is genuinely good from a policy perspective. But then I also probably think that there's a lot more people who genuinely need help and a lot fewer people who are lazy or entitled than you do, and that's just a difference of opinion.

I guess I'd also say that I'm more worried about restraining the extremely wealthy and the giant corporations and the bankers than about any of that, because I think that stuff is a lot more harmful in day to day life than maybe some lazy people get some money, but that's another argument.

NA

+1000

As someone who had to take welfare for a long time, and has known a lot of people on welfare, and what it's like day after day to watch the rich and try and try not to be poor, THIS.

Hell, I'm of the opinion that letting someone starve because they're a lazy shithead is... Kind of disproportionate retribution there, dude.

And if I really wanted to facetiously play devil's advocate, I'd argue that keeping lazy shitheads out of the workforce is a good thing for society in general. :P

Yep, pretty much this

I'm curious, did you get the numbers? I roll my eyes at Example #1's claim that she's "too good" for any honest job (though, in all fairness, retail does absolutely suck and I hate it with the fire of a thousand suns.) But how rational and/or ethical her choice is depends on a lot of factors--has she got any kids, what retail jobs are actually available to her, how much do they pay, how many hours and how reliable a schedule, what's the cost of living in her area, what assistance would she still qualify for if she WAS working, and how much better (or worse) would she make out on just welfare?

And whether the bank charge in Example #2 is exploitative or not really depends on the amount of the check and the percentage they charged. If she paid two or three bucks on a few hundred dollars, that's a slightly different matter than paying five bucks on fifty, for example.

In all honestly, exploitative or not, I think a lot of the fees banks charge are highway robbery. Credit unions FTW.

Flat | Top-Level Comments Only

[ SECRET POST #2496 ]

Re: Non-fandom confessions

Re: Non-fandom confessions

Re: Non-fandom confessions

Re: Non-fandom confessions

Re: Non-fandom confessions

Re: Non-fandom confessions

Re: Non-fandom confessions

Re: Non-fandom confessions

+1000

Re: Non-fandom confessions

Re: Non-fandom confessions