Speaking to a friend with unemployed parents, on food stamps, and welfare

[dannno]

In a free society local communities would take care of the poor.. any social safety nets at the local level would be virtually non-existent if the federal government would end our foreign empire, end minimum wage, get rid of the FDA, DOE, DE, war on drugs, etc, took away income tax, honest money.. in fact it could eventually be taken care of completely by private charity organizations, but if you let people hold onto their money then they can choose to spend it at the local level for these types of services.

You can tell him that Ron Paul doesn't advocate getting rid of the social safety nets for people who are really dependent on them because of the situation we have all been put into. Instead he wants to end our foreign empire, and use that money to fund them while we set our country up to prosper via sound money, deregulation, lower taxes, etc..

 

[dannno]

the stong shall live the weak shall perish......not any help but true

lol, what a horrible answer.. you act as if the government doesn't CAUSE poverty to begin with..

 

[georgiaboy]

I heard a question posed to a group of folks one time "if tomorrow all the federal and state handout programs ended abruptly, would this cause you to give more or less to charities?"

the silence proved the point.

 

[Paul Or Nothing]

^^^
That doesn't prove anything, most people just aren't economically literate to realize that everyone would've more money than they've now, if & when, handouts are stopped since that'd significantly lower their taxes. Most people giving to charities are either middleclass or rich who pay lots of taxes so if govt stopped STEALING from them in the name of "doing good" then it's certain that at least some portion of the "extra-income" would go to charities even though people may not realize it.

TO OP - I think the question of "what should I tell him" depends a lot on his intellectual capacity to understand the broader picture, if he's capable of understanding it then he needs to be made aware of the basic economics which is very simple & logical anyway that the more govt takes from the evil rich & middleclass people to give away handouts, the less money there is in the productive sector of the economy to create jobs & increase production of goods/services & thereby help in lowering their prices while the money going to the govt is gobbled up politicians & bureaucrats & less than 1/4th of it is actually used for "helping the people" & even that doesn't help since that money creates more competition for goods/services & thereby increasing their prices; examples of disastrous consequences of socialism/communism everywhere around the world can be brought up.

And it's important to dispel the MYTH that Ron Paul will end all welfare immediately, no, he won't, he's talked about a transition-plan ( http://www.lewrockwell.com/paul/paul647.html ) & that needs to be told to those who may be against Ron Paul due to his general anti-handout stance but what he will do is reduce considerable spending elsewhere like all the useless departments & wars & bases which'll help him in his transition-plan till people are weaned away from "govt taking care of them"

 

[Jeez]

Ok, here's the answer. The double flat tariff amendment. Ron Paul believes the income tax is evil and the tariff is the best means to collect federal revenue. By uniting to pass a constitutional amendment to replace all internal federal taxes with a tariff that is flat for every product and every country of origin imported into the US we could easily solve our problems. This will return jobs to the US, and make muti-national corporations our allies in reducing government spending.

Tariffs will hurt US more than they will help, most foreign manufacturers can simply costs further and still compete. Nor does it address the root cause of why jobs went abroad (minimum wage, soaring health care costs, unions etc).

 

[squarepusher]

Hell, some people have jobs, dont hide it, and STILL collect unemployment because it allows for this. I work with a guy who works 32 hours a week, which is part time, and still collects his full unemployment check!

what state is that?

 

[noxagol]

what state is that?

Illinois.

 

[LadyBastiat]

IMHO, this is the wrong time to talk politics. Instead, I would help your friend and his parents as best as possible, preferably through helping them find any type of work. Make them believe in themselves first before anything...

+1776!!! Prove how wrong your friend is for believing as he does. It isn't just the Republicans who don't care about the little man... its actually 99.9% of our entire government.

 

[Jeez]

Fyi on Illinois unemployment claims


Yes, not only can she file an unemployment claim, she will probably be awarded benefits. An employee in
Illinois can receive unemployment benefits when you let her go, even if she is currently working another part-time job.

Most of us think of unemployment benefits as the last stopgap for people who are completely without work. That is one purpose of the benefits. However, unemployment compensation – in Illinois and elsewhere – is designed to partially replace income lost (through no fault of the employee’s.) The loss of income can be due to being fired or laid off, or it may be due to a reduction in hours worked.

This means that when an employee’s hours are drastically cut, or she is laid off, she can collect unemployment even if she does have some other work.

In fact, the employee could file for and receive unemployment benefits even if she was still working part-time for you, if the company had significantly cut her hours. Suppose Betty was a full-time counter person at a dry cleaners. Due to a loss of business when another dry cleaner opened up across the street, Betty’s employer cuts her hours from 40 per week to 20 per week. Betty could legitimately file for unemployment benefits because she has had a significant reduction in pay.

In some cases, Illinois employees can collect unemployment even if they quit, as long as they quit “for good cause.”

Workers must be honest with the Illinois Department of Employment Security on the amount they are currently earning, which means reporting all income. The worker must also be able to work, be available to work, and be actively seeking employment.

 

[Pants]

Look at it this way.. I am on Unemployment... I have been unemployed 30 or 31 weeks.. I am a hard line conservative who leans Libertarian. I don't like the idea of collecting a check as much as people hate the program, but it is what it is. I worked since I was 16, became self sufficient at the age of 18. Had my own apartment on my 18th birthday, paid my way through school.. I worked for 25 years and this is the first time I had a full Summer vacation since I was 15.. It wasn't really a summer vacation to where I could lay on a beach all day and drink Margaritas.. It was a very stressful time. This summer vacation has turned into a fall vacation, and a Winter vacation. I applied at roughly 200 jobs so far, had a hand full of interviews. Nothing solid as far as full time. This job market sucks.

I am going to college, and earned about 20 credits in the first five months. Based on the college credits, I am starting to receive some very part time entry level work in the field I want to be in. At $3+ a gallon gas, I am taking a loss on going to these part time jobs.. I am doing it for experience, and I think its important to avoid a huge gap of nothing on a resume.. I might have some contract work coming from a government agency. If everything works out, I probably will make $40 an hour at 10 hours per week.. And I probably still could collect $125 a week in partial unemployment. I don't look at working part time and collecting partial unemployment as a problem. At least people are working, and you shouldn't penalize them for gaining experience in a new field that will lead them into a full time position. I can see people milking the system and working at a place for $9.00 an hour at 35 hours a week. I think with partial unemployment it comes out to $150 more than full unemployment benefits end up being, and about $200 more a week than what a straight $9.00 an hour job at 40 hours a week will pay, and it prolongs the tiers of unemployment.

If this government job works out, I probably will continue to collect unemployment for a little bit. I need to get established, purchase tools, diagnostic equipment, liability insurance, and other odds and ends. Hopefully the part time government work will lead into something full time.

I am cut off of unemployment right now. My 26 week state unemployment ran out the week Extended unemployment ran out. (November 27th??) The deadline to apply for extended unemployment was November 20th. I got upset at the system and applied for food stamps, and then resubmitted financial aid based on me receiving no income. Looks like I got $400 in food stamps ($150 for this month, $250 for January).. and $600 pell grant for the 1st college term.. and $600 next college term which starts in January. I still haven't received any unemployment benefits for the last 3 or 4 weeks. I was told everything should be here by the end of the week. I legitimately needed food stamps. Applying for them was a very humiliating experience. My wife and I both cried while meeting with Social Services to apply, believe me I wouldn't have went there unless I had a reason to take them. Since unemployment resumed, I don't know if I will get food stamps for January. I probably won't need them.

The problem is BOTH parties. You can complain about unemployment and unemployment extensions, both parties created this mess. They should take responsibility and pay for it. Nor should they hold Unemployment hostage to pass other legislation and earmarks. I believe unemployment needs to be revamped and reformed. So many are on it, you can't change the rules in the middle of the game. Lets create jobs first and then fix unemployment later.

I talked to several employers. Most companies are in a hiring freeze for a number of reasons.. 1st reason.. They can't budget or set up long term plans.. They have no idea how the tax laws, or tax changes will affect them. Congress extending the tax cut for 2 years might help, but how can a business plan for long term if its only 2 years? 2nd reason is Health Care. Nobody can determine long term health care costs for the next 5 years. Businesses have very limited information how health care will affect the bottom line. A lot of businesses are operating on a skeleton crew, the people who leave are never replaced, and the remaining people are doing the work of 2, 3, or 4 people. They would like to hire perminant employees but can't.

I just wanted to buzz in and say I am doing everything I possibly can to get off this goverment lifeline. Hopefully sooner than later.

 

[RCA]

Question 1: Is he anti-war?